Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
2000-11-07 - Voters Pamphlet - State
`i Yh p MC CL �1 + VOTE BY MAIL GENERAL ELECTION, NOVEMBER 7, 2000 F Compiled and Distributed by h' 't g Oregon Secretary of State This Voters'Pamphlet is provided for assistance in casting your vote by mail ballot. OF BILL BRADBURY �� �� STATE OF OREGON 0 SECRETARY OF STATE Qr SECRETARY OF STATE f+ ' _ : SUZANNE TOWNSEND 0 z 136 STATE CAPITOL DEPUTY SECRETARY OF STATE SALEM,OREGON 97310-0722 (503)986-1500 Dear Oregonian: This is Volume 1 of the 2-volume 2000 General Election Voters' Pamphlet. As in the last two general elections, the pamphlet is divided into two volumes:Volume 1 for state measure information and Volume 2 for candidate information.The candidate volume will be mailed in the next seven to ten days. The size of this book makes it unique and you will notice that it looks more like your telephone directory than the voters'pamphlets you have received in the past.There are 26 state measures on the ballot—the most since 1914. A record setting 607 arguments were either purchased for$500 or placed for free (requiring 1000 voter signatures).The 26 state measures and 607 arguments have produced the thickest voters'pamphlet in Oregon history. The pamphlet's increased length means that stapling, which is the usual binding method, will not work. Rather than divide the measures into two volumes, it was more cost effective and convenient to bind it like a telephone book. I have introduced an innovation for Volume 1 that I hope you will find useful. On the opposite page is a table of contents for the measures. Next to each measure you will see an arrow which lines up with a printed tab that references the impartial information for that measure.The tab serves two purposes. First, it allows you to quickly find a measure. Second, it clearly differentiates between the parts of this book designed to inform you and those trying to influence you.The impartial information about a measure (ballot title, estimate of financial impact, text and explanatory statement) has the printed tab on the page. The information placed by proponents and opponents of the measure has no printed tab and follows the impartial information. Although this pamphlet looks different, it is just as recyclable as previous voters'pamphlets. I encourage you to recycle it. This is a unique voters' pamphlet and this will be a unique election. Oregon's election will be the first ever entirely vote-by-mail general election in the United States.To participate in this election, there are some important dates to remember: • October 17 is the deadline to register to vote. • October 20 to 24 are the dates that ballots will be mailed out. If you are registered to vote and do not receive a ballot in the mail, call your local county elections office for assistance.The phone number for each office is printed on page 375. • November 7 at 8:00 p.m. is the deadline for your ballot to be received by a county elections official. I have issued a challenge to Oregonians to have the highest voter turnout of any state in the nation this fall.To promote this effort, I have launched a website (www.oregonvotes.com) as a clearinghouse for election information.Working together, Oregon can set the mark for the new millennium with an historic voter turnout in our unique vote-by-mail election. Sincerely, /�� AJZ-7 Bill Bradbury On the cover: The crisp clear light of a December morning reflects off the glass of the Yaquina Head Lighthouse. At 93 feet, it is the tallest lighthouse on the Oregon coast. First lit in 1873, it is still in service. 1998 photo courtesy of Ron Benton of Wa/dport, Oregon. Page Measure 83 Amends Constitution:Authorizes New Standards,Priorities for Veterans' 5 8300 Loans;Expands Qualified Recipients Measure 84 Amends Constitution:State Must Continue Paying Local Governments for 8 8400 State-Mandated Programs Measure 85 Amends Constitution:Modifies Population, Minimum Area Requirements 14 85 0 ■ for Formation of New Counties �I Measure 86 Amends Constitution:Requires Refunding General Fund Revenues 17 8600 Exceeding State Estimates to Taxpayers Measure 87 Amends Constitution:Allows Regulation of Location of Sexually Oriented 22 87 NO Businesses Through Zoning Measure 88 Increases Maximum Deductible in Oregon for Federal Income Taxes Paid 31 8800 ^v, Measure 89 Dedicates Tobacco Settlement Proceeds to Specified Health, Housing, 40 8910 iTransportation Programs '' �^^ Measure 90 Authorizes Rates Giving Utilities Return on Investments in Retired Property 53 90 Cn CZ Measure 91 Amends Constitution:Makes Federal Income Taxes Fully Deductible on 59 91 Oregon Tax Returns Measure 92 Amends Constitution:Prohibits Payroll Deductions for Political Purposes 80 92 ^^11 Without Specific Written Authorization Measure 93 Amends Constitution:Voters Must Approve Most Taxes, Fees;Requires 96 93 Certain Approval Percentage NO CZ "j Measure 94 Repeals Mandatory Minimum Sentences for Certain Felonies, Requires 113 9400 U) Resentencing Measure 95 Amends Constitution:Student Learning Determines Teacher Pay; 139 95 Qualifications, Not Seniority, Determine Retention U) Measure 96 Amends Constitution:Prohibits Making Initiative Process Harder, Except 155 96 Through Initiative;Applies Retroactively Measure 97 Bans Body-Gripping Animal Traps,Some Poisons;Restricts Fur Commerce 162 97 C_ Measure 98 Amends Constitution:Prohibits Using Public Resources for Political 179 9810 O Purposes;Limits Payroll Deductions Measure 99 Amends Constitution:Creates Commission Ensuring Quality Home Care 197 99 Services for Elderly, Disabled Measure 1 Amends Constitution:Legislature Must Fund School Quality Goals 207 1 ^, Adequately;Report;Establish Grants ^W Measure 2 Amends Constitution:Creates Process for Requiring Legislature to 211 2 Review Administrative Rules Measure 3 Amends Constitution:Requires Conviction Before Forfeiture;Restricts 236 300 Proceeds Usage;Requires Reporting, Penalty Meas,jre 4 Dedicates Tobacco-Settlement Proceeds;Earnings Fund Low-Income 249 400 Health Care Measure 5 Expands Circumstances Requiring Background Check Before Transfer of 265 5 NO Firearm Measun 6 Provides Public Funding to Candidates Who Limit Spending, Private 284 600 Contributions Measue 7 Amends Constitution:Requires Payment to Landowner if Government 309 700 Regulation Reduces Property Value Meae ire 8 Amends Constitution:Limits State Appropriations to Percentage of State's 331 8 Prior Personal Income Measure 9 Prohibits Public School Instruction Encouraging, Promoting, Sanctioning 346 9 Homosexual, Bisexual Behaviors 3 Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—General Information Information GENERAL Your official 2000 General Election Voters' Pamphlet is divided The explanatory statement is an impartial statement explaining into two separate volumes.This was necessary because there the measure.Each measure's explanatory statement is written by are 26 statewide measures and 607 arguments filed in support of a committee of five members, including two proponents of the or in opposition to these measures.The amount of information is measure, two opponents of the measure and a fifth member too large to be bound into one book in a cost-effective manner. appointed by the first four committee members, or, if they fail to This is Volume 1 and contains information on the statewide ballot agree on a fifth member, appointed by the Secretary of State.Explanatory statements can be appealed and may be changed by measures, as well as information on registering to vote and the Oregon Supreme Court. obtaining an absentee ballot.Volume 2 will include the list of state candidates, statements submitted by state candidates, political Citizens or organizations may file arguments in favor of, or in party statements and drop site locations.It may also include your opposition to, measures by purchasing space for$500 or by sub- county Voters' pamphlet if your county chooses to produce a mitting a petition signed by 1,000 voters.Arguments in favor of a Voters'pamphlet in combination with the state.Volume 2 will be measure appear first,followed by arguments in opposition to the mailed October 18–21. measure,and are printed in the order in which they are filed with For each of the 26 statewide measures in this Voters' Pamphlet the Secretary of State's office. you will find the following information: Additionally, measures 83 through 89 were referred to Oregon (1) the ballot title; voters by the 1999 Legislature and you will find a "Legislative Argument in Support" for each of these measures. Oregon law (2) estimate of financial impact; allows the Legislature to submit, at no cost, an argument in sup- (3) complete text of the proposed measure; port of each measure it refers to the people. The Voters' Pamphlet has been compiled by the Secretary of (4) explanatory statement;and State since 1903,when Oregon became one of the first states to (5) arguments filed by proponents and opponents of the provide for the printing and distribution of such a publication.One measure. copy of the Voters'Pamphlet is mailed to every household in the state. Additional copies are available at the State Capitol, local The ballot title is drafted by the Attorney General's office.It is then post offices,courthouses and all county election offices. distributed to a list of interested parties for public comment.After review of any comments submitted, the ballot title is certified by the Attorney General's office. The certified ballot title can be appealed and may be changed by the Oregon Supreme.Court. WEBSITE The estimate of financial impact for each measure is prepared by a committee of state officials including the Secretary of State,the Most of the information contained in this Voters'Pamphlet is also State Treasurer, the Director of the Oregon Department of available in the Online Voters'Guide on the World Wide Web at Administrative Services and the Director of the Department of hftp://www.sos.state.or.us/elections/nov72000/nov72000.htm-,, Revenue.The committee estimates only the direct impact on state and local governments, based on information presented to the committee. ATTENTION: The State of Oregon prints measure arguments and candidate statements ,Ts submitted by the author.The state does not correct punctuation, grammar, syr(ax errors or inaccurate information. The only changes made are attempts to cor'rec't spelling errors if the word as originally submitted is not in the dictionary. Measure arguments are printed for the measures designated by the persons submitting the arguments and appear in favor or in opposition as designated by the submitters. TABLE OF CONTENTS Page Page County Elections Offices............................................... 375 Vote by Mail Information................................ .............. 374 Disabled Voter Information............................................. 374 Voter Registration Information........................ ............. 373 Measures....................................................................... 5 YOUR VOTED BALLOT MUST BE RETURNED (POSTMARKS DO NOT COUNT TO YOUR COUNTY ELECTIONS OFFICE BY ELECTION DAY,TUESDAY, NOVEMBER , 2000. County Elections Offices are open on election day from 7 a.m.to 8 p.m. 4 Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 83 Senate Joint Resolution 2—Referred to the Electorate of Oregon the director,best accomplish the purposes and promote the by the 1999 Legislature to be voted on at the General Election, financial sustainability of the Oregon War Veterans' Fund, November 7,2000. including,but not limited to,standards and priorities neces- sary to maintain the tax-exempt status of earnings from bonds issued under authority of this section and section 2 of B this Article. ALLOT TITLE Sec.3. No person shall receive money from the Oregon War Veterans'Fund except the following: (1)A person who: ! (a)Resides in the State of Oregon at the time of applying for a loan from the fund; # �it 'F� tttf � (b)Served honorably in active duty,other than active duty for training, in the Armed Forces of the United States: (A)For a period of not less than 210 days[, any part of which I �P' '�8"Y3t at1th1Cf2 fJatiitrd& occurred between September 15, 1940,and December 31, 19761 tdripC(f[e , grid 1xpttf � li� ft#AtS ?CAt or who was, prior to completion of such period of service, dis- charged or released from active duty on account of service- connected injury or illness;or (B) In a theater of operations for which a campaign or pfle�ifl�;tr�d tte4tfictionsr (oafs expeditionary ribbon or medal is authorized by the United ; x neitti � Ittet trot States; #Udr shit m �( to itr:; (c) Has been honorably separated or discharged from the C;tet# t0o} ti �gpee , � q#. Armed Forces of the United States or has been furloughed to a trans"; # fi etid r##ttle ' tft " reserve;and { frrtrslf #�#, Maactre3j(�ri rt[rsrtl fit# (d) Makes application for a loan [either] within the 30-year d(a ted bed f� #g� period immediately following the date on which the person was p1,tt378 C�ilesr p ti3elCt�tt�irltucles, released from active duty in the Armed Forces of the United [rfopetaiictnarwlt€ch��siiifisLttttaTi�sd, # States[, or not later than January 31, 1985, whichever occurs I ire"tag aa�e�tit t� iangugs. last]. (2)(a)The spouse of a person who is qualified to receive a loan under subsection(1)of this section but who has either been miss- ing in action or a prisoner of war while on active duty in the Armed ( Oe[rE` �[ttt i ?�it�telY )Illrlr# ', Forces of the United States even though the status of missing or h fl#p» p�3rlrtd being a prisoner occurred prior to completion of the minimum Y etel np�ZSe#..... a�t rt)ax[ f�ure l �rl . length of service or residence set forth in subsection (1) of this section, provided the spouse resides in this state at the time of application for the loan. (b) The surviving spouse of a person who was qualified to receive a loan under subsection (1) of this section but who died TEXT OF MEASURE while on active duty in the Armed Forces of the United States even though the death occurred prior to completion of the mini- mum length of service or residence set forth in subsection (1)of Be It Resolved by the Legislative Assembly of the State of this section,provided the surviving spouse resides in this state at Oregon: the time of application for the loan. (c)The eligibility of a surviving spouse under this subsection PARAGRAPH 1. Sections 1 and 3, Article XI-A of the shall terminate on his or her remarriage. Constitution of the State of Oregon,are amended to read: Sec. 1. (1) Notwithstanding the limits contained in section 7, PARAGRAPH 2.The amendment proposed by this resolu- Article XI of [the] this Constitution, the credit of the State of tion shall be submitted to the people for their approval or Oregon may be loaned and indebtedness incurred in an amount rejection at the next regular general election held throughout not to exceed eight percent of the true cash value of all the this state. property in the state, for the purpose of creating a fund, to be known as the "Oregon War Veterans' Fund,"to be advanced for NOTE: Boldfaced type indicates new language; [brackets and the acquisition of farms and homes for the benefit of male and italic]type indicates deletions or comments. female residents of the State of Oregon who served in the Armed Forces of the United States.Secured repayment thereof shall be and is a prerequisite to the advancement of money from such fund,except that moneys in the Oregon War Veterans'Fund may also be appropriated to the Director of Veterans' Affairs to be expended,without security,for the following purposes: [(1)] (a)Aiding war veterans'organizations in connection with their programs of service to war veterans; [(2)] (b)Training service officers appointed by the counties to give aid as provided by law to veterans and their dependents; [(3)](c)Aiding the counties in connection with programs of ser- vice to war veterans; [(4)](d)The duties of the Director of Veterans'Affairs as con- servator of the estates of beneficiaries of the United States Veterans'Administration;and [(5)](e)The duties of the Director of Veterans'Affairs in provid- ing services to war veterans,their dependents and survivors. (2)The Director of Veterans' Affairs may establish stan- dards and priorities with respect to the granting of loans from the Oregon War Veterans'Fund that,as determined by 5 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 83 EXPLANATORY STATEMENT Ballot Measure 83 amends the Oregon Constitution to expand the eligibility for receiving home and farm veterans' loans. The proposed amendment would also authorize the Director of Veterans'Affairs to establish standards and priorities for granting loans from the Oregon War Veterans'Fund. The Oregon Constitution currently authorizes the state to make home or farm loans to Oregon residents who served honorably in active duty in the Armed Forces of the United States.The active duty must be at least 210 days in length or when discharge or release from active duty of less than 210 days is due to a service- connected injury or illness.In order for an Oregon resident to be eligible for a loan, however, the Constitution requires at least some part of the active duty to have been between September 15, 1940, and December 31, 1976. In addition, the Constitution cur- rently requires loan applications to have been filed not later than January 31, 1985, or within the 30-year period immediately fol- lowing the date on which the person was released from active duty. Ballot Measure 83 would eliminate the requirement that a por- tion of active duty occur prior to 1977.Ballot Measure 83 provides that time spent training while on active duty does not count toward the 210 day minimum length of active duty service. Ballot Measure 83 retains the requirement that active duty must be for a period of at least 210 days or if discharge from active duty is due to a service-connected injury or illness. Ballot Measure 83 also establishes an alternative basis for meeting the active duty requirement that does not depend on the length of active duty. Under the alternative, an Oregon resident would be eligible for a veterans' loan if the person's active duty was in a theater of operations for which a campaign or expedi- tionary ribbon or medal is authorized by the United States.Ballot Measure 83 would also eliminate the requirement that a loan application be filed not later than January 31, 1985, but retains the requirement that application must be made within 30 years after the date of release from active duty. Home and farm loans to veterans are made from the Oregon War Veterans'Fund.The Oregon War Veterans'Fund is funded by the sale of bonds. Under federal law, the interest income that bondholders receive from these bonds is exempt from federal income taxation. Federal law, however, further provides that the interest on bonds that finance loans to veterans with active duty occurring only after 1976 is not exempt and therefore subject to federal income taxation. Ballot Measure 83 authorizes the Director of Veterans'Affairs to establish standards and priorities that the director determines best accomplish the purposes and promote the financial stability of the Oregon War Veterans'Fund, including those necessary to maintain the tax-exempt status of interest on bonds that fund Oregon veterans'home and farm loans. Committee Members: Appointed By: Senator Verne Duncan President of the Senate Representative Bob Montgomery Speaker of the House David S.Barrows Secretary of State Rick Hanson Secretary of State Kathleen Beaufait Members of the Committee (This committee was appointed to provide an impartial explanation of the ballot measure pursuant to ORS 251.215.) 6 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 83 Arguments LEGISLATIVE ARGUMENT IN SUPPORT ARGUMENT IN FAVOR Five states, including Oregon, currently have programs in place The United Veterans' Groups of Oregon recommends a "Yes" that allow veterans who served prior to 1977 to receive lower vote on Ballot Measure 83 for several important reasons.Passage interest home loans through the Veterans' Home Loan program. of Ballot Measure 83 would allow veterans who entered active This program began in 1944 to serve as an additional benefit military service after 1976 and served under honorable conditions for servicemen returning from World War II. Over the years the to become eligible for the Oregon Department of Veterans'Affairs program has helped many veterans to attain,home ownership. Veterans'Home Loan Program. The Oregon Constitution currently limits eligibility for these lower The Veterans'Home Loan Program is self-supporting interest home loans to veterans that'served prior to 1977,exclud- . Program supported entirely by the mortgage payments of ing thousands of Oregon veterans who have served our country those who have received the home loans. since the end of the Vietnam War. Ballot Measure 83 would . Program does not receive any taxpayer money.There is no expand eligibility for the program to all residents who served cost to the state. honorably in the military for at least 210 days or who were in a theater of operations where they earned a ribbon or medal. The Veterans' Loan Program has a positive economic We urge a"yes"vote on Ballot Measure 83 impact on the State • Since 1945, more than 332,000 loans have been made. Committee Members: Appointed By: • More than$7.3 billion has been lent. Senator Verne Duncan President of the Senate • Increases home ownership. Representative Kathy Lowe Speaker of the House . Creates jobs. Representative Bob Montgomery Speaker of the House . Strengthens communities. • Helps support schools. (This Joint Legislative Committee w.1s appointed to provide the legislative . It's the right thing to do argument in support of the ballot measure pursuant to ORS 251.245.) Thousands of Oregonians have served their state and nation since the end of the Vietnam War.They have served in locations such as Beirut, Lebanon, Somalia, Grenada, and Central America.They continue to serve in the Persian Gulf, Bosnia and Kosovo.They continue to face many of the same risks as their counterparts who served in earlier conflicts.Their service to their state and nation,no less valuable than the service of their earlier peers,should be recognized. As the umbrella organization representing Congressionally Chartered veterans'service organizations in the State of Oregon, we recommend a"Yes"vote. R.Bruce Brown,Chairman United Veterans'Groups of Oregon Member Organizations Air Force Sergeants'Association American Ex-Prisoners of War American Legion AMVETS Disabled American Veterans Korean War Veterans Assn. Marine Corps League Military Order of the Purple Heart The Non Commissioned Officers Assn. Paralyzed Veterans of America The Retired Enlisted Association The Retired Officers'Association Veterans of Foreign Wars Vietnam Veterans of America (This information furnished by R.Bruce Brown,United veterans'Groups of Oregon.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the'State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 7 Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 84 •• Senate Joint Resolution 39—Referred to the Electorate of Oregon EXPLANATORY STATEMENT by the 1999 Legislature to be voted on at the General Election, November 7,2000. Section 15, Article XI of the Oregon Constitution, requires the state to pay for services that the state requires local'governments BALLOT TITLE to provide.Section 15 is repealed by section 15 a of Article XI on June 30, 2001, unless the people vote to keep section 15 in effect.Ballot Measure 84 keeps section 15 in effect. Y Section 15 covers administrative, financial, social, health and Alli[ 1 [ OtN1ICAIK& l `: other specified services that the state requires local governments No pA��l r L�}CA��Y> �� to provide.For purposes of section 15,"local government"means � 111t�=MA�AfIE! � a city, county, municipal corporation or municipal utility operated by a board or commission. � ` ;5"` f "vbt �rts rtretCtrrt that; Under section 15,a local government does not have to provide ets4i�t + t7t ��Ctfsl cii& tdtpt €Ie < a service that the state requires if: "N "{lfrlTl * � ' ,'rpef irti> ttti ttSet (1)The state fails to pay at least 95 percent of the cost of the �Aktetk ttrhtm required service;or SUFtY:"Chts t1 fe to sectbrt f ;03 tfle a (2) The cost of providing the service exceeds one hundredth cowrtutaort,uutdhrres st �s1tret3 pey ioctl of one percent of the local government's budget for the M'' re� services, not counting the costs met by the state. The state may provide money for a service by appropriating the funds or by requiring the local government to collect fees or td#r{t1 titt�grrft fitC�ftCQ5rt +5Xt�itaret!C charges. v8 pt� [oc1� off!�t�te.f�1��tttr�tp tee �tlt ii�� :, tier & tter8ttttkteitletrttt8d #tj�> r1ts Section 15 requires that at least 18 of the 30 state Senators lifNAbfGlAt. 1 tiaras eft and 36 of the 60 state Representatives approve any bill that oe It gt � s Qr r � reduces the money that the state distributes to local governments from the proceeds of a specific state tax. Section 15 does not apply to: (1)A law approved by at least 60 percent of the members of TEXT OF MEASURE each house of the legislature; (2)A service required by a state or federal court; Be It Resolved by the Legislative Assembly of the State of (3)A law enacted or approved through an initiative or referendum; Oregon: (4) A service that informs citizens about a local government PARAGRAPH 1.Section 15a,Article XI of the Constitution activity;or of the State of Oregon,is repealed and section 15,Article XI (5)Any other program or service specified in section 15. of the Constitution of the State of Oregon,is retained as part of the Oregon Constitution. Committee Members: Appointed By: PARAGRAPH 2.The amendment proposed by this resolu- Senator Lee Beyer President of the Senate tion shall be submitted to the people for their approval or Representative Richard Devlin Speaker of the House rejection at the next regular general election held throughout Representative Deborah Kafoury Secretary of State this state. Representative Bill Witt Secretary of State Kathleen Beaufait Members of the Committee (This committee was appointed to provide an impartial explanation of the ballot measure pursuant to ORS 251.215.) 8 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 84 Arguments LEGISLATIVE ARGUMENT IN SUPPORT ARGUMENT IN FAVOR Measure 84 preserves the voter-approved constitutional require- Eliminate Hidden Costs and Hidden Taxes ment for state government to pay for services that it requires local Yes on Measure 84 governments to provide. We provision was added to the Oregon must continue to slow the growth of hidden taxes! State The "local mandate" go p g government should pay for the programs it enacts. Measure 84 Constitution by Oregon voters as Ballot Measure 30 in the 1996 retains this principle of accountability in Oregon's law,passed by general election. This section of the Constitution states that, if the voters in 1996. state government requires a local government to provide new or additional services,then state government must also provide the Hidden costs result when the state government makes your coun- additional funding to support those services.If the state does not ties and cities deliver state programs without providing money to provide the funds,the local government is not required to provide pay for them. By their very nature, hidden costs grow and grow the service. with no accountability and no control. As consumers, you know When voters approved the"local mandate"law in 1996, a provi- hidden costs get translated into higher prices. sion was included that required voters to review the law in Hidden costs also become higher taxes for you as a local tax- November 2000. Measure 84 provides that review. Unless payer.It's like giving the State unlimited authority to charge state Measure 84 is approved, the 1996 "local mandate"amendment programs against your local property taxes without your will be removed entirely from the Constitution.This means that the approval. Legislature will have no restrictions on imposing new service You have a chance through Ballot Measure 84 to retain requirements on local governments without funding them. Oregon's law limiting unfunded mandates and assuring future There are exceptions to the funding requirement.State or federal accountability. courts may mandate services or requirements without providing You can assure for the future that the responsibility for enacting funding.Voters may enact new laws without funding through the government programs and paying for them remains linked initiative process.The Legislature, if at least 60%of the members together. of each house agree,may enact a new mandate without funding. The voter approved"local mandate"law has been a success.The You can stop us from returning to the illusion that people are law helps to ensure the unique approach each local government getting something for nothing. has to providing services. Very few pieces of legislation since Keep the brakes on the growth of hidden taxes. 1996 have been called into question under this law, a signal Vote YES on#84 that the Legislature and state agencies are seriously consider- ing the cost of funding programs before forcing them on local Submitted by: governments. Richard M.Butrick We urge you to re-affirm your support for the"no local mandates President without funding"law by voting YES on Measure 84. Associated Oregon Industries Committee Members: Appointed By (This information furnished by Richard M. Butrick, Associated Oregon Senator Lee Beyer President of the Senate Industries.) Representative Richard Devlin Speaker of the House Representative Kevin L.Mannix Speaker of the House (This Joint Legislative Committee was appointed to provide the legislative argument in support of the ballot measure pursuant to ORS 251.245.) (This space purchased for$500 In accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. g CONTINUED IP Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 84, Arguments ARGUMENT IN FAVOR ARGUMENT IN FAVOR VOTE YES ON MEASURE 84! RETAIN OUR MANDATES LAW-VOTE YES ON 841 STOP UNFUNDED MANDATES! Ballot Measure 84 • AYES VOTE requires the Legislature to provide funding to An unfunded mandate is a binding directive from one level of public safety districts such as.fire and 9-1-1 communica- government to another to accomplish something without provid- tions,as well as other districts such as water,sewer,parks ing the money to pay for it. Ballot Measure 30, approved by the & recreation, and library whenever the Legislature voters in 1996, changed this practice in Oregon. It required the requires a local government to establish a new program or State to provide money to local governments for the"usual and provide additional services for existing programs. reasonable" costs of mandates. Local governments are often amenable to receiving responsibilities for services when there is WHO PAYS THE COST OF UNFUNDED MANDATES? adequate State funding or fiscal flexibility to pay for them. But • when we are mandated responsibilities without fiscal assistance, You the taxpayers or ratepayers end up funding these the impact often results in protecting the State budget at the Legislative mandates when your local districts must pro- vide additional service. expense of our local budgets. As a result, we are blamed for higher property taxes,fees,and charges to cover costs for which VOTERS APPROVED THIS MEASURE IN NOVEMBER 1996! the State government should be held accountable. • Voters already approved this measure once;VOTE YES to In placing Measure 30 on the ballot in 1996, legislators recog- permanently require the Legislature to pay for unfunded nized that a partnership must exist between each level of mandates to our local service providers. government and fiscal impact discussions must take place before mandate legislation is passed.They also felt a need for a trial MAKE THE LEGISLATURE THINK... period to make sure that the new law would work as they BEFORE REQUIRING NEW PROGRAMS THAT expected. COST YOU MONEY! The trial period has ended and the law has worked very well. VOTE YES ON MEASURE 84! There has been greater sensitivity and accountability by the State (This information furnished by Greg Baker, Executive Director, Special to the impact of unfunded mandates on our communities'ability to Districts Association of Oregon.) meet our local needs for public safety and community livability. There was one occasion where the State felt it was a statewide priority to impose an unfunded mandate and the necessary two thirds vote was achieved to do so.This is the way the law was designed to work. Measure 84 is the opportunity to preserve Oregon's voter- approved unfunded mandates provision. Vote for State accountability and for local control.Vote"Yes"on Measure 84 to continue Oregon's unfunded mandate law. (This information furnished by Commissioner Harold Haugen, Josephine County, President,Association of Oregon Counties;Commissioner Steve McClure, Union County, 2nd Vice President, Association of Oregon Counties; Commissioner Charlie Hales, Portland, President, League of Oregon Cities,Mayor Susan Roberts, Enterprise, Vice President, League of Oregon Cities; Greg Baker, Executive Director, Special Districts Association of Oregon.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 10 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet-Statewide Measures Measure No. 84 Arguments ARGUMENT IN FAVOR ARGUMENT IN FAVOR Measure 84 is good news for taxpayers. STOP UNFUNDED MANDATES-SUPPORT MEASURE 84 Measure 84 would retain Oregon's constitutional provision While reaching agreement on issues these days is very difficult, approved by the voters in 1996 that state funds cover the expense one issue facing Oregon voters this November 7 is not. The of future state mandates on local governments. concept is really quite simple. When the State of Oregon approves new programs that cost more money, the State of When state government requires local governments to provide a Oregon shall provide full funding for those programs.VOTE YES particular service,but doesn't provide the money to pay for it, an ON MEASURE 84-stop the list of unfunded mandates placed on unfunded mandate is created. It's as if someone else had the local government and local property taxpayers from growing. ability to write checks from your personal bank account for purchases you might not necessarily approve of or choose WHAT IS AN UNFUNDED MANDATE? for yourself. • A program enacted by the State legislature or agencies and In the past 4 years since passage of Oregon's unfunded man- given to local government WITHOUT adequate funding! dates law there have been only two unfunded mandates. As a WHO PAYS FOR UNFUNDED MANDATES? result, local citizens have had greater local resources and choice in deciding to fund local services such as fighting crime, main- • YOU DO,the local taxpayers through higher property taxes! taining parks, and helping children at risk.Even in the one case CAN WE STOP THESE MANDATES IN THE FUTURE? where an unfunded mandate was passed regarding landslides, the Legislature achieved enough consensus to achieve the 2/3's. . Vote YES on Measure 84 vote necessary to impose it as a statewide priority.This is how the law was intended to work. Now is a very important time to retain Article 15 of the Oregon constitution,approved by the Oregon voters in 1996,requiring the In these times when economic growth is slowing and county State to pay for programs mandated on local governments.The revenues from federal forests continue to decline, it makes no federal and state governments continue to shift responsibility for sense for the state legislature to decide how a local government's services to local government.Local taxpayers deserve the assur- funds are spent. If a state service is important enough to ances of Article 15 in the future that funding to pay for these become law,it should be funded from the state's resources. programs will also be provided.A YES VOTE on Measure 84 will State government should pay for state programs and local keep the State from shifting the hidden tax burden to the local government should pay for local programs. Unfunded man- level. dates have plagued local planning efforts for years,always at Twelve(12)states already have constitutional amendments limit- the expense of local taxpayers. ing unfunded mandates Congress has also passed a bill limiting Vote "Yes" on Measure 84 and retain Oregon's unfunded federal unfunded mandates.The past four years in Oregon have mandates law. proven that Measure 30 works - very few unfunded mandates have been passed and less hidden taxes passed on to local tax- Randall"Randy"Franke payers.Oregon voters deserve to have these assurances in the Patti Milne future as well.Join us and VOTE YES on Measure 84 to retain Mike Ryan Oregon's unfunded mandates law. (This information furnished by Randall Franke,Mike Ryan,Patti Milne.) (This information furnished by Bill Bellamy, Jefferson County Commissioner,John Mabrey,Wasco County Judge.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 In accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the i ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 11 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 84 Arguments ARGUMENT IN FAVOR ARGUMENT IN FAVOR Say NO to Unfunded Mandates "Unfunded Mandates Law has Worked Well" Vote YES on Measure 84 Jackson County has experienced numerous revenue losses over There's a basic principle in our Constitution that says,if the state the past 4 years and faces uncertain times in the future.Millions requires a local government to do something,the state must pay of dollars have been lost in reduced forest receipts and even the the costs of that mandated activity,or the local government need best hope for a federal forest safety net would only be good for six not comply.And, if the state cuts funding for the programs they years. During this period, unfunded mandates from the state require, local governments may stop doing them. would have reduced our citizens ability to choose local services It's a simple, sensible principle that's been in place since voters they want.An unfunded mandate occurs when the state requires approved it in 1996. It has worked to make the partnership the county to perform tasks and does not provide funding to pay between the state and local governments stronger.It has worked for it. to keep local dollars directed to local services, chosen by local The voters of Oregon approved an amendment to Article 15 of the people, rather than being spent on state requirements. Oregon constitution (Ballot Measure 30) in 1966 which requires Now we need to keep it working. the State to pay for services it mandates local government to provide.In the past,these mandates were often unfunded and ate Section 15 of the Constitution, which prevents unfunded state away at our shrinking local tax dollar.As a result of this new law mandates on cities,counties,schools and special districts,will be there have been very few unfunded state mandates on Jackson repealed on June 30, 2001 unless Measure 84 is approved. A County. The State has been more sensitive in establishing its YES vote on Measure 84 will prevent unfunded mandates from priorities since they have to pay for mandated services on local cutting into funding for the local programs that we need.A YES government. This has allowed our citizens to have more vote on Measure 84 keeps the state accountable for decisions resources and choice in setting priorities for local services. that affect the finances in our communities. When the"unfunded mandates"amendment was approved by the Prevent unfunded mandates,and vote YES on Measure 84! voters in 1996, they included a provision that required voters to review the law in November, 2000. Measure 84 is that review. if (This information furnished by Commissioner Charlie Hales, Portland, Measure 84 is not approved,the 1996 voter-approved"unfunded Mayor Susan Roberts,Enterprise;League of Oregon Cities.) mandates"amendment will be deleted from the constitution.This would allow the Legislature,once again,to impose new programs on local governments without funding them. Article 15 of the constitution requiring the state to pay for man- dates on local government has proven to be a,good law.It should be retained.Avoid hidden taxes.Vote"Yes"on Measure 84. (This information furnished by Commissioner Jack Walker, Jackson County;Commissioner Ric Holt,Jackson County.) (This space purchased for$5001n accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 12 CONTINUE54 Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 84 Arguments ARGUMENT IN FAVOR ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION Ballot Measure 84 is about accountability and local control! Measure 84 Damages the Integrity and If Ballot Measure 84 is not readopted the Legislature and state Cohesion of Our State agencies will once again be able to create programs without bud- Endowed as Oregon is with plentiful natural resources and a geting money and force local communities to come up with the diverse population,we don't need to put roadblocks in the way of funding instead!These unfunded mandates place local citizens our ability to address problems arising from Oregon's population in the position of increasing their taxes,cutting local programs to growth or changes in the economy. Binding the state's hands to find the funds,or breaking the law.They force choices to be made set policy when it must seek to protect the quality of life in Oregon in violation of local control! makes no sense. Ballot Measure 84 is a constitutional amendment that provides Important issues are at stake, from to clean air or water stan- a large measure of protection for local control. It places a dards,to minimum standards for road or building construction,to permanent constraint on state agencies and the Legislatures safety and health for workers on the job.Major efforts to protect ability to mandate programs. They will have to provide the the quality of life and business climate in Oregon should not be funds or obtain approval from 3/5th of the Legislature first. It undermined. raises the requirements for the services and programs that they Measure 84 makes it difficult to set new policy in this state and want to create. require all governmental jurisdictions,within the state to enforce What is truly unique about Ballot Measure 84 is that Oregon's these new policies. Had Measure 84 been in place in earlier voters overwhelming approved an identical Ballot Measure in decades,Tom McCall might never have been able to promote and 1997(Measure 30).This was done with the requirement that it be pass landmark legislation such as Oregon's Open Beaches law. voted on again in the November 2000 election so its effectiveness Vote No on Measure 84 could be assessed. After four years of experience it can be Keep Oregon Prepared to Deal With the Future said that the idea has worked!The Legislature and state agen- cies have drastically limited their practice of creating programs (This information furnished by Senator Tony Corcoran,Sen.Dist.22.) without budgeting state funds to pay for running them. Local control has greatly benefited from this change in Oregon's constitution. - Join me in voting for Ballot Measure 84 to make it permanent. It has earned our support. (This information furnished by Tom Brian.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 13 Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 85 House Joint Resolution 28—Referred to the Electorate of Oregon EXPLANATORY STATEMENT by the 1999 Legislature to be voted on at the General Election, November 7,2000. •• When the Oregon Constitution was adopted in 1857,the require- ment was any new county must contain at least 400 square miles BALLOT TITLE and at least 1,200 inhabitants. The Oregon Constitution also currently forbids existing counties from being reduced to less than 400 square miles or less than 1,200 inhabitants. Ballot Measure 85 would amend the Oregon Constitution, allowing the formation 04firS"1ftiT10N li©DIFIIES of a new county containing less than 400 square miles, and the reduction of an existing county to less than 400 square miles as I '4fLATti t1+[e,MIT+ffMtaNl AREA REOUIREMENTS long as the new county has at least 100,000 inhabitants. This Cl>tl11dN Uir`NEW COUNTIES measure also states a new county may not be created on land from within an existing county unless the remaining population of 1> S irk: "Xes"vczte:modifies population and the existing county is equal to or greater than the new county at lrtlrl3tl � fpt fot€rtittgrt of,na�lr nountie the time the new county is established. No.;trote rewrig current nsttttattone€ Committee Members: Appointed By: i�fti€rgUm"area of co niias: population;of new Ortt� Senator John Lim President of the Senate Representative Ron Sunseri Speaker of the House Arnetxltuttan.Constttutton rtow requires that Representative Gary Hansen Secretary of State � s have tittrtitflf#dt€t•ar sci of 400 square mi]es and hat rtew Commissioner Sharron Kelley Secretary of State pis iiiX ittt(ifu ,:"tJf '12f#f# inhabitants. Measure permits; Commis�joner Randall Franke Members of the Committee t�,Ct?uttt�t t# be iiisltit wi#h, dr, existing criunty to be t ltt €tin 5th l�ff rt of squere,m€le$ proV€deo that new (This committee was appointed to provide an impartial explanation of the txtlsretll i4 t#1,wo inhabitants.If n$w county is estab- ballot measure pursuant to ORS 251.215.) ��t tart land ft rrf t t;ounty, existi:A91 county, must retain Si at"tom aaa�at as;that etf etew county,at time new' coutt#]f l�estatlshetl ii» TIf AT Q 1~11NA ft�: il1PACT:There is no,finartcial effect #3�t,Ste or ioolt4lr#tirtt kit a%pentitUrs or reVrtu£ . Rl TEXT OF MEASURE Be It Resolved by the Legislative Assembly of the State of Oregon: PARAGRAPH 1.Section 6,Article XV of the Constitution of the State of Oregon, is amended to read: Sec.6. [No] Each county shall [be reduced to] consist of an area of no less than [four hundred)400 square miles[;nor shall any new county be established in this State containing a less area,nor unless such new county shall contain]and a minimum population of [at least twelve hundred] 1,200 inhabitants. However,a new county may be established with,or an exist- ing county may be reduced to, an area of less than 400 square miles if the new county has more than 100,000 inhab- itants. A new county may not be established on land from within an existing county unless the existing county retains a population equal to or greater than the new county at the time the new county is established. PARAGRAPH 2.The amendment proposed by this resolu- tion shall be submitted to the people for their approval or rejection at the next regular general election held throughout this state. NOTE: Boldfaced type indicates new language; [brackets and italic]type indicates deletions or comments. 14 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 85 Arguments LEGISLATIVE ARGUMENT IN SUPPORT ARGUMENT IN FAVOR HistooL The manner of establishing counties in Oregon is Vote YES on Measure 85 unchanged since Oregon's original Constitution of 1857, when The rules for establishing new counties have not changed since the entire population was about 50,000.A county at that time was 1857 when the Oregon Constitution was adopted. County size required to have 400 square miles'and 1200 people. was based, in part, on the distance a man could cover on Today, 143 years later, things have changed a great deal. horseback in one day (approximately 400 square miles) and a Oregon's population has reached 3.3 million and continues to population requirement of at least 1,200 residents. Today, 143 grow. years later,time and distance are measured by the speed of the Internet instead of a day's horseback ride. Oregonians'govern- How it Works. Measure 85 does not require the formation of a ance requirements have also changed. new county. Instead, it changes the requirements and allows a county with less than 400 square miles and 1200 population.A Oregon's population is now numbered in the millions instead of new county may be formed provided it contains at least 100,000 thousands and our land use laws now concentrate people in inhabitants. cities. It's common to have a number of communities with resi- dents having very different personal requirements living close Safeguards.The measure protects existing counties by requiring together within a county. Communities that are still somewhat that the new county may form only if it leaves an equal to or rural in nature find themselves needing relief from county tax greater population in the existing county.Also,State taxes shared systems that support mostly big city programs in the larger by all counties (for example, gas taxes and cigarette taxes) are community. distributed based on population,not on the number of counties. Measure 85 eliminates the 400 square mile county size require- Not every city or county in Oregon would or could be affected by ment in communities with populations of 100,000 or more, and Measure 85 because of the 100,000 population requirement,but allows voters to establish new counties. Measure 85 protects in no case will any new county even begin without a vote of the existing counties by requiring that a new county may be formed local communities involved. only if it leaves an equal or greater population behind.Since those Local Control. Measure 85 is an extension of citizens' right of state taxes which are given back to counties(liquor,cigarette and self-determination.Measure 85 creates a choice for Oregonians, gasoline taxes) are based on a per capita basis, each citizen's a protection against consolidating and centralizing governments share of such taxes remains the same. when local communities may oppose such bigger, more expen- Measure 85 is about choice. It's not Civil War or the Boston Tea sive government. Measure 85 eliminates 1857 guidelines and Party. Measure 85 protects small communities from fiscal and creates another tool for Oregonians to meet the changing needs political impacts caused if a large city and a county join and of our State in a new Century. centralize services.Measure 85 gives voters in local communities We urge your"yes"vote. the right to reject efforts to force them to join a more expensive and less personal government. That protection is an important Committee Members: Appointed By: thing to remember about Measure 85. Senator John Lim President of the Senate Debra Noah Gussie McRobert David Widmark Representative Vic Backlund Speaker of the House (This information furnished by Debra Noah, Gussie McRobert, David Representative Ron Sunseri Speaker of the House Widmark.) (This Joint Legislative Committee was appointed to provide the legislative argument in support of the ballot measure pursuant to ORS 251.245.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the f accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 15 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 85 Arguments ARGUMENT IN FAVOR ARGUMENT IN FAVOR Vote YES on Ballot Measure 85 Oregon has changed a lot since 1857 This measure is not about new counties. This is simply about In 1857 Oregon's Constitution was created by a Constitutional choices and options. It's that simple. When Portland and Convention. After weighty debates on slavery, suffrage, prohibi- Multnomah County looked at merging into one governmental tion, and the rights of citizens, the Convention also considered entity, which they seem to do every five to ten years, Gresham more mundane issues like"how are we going to form counties?" looked at its choices. There were not many. Should Gresham, Troutdale, Fairview or Wood Village choose to not merge into the In the 1857, Oregon was sparsely populated. Oregon contained City-County entity, there were very few options. Through joint about a hundred thousand square miles of land but fewer than work by elected officials from the East Multnomah County region, fifty thousand settlers.The Convention took this into consideration some laws were changed which would allow the people outside of when it decided that new,counties must minimally contain 400 Portland the choice to merge into another county,only by popular square miles and 1200 people. vote.But the best option,our own small county, is not possible at Since 1857, Oregon's population has swollen past three million. this time.This measure changes that. Most of those people live in the northern end of the Willamette The Oregon Constitution's provisions for forming a new County Valley, with the odd result that Oregon's smallest counties are are old and outdated. This amendment will allow a final, last also the most heavily populated.As neighbors become packed in choice of forming a new County which is small in area but not in closer together, they begin to notice that there are significantly population.This choice is the best in fiscal matters and the best different interests within their county.Some of these differences for self-governance.There is no fiscal impact to this measure.Tax can be resolved,but often one part of a county dominates another revenue for existing counties remaining unchanged will not be politically.The result is that those citizens feel unrepresented by reduced or changed. their county government. This choice is simply the final option to make self-governance a Measure 85 provides a solution to this. possibility in certain urban regions with large populations.This will By recognizing the changes Oregon's population, Measure 85 not tear the county map of Oregon asunder. It will not ruin cities provides citizens with the choice to form a new county that more or counties. It will simply allow a choice for people numbering at closely represents their interests. least 100,000 strong to change political affiliations should a much larger population choose to change their governmental structure. What will Measure 85 do? A minority will not be forced into a large governmental experiment – Oregonians will be able to form a new county by a popular vote. if they should choose not to do so. – A new requirement of 100,000 people will replace the old Again, this is about choice.Should one large population choose requirement of 400 square miles. to merge into a big government, Measure 85 simply allows the remaining population to create their own smaller,more represen- What will Measure 85 not do? tative county. – It will not alter the distribution of legislators at the state level. John A.Leuthauser – It will not strip existing counties of population. New counties (This information furnished by John A.Leuthauser.) must leave behind more people than they take. What will Measure 85 mean? – Politically oppressed populations will be free to form a new county that better reflects their interests. – Oregonians will have more choices in determining how they choose to live. – Local governments will more closely reflect the interests of the people that they serve. Vote YES on Measure 85. (This information furnished by Richard P. Burke, Mainstream Liberty Caucus.) (This space purchased for$500 In accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. acc racy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 16 Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 86 House Joint Resolution 17—Referred to the Electorate of Oregon (5)The Legislative Assembly may enact IaAs: by the 1999 Legislature to be voted on at the General Election, (a) Establishing a tax credit, refund payment or other November 7,2000. mechanism by which the excess revenues are returned to taxpayers,and establishing administrative procedures con- nected therewith. BALLOT TITLE (b) Allowing the excess revenues to be reduced by ad •. ministrative costs associated with returning the excess • revenues. (c) Permitting a taxpayer's share of the excess revenues y ' not to be returned to the taxpayer if the taxpayer's share is less than a de minimis amount identified by the Legislative Assembly. (d)Permitting a taxpayer's share of excess revenues to be " offset by any liability of the taxpayer for which the state is authorized to undertake collection efforts. z x r6 f�I � s# tt (6)(a) Prior to the close of a biennium for which an esti- �t mate described in subsection (1) of this section has been made,the Legislative Assembly,by a two-thirds majority vote � � " cam)rItI1l , z � £ of all members elected to each House,may enact legislation declaring an emergency and increasing the amount of the estimate prepared pursuant to subsection(1)of this section. (b)The prohibition against declaring an emergency in an act regulating taxation or exemption in section la,Article IX f � £ of this Constitution, does not apply to legislation enacted pursuant to this subsection. Y (7)This section does not apply: (a)If,for a biennium or any portion of a biennium,a state tax is not imposed on or measured by the income of individuals. �� �1htflettldtz� (b)To revenues derived from any minimum tax imposed vex on corporations for the privilege of carrying on or doing business in this state that is imposed as a fixed amount and that is nonapportioned (except for changes of accounting periods). (c)To biennia beginning before July 1,2001. ,r`� .}£de£. � P+,g PARAGRAPH 2.The amendment proposed by this resolu- tion shall be submitted to the people for their approval or TEXT 0 F MEASURE rejection at the next regular general election held throughout this state. Be It Resolved by the Legislative Assembly of the State of Oregon: PARAGRAPH 1. The Constitution of the State of Oregon is amended by creating a new section 14 to be added to and made a part of Article IX,such section to read: SECTION 14. (1) As soon as is practicable after adjourn- ment sine die of a regular session of the Legislative Assembly,the Governor shall cause an estimate to be pre- pared of revenues that will be received by the General Fund for the biennium beginning July 1.The estimated revenues from corporate income and excise taxes shall be separately stated from the estimated revenues from other General Fund sources. (2)As soon as is practicable after the end of the biennium, the Governor shall cause actual collections of revenues received by the General Fund for that biennium to be deter- mined.The revenues received from corporate income and excise taxes shall be determined separately from the rev- enues received from other General Fund sources. (3)If the revenues received by the General Fund from cor- porate income and excise taxes during the biennium exceed the amount estimated to be received from corporate income and excise taxes for the biennium,by two percent or more, the total amount of the excess shall be returned to corporate income and excise taxpayers. (4) If the revenues received from General Fund revenue sources, exclusive of those described in subsection (3) of this section, during the biennium exceed the amount esti- mated to be received from such sources for the biennium,by two percent or more,the total amount of the excess shall be returned to personal income taxpayers. 17 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 86 EXPLANATORY STATEMENT Ballot Measure 86. adds a new section to the Oregon Constitution. It would require refunds to taxpayers when state General Fund revenues exceed state estimates of General Fund .• revenues by two percent or more,as currently required by statute. Current statutory law requires the state to estimate General Fund revenues separately from corporate income and excise taxes and from all other sources, including personal income taxes, for each two-year state budget period (also called a bien- nium).If collections for the biennium from either corporate income and excise taxes or from other General Fund revenue sources exceed their estimates by two percent or more, current statutes require that the surplus over 100% of the estimate, commonly known as the"kicker,"be refunded to taxpayers in the form of a direct refund or through a tax credit. Ballot Measure 86 would establish these "kicker' refunds as constitutional requirements.As under current law, Ballot Measure 86 would require"kicker'refunds to be determined separately for corporate taxpayers and for personal income taxpayers. Ballot Measure 86 would permit the Legislative Assembly,by a two-thirds majority vote of all members elected to each house,to increase the estimates at any time during the two-year state bud- get period.The effect of an increase in an estimate would be to reduce or eliminate the"kicker"refunds otherwise due taxpayers under Ballot Measure 86. By contrast, the Oregon Constitution currently permits the Legislative Assembly to modify or eliminate the statutory"kicker"by a three-fifths majority vote of all members elected to each house of the Legislative Assembly. Ballot Measure 86 would permit the Legislative Assembly to determine the means by which "kicker" refunds are returned to taxpayers,to deduct administrative costs from refunds,to withold refunds of very small("de minimis")amounts and to offset a tax- payer's refund against outstanding liabilities owed by the taxpayer to the state. Ballot Measure 86 would apply to biennia beginning on or after July 1,2001. Committee Members: Appointed By: Senator Bill Fisher President of the Senate Representative Tim Knopp Speaker of the House Senator Neil Bryant Secretary of State Representative Ken Strobeck Secretary of State Jerry Hudson Members of the Committee (This committee was appointed to provide an impartial explanation of the ballot measure pursuant to ORS 251.215.) 18 CONTIN ME—Do Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 86 Arguments LEGISLATIVE ARGUMENT IN SUPPORT ARGUMENT IN FAVOR HISTORY OF THE"KICKER LAW" Support the Kicker The surplus"kicker law",enacted in 1979,provided for the return Return the People's money to the People! of, or a credit on, personal and corporate/excise taxes when The "kicker" has been the single most popular version of tax collections exceeded projected revenues by at least two percent. reform in the history of Oregon.It is a very simple.The Governor The 1979 law applied to the biennium beginning July 1,1979 only, and Legislature balance the budget then return the remaining unless approved by the voters at the 1980 primary election. On funds collected over 2%to the people of Oregon. May 20, 1980,the voters approved continuance of the"tax reduc- tion program"by a vote of 636,565 to 64,979. This amendment must be placed in the Constitution next to the requirement to balance the State budget.You would think a law Under the"kicker law", state economists issue a forecast at the would be good enough! end of every legislative session projecting what they think income tax collections will be in the coming two-year budget period. If Unfortunately,Democratic Governors and Democratic Legislators actual revenue exceeds 2 percent more than the forecast, the have consistently tried to spend your money.They have opposed extra tax collected, including the 2 percent, must be refunded. returning a dime of your money.It is not pay as you go but steal Individual and corporate/excise kicker dollars are calculated as you go in their book! separately. The Republican Legislature fought hard to return non-budgeted This kicker refund has been triggered seven times since 1981, funds back to the people. Despite rhetoric, the Republican returning a total of$1.2 billion in personal income tax and$426 Legislature funded education at the highest level in Oregon million in corporate/excise tax.The Legislature kept the personal history,and passed education accountability in the form of school kicker dollars in 1989-91 and the corporate/excise kicker dollars report cards. in 1991-93 to balance the budget. Rhetoric claiming the amendment will hurt education is false.The NEW TAXPAYER PROTECTIONS Legislature and Governor can work together. Current law requires a three-fifths vote in each house of the Small businesses support the "kicker:' It is common sense Legislative Assembly to keep the kicker dollars.Ballot Measure 86 accountability of elected officials.Look at the real tax brackets for amends Oregon's Constitution to require an increase to a 2/3 vote Oregon small businesses that make up 96%of the economy: in each house of the Legislative Assembly to keep the kicker . Federal tax bracket 28 to 36% dollars. • Employee SS FICA 8% The "kicker law" is a statute. Like any other statute, it can be . State income tax 9% amended or repealed by the legislature.Ballot Measure 86 would . Business portion SS FICA 15% assure that the"kicker law"could only be amended or repealed by - Property tax 2% a vote of the people. • Health insurance payments Committee Members: Appointed By: Local businesses are tax bracketed at 63% to 70%. Small Senator Bill Fisher President of the Senate businessmen make less than elected officials or government Representative Tim Knopp Speaker of the House employees.Any retirement savings comes out of the leftovers that Representative Jackie Winters Speaker of the House feed and cloth their children. Local businesses support local government, and expect local government to support the local (This Joint Legislative Committee was appointed to provide the legislative economy. argument in support of the ballot measure pursuant to ORS 251.245.) The Republican Legislature asked Oregonians to send a tax message.Small businesses cannot afford higher taxes. Please support the"kicker"amendment,and look forward to any refund due at Christmas. Respectfully, Brian J.Boquist North Indian Creek Ranch ICI Cattle&Timber Company International Charter Incorporated of Oregon (This information furnished by Brian J. Boquist, Managing Partner & Director, North Indian Creek Ranch, ICI Cattle& Timber Company LLC, International Charter Incorporated of Oregon.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 19 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 86 Arguments ARGUMENT IN FAVOR ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION OREGON HOUSE SPEAKER LYNN SNODGRASS Oregon League of Women Voters Opposes Measure 86. SUPPORTS BALLOT MEASURE 86 The League of Women Voters of Oregon is a grass-roots, "It's not the bureaucrats'money, it belongs to Oregon families!" non-partisan organization which encourages informed and active "The kicker is an over-collection of money,and participation of citizens in government. Since 1920, the League has worked to inform voters, improve our political process and people are entitled to a refund." strengthen our democracy. "Measure 86 was placed on the ballot by the Oregon Legislature The League of Women Voters of Oregon opposes Measure 86 on my watch, because it does not belong in the Constitution. and I want to make sure taxpayers get back The Constitution is the fundamental legal document which estab- lishes permanent rules governing the State. It is inappropriate what's rightfully theirs." and unreasonable to clutter the Constitution with detailed language and policy on taxes and budgets. The Constitution "Oregon families work hard,they pay taxes,when we collect should rarely be changed.Tax and budget policy to meet new cir- too much, it's our moral obligation to return the excess" cumstances and changing needs can be made by statute,either "Help curb the growth of government by putting the kicker by the Legislature or by citizen initiative. Simply put, rules about what happens when "general fund in the Oregon Constitution" revenues exceed state estimates by more then two percent" VOTE YES ON MEASURE 86 do not belong in the same place as our fundamental guaran- tees of freedom of speech, freedom of assembly, and free- Lynn Snodgrass dom of religion. Speaker of the House The League is also concerned about this measure as tax and (This information furnished by Lynn Snodgrass,Speaker of the House.) budget policy.It is not wise to have a law which,in effect,prevents the state from establishing a surplus fund to use in hard economic times. Even if this measure reflected good tax and budget policy, it still should have no place in the Constitution. PLEASE JOIN US IN VOTING"NO"ON MEASURE 86. (This information furnished by Paula Krane,President,League of Women Voters of Oregon.) (This space purchased for$5001n accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$5001n accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 20 CONTINUE-D-10 Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 86 Arguments ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION GOVERNOR JOHN KITZHABER URGES The Oregon AFL-CIO Recommends a A"NO"VOTE ON MEASURE 86 NO Vote on Measure 86 IT'S FISCALLY IRRESPONSIBLE AND DOES NOT We believe tax relief should be targeted to those who need it BELONG IN THE CONSTITUTION most–to Oregon's working families. Dear Fellow Oregonians: Unfortunately,the"kicker law"as currently written has generated As Governor, I share responsibility for the fiscal stewardship of disproportionate tax credits for our least needy taxpayers – our State. In making decisions about taxes and spending, I am Oregon's largest,most profitable corporations. obliged to think about how those decisions will affect our State, In the 1990s,kicker credits for corporate taxpayers averaged 18% not just in these good economic times, but in the hard times that per biennium,while refunds to individual taxpayers averaged only we know we will someday face. 5%per biennium.And most of the refunds to individuals went to Measure 86 is fiscally irresponsible. It will make it extremely our highest-income taxpayers. difficult, if not impossible,for the State to ever build up a savings The kicker law is one reason that we have seen a dramatic shift account in good times– an account that we will need to meet in Oregon's tax burden from businesses to individual taxpayers the emergency needs we are certain to have during the next over the last decade–and why funding for schools and human economic downturn. services has been squeezed while we have enjoyed unprece- Measure 86 also gives Constitutional force to State economists' dented economic prosperity. estimates of future revenues.The measure tells the State what A formula that produces such grossly unfair tax credits for can and cannot happen when an economist's estimate is off by our least needy taxpayers – and undermines funding for more that 2%.The Constitution should not be amended lightly. public education--should not be placed in our constitution. Please join me in voting"No"on Measure 86. Please join us in voting No on Measure 86. (This information furnished by John A.Kitzhaber,M.D.) Tim Nesbitt,'President Brad Witt,Secretary-Treasurer Oregon AFL-CIO (This information furnished by Tim Nesbitt,Oregon AFL-CIO Committee on Political Education.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 21 F_ 'Official 2000 General.Election Voters'Pamphlet-Statewide Measures Measure No. 87 House Joint Resolution 52—Referred to the Electorate of Oregon EXPLANATORY STATEMENT by the 1999 Legislature to be voted on at the General Election, November 7,2000. Ballot Measure 87 would add a new section to the Bill of Rights of the Oregon Constitution.Ballot Measure 87 would remove the limitations that the state constitutional right of free expression BALLOT TITLE (Article 1, Section 8) places on the authority of a local govern- ment, such as a city or county, to regulate through zoning the location of a"sexually oriented business,"in favor of the zoning •• authority allowed by the United States Constitution.The United States Constitution gives each city and county more ability to �+��tfRi< IT zone the location of sexually oriented businesses than does �1`Flibltt ! fRilli Article 1,Section 8 of the Oregon Constitution. ��e 3 iRE$UtW�C f)iw � 3 Under current Oregon law,cities and counties have the author- ity to regulate the locations of all businesses.However, if a local onyyyt�yy`?� e8 �� t€igtn38eifttae€l.ri8tgtt government seeks to regulate the location of a sexually oriented business based only on the content of what it displays or sells, � t* P " # ��U3lrls Ark 7rtln tiLtSl- then that is a violation of the business' right to free expression nesaa , ritpretortte€ ff lure under the Oregon Constitution.Article 1, Section 8 provides that 5 flrr�elidtl ter$ o � r the government shall pass no law"restraining the free expression lltott ort�rttdas[tss doh show of opinion,or restricting the right to speak,write,or print freely on tr8 firteCJsl�USAtd �otfte tffsiis any subject whatever."Therefore, if a local government currently 1 �f �ttx 88 wants to specially zone the location of sexually oriented busi- nesses, the government has to show some threatened or actual l�lffct qtr ltl# �Yt►l�� rni� stab z : neighborhood harm from the business. . SS�9tif #hpfC ift )� �� my Ballot Measure 87 would allow local governments to specially zone the location of sexually oriented businesses without show- ag ing any threatened or actual harm, to the extent that the United rtttlittrrf11� 71trt�#1€ t3,istn#auttct : tr tftspl8 titlBtat& ' States Constitution permits.The "sexually oriented businesses" #tCisi s � �l#)l covered by Ballot Measure 87 are those whose "principal busi- � � 4!1l) � � TherES ltt � rirt1�' Hess" is: nude dancing; nude entertainment; or the production, dt 5 !C fi # distribution or display of representations of sexual activity. 4� �8ft�� 3eti�t€ttlres 43t C&vim F Committee Members: Appointed By: Senator Neil Bryant President of the Senate Representative Rob Patridge Speaker of the House TEXT 0 F MEASURE David Fidanque Secretary of State Representative Floyd Prozanski Secretary of State Roy Pulvers Members of the Committee Be It Resolved by the Legislative Assembly of the State of Oregon: (This committee was appointed to provide an impartial explanation of the ballot measure pursuant to ORS 251.215.) PARAGRAPH 1. The Constitution of the State of Oregon is amended by creating a new section 42 to be added to and made a part of Article I,such section to read: 'SECTION 42.(1)Notwithstanding section 8 of this Article, to the extent permitted by the United States Constitution, political subdivisions•in this state may, through the use of zoning authority, regulate the location of sexually oriented businesses. (2) As used in this section,"sexually oriented business" means a commercial establishment, the principal business of which is nude dancing,nude entertainment or the produc- tion, distribution or display of representations of sexual activity. PARAGRAPH 2.The amendment proposed by this resolu- tion shall be submitted to the people for their approval or rejection at the next regular general election held throughout this state. 22 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 87 Arguments LEGISLATIVE ARGUMENT IN SUPPORT ARGUMENT IN FAVOR Measure 87 amends Oregon's Constitution to allow cities If you're married, suppose I could take the very heart of your and counties to locate sexually oriented businesses. relationship with your spouse into my hands.And then suppose I took this beautiful love that brought you together as man and wife, Today under Oregon law, nude dancing establishments and adult and tarnish it,demean it,defile it,and cause it to be deformed. bookstores are able to locate in our neighborhoods and next to our local schools and parks because cities and counties are The Bible strongly affirms the beauty, blessedness, and joy of powerless to keep sexually oriented businesses away from the sexual relationships in the context of marriage. In the most most vulnerable members of our community,our children. intimate of our moments as man and wife, we express love in a way that is most blessed. Clearly, this is what we desire for our Oregon is one of two states in the Nation that prohibits cities and children as they mature and move towards marriage. counties from determining,through zoning,the proper location of p But this is precisely what is attacked by the satanic pornography sexually oriented businesses in their community. Measure 87 y allows cities and counties to determine where sexually oriented industry.Young men become brute beasts, and women imper- businesses are located in their community. sonal objects in the minds of those dominated by pornography. This is the horror of pornography.Not that it makes sex fiends of Measure 87 specifically defines"sexually oriented businesses"as some, but that it removes the wonder and beauty of Biblical a commercial establishment, the principal business of which is sexuality in the context of marriage, tarnishing the most inti- the production, distribution or display of representation of sexual mate of our human relationships.How can it help but wreak havoc activity to insure that innocent businesses are not affected. on the public good? • Measure 87 allows local communities to determine the location The Bible is the standard by which all men's actions must be prop- of sexually oriented businesses. erly evaluated and governed.It tells us that civil government's job • Measure 87 will not affect public libraries, convenience stores is to effect public good by restraining certain sins as it punishes and normal bookstores. evildoers(Rom.13:4)and by praising the righteous(2 Pet.2:14). • Measure 87 will not result in the censoring of books, maga Adultery was a capital crime in the Old Testament (Lev.20:10). zines or videotapes. Our English word tells us something about this sin.Adultery adul- terates(debases, contaminates, makes impure)the relationship • Measure 87 will not ban sexually oriented businesses. with one's mate.It eats away at the very fabric of society.It must Measure 87 provides a common sense approach to give local be restrained. communities the tools they need to improve the quality of life in Clearly,the Bible asserts that pornography is a like sin,an adul- their community. terating evil (Matt. 5:27-30; Rom. 1:24; Gal. 5:19; Rev.21:27). It Measure 87 is only about...location,location,location! must be strongly discouraged by the civil government. We therefore support Measure 87. Committee Members: Appointed By: Prepared by the Parents Education Association, a family-based Senator Neil Bryant President of the Senate Biblical Alternative to the National Education Association Representative Randall Edwards Speaker of the House (This information furnished by Dennis R. Tuuri, Parents Education Representative Rob Patridge Speaker of the House Association.) (This Joint Legislative Committee was appointed to provide the legislative argument in support of the ballot measure pursuant to ORS 251.245.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 23 CONTINUED P Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 87 Arguments ARGUMENT IN FAVOR ARGUMENT IN FAVOR SUPPORT SMART PLANNING NUDE DANCING ADULT BOOKSTORES Vote Yes on 87 DID YOU KNOW UNDER OREGON LAW THESE BUSINESSES We are a neighborhood group from Portland. CAN LOCATE NEXT DOOR TO YOUR ... We are not anti-porn.We are pro-smart planning. Our Story. SCHOOLS DAY CARE CENTERS There are seven adult businesses along a three-mile stretch of the commercial strip by our neighborhood.About two years ago a PARKS sex superstore located at a neighborhood access point--directly AND YOU CAN'T DO ANYTHING ABOUT IT! across the street from homes -- a couple blocks from an elementary school. Measure 87 empowers local communities to decide where sexu- The Portland City Council wanted to help with zoning, so did the ally oriented businesses locate. state legislature.They could do absolutely nothing. The Oregonian said about Measure 87, then House Joint Cities can zone gas stations,liquor stores and farms. Resolution 52: Why do sex shops have special protections from zoning? "it would give Oregonians a chance to deal with the proliferation of sex-oriented businesses and the Our group ranges from liberal Democrats to conservative helplessness of people who want to keep the busi- Republicans.We have rejected offers of help from the Christian nesses away from their homes and schools:' Coalition.We are not a religious group. We are average citizens who are fighting for our neighborhood. "it would simply invite voters to give their local elected officials the same ability to zone for sex Will you help us? shops that they have for other businesses:' Adult Business Effect Neighborhoods "it would not lower Oregon's standards of free Austin:a study documents sex crimes occurring at a 66%higher expression."(June 29, 1999 Editorial) rate where there are multiple sexually oriented businesses. In bipartisan cooperation,these legislators voted to refer Measure Los Angeles: responses to a property owner survey find that 87 to you: when adult oriented businesses locate near business - female State Representatives State Senators patrons decrease and attracting employees is harder. Atkinson Backlund Adams Indianapolis: appraisers find homes within 1,000 feet of a new Beyer Butler Bryant adult business devalue an average of 20% Close Devlin Corcoran Edwards Gardner Courtney BM 87 is already law in 48 states Gianella Harper Dertler In 48 states -- city and state governments have the authority to Hill Hopson Dukes zone adult businesses. Jenson Kafoury Duncan Knopp Kropf Ferrioli 48 states (including Nevada, Louisiana and New York) -- have Krummel Kruse Fisher laws similar to Measure 87,yet clearly adult business continue to Lehman Leonard Hannon satisfy customers. Lewis Lokan Hartung Measure 87 allows smart planning Lowe Lundquist Lim Mannix Merkley Miller Some claim that they wouldn't mind if a sex shop opened across Messerle Minnis Nelson from their school,home or community center. Montgomery Morgan Qutub Patridge Ross Shannon This is elitism. Schrader Shetterly Shields If they shared the experience of effected neighborhoods they Snodgrass Starr Tarno would care. Poorer communities shouldn't be dumping grounds Strobeck Sunseri Timms for the secondary effects of sex shop clusters. Wells Welsh Yih Williams Wilson The Portland City Council voted August 24,2000 to support Winters Witt Measure 87 PROTECT OUR CHILDREN Vote"YES"on 87 RETURN LOCAL CONTROL TO LOCAL COMMUNITIES (This information furnished by Russ Brown, SIEGE:A Campaign Against VOTE YES ON 87 Porn Near Homes and Schools.) Authorized by Oregonians for Children, 712 East Jackson, Medford, OR 97504, (541)732-0644, www.Oregon87.org (This information furnished by Peter Cheney,Oregonians for Children) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) [accuracy e printing of—this does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- nt by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the or truth of any statement made in the argument. I accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 24 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 87 Arguments ARGUMENT IN FAVOR ARGUMENT IN FAVOR FREE EXPRESSION IS SAFE UNDER MEASURE 87 SEX SHOP<—450 Feet—>ELEMENTARY SCHOOL Local choice through zoning, "would not-- as it should not Is this what you want for your child or grandchild? trample on freedoms of expression as outright bans would do;' It is happening in Oregon today!!! The Oregonian newspaper said in its June 29, 1999 editorial favoring Measure 87(then House Joint Resolution 52). DON'T LET IT HAPPEN IN YOUR COMMUNITY VOTE YES ON 87 THE OREGONIAN CALLS MEASURE 87 A, "SENSIBLE,NECESSARY CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT." Do you want a sex shop within 450 Feet of your child's elemen- "Courts in other states have accepted zoning restrictions on tary school? In Coos Bay children are forced to live with this the sex industry. Since 1987, though, the Oregon Supreme reality and parents are powerless to do anything about it. Court's interpretations of the state constitution's freedom of Today,Oregon law prohibits citizens and local governments from speech provisions have consistently thwarted local efforts to locating sexually oriented businesses away from places children regulate sex shops" The Oregonian said. play like schools, parks, and day care centers. A YES vote on Measure 87 refers,"to voters a clean, straightforward change Measure 87 gives local citizens an opportunity to say where in the state constitution" sexually oriented businesses locate in their community. Measure 87 allows cities and counties to locate sexually Measure 87 will not censor or ban adult business.Local commu- oriented businesses in appropriate areas of a community without nities in 48 states have the ability to say where sexually oriented trying to ban them. businesses locate in their community. Give your community an It gives,"Oregonians a chance to deal with the proliferation of opportunity to say where sexually oriented businesses locate. sex-oriented businesses and the helplessness of people who want to keep the businesses away from their homes and schools," IF YOU WANT A VOICE IN WHERE The Oregonian said. SEXUALLY ORIENTED BUSINESSES MEASURE 87 IS DIFFERENT ARE LOCATED IN YOUR COMMUNITY FROM PAST BALLOT MEASURES VOTE YES ON 87!1!! "A straightforward,uncluttered measure to amend the constitu- THESE MAYORS SAY VOTE"YES"ON 87 tion to allow zoning of sex-oriented businesses would not revive CITY MAYOR the arguments about what's obscene or moral that contributed to Beaverton Rob Drake defeats of measures in 1994 and 1996. It would not lower Bend Jim Young Oregon's standards of free expression,"The Oregonian said. Eugene Jim Torrey "It would simply invite voters to give their local elected officials 9 the same ability to zone for sex shops that they have for other Forest Grove Richard Kidd businesses" Grants Pass Gordon Anderson Gresham Charles Becker SUPPORT FOR MEASURE 87 MAKES SENSE Hillsboro Gordon Faber "Oregonians deserve a ballot referral on this question that is Irrigon Linda Fox uncluttered with either morality-driven provisions or industry- Lake Oswego Bill Klammer sponsored exceptions," The Oregonian said. Oregon City John F.William,Jr. Salem Mike Swaim PROTECT OUR CHILDREN Sherwood Walt Hitchcock SUPPORT COMMON-SENSE Silverton Ken Hector VOTE YES ON 87 Wilsonville Charlotte Lehan Authorized by Oregonians for Children, PROTECT OUR CHILDREN 712 East Jackson, Medford,OR 97504, (541)732-0644, RETURN LOCAL CONTROL TO LOCAL COMMUNITIES www.Oregon87.org VOTE YES ON 87!!!!! (This information furnished by Peter Cheney,Oregonians for Children.) Authorized by Oregonians for Children, 712 East Jackson,Medford,OR 97504, (514)732-0644, www.Oregon87.org (This information furnished by Peter Cheney,Oregonians for Children.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 25 CONTINUED Official 2060 General.Election Voters'Parnphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 87 Arguments ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION This measure is about freedom.Our freedom as adults to make MEASURE 87 WOULD WEAKEN, informed choices. Make no mistakes, this measure is meant to THE OREGON BILL OF RIGHTS1 eliminate adult entertainment,not merely to rezone it.The propo- nents of this measure would have you believe that this is merely VOTE"NO"ON MEASURE 87 a way to move adult businesses away from what they deem to be As a former Justice of the Oregon Supreme Court,I have spent sensitive areas.In truth,it will allow cities to eliminate those busi- a lot of time thinking about the practical application of the Oregon nesses through zoning restrictions. Bill of Rights to the everyday lives of Oregonians. This same type of measure has been attempted in major cities across the country.Where it has passed, the adult industry has We should be proud of our state Bill of Rights which has pro- been effectively eliminated. All while under the guise of merely tected us against the possible excesses of government since we rezoning. became a state in 1859. We are currently afforded a choice when it comes to the adult Unfortunately, when the Legislature decided to send Measure entertainment in this state. If this measure passes, and adult 87 to the ballot,they chose to undermine the Bill of Rights.Here businesses are shut down, or forced into the most undesirable is the current language of Article 1, section 8—the provision of locations,our choice has been eliminated. Oregon Constitution that Measure 87 would partially repeal: Both tolerance and intolerance have a way of spreading.If we as individuals become intolerant of the views of those around us, "No law shall be passed restraining the free expression of they will in turn become intolerant of us.We needn't accept the opinion, or restricting the right to speak, write, or print freely on views of our neighbors,we only need to realize that they have just any subject whatever; but every person shall be responsible for as much right to express their views as we do. As tolerance the abuse of this right:' grows,our society as a whole becomes a better place to live. MEASURE 87 TAKES AWAY YOUR RIGHTS Opposing this measure doesn't necessarily mean that you TO FREE EXPRESSION support the adult entertainment industry.It means you recognize its right to exist, regardless of whether you support it.There is a For over 140 years, this language in the Oregon Bill of Rights fine line between showing someone how you believe life should has protected the right of all Oregonians to decide for ourselves be lived, and telling them how they should live. This measure what we want to read, see and hear in the privacy of our own crosses that line. homes. If passed, Measure 87 will partially replace our current Freedom is a gift that is passed from one generation to the constitutional guarantee of free expression with weaker federal next.With each constraint that we place on ourselves,with each constitutional provisions. diminished freedom,with each choice removed,we are that much weaker as a people.By passing a measure such as this one,we W don't need to erode our basic freedoms n deal with the are restricting that freedom not only for-ourselves, but for future problems caused by "sexually oriented businesses:' Local generations. governments already have all the power they need to deal with businesses that are causing problems. (This information furnished by Rob Reynolds.) DON'T WEAKEN THE OREGON BILL OF RIGHTS! VOTE NO ON MEASURE 8711 Betty Roberts, Retired Justice,Oregon Supreme Court (This information furnished by Betty Roberts, No Censorship - No on Measure 87 Committee.) (This space purchased for$500 In accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 In accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the [accuracy.or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 26 CONTINUED J Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 87 Arguments ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION OREGON LIBRARIANS AGAINST CENSORSHIP THE LEGISLATURE SHOULDN'T HAVE IGNORED URGE YOU TO VOTE NO ON MEASURE 87! THE WILL OF THE VOTERS We are librarians who cherish the right of all Oregonians to VOTE NO ON MEASURE 87! decide for ourselves what we want to read, see and hear in the As legislators, we were appalled when a majority of our privacy of our own homes. colleagues voted to refer another censorship ballot measure to Measure 87 is written in way that would weaken that funda- the voters. mental protection of the Oregon Bill of Rights and open the door As the voters, you have already rejected similar measures to censorship in Oregon. twice before:Measure 19 in 1994 and Measure 31 in 1996. We don't need to weaken the Oregon Bill of Rights to deal with Both times you said: "NO – DON'T WEAKEN THE FREE the zoning of"sexually oriented businesses"and we shouldn't. EXPRESSION PROTECTIONS OF THE OREGON BILL OF LOCAL GOVERNMENTS HAVE ALL THE POWER RIGHTS!" THEY REALLY NEED What part of"NO"doesn't the legislature understand? Currently, cities and counties have broad zoning authority to There are lots of reasons why you should reject this measure restrict and regulate the locations of all businesses.If a business a third time, but one of the best is to remind the majority of causes problems, cities and counties already have the power to Legislators that it was wrong for them to assume that you didn't shut down those businesses. know what you were doing the first two times you cast your vote Measure 87 will give cities and counties the power to shut on this issue. down businesses even if they aren't causing any problems—just PLEASE JOIN US IN VOTING NO ON MEASURE 871t because the politicians think those businesses are offensive. Senator Kate Brown Rep.Dan Gardner We shouldn't give politicians the power to decide for us what Senator Ginny Burdick Rep Gary Haansen we can read, see or hear. Once they start to censor which art Senator Lee Beyer Rep.Kitty Prcy galleries we can go to--or what video stores or movie theaters— Senator Susan Castillo Rep.Floyd Prozanski where will the censorship stop? Senator Cliff Trow Rep.Jackie Taylor DON'T OPEN THE DOOR TO CENSORSHIP! Rep.Chris Beck Rep.Vicki Walker VOTE NO ON MEASURE 871111 Rep.Jo Ann Bowman Colleen Bell Jeanne Goodrich Larry R.Oberg (This information furnished by Andrea R.Meyer, No Censorship-No on Karyle Butcher Carol Hildebrand Carolyn S.Peake Measure 87 Committee.) Diedre Conkling Curtis L.Kiefer Wyma Jane Rogers Ginnie Cooper Candace Morgan Joanna Rood Robert Ray Craddick Mary Norman Janet Webster Carole Dickerson (This information furnished by Jeanne Goodrich, No Censorship-No on Measure 87 Committee.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 27 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 87 Arguments ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION SUPPORT THE ARTS HERE'S WHAT THE LEGISLATORS VOTE"NO"ON MEASURE 87!! WHO WROTE MEASURE 87 As Oregon artists, authors, performers, and educators, we ARE HOPING YOU WON'T FIGURE OUT know that Measure 87 is a threat to artistic freedom in Oregon The legislators who wrote Measure 87 want you to believe because it would allow local governments to decide for you what they're not taking away your freedom.That's just not true. businesses are"sexually oriented." Here are some other things the supporters of Measure 87 are There is no telling which art galleries, theaters, concert halls, hoping you won't realize before you vote: book stores or neighborhood video stores might fit the politicians' idea of a"sexually oriented business"if Measure 87 is approved. • It will partially repeal the Oregon Bill of Rights protection of free expression that hasn't been changed since we became Oregon has a proud history of artistic freedom—in large part a state in 1859. because the Oregon Bill of Rights contains some of the strongest protections for free expression in the country. But Measure 87 • It will replace our current free expression protections with would weaken that protection and open the door to government weaker federal constitutional standards. censorship. • Cities and counties already have the power to shut down We've seen what happens in other states with weaker free businesses that cause problems. expression protections: • While Measure 87 won't allow banning adult businesses, it • politicians tried to shut down the Cincinnati Art Institute will require local governments to set aside areas in every city when it sponsored an exhibit of sexually suggestive photos and county where"sexually oriented"businesses can locate. • in Oklahoma City, officials tried to shut down a local video • City and county politicians will have the power to put sex store because it rented"The Tin Drum" shops in your neighborhood.They'll have to put them some- If Measure 87 is approved, instead of deciding for ourselves where. what we want to read, see and hear, the politicians will make • Depending on how the politicians define"sexually oriented" those decisions for us. businesses, this measure could cover art galleries, book- Don't be fooled.Measure 87 weakens the Oregon Bill of Rights stores, neighborhood video stores and even internet service and Oregon's protection of free expression.We don't need to do providers. that and we shouldn't!! • What's worse, all 276 cities and counties in the state could Support Oregon artists.Vote No on Measure 87H adopt different standards for what is and isn't the"principal business" of "commercial establishments" who sell or rent Ursula K.LeGuin,author products that include nudity or"representations"of"sexual James Canfield,choreographer activity."This patchwork quilt of censorship laws will mean an Dan Reed, musician art gallery that's legal in one community might be shut down Kristy Edmunds, artist in the neighboring town. Henk Pander,artist John Daniel,author Can you imagine government employees checking with your Valerie Brooks,writer local bookstore to see if they've sold too many romance novels by Phillip M.Margolin,author Nora Roberts lately? Maybe your neighborhood video store has Jan Eliot,cartoonist("Stone Soup") rented too many R-rated movies this month. Once censorship Molly Gloss,author gets started,there's no telling where it will go. Peter Sears, poet,teacher, publisher DON'T GIVE UP YOUR BILL OF RIGHTS Jessica Maxwell,author PROTECTION OF FREE EXPRESSION! Sydney Thompson,Community of Writers Thomas M. Lauderdale, musician and artistic director, Pink VOTE NO ON MEASURE 871! Martini Sally C.Lawrence,President,Pacific Northwest College of Arts Oregon Coalition for Free Expression Judith Barrington, writer and director of the Flight of the Mind (This information furnished by Janet Arenz, Oregon Coalition for Free Writing Workshops Expression.) Ruth Gundle, publisher,The Eighth Mountain Press (This information furnished by Joan Biggs,No Censorship-No on Measure 87 Committee.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 28 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 87 Arguments ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION THE ACLU URGES YOU TO VOTE NO ON MEASURE 87 Vote No on Measure 87 MAKE SURE YOU READ THE FINE PRINT!! Oregon has the strongest free speech protections in the country. of Measure 87 haven't told you is that this It is a testament to the strength and diversity of our society that What the proponents we protect speech that is socially unpopular.This measure will amendment to the Oregon Bill of Rights will give every city coun- open the door to new forms of censorship in Oregon. It's a bad cil and county commission the power to locate"sexually oriented" idea. businesses wherever they want,and they will have to allow them to locate somewhere.They could locate these businesses in your Most of us realize that we do not have the right to tell our neighborhood or even create a red light district near your home neighbors what they can watch or read, especially in the privacy or business. of their own homes.People who do not realize this are known as MEASURE 87 HAS A HUGE LOOPHOLE! busybodies. The legislators who wrote Measure 87 are hoping that you'll This is the third time in recent years that busybodies have tried to carve exceptions into Oregon's free speech clause.The voters never read or think about the actual language of this constitutional defeated the busybodies the first two times, yet the Legislature amendment before you vote. has referred it to us a third time.How many times will we have to The measure covers "commercial establishments" whose defeat this before the Legislature gets the message? "principal business"is nude dancing or nude entertainment.The This measure turns zoning codes into busybody weapons.Who problem is that nude dancing bars and taverns make the vast knows where the busybodies will stop?This amendment catches majority of their revenue from the sale of alcohol and video poker. mainstream movie theaters,playhouses,bookstores,video rental In order to apply Measure 87 to nude dancing bars and tav- stores,website operators and even libraries in its net.How many erns,cities and counties will have to define"principal business"in of your choices do you want determined by the busybodies? a way that will sweep in mainstream art galleries,bookstores and If Measure 87 passes: neighborhood video stores. Busybodies may decide that a local theater doesn't show That's why we say Measure 87 will open the door to censor- enough G-Rated movies. ship.We don't need the government deciding which pictures in art galleries and museums are "sexually oriented" We also don't Busybodies may decide that the local playhouse has too need the government checking the inventory of neighborhood many risque performances. bookstores to see how many books have passages with"repre- Busybodies may decide that your neighborhood book- sentations"of sexual activity. store sells too many romance novels. Tell the Legislature one more time they shouldn't try to repeal If Measure 87 passes the Constitution will no longer protect your the free expression protection of our Constitution. choices. DON'T WEAKEN OUR BILL OF RIGHTS! If you care about the choices available to you,please vote NO on VOTE NO ON MEASURE 87H Measure 87. For more information write to ACLU of Oregon If ou are a busybody,there is always thera py PO Box 40585, Portland,OR 97240 y or go to www.aclu-or.org Furnished by the Libertarian Party of Oregon (This information furnished by David Fidanque, American Civil Liberties The Libertarian Party of Oregon is the third largest political party Union of Oregon.) in the state. Libertarians are fiscally conservative and socially tolerant,we believe that government should be limited to protect- ing our freedoms while ensuring personal responsibility. For more information call 1 (800)829-1992 or visit our web site at www.lporegon.org (This information furnished by Eric Winters,Libertarian Party of Oregon.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$5001n accordance with ORS 251.255.) Fhe rinting of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the acy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 29 CONTINUED P Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet-Statewide Measures Measure No. 87 Arguments ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION DON'T OPEN THE DOOR TO CENSORSHIP! VOTE NO ON MEASURE 87!! As business owners of traditional bookstores, movie theaters, art galleries,and music stores,we think it's a bad idea to let politi- cians close down legal businesses or force them to move just because they don't like the content of the expression that takes place in those businesses. That's censorship by the government and that's what Measure 87 is all about. CITIES&COUNTIES CAN ALREADY SHUT DOWN BUSINESSES THAT ARE CAUSING PROBLEMS WE DON'T NEED TO WEAKEN THE BILL OF RIGHTS! Most of us don't care for"sexually oriented businesses"and we don't spend our money at those places. But we don't need to repeal the Oregon Bill of Rights free expression protection to deal with businesses that are causing problems. Local governments already have the power to go after businesses that are causing problems. Measure 87•allows government to target businesses that aren't causing harm to their neighbors. MEASURE 87 PUTS LEGAL BUSINESSES AT RISK Once we allow restrictions on legal businesses because politi- cians find them offensive,there will be no way to know where the censorship will stop.Measure 87's definition of"sexually oriented business" is wide open for abuse.The measure doesn't restrict how politicians will determine the "principal business" of a commercial establishment. The last thing we need in Oregon is morality police in book- stores, movie theaters and art galleries monitoring what we sell and what you buy! MEASURE 87 IS AN INVITATION TO CENSORSHIP VOTE NO ON MEASURE 87!1 Michael Powell, Powell's Books Bill Kloster, Looking Glass Bookstore, Portland Roberta Tichenor,Annie Blooms Books, Portland Thomas Ranieri,Cinema 21, Portland Terry Currier, Music Millennium, Portland Larry West,The Book Mark, Eugene Jack Wolcott, Grass Roots Books&Music,Corvallis Candy Moffett,Alder Gallery, Eugene Michael Lamont, Bijou Art Cinemas, Eugene Victoria Frey, Quartersaw Gallery, Portland Mark Woolley, Mark Woolley Gallery, Portland Photographic Image Gallery, Portland Pulliam Deffenbaugh Gallery, Portland (This information furnished by Michael Powell, No Censorship - No on Measure 87 Committee.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 30 Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet--Statewide Measures, Measure No. 88 Senate Bill 535—Referred to the Electorate of Oregon by the spouse; 1999 Legislature to be voted on at the General Election, (ii) $1,800, in the case of an individual who is not a married November 7,2000. individual and is not a surviving spouse; (iii)$1,500, in the case of a married individual who files a sep- arate return;or BALLOT TITLE (iv)$2,640, in the case of a head of household. (C) For purposes of subparagraph (A) of this paragraph, the additional standard deduction is the sum of each additional amount to which the taxpayer is entitled under subsection[(8)](7) r of this section. (D)As used in subparagraph (B) of this paragraph, "surviving spouse"and"head of household"have the meaning given those .. 4 =y terms in section 2 of the Internal Revenue Code. •• (E)In the case of the following,the standard deduction referred Itedtotib) tII � �Xft3ti� lft� xe ' to in subparagraph(A)of this paragraph shall be zero: F (i) A husband or wife filing a separate return where the other spouse has claimed itemized deductions under subparagraph(A) of this paragraph; (ii)A nonresident alien individual; (iii) An individual making a return for a period of less than 12 tttt months on account of a change in his or her annual accounting period; {tllp R�fi �iS t0 (iv)An estate or trust; (v)A common trust fund;or { ��gtltfhft �tlar (vi)A partnership. (d)For the purposes of paragraph(c)(A)of this subsection,the taxpayer's itemized deductions are the sum of: qR 43 (A) The taxpayer's itemized deductions as defined in section 63(d) of the Internal Revenue Code (reduced, if applicable, as described under section 68 of the Internal Revenue Code)minus the deduction for Oregon income tax (reduced, if applicable, by the proportion that the reduction in federal itemized deductions resulting from section 68 of the Internal Revenue Code bears to the amount of federal itemized deductions as defined for pur- poses of section 68 of the Internal Revenue Code);and 3� a pr (B)The amount that may be taken into account under section Nt3t1Us r 213(a) of the Internal Revenue Code, not to exceed seven and one-half percent of the federal adjusted gross income of the tax- payer, if the taxpayer has attained the following age before the close of the taxable year,or, in the case of a joint return, if either taxpayer has attained the following age before the close of the TEXT OF MEASURE to()F year:or taxable y ears beginning i Fon or after January 1,1991,and before January 1, 1993, a taxpayer must attain 58 years of age AN ACT before the close of the taxable year. (ii) For taxable years beginning on or after January 1, 1993, Relating to taxation; creating new provisions; amending ORS and before January 1, 1995, a taxpayer must attain 59 years of 316.687 and 316.695;and providing that this 1999 Act shall be age before the close of the taxable year. referred to the people for their approval or rejection. (iii) For taxable years beginning on or after January 1, 1995, Be It Enacted by the People of the State of Oregon: and before January 1, 1997, a taxpayer must attain 60 years of age before the close of the taxable year. SECTION 1.ORS 316.695 is amended to read: (iv) For taxable years beginning on or after January 1, 1997, 316.695.(1) In addition to the modifications to federal taxable and before January 1, 1999, a taxpayer must attain 61 years of income contained in this chapter,there shall be added to or sub- age before the close of the taxable year. tracted from federal taxable income: (v) For taxable years beginning on or after January 1, 1999, a (a) If, in computing federal income tax for a taxable year, the taxpayer must attain 62 years of age before the close of the tax- taxpayer deducted itemized deductions, as defined in section able year. 63(d) of the Internal Revenue Code, the taxpayer shall add the (2)(a)There shall be subtracted from federal taxable income amount of itemized deductions deducted(the itemized deductions any portion of the distribution of a pension, profit-sharing, stock less an amount, if any, by which the itemized deductions are bonus or other retirement plan, representing that portion of con- reduced under section 68 of the Internal Revenue Code). tributions which were taxed by the State of Oregon but not taxed (b) If, in computing federal income tax for a taxable year, the by the Federal Government under laws in effect for tax years taxpayer deducted the standard deduction, as defined in section beginning prior to January 1, 1969,or for any subsequent year in 63(c) of the Internal Revenue Code, the taxpayer shall add the which,the amount that was contributed to the plan under the amount of the standard deduction deducted. Internal Revenue Code was greater than the amount allowed (c)(A) From federal taxable income there shall be subtracted under this chapter. the larger of(i)the taxpayer's itemized deductions or(ii)a stan- (b) Interest or other earnings on any excess contributions of a dard deduction.Except as provided in subsection[(9)](8)of this pension, profit-sharing, stock bonus or other retirement plan not section,for purposes of this subparagraph,"standard deduction" permitted to be deducted under paragraph (a)of this subsection means the sum of the basic standard deduction and the addi- shall not be added to federal taxable income in the year earned tional standard deduction. by the plan and shall not be subtracted from federal taxable (B) For purposes of subparagraph (A) of this paragraph, the income in the year received by the taxpayer. basic standard deduction is: (3)(a) Except as provided in paragraph (b) of this subsection (i) $3,000, in the case of joint return filers or a surviving 31 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet-Statewide Measures Measure No. 88 and [subsections (4) and(5)] subsection (4) of this section, in federal taxable income by a shareholder of an S corporation pur- addition to the adjustments to federal taxable income required by suant to sections 1366 to 1368 of the Internal Revenue Code ORS 316.680,there shall be added to federal taxable income the shall be adjusted for purposes of determining Oregon taxable amount of any federal income taxes in excess of[$3,000]$5,000, income,to the extent that as items of income,loss or deduction of accrued by the taxpayer during the taxable year as described in the shareholder the items are required to be adjusted under the ORS 316.685,less the amount of any refund of federal taxes pre- provisions of this chapter. viously accrued for which a tax benefit was received. (c)The tax years referred to in paragraphs (a) and (b) of this (b) In the case of a husband and wife filing separate tax subsection are those of the S corporation. returns,the amount added shall be in the amount of any federal (d)As used in paragraph (a)of this subsection,an S corpora- income taxes in excess of [$1,500] $2,500, less the amount of tion refers to an electing small business corporation. any refund of federal taxes previously accrued for which a tax [(8)(a)] (7)(a) The taxpayer shall be entitled to an additional .. benefit was received. amount, as referred to in subsection (1)(c)(A) and (C) of this •• (c)(A)For a calendar year beginning on or after January 1, section,of$1,000: 2003,the Department of Revenue shall make a cost of living (A) For himself or herself if he or she has attained age 65 adjustment to the federal income tax threshold amount before the close of his or her taxable year;and described in paragraphs(a)and(b)of this subsection. (B) For the spouse of the taxpayer if the spouse has attained (B)The cost of living adjustment for a calendar year is the age 65 before the close of the taxable year and an additional percentage by which the U.S.City Average Consumer Price exemption is allowable to the taxpayer for such spouse for federal Index for the average of the monthly indexes for the second income tax purposes under section 151(b) of the Internal quarter of the calendar year exceeds the average of the Revenue Code. monthly indexes of the second quarter of the calendar year (b)The taxpayer shall be entitled to an additional amount, as 2002, referred to in subsection (1)(c)(A) and (C) of this section, of (C) As used in this paragraph, "U.S. City Average $1,000: Consumer Price Index" means the U.S. City Average (A)For himself or herself if he or she is blind at the close of the Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers(All Items)as taxable year;and published by the Bureau of Labor Statistics of the United (B) For the spouse of the taxpayer if the spouse is blind as of States Department of Labor. , the close of the taxable year and an additional exemption is allow- (D) If any adjustment determined under subparagraph(B) able to the taxpayer for such spouse for federal income tax of this paragraph is not a multiple of $50, the adjustment purposes under section 151(b) of the Internal Revenue Code. shall be rounded to the next lower multiple of$50. For purposes of this subparagraph, if the spouse dies during the (E)The adjustment shall apply to all tax years beginning in taxable year, the determination of whether such spouse is blind the calendar year for which the adjustment is made. shall be made immediately prior to death. [(4)(a)If federal income taxes are paid or determined, due to (c) In the case of an individual who is not married and is not a additional assessments as described in ORS 316.685 (2), on surviving spouse, paragraphs(a)and (b)of this subsection shall income for a taxable year beginning on or before December 31, be applied by substituting 11,200"for"$1,000:' 1986, there shall be added to federal taxable income that portion (d) For purposes of this subsection, an individual is blind only of the federal income tax due to additional assessments which, if his or her central visual acuity does not exceed 20/200 in the when added to federal income tax previously paid and deducted better eye with correcting lenses, or if his or her visual acuity is for that prior taxable year on the taxpayer's Oregon return, greater than 20/200 but is accompanied by a limitation in the exceeds$7,000.] fields of vision such that the widest diameter of the visual field [(b) In the case of a husband and wife filing separate tax subtends an angle no greater than 20 degrees. returns, the amount to be added to federal taxable income under [(9)] (8) In the case of an individual with respect to whom a this subsection shall be that portion of the federal income tax due deduction under section 151 of the Internal Revenue Code is to additional assessments which, when added to federal income allowable for federal income tax purposes to another taxpayer for tax previously paid and deducted for that prior year on the tax- a taxable year beginning in the calendar year in which the indi- payer's Oregon return, exceeds$3,500.] vidual's taxable year begins, the basic standard deduction [(5)(a)] (4)(a) In addition to the adjustments required by ORS (referred to in subsection (1)(c)(B) of this section) applicable to 316.130, a full-year nonresident individual shall add to taxable such individual for such individual's taxable year shall equal the income a proportion of any accrued federal income taxes as lesser of: computed under ORS 316.685 in excess of[$3,000, or$7,000 if (a)The amount allowed to the individual under section 63(c)(5) subsection (4)(a) of this section is applicable,] $5,000 in the of the Internal Revenue Code for federal income tax purposes for proportion provided in ORS 316.117. the tax year for which the deduction is being claimed;or (b) In the case of a husband and wife filing separate tax (b)The amount determined under subsection (1)(c)(B) of this returns, the amount added under this subsection shall be com- section. puted in a manner consistent with the computation of the amount SECTION 2.ORS 316.687 is amended to read: to-be added in the case of a husband and wife filing separate 316.687.There shall be added to federal taxable income of a returns under subsection (3) [or(4)]of this section[, whichever is parent who makes an election under section 1(g)(7)(B) of the applicable].The method of computation shall be determined by Internal Revenue Code any amount in excess of the standard the Department of Revenue by rule. deduction allowed for a child under ORS 316.695[(9)](8)but not [(6)] (5) [Subsection (3)(b), subsection (4)(b) and subsection in excess of the amount described in section 1(g)(7)(B)(i) of the (5)(b)] Subsections (3)(b) and (4)(b) of this section shall not Internal Revenue Code(twice the amount in effect for the taxable apply to married individuals living apart as defined in section year under section 63(c)(5)(A)of the Internal Revenue Code).The 7703(b)of the Internal Revenue Code. addition under this section shall be made for each child whose [(7)(a)j (6)(a) For tax years beginning on or after January 1, income is included in the taxable income of the parent under sec- 1981, and prior to January 1, 1983, income or loss taken into tion 1(g)(7)(B)of the Internal Revenue Code. account in determining federal taxable income by a shareholder SECTION 3.The amendments to ORS 316.687 and 316.695 of an S corporation pursuant to sections 1373 to 1375 of the by sections 1 and 2 of this 1999 Act apply to tax years begin- Internal Revenue Code shall be adjusted for purposes of deter- ning on or after January 1,2002. mining Oregon taxable income, to the extent that as income or SECTION 4.This 1999 Act shall be submitted to the people loss of the S corporation,they were required to be adjusted under for their approval or rejection at the next regular general the provisions of ORS chapter 317. election held throughout this state. (b) For tax years beginning on or after January 1, 1983, items of income, loss or deduction taken into account in determining NOTE: Boldfaced type indicates new language; [brackets and italic]type indicates deletions or comments. 32 CONTINUED 10 Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 88 EXPLANATORY STATEMENT Ballot Measure 88 amends Oregon state statutes to increase from $3,000 to $5,000 the maximum amount that may be deducted on Oregon personal income tax returns for federal income taxes paid. Under current law,personal income taxpayers may deduct their federal income tax liability for a tax year from their Oregon taxable income for that year, up to a maximum amount of $3,000. If a personal income taxpayer has a federal tax liability of more than $3,000, the amount of federal taxes in excess of $3,000 is not •. deductible for Oregon tax purposes. Ballot Measure 88 increases to $5,000 the maximum amount of federal income taxes that a personal income taxpayer may deduct from Oregon taxable income. Under Ballot Measure 88, only a taxpayer's federal taxes that are greater than$5,000 would remain nondeductible for Oregon tax purposes. For married individuals who file separate tax returns, current law contains a special rule that limits to $1,500 the maximum amount of federal taxes that each spouse may deduct from Oregon taxable income. Ballot Measure 88 would continue the special rule for married individuals who file separate returns, but would increase to$2,500 the maximum amount of federal taxes that each spouse could deduct from Oregon taxable income. Under Ballot Measure 88, the maximum amount of federal taxes that could be deducted from Oregon taxable income would be adjusted up or down each year by a cost of living factor that is based on the Consumer Price Index. Under current law, the .$3,000 maximum deduction for federal income taxes (or$1,500 maximum deduction in the case of married individuals filing separate returns) is not subject to cost of living adjustments. Ballot Measure 88 would apply to income tax years beginning on or after January 1,2002.Cost of living adjustments would be made annually,starting in 2003. The Legislative Revenue Office estimates that this measure would reduce revenue to the general fund by$168 million in the 2001-03 biennium and$259 million in the 2003-05 biennium. Committee Members: Appointed By: Senator Eileen Qutub President of the Senate Representative Ken Strobeck Speaker of the House Senator Verne Duncan Secretary of State Representative Jeff Merkley Secretary of State Fred Miller Members of the Committee (This committee was appointed to provide an impartial explanation of the ballot measure pursuant to ORS 251.215.) 33 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 88 Arguments LEGISLATIVE ARGUMENT IN SUPPORT ARGUMENT IN FAVOR A"yes"vote on Measure 88 increases the maximum Oregon Associated Oregon Industries, personal income tax deduction for federal income taxes paid representing 19,000 businesses,urges a from$3,000 to$5,000. YES VOTE ON MEASURE 88. This measure will reduce the amount of state income tax indi- Did you know that Oregon law requires you to pay a tax on a tax? viduals pay - without harming schools, public safety or other That's right. essential state government services. The amount of personal income tax that Oregonians pay is And while Measure 88 does not completely eliminate this ridicu- among the highest in the nation usually in the top three, along lous situation,it does move in the right direction by reducing some with New York and Washington D.C. of the tax burden.And it does so in a fiscally responsible manner. Measure 88 will reduce the tax burden of Oregonians by an As Oregon's largest and oldest business Association it has long estimated$47 million in its first year and by approximately$120 been our aim to promote tax policies that provide necessary public services and at the same time make all Oregonians more million per year thereafter.This will have the effect of lowering taxes and reducing the overall size of government, but still per- mitting essential state-supported services to be adequately Measure 88 will do just that. funded. By reducing this double taxation: Current Oregon law permits taxpayers to deduct their federal income taxes when calculating their state income taxes.The cur- Oregonians can save and invest more of what they earn. rent limit for this deduction is$3,000-the same level it has been • More dollars will be available to entrepreneurs who regenerate since 1987. the economy and improve job growth and wealth formation. Measure 88 will cut the amount of income tax most Oregonians • Necessary public services such as K-12,higher education and pay by allowing a larger subtraction of federal personal income the Oregon Health Plan are protected from severe cuts. taxes from Oregon income - raising the maximum deduction amount from$3,000 to$5,000.In addition,the$5,000 amount will Tax policies need to be moderate and sensible. be adjusted up or down by a cost-of-living factor based on the It is sensible that Oregonians ought not to pay a tax on a tax.It is Consumer Price Index.Under current law,the deduction 9mount moderate to change such a law in a manner that is fiscally is not adjusted for inflation. responsible. Measure 88 will also allow married individuals who file separate Measure 88 meets those requirements.Vote YES on Measure returns an increase from$1,500 to$2,500 as the highest amount 88, of federal taxes that each spouse can deduct from Oregon tax- able income. , (This information furnished by Richard M. Butrick, Associated Oregon Measure 88 is a reasonable, responsible tax reduction measure Industries.) which will benefit Oregon taxpayers. Coupled with the fact that Oregon has no sales tax, and recent ballot measures and legislative actions have reduced property taxes, this measure further reduces the tax burden of Oregonians by effectively cut- ting the state income tax. Committee Members: Appointed By: Senator Eileen Qutub President of the Senate Representative Leslie Lewis Speaker of the House Representative Ken Strobeck Speaker of the House (This Joint Legislative Committee was appointed to provide the legislative argument in support of the ballot measure pursuant to ORS 251.245.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 34 CONTINUED 10 Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 88 Arguments ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION THE OREGON PTA ASKSYOUTO VOTE NOON MEASURE 88. GOVERNOR JOHN KITZHABER URGES Measure 88 is a bad deal for Oregon. It won't benefit most tax- A"NO"VOTE ON MEASURE 88 payers at all.But it WILL cost our children dearly. MOST OREGONIANS GET NO TAX BENEFIT AT ALL In a state where our legislature has to struggle every session to Dear Fellow Oregonians: find enough money in the budget to adequately fund education, Measure 88 would give no help to 60%of Oregon taxpayers.But health care,public safety,roads,and services for children and the it would hurt all Oregonians. _ elderly, it is irresponsible to talk about drastically cutting revenue Measure 88 would not give a tax cut to most taxpayers. For for the state. instance,a family of four making$40,000 would get nothing at all. This measure would cost$167 million in the next two years and It would give only a minimal benefit to many other middle-class $260 million in the two years after that.To illustrate, $260 million families; a family of four making $47,000 would receive $2 a dollars is over three times the 1999-2000 formula revenue budget month. for the North Clackamas School District,over 3.5 times the bud- But Measure 88 would reduce resources available for State gets for the Bend/La Pine and Medford School Districts,and over General Fund services–by over$150 million in 2001-2003, and ° 17 times the budget for the North Bend School District. by over$250 million in the next budget cycle. It is inconceivable to even think about such an enormous loss of The vast majority of the State's General Fund dollars go to just a funds.A loss that will make it even harder for our school districts few programs. Education – including K-12 public schools, com- to reduce class size, or focus on teacher training. A loss that would mean even fewer children will receive health care benefits, munity colleges, and state universities.The Oregon Health Plan. The State prison system. Services a seniors and the disabled. and fewer struggling families will receive critical help. Those are the services that would suffer if this measure passes. As with other proposed "tax cuts" it is the wealthy who benefit. Measure 88 would make it impossible to avoid real cuts in Sixty percent of Oregon taxpayers will not get any tax cut at all.A services Oregonians care about. family of four with an income of $45,000 will get nothing. The Please join me in voting"No"on Measure 88. same family with an income of$47,000 would get$2 a month. OUR CHILDREN SIMPLY CAN'T AFFORD THIS MEASURE. (This information furnished by John A.Kitzhaber,M.D.) VOTE NO ON MEASURE 88 (This information furnished by Kathryn Firestone,President,Lisa Laursen Thirkill, VP for Legislation;The Oregon PTA(Oregon Congress of Parents and Teachers).) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 35 CONTINUED 11� Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 88 Arguments ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION Oregon Seniors Oppose Measure 88 The Working Men and Women of Organized Labor Oppose Measure 88 is a particularly raw deal for Oregon seniors. Measure 88 Most seniors would see no tax relief.But,more importantly, The Legislature's Measure 88 gives no tax relief at all, or very the measure would hurt services that many seniors and little, to Oregon's working families. But it will hurt the quality of people with disabilities depend on. services that working families rely on–from education to public Measure 88 gives no benefit to most taxpayers–and gives 57% safety to services for seniors and people with disabilities. of the benefits to the highest-income 20%.There aren't that many If Measure 88 passes,a family of four making$45,000 or less will seniors in that top 20%. get nothing.A family making $50,000 might get a few dollars a But Measure 88 would cut over$167 million in State resources in month. the first two years, and$260 million in the two years after that-- But the measure will cost hundreds of millions of dollars–dollars reducing the State's ability to pay for services seniors depend on. that will come out of a wide variety of public services. Measure 88 threatens funding for: Public schools;the Oregon Health Plan;state universities;com- • Community care options such as in-home care,adult foster munity colleges; community-based care for the elderly; child homes, and assisted living facilities. abuse prevention services and foster care; economic develop- ment for rural communities; the State prisons; the State Police; • Senior centers. the Department of Forestry...those are the services that rely.on Oregon state funds.The harm to many far outweighs the benefit • Senior and disability transportation. to a few. • Meals on Wheels. It's not worth it. Please join the working men and women of • The Oregon Health Plan. organized labor in voting"NO"on Measure 88. Please join the Oregon State Council of Senior Citizens, This voters statement brought to you by the United Seniors of Oregon and the Portland Gray Panthers in American Federation of Teachers-Oregon opposing Measure 88. Oregon AFL-CIO Oregon State Council of Service Employees International Union (This information furnished by Jim Davis, Oregon State Council of Senior Oregon Public Employees Union, SEIU Local 503 Citizens;United Seniors of Oregon;Portland Gray Panthers.) Oregon School Employees Association Pacific Northwest Regional Council of Carpenters (This information furnished by Richard H. Schwarz, AFT-Oregon; Terry Cavanagh, Oregon Public Employees Union, SEW, Local 503; Arthur Towers, Oregon State Council, Service Employees Intl Union; Edward John Glad, Pacific Northwest Reg?Council of Carpenters;Ed Edwards, Oregon School Employees Assoc.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 36 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet-Statewide Measures Measure No. 88 Arguments ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION Ecumenical Ministries of Oregon Opposes Measure 88 Reject Measure 88:It's All Pain,No Gain! Ecumenical Ministries of Oregon recommends a NO vote on Measure 88 costs too much. Measure 88.It will benefit only those who least need the benefit, Measure 88 will cost the state of Oregon$260 million every two while it hurts those among us who are most at risk. years in lost programs.That's more than double what the state Measure 88 lowers the effective tax rate for wealthier Oregonians spends on state parks, nearly 30 times what we spend on chil- while at the same time providing no material tax relief to low-and dren's health insurance programs, and more than the state moderate-income Oregonians.Meanwhile Oregon ranks second spends on child abuse prevention and related services like foster in the nation for widening the gulf over the last decade between care. . the top 20% of earners and the bottom 20% of earners in the Measure 88 doesn't help many Oregonians. state. 60% of Oregonians will receive absolutely no tax savings from EMO has consistently called for a restructuring of Oregon's tax Measure 88. That's right...nothing. Even upper income and wealthy taxpayers, the folks this measure is designed to benefit, system to meet the criteria of adequacy, ability to pay, fairness, efficiency, competitiveness, flexibility, and consumer respon- receive a relatively small tax cut.The most anyone will see his or sibility. This measure meets none of those standards and is her tax bill reduced is$15 a month.That's the maximum benefit anyone will receive from Measure 88. irresponsible. Please vote"No"on Measure 88. Measure 88 increases Oregonians'federal taxes. To make matters worse,those Oregon taxpayers whose state tax Note: The Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Portland and the bill is reduced as a result of Measure 88 will then have lower Greek Orthodox Church abstained from EMO's deliberations Oregon tax payments to deduct from their Federal income taxes. regarding the November ballot measures.The Roman Catholic The net result: Oregonians who receive this tax break will owe Archdiocese releases all public policy statements for the more in Federal taxes. This foolish measure would slash our Archdiocese through the Oregon Catholic Conference. State's budget while fattening Federal coffers. (This information furnished by Enid Edwards, Ecumenical Ministries of Measure 88 is a bad idea. Oregon.) Measure 88 will cut state programs that help children and fami- lies. It will provide the majority of Oregonians with absolutely no tax relief. Even the upper income Oregonians who benefit from this cut will get only$15 a month.Worse,much of the"tax cut"is no cut at all...it just foolishly redirects our state tax money to the Federal Government. Vote No on Measure 88! Peggi Timm, Baker County Commissioner Mike McArthur, Sherman County David Fuks, Multnomah County Commissioner Gina Furman,Tillamook County Normie Wright,Jackson County Audrey Jacobs, Malheur County Chuck Clemans,Clackamas County Because We Care About Oregon PAC Beverly Stein,Chair (This information furnished by Beverly Stein, Because We Care About Oregon PAC.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument.. 37 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 88 Arguments ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION The Oregon AFL-CIO Opposes Measure 88: Two wrongs don't make a right. The Harm To Many Far Outweighs The Benefit To A Few When Oregon legislators felt backed into a corner by Bill The Legislature's Measure 88 gives no tax relief at all, or very Sizemore's impending federal tax deductibility measure (now little, to Oregon's working families. But it will hurt the quality of Measure 91), they referred to the ballot their own somewhat services that working families rely on—from education to public watered-down version of the same idea. They sought to wash safety to services for seniors and people with disabilities. their hands of Measure 91 by offering this alternative, Measure If Measure 88 passes,a family of four making$45,000 or less will 88.It may be"Sizemore Lite,"as it's become known,but it's still a. bad idea. get nothing.A family making $50,000 might get a few dollars a month. Unfortunately, not much changes between Measures 88 and 91. But the measure will cost hundreds of millions of dollars–dollars Capping federal deductibility at $5,000 rather than $3,000 still that will have to be cut from the funding that supports a wide causes many of the same problems as Measure 91. A cut this variety of public services: large necessarily impacts the state General Fund. You cannot "belt tighten"$200 million—it's a drastic cut. • Public schools Most importantly, such cuts can only be accomplished through • The Oregon Health Plan the General Fund's largest programs: • State universities • Community colleges K-12 Education—Oregon's schools take up 42 percent of the • Community-based care for the elderly General Fund. Very few Oregonians believe that education • Child abuse prevention services and foster care funding is too high, but Measure 88 will force substantial cuts in • Economic development for rural communities current funding,levels.There's simply no way around it. • State prisons Higher Education — Oregon's colleges and universities • The State Police account for another 16 percent of the General Fund. Enrollment • The Department of Forestry has leveled in recent years due to high tuition costs, so raising The harm to many far outweighs the benefit to a few. rates is not an answer. It's not worth it. Please join the working men and women of the • Human Services— Programs aimed at public health, senior Oregon AFL-CIO in voting"NO"on Measure 88. citizens, the poor and the mentally retarded/developmentally Tim Nesbitt, President disabled are in place to help the neediest Oregonians. Measure Brad Witt,Secretary-Treasurer 88 would take money from the neediest in order to benefit those Oregon AFL-CIO Oregonians who are already better-off. • Public Safety—The budgets for the Oregon State Police,the (This information furnished by Tim Nesbitt,Oregon AFL-CIO Committee on Department of Corrections and other public safety agencies Political Education.) accounts for 15 percent of the General Fund.This one is simple: Do you want less money spent on public safety? Oregon cannot afford these kinds of cutbacks.Join me and Vote NO!on Measure 88(and Measure 91). Gordon O'Brien,Salem AFSCME Local 896(State Police Forensics) (This information furnished by Don Loving,Oregon AFSCME Council 75.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 38 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 88 Arguments ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION OREGON EDUCATORS ASK YOU TO CONSIDER THE FOLLOWING POINTS REGARDING MEASURE 88: • Measure 88 reduces funding for Oregon's public schools at a time when our children are facing some of the most over- crowded classrooms in the nation. • Measure 88 cuts resources to school children,at a time when the legislature spends less for student achievement than schools received a decade ago. • Measure 88 exacerbates the public school funding shortage at a time when Oregonians are experiencing unprecedented prosperity. • Measure 88 cuts state funding by shrinking resources even though most voters think public schools and other vital services aren't funded adequately as it is. WHAT'S WRONG WITH THIS PICTURE? Written by the Oregon Legislature, Measure 88 reduces General Fund revenues by $168 million the first year it takes effect. Because Oregon's public schools are the single largest responsi- bility of state government, passage of this measure would likely result in devastating cuts to school districts across Oregon. THAT'S UNFAIR TO STUDENTS. IT'S UNNECESSARY. IT WILL HURT OREGON'S RECORD OF EDUCATIONAL EXCELLENCE BY CUTTING STAFF AND SWELLING CLASS SIZES EVEN MORE. Oregon's Constitution directs the Legislature to fund its public schools.Citizens expect them to be funded adequately,to prepare students to compete successfully in the 21st century economy. Oregon students have already suffered a decade of disinvestment in public schools.This has resulted in large class sizes,outdated textbooks, shortages of materials, deteriorating facilities, and program cutbacks. Measure 88 only exacerbates the problem. Don't shortchange Oregon's kids! VOTE "NO" ON BALLOT MEASURE 88 – IT'S A CUT SCHOOLS CAN'T AFFORD. (This information furnished by James Sager, Oregon Education Association.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 39 Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 89 House Bill 2007—Referred to the Electorate of Oregon by the ORS 293.701 to 293.790 and the earnings from such invest- 1999 Legislature to be voted on at the General Election, ments shall be credited to the Health Security Fund. November 7,2000. (5) Earnings on moneys in the Health Security Fund shall be distributed annually. SECTION 2.The programs listed in this section are health programs eligible for financing with moneys in the Health BALLOTTITLE Security Fund, and earnings on moneys in the Health Security Fund shall be expended on the programs in the fol- lowing amounts: t�?1f�/ll $Ft�ASOSI*CLk�ll (1) Forty percent of the earnings, but not more than $7 million in each fiscal year, to counties for public health hi©ktNQ: programs and services and mental health programs and services as provided in section 4 of this 1999 Act. (2)Twenty percent of the earnings, but not more than $5 � � �", I' Ytste i:rte (arid front tcCO million in each fiscal year,to the Elderly and Disabled Special .• filet Fare t to SpBCifd ".kilt(t, haus100`, Transportation Fund for expenditure as other moneys in the at1s343i #1actprrktt5 Elderly and Disabled Special Transportation Fund are R�iL1 "I£f V1P � expended. orettttg fund from (3)Twenty percent of the earnings, but not more than $5 tb}.a eeltneot•tt�dlted tq o� efeattkt'hsus[ng tCs- million in each fiscal year, to the Housing and Community ) e0 ' Services Department for programs that provide housing for Ijifi4#ilfY iseuteteatessfatx# usrtsg fien's"strata of persons with disabilities or for low and very low income tot ' tik aattt8mettt (�{urres atanual`dtstrt a ti on ttt families and individuals. �itd� r3tsa tf fund's�nvetTtrtt earnings enir fo steed (4)Ten percent of the earnings to fund tobacco use pre- ptgrttta,llludtt $ldrty�dlsalliisporttitott:fur tl,low vention,education and cessation programs administered by ff5Cr3g,�8t)dirt prolttat,)elm tts8#7C�tttitsn pro= the Health Division. "gram ;)oletipe�tvetSlty`e tnl.researcher (5) Seven percent of the earnings,but not more than $10 r�tut rtrent; n n Irk Ettt aftt34 {?1zl ing vtaY tejt s shatter.! million,to Oregon Health Sciences University as provided in carE1;county attd"ttentat;teiatlh barrts; eistature tnay sections 6 and 7 of this 1999 Act. ap (6)Three percent of the earnings,but not more than $1.5 me tvea;egdit4rrtic l tjrtiortr, ?fVcOfs tvernr ertt rsrtt "when! million in each fiscal year, to the Department of Human futr8d� ftf3rdeC € ttlllglltsi()�Etffrnerll' Resources to fund the department's shelter care grant pro- gram as provided in section 8 of this 1999 Act. tt3C� toflllrrt tttietFttteQo Iast#tt Settlement SECTION 3.(1)Notwithstanding section 1 (2)of this 1999 Act,the Legislative Assembly,upon approval by two-thirds of reerrentbtttitT#tTtBSketletstttiest3tftatetl the members elected to each house of the Legislative rltxTli>n tttetled he8t, tikfsltlg end tretrsrtahon Assembly,may appropriate moneys from the Health Security togrnts smote year�1 .tuly 1, { } tue0, Fund principal when the following economic conditions ?t) efimr <tXttlaerstefteiats £ISat�d• tate" present or predicted in this state indicate the presence or $t(2 arttt• ,4 ti�itt restttvel t17�: rllt9itt�1M5r local"; likelihood of an economic recession: OvertirtteCS r � arr'esaiated $5 •,Cnifiiota io'�1, (a) The seasonally adjusted rate of nonfarm payroll $i,7 it itHrpt�gin"2� pfd rti{llu3Yt in t)3 employment declines for two or more consecutive quarters; Th '110.1e ttnancle and (b)A quarterly economic and revenue forecast projects a negative ending balance that is greater than one percent of General Fund appropriations for the biennium for which the forecast is being made. TEXTD (2) Notwithstanding section 1 (2) of this 1999 Act, the TEXT OF MEASURE Legislative Assembly may also appropriate moneys from the Health Security Fund principal when any judicial order or AN ACT decree or any settlement agreement to which this state is a party requires the State of Oregon to pay any portion of the Relating to the Health Security Fund; appropriating money; and fund principal to the federal government. providing that this 1999 Act shall be referred to the people for (3)Appropriations made under subsection(1)or(2)of this their approval or rejection. section must be for the purpose of financing those health Be It Enacted by the People of the State of Oregon: programs established or defined by law as programs eligible for such financing. SECTION 1.(1)As used in this section,"health programs" (4) The Legislative Assembly may by law prescribe the means programs for transportation of the elderly and dis- procedures to be used and identify the persons required to abled,programs for housing for persons with disabilities and make the forecasts and projections described in subsection for low and very low income families and individuals and any (1)(b)of this section. other programs established or defined by law as programs (5)The Legislative Assembly may not use moneys in the eligible for financing with moneys from the Health Security Health Security Fund for a purpose other than financing Fund established under this section. health programs or under conditions other than those (2)The Health Security Fund is established in the State described in subsection(1)of this section unless the electors Treasury, separate and distinct from the General Fund. All of this state approve a measure referred to the electors by earnings on moneys in the fund shall be appropriated con- the Legislative Assembly that authorizes the use of moneys tinuously and expended only for the purpose of financing in the Health Security Fund without regard to economic con- health programs. ditions or for a purpose specified in the measure.When the (3)The Health Security Fund shall consist of all moneys electors of this state approve the use of moneys in the fund paid to this state by United States tobacco products manu- for a purpose other than financing health programs,moneys facturers under the Master Settlement Agreement of 1998. may be appropriated from the Health Security Fund under (4) Moneys in the fund shall be invested as provided in this subsection only for the purpose approved by the electors. 40 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 89 SECTION 4.(1)The following health programs are eligible submit an annual report to the Legislative Assembly or the to receive financial assistance from the Health Security Fund appropriate interim legislative committees ,about the key established under section 1 of this 1999 Act: faculty recruitments that have been funded through the (a) Public health programs and services required under Oregon Health Sciences University Medical Research ORS 431.416;and Partnership and the resulting return to Oregon's economy (b) Mental health programs and services required under and quality of life. ORS 430.630. SECTION 7. In each fiscal year,there is transferred to the (2) In each fiscal year, the counties in this state shall Oregon Health Sciences University public corporation seven receive not more than$7 million in financial assistance from percent of all earnings on moneys in the Health Security the Health Security Fund for the programs described in Fund until $10 million has been transferred.The moneys subsection (1)of this section. If in any fiscal year there are transferred under this section may be expended for the insufficient moneys available for the distribution to counties Oregon Health Sciences University Medical Research of the amount specified in this subsection,earnings from the Partnership created under section 6 of this 1999 Act. Health Security Fund shall be reduced proportionately SECTION 8. (1) In each fiscal year, the Department of among all counties eligible to receive earnings from the Human Resources shall receive not more than $1.5 million ,. fund. from the Health Security Fund to finance a grant program • (3) Each county shall receive a share of the moneys dis- under which the department awards grants to nonprofit orga- tributed to counties under subsection (2) of this section in nizations that provide shelter care or temporary supervised such proportion as the population of the county bears to the housing accommodations for pregnant women, mothers of total population of all the counties in this state. However, newborn children and their newborn children or women who when the full amount specified in subsection (2) of this are victims of domestic violence. section is distributed to counties,a county shall not receive (2)To be eligible for a grant,a nonprofit organization must less than$50,000 in the fiscal year.Allocation plans and poli- have been organized and operating shelter care programs or cies adopted by the Department of Human Resources under facilities prior to January 1, 1999. A nonprofit organization subsection (4) of this section may establish other may use grant moneys from the Health Security Fund only criteria for distribution of moneys under this subsection. for maintenance and expansion of existing program activi- (4) The Department of Human Resources shall develop ties and may not use grant moneys for the establishment of allocation plans and policies to be followed by counties new facilities or programs.However,a nonprofit organization when spending moneys received under this section.The allo- may use grant moneys to change the location of existing cation plans and policies shall require a county to allocate facilities. the moneys received under this section equally between (3)A.grant made to any single nonprofit organization may public health programs and services and mental health not exceed 25 percent of the organization's income in the programs and services.However,the plans and policies may fiscal year immediately preceding the fiscal year in which the allow a county governing body to change the allocation ratio grant is received. to meet local conditions and needs. The department may (4)In any fiscal year,a nonprofit organization may receive also establish reporting requirements for counties relating to a$25,000 grant for each shelter or housing facility operated the use of moneys received under this section. by the organization, but may not receive more than $75,000 SECTION 5. Section 6 of this 1999 Act is added to and in any fiscal year. made a part of ORS chapter 353. (5) Not less than 25 percent of the total amount of grants SECTION 6. (1) The Oregon Health Sciences University awarded by the Department of Human Resources in a fiscal Board of Directors shall enter into an agreement with a com- year shall be awarded to nonprofit organizations that in the munity foundation,as defined in ORS 348.580,in Oregon to fiscal year immediately preceding the fiscal year in which the create an Oregon Health Sciences University Medical grant is awarded received more than 50 percent of operating Research Partnership. The partnership may be used to revenues from sources other than federal, state or local recruit and retain faculty who are national quality investiga- government agencies. tors who conduct bench-to-bedside research in emerging SECTION 9. When the earnings on moneys in the Health clinical areas such as cancer,gene therapy,vaccine develop- Security Fund in any fiscal year exceed the amount neces- ment,women's health issues and cardiovascular disorders. sary for distribution of the maximum amounts to health (2)The board shall transfer moneys appropriated to,allo- programs as provided in section 2 of this 1999 Act, the cated to,transferred to or otherwise received by the univer- Legislative Assembly may provide for the distribution of the sity for the purposes of the partnership to the community excess earnings in amounts greater than those specified in foundation to be placed in the partnership. section 2 of this 1999 Act or to health programs other than (3) Any agreement entered into between the board and a those specified in section 2 of this 1999 Act. community foundation under this section shall include a SECTION 10. The first distribution of moneys from the requirement that the partnership be invested by the commu- Health Security Fund shall be made not later than one year nity foundation and that moneys in the partnership be after the effective date of this 1999 Act. distributed to the Oregon Health Sciences Foundation as SECTION 11. This 1999 Act shall be submitted to the follows: people for their approval or rejection at the next regular (a)For each$2 million of private matching funds raised by general election held throughout this state. the Oregon Health Sciences Foundation, the community foundation shall release $1 million from the partnership to the Oregon Health Sciences Foundation for the purpose of recruiting and retaining intellectual capital at the university, if such funds are available. (b) For each $3 million increment raised and released under paragraph (a) of this subsection, the Oregon Health Sciences Foundation may use no more than $1 million for recruitment,relocation and capital expenses for each faculty recruitment and a minimum of $2 million to establish an income-producing endowment to support the faculty position. (4)In addition to the requirements of subsection(3)of this section,the agreement shall include a requirement that the community foundation, in partnership with the university, 41 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Vbters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 89 EXPLANATORY STATEMENT Ballot Measure 89 enacts a law that establishes the Health Security Fund.All moneys paid to Oregon by the United States tobacco products manufacturers under the Master Settlement Agreement of 1998 will be deposited into the fund. Except as authorized by the voters,all expenditures and appropriations from the fund earnings are limited to financing health programs. Currently,expenditure of the interest earnings and principal of the fund is unrestricted. For purposes of this measure, "health programs" includes transportation of the elderly and disabled, housing for disabled persons and low income families and other programs established or defined by law as being eligible for financing from the fund. Ballot Measure 89 requires that the moneys in the Health Security Fund be invested according to statutory guidelines. Commencing in 2001, earnings from the fund must be made available for annual distribution as follows: (1) 40 percent, up to $7 million, to counties for public health programs and services and for mental health programs and services. (2) 20 percent, up to $5 million, to the Elderly and Disabled Special Transportation Fund. ' (3)20 percent,up to$5 million,to the Housing and Community Services Department for housing for the disabled and for low and very low income families and individuals. (4) 10 percent for tobacco use prevention,education and ces- sation programs administered by the Health Division. (5) 3 percent, up to$1.5 million, to the Department of Human Services for shelter care grant programs. In addition,an annual payment of 7 percent,up to a maximum of$10 million over the life of the fund, is available to the Oregon Health Sciences University for the Oregon Health Sciences University Medical Research Partnership. If the fund earnings exceed the maximum dollar amounts specified, the measure authorizes the Legislative Assembly to expend the additional amounts for the specified programs or for other health programs. Ballot Measure 89 specifies economic conditions that must be present for expenditure of the principal of the fund to be autho- rized by the Legislative Assembly. It also authorizes payments to the Federal Government from the principal under court order. All such expenditures from principal must be for health care programs. The measure also authorizes voters voting on a measure referred by the legislature to expend the fund for purposes other than specified in Ballot Measure 89 or without regard to economic conditions but only for a purpose approved by the voters. Ballot Measure 89 specifies the methods by which programs become eligible for funding and the methods of fund distribution. Oregon election law provides that when two ballot measures conflict,as Measure 89 and Measure 4 do,the measure receiving the highest number of yes votes will prevail. .Committee Members: Appointed By: Senator Ted Ferrioli President of the Senate Representative Bruce Starr Speaker of the House Representative Richard Devlin Secretary of State Senator Joan Dukes Secretary of State Kathleen Beaufait Members of the Committee (This committee was appointed to provide an impartial explanation of the ballot measure pursuant to ORS 251.215.) 42 CONTINUED. Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 89 Arguments LEGISLATIVE ARGUMENT IN SUPPORT ARGUMENT IN FAVOR Oregon will receive roughly 2.2 billion dollars over the next 25 Ballot Measure 89,An Argument in Support Of years as the result of a legal settlement with the United States Healthy communities are communities in which residents and tobacco companies.Measure 89 guarantees that those funds will visitors are assured not be simply absorbed into ongoing government programs, but . Safe drinking water,food,and air will instead to dedicated to providing financial resources to . No infectious diseases such as tuberculosis and meningitis specific programs which improve health care and assist the in schools and daycare centers elderly and disabled members of our communities.This is done . influenza and pneumonia vaccines are available to seniors through the Health Security Fund,established by Measure 89. . Families and individuals in crisis can receive mental health Measure 89 requires that the Health Security Fund can be used services only for health-related programs, unless approved by voters.The • Senior citizens can remain independent and self-sufficient measure prevents the legislature from expending any principal of with transportation available for doctor appointments and the fund unless there is a two-thirds majority vote of each house grocery shopping of the legislature. Measure 89 also establishes a balanced • Safe, affordable housing is available for the disabled and process for distribution of any earnings generated by this fund. very low income • Activities to prevent cancer and chronic diseases are A yes vote on Measure 89 ensures that tobacco settlement funds underway are distributed among appropriate programs, including county public and mental health programs, housing for the disabled Ballot Measure 89 provides funding forever for healthy and persons with low income, transportation for the elderly and communities. disabled, tobacco use prevention programs, and shelter for Passage will guarantee that interest from the tobacco settlement women who are pregnant, with young children, or suffering (Health Security Trust Fund) will provide (1) local public health abuse. and mental health services; (2) elderly and disabled transporta- Measure 89 represents a positive and productive way to use the tion; (3) housing for the disabled and low/very low income; (4) proceeds of the tobacco settlement. tobacco prevention activities; (5) shelter care. With payments coming from the interest–not the principal–you, the voter, are Measure 89 represents sound financial planning and a commit- making a long-term investment in the health of your communities.. ment to positive action to help those Oregonians who are most in need - without taking any money from taxpayers' pockets. Public Health doctors,nurses,health educators,and sanitar- Measure 89 will reduce the burden on taxpayers by providing a fans support activities for healthy communities. Support sure source of funding for these important programs, thereby Ballot Measure 89. reducing the pressure to impose taxes to pay for these programs. Submitted by Measure 89 is a win for taxpayers and a win for Oregonians who DaNES(Doctors and Nurses,Educators,Sanitarians)for Healthy are most in need.Please Vote Yes on this important measure. Communities Linda K.Fleming,Treasurer Committee Members: Appointed By: 108 W.First St. Senator Ted Ferrioli President of the Senate Fossil,Oregon 97830 Representative Kevin L.Mannix Speaker of the House (This information furnished by Linda K Fleming, DaNES (Doctors and Representative Bruce Starr Speaker of the House Nurses,Educators,Sanitarian)for Healthy Communities.) (This Joint Legislative Committee was appointed to provide the legislative argument in support of the ballot measure pursuant to ORS 251.245.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 43 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet-Statewide Measures Measure No. 89 Arguments ARGUMENT IN FAVOR ARGUMENT IN FAVOR Measure 89 Is the Oregon Health Security Fund. If you've ever seen the movie"The Insider"this is how the Measure 89 Is a Great Investment in Oregon's Health! ending makes sense. Measure 89 Sends Oregon's tobacco settlement dollars to the The Creation of the Health Security Fund from OREGON'S places they need to go: TOBACCO SETTLEMENT ALLOCATION is a GOOD IDEA. It • Prevention of Smoking makes good sense and does not stem from greed which seem to • Health Support and Maintenance earmark other measures wanting to use the tobacco settlement allocation.This measure will protect the principle amount of the Measure 89 is a Health Support Measure. In addition to fund for use during economic downturns while using the interest Tobacco Use Prevention: to protect our public health and safety,provide needed funding for • Provides Low-Income Affordable Housina for the Elderly, housing and senior transportation, Oregon Health Sciences Disabled, and Low-Income Families. Housing is Funda- University and funding for tobacco prevention and, cessation mental to Health! programs. • Provides Transportation for Elderly and Disabled.Trans- WE MUST INVEST in protecting our communities and their citi- l2ortation gets people to the Doctor. zens.The ability of local programs to provide needed prevention, • Provides County Public and Mental Health Services. early intervention and protective programs is in a state of serious • Provides Shelter for Battered Women. disrepair. Our mental health system cannot adequately provide Measure 89 Sets up a Trust Fund so that the Limited Tobacco necessary services for our children as well as crisis services for Settlement Dollars will last Oregon for Generations to come.Only adults and local health departments are left with little ability to the Interest on the Fund will be spent. Will smooth out annual address communicable diseases. funding and allow better planning. TOBACCO SETTLEMENT DOLLARS ARE THE ANSWER. Measure 89 Is Oregon's Best Bet for critically needed Low- The local programs you will be funding with this measure were Income Housing g evelop ent Dollars.The State General Fund established to protect and ensure the health of us all. These cannot adequately support Education, Health, and Housing.The SERVICES ARE IN SERIOUS NEED OF SUPPORT.WITHOUT need for housing assistance has continued to grow for 15 years. OUR SUPPORT, AND THE REVENUE PROVIDED IN THIS Measure 89 provides a rare way to help solve the problem. BALLOT MEASURE, THE ABILITY OF THESE SERVICES TO PROTECT YOU AND YOUR COMMUNITY WILL BE GREATLY The Housing Lobby Coalition urges you to Vote Yes on REDUCED. Preventive mental health care, protection against Measure 89 because Housing is Fundamental to Health! food born illnesses such as E.coli,and prevention efforts against (This information furnished by Jim Markee,Housing Lobby Coalition.) dangerous communicable diseases are examples of such services that protect the health of each community in our state. WE NEED YOUR SUPPORT! PLEASE READ ALL OF THE MEASURES ON THE BALLOT CAREFULLY.MEASURE 89 IS A MEASURE WE CAN ALL SUPPORT. THANK YOU (This information furnished by Gina Firman,Settlement Funds For Healthy Oregonians and Communities.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 44 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 89 Arguments ARGUMENT IN FAVOR ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION Community protective health and mental health services are The American Heart Association unlike personal health care services,and are undertaken in order BALLOT MEASURE 89 to protect the overall health and safety of communities.Examples FAILS TO DEVOTE ENOUGH TO PREVENTION include infectious disease control, immunizations, maternal and child health clinics,mental health crisis and commitment services The National Tobacco Agreement will bring hundreds of millions and case management of former state hospital patients. of dollars to Oregon. It would be a big mistake not to devote With all of the pressures on the state General Fund,these critical enough of the settlement money to tobacco-prevention to make a local health and mental health programs have fallen behind in real difference.This is an historic opportunity that will not come to receiving adequate state funding to provide these essential pub- Oregon again anytime soon.Let's not make a mistake that we will lic and mental health services. Local revenues to support these be paying for,for the rest of our lives. needed programs have seriously declined due to property tax BALLOT MEASURE 89 limitations and reduced timber receipts. FAILS TO REDUCE COSTS TO TAXPAYERS Measure 89 creates the"Oregon Health Security Fund".Funded It's been estimated that diseases caused by tobacco use cost by the Tobacco Settlement Dollars (not our tax dollars), approxi- Oregonians over$1 billion dollars a year in economic and health mately$75 million a year for at least 20 years will be put into this costs.Just over$300 million a year in taxpayer dollars are spent trust fund.The interest will be spent for critical services including in Oregon on public health care. The only way we can really, your local public and mental health system. It won't take long for reduce these costs, over the long haul, is to invest in tobacco the principal to build and the interest to be a substantial boon to prevention today. the services that protect you and your community. BALLOT MEASURE 89 Ballot Measure 89 calls for the interest to be spent on six areas: FAILS TO PROTECT OUR KIDS 1.Prevention of smoking and treatment of tobacco related The overwhelming majority of smokers began smoking as chil- disease dren or teens. Smoking has devastating health consequences. 2. Local public and mental health services For instance, 21% of all heart disease deaths are caused by 3. Low-income housing development smoking.Tobacco prevention is critical to keeping our kids healthy 4.Transportation for the elderly and disabled now,and in the future. 5.Emergency shelter for battered women 6.Services for Oregon Health Sciences University That's Why... PLEASE SUPPORT THE CREATION OF THE HEALTH THE AMERICAN HEART ASSOCIATION SECURITY FUND FOR THE HEALTH AND SAFETY OF ALL is Opposed to Measure 89 OREGONIANS Tobacco Settlement Money Should Make a Real Commitment to (This information furnished by Gina Firman, Coalition of Concerned Tobacco Prevention! Community Mental Health Professionals.) TO ENSURE THE FUTURE HEALTH OF OREGON VOTE NO on BALLOT MEASURE 89 (This information furnished by John Chism,American Heart Assoc.) (This space purchased for$5001n accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 45 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 89 Arguments ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION* ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION The AMERICAN LUNG ASSOCIATION of Oregon American Cancer Society of Oregon Opposes Measure 89 Opposes Measure 89 Measure 89 Fails to Commit to Tobacco Prevention Tobacco Settlement Dollars Should be Used to Make a Real Oregonians have put their trust in the Cancer Society for more Commitment to Tobacco Prevention than 54 years to give them the facts on lung cancer and tobacco- MEASURE 89 FAILS TO DEVOTE ENOUGH MONEY TO related illness.We are opposing Measure 89 because it devote TOBACCO USE REDUCTION FOR OUR KIDS enough money to prevention. And,there are a few things we think you should know before you Measure 89 Doesn't Meet Oregon's Needs for vote.We're opposing this Measure 89 because it would not make Tobacco Reduction a REAL commitment to tobacco rrevention in Oregon. Millions Ballot Measure 89 is pork barrel politics at it worst.It's just another and millions of Tobacco Settlement dollars are flowing into example of the legislature kowtowing to a litany of special inter- Oregon right now.But Measure 89 doesn't devote enough of the ests.Measure 89 would divert the tobacco settlement money to a Settlement to fund the very programs we need most to keep our whole host of pet projects.This goes against the original intent of kids safe and healthy...and that's just wrong. the settlement–to help reduce the financial burden of tobacco We're the American Lung Association of Oregon. We've spent use. nearly a century in Oregon promoting and providing programs to Measure 89 Won't Help Save Oregon Taxpayers Money prevent devastating tobacco-related diseases like lung cancer Oregon taxpayers spend nearly $400 dollars a year on public and emphysema.You can trust us to put the health of Oregonians health costs linked to illnesses caused by tobacco use. first and foremost,we always have. Investments in anti-smoking efforts will pay major dividends We Believe the Settlement Money Should be Used as it through better public health and a reduction in health care costs was Intended,to Make a REAL Commitment to by reducing the expensive illnesses associated with tobacco. Reduce Tobacco Use. Measure 89 Won't Help Improve Health Down the Road FACT: Implementing effective youth-targeted programs, And here are the facts: combined with community and media activities, can • Tobacco use is one of the leading causes of cancer in this prevent or postpone the onset of smoking among 20% country to 40%of U.S.adolescents. • Tobacco kills more than 1 in 5 Oregonians FACT: 90%of new smokers are children and teens.According - Tobacco is already used by over 60,000 Oregon children Tobacco is the most preventable threat to our nation's health to the Centers for Disease Control(CDC),comprehen- sive tobacco prevention programs are the most You can trust us when we say, "Prevention Works:' Funding effective in reducing tobacco use. tobacco prevention saves lives and reduces illness—then we FACT: Nationwide public health studies indicate more than could spend those funds other ways. Measure 89 doesn't do one-third e public h high school students are current enough to fund tobacco prevention—and that's what the Tobacco Settlement was all about. smokers.In Oregon,over 60,000 children already use tobacco. The Cancer Society Urges You to Vote NO on 89 We believe you should know who is behind Use the tobacco settlement funds to fight tobacco addiction, Measure 89...Special Interests. and reduce the toll tobacco takes on our state! FACT: Measure 89 is just another example of the Legislature (This information furnished by Nancy Bennett,American Cancer Society) giving in to Special Interests. FACT: Measure 89 diverts the Tobacco Settlement to pay for the Legislature's Pet Projects. FACT: Measure 89 is just one more measure that says one thing,but does another. The AMERICAN LUNG ASSOCIATION of Oregon Urges You to Vote"No"on MEASURE 89 (This information furnished by David J. Delvrelee, American Lung Association of Oregon.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 46 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 89 Arguments ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION WHO CAN YOU TRUST TO GIVE YOU HONEST Oregonians Have Trusted Us to Protect Your Health INFORMATION ABOUT ISSUES THAT EFFECT For 190 Years OREGONIAN'S FUTURE HEALTH? AMERICAN LUNG ASSOCIATION,est.in Oregon 1915 Measure 89 doesn't devote enough of the Tobacco AMERICAN HEART ASSOCIATION,est.in Oregon 1948 Settlement money to tobacco prevention,and that's why... The Following Groups ALL Oppose Measure 89 AMERICAN CANCER SOCIETY,est.in Oregon 1946 AMERICAN CANCER SOCIETY And,we are opposed to Measure 89 because... Measure 89 Doesn't Spend enough of the Tobacco Settlement AMERICAN HEART ASSOCIATION on Tobacco Prevention AMERICAN LUNG ASSOCIATION OF OREGON THE US CENTERS FOR DISEASE CONTROL AND OREGON FEDERATION OF NURSES AND PREVENTION,the`,`CDC"says... HEALTH PROFESSIONALS The following are excerpts from the US Surgeon General and AMERICAN COLLEGE OF CARDIOLOGY, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Report OREGON CHAPTER `Healthy People 2010."Emphasis Added. OREGON ADVOCACY COALITION OF SENIORS&PEOPLE 'The most important advance in comprehensive pro- WITH DISABILITIES grams has been the emergence of statewide tobacco control efforts" AMERICAN ASSOCIATION OF UNIVERSITY "Evidence shows that these multi-faceted,state-based WOMEN OF OREGON tobacco control programs are effective in reducing OREGON ALLIANCE OF CHILDREN'S PROGRAMS tobacco use" OREGON STATE COUNCIL OF SENIOR CITIZENS THE US CENTERS FOR DISEASE CONTROL AND OREGON HEALTH CARE ASSOCIATION PREVENTION,the"CDC"is Right...Prevention Does Work!!! OREGON CENTER FOR ASSISTED LIVING But, In Order for Prevention IQ Work HUMAN SERVICES COALITION OF OREGON Oregon Needs to Make a REAL Commitment PORTLAND GRAY PANTHERS That Means Defeating Measures,Like 89,which Fails to Adequately Fund Prevent'on OREGON ADVOCACY CENTER Oregon's Heart,Lung and Cancer Organizations OREGON CONSUMER LEAGUE are Opposed to Measure 89 UNITED SENIORS OF OREGON Measure 89 falls short because it just doesn't do enough to Fund Prevention from Settlement Dollars WE URGE YOU to VOTE NO on MEASURE 89 WHO'S BEHIND MEASURE 89? (This information furnished by John Valley,American Cancer Society.) Measure 89 Funds a Litany of Special Interest Group's Pet Projects...It's Just Politics as Usual And that's bad for Oregon's health because Measure 89 to fails to devote enough money to prevention of tobacco-use! The People You Can Trust to Put Oregon's Health First Urge You to:VOTE NO ON MEASURE 89 (This information furnished by John Valley,American Cancer Society.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 47 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide.Measures Measure No. 89 Arguments ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION OREGON NURSES&HEALTH CARE PROFESSIONALS Oregon Nurses Say"No"to Ballot Measure 89 Because... REJECT BALLOT MEASURE 89 It fails to Make a Commitment to Tobacco Prevention Because it doesn't do enough for tobacco prevention! • It's Time to Make a Real Commitment to Tobacco Prevention in Oregon VOTE NO ON MEASURE 89... Measure 89 does not allocate a reasonable amount of the because it fails to devote enough of the Tobacco Settlement Tobacco Settlement dollars for Tobacco Prevention.The Tobacco money to tobacco-prevention. Settlement was about recovering money for the damage the tobacco industry has done to our health.The money should be VOTE NO ON MEASURE 89... spent on programs to keep them from doing more of the same in because prevention programs to ensure the future health of the future.The money should be pent on tobacco prevention. Oregon's kids deserve a real commitment. • Measure 89 Fails to Fund Prevention Adequately VOTE NO ON MEASURE 89.... Oregon's smoking prevention programs have made a big differ- because the huge costs associated with treating tobacco-related ence...but it's not enough. The Tobacco Settlement was about illnesses are breaking the"financial"backs of Oregon taxpayers. preventing future tobacco addiction.This measure just doesn't cut VOTE NO ON MEASURE 89... it—there is not a reasonable amount for tobacco prevention for As nurses and health care providers, we can tell you first hand, the youth of Oregon. diseases caused by tobacco take a real toll, both on people's . Measure 89 Won't Help Our Kids health and on scarce healthcare dollars.The Tobacco Settlement What we need are programs to help kids before they start smok- was, in great part, about decreasing the future costs associated ing. Research shows that most smokers begin when they are in with nicotine addiction and smoking.We're opposing Measure 89 their teens. If we can help our kids get through their teen years because doesn't devote enough of the Tobacco Settlement for without starting to smoke,they're likely to never smoke.Tobacco tobacco prevention in Oregon. prevention efforts are critical in keeping kids from starting to The Facts- smoke in the first place. 1. Everyday in America, nearly 3,000 children start to smoke; • Measure 89 is Designed to Fund Special Interests 2:Nearly every adult smoker today, started smoking as a kid This measure is just another example of the legislature caving (90%); into special interests and trying to divert the Tobacco Settlement 3.The greatest tobacco use increase in youth occurs between money for its pet projects. Measure 89 is pork barrel politics at 7th and 9th grade. its worst. The Costs- Oregon NURSES Ask You to Join Us in 1. It costs Oregon taxpayers more than $300 million dollars a Voting NO on Measure 89 year on average, for public health costs associated with Tobacco Prevention from Tobacco Settlement Money tobacco use 2. It costs Oregon taxpayers, about $100 million dollars in Natalie Rasmussen,Registered Nurse indirect costs associated with 1 million lost work days associ- Lisa K.Hansen,Registered Nurse ated with tobacco use Carolyn Carter,Registered Nurse 3. It costs Oregon more than $400 million dollars a year on Anne Rosenfeld,Registered Nurse average,for private health costs associated with tobacco use Measure 89 Doesn't Devote Enough to Prevention Jean R.Moseley,Registered Nurse Measure 89 Won't Do One Thing to Reduce Sara Crivellone,Registered Nurse Future Health Care Costs Maryanne Bletscheu,Registered Nurse,MSN Please Join the Oregon Federation of NURSES and Health Professionals (This information furnished by Maryanne Bletscheu,RN,MSN.) in Voting NO on Measure 89! (This information furnished by Katherine R.Schmidt,Oregon Federation of Nurses and Health Professionals.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon,nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 48 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 89 Arguments ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION Former Surgeon General C.Everett Koop Urges No Vote on Oregon Physicians Oppose Measure 89 Because... Measure 89 Tobacco Settlement Dollars Should be Spent on Dear Oregon Families, Tobacco-related Problems! Ballot Measure 89 is a lost opportunity.Ballot Measure 89 takes And, Measure 89 Fails to Do This! tobacco settlement dollars designed for preventing tobacco use and spends it on special interest Rrojects that have nothing As physicians, we see patients every day with serious tobacco to do with preventing kids from starting smoking or helping related illnesses.These diseases are often life threatening, and smokers quit. That is why I join with Oregon's leading public may include lung cancer, emphysema, and mouth and throat health advocates including the American Cancer Society, the cancers. Measure 89 squanders Oregon's chance to effectively American Lung Association and the American Heart Association address tobacco-use reduction. to oppose Measure 89. 1 strongly urge voters to protect That's Why Doctors OPPOSE Ballot Measure 89 Oregonian's health, lives and pocketbooks by voting NO on Measure 89. The tobacco settlement monies should be used for smoking prevention efforts and to help smokers'stop smoking.Measure 89 The tobacco settlement is an historic opportunity—not only to does not dedicate a reasonable amount of the Settlement dollars send a message to tobacco companies that we recognize their coming into Oregon for tobacco-use prevention and instead gives products for what they are—agents of death—but also to put in the money away to a long list of pork barrel projects and special place programs that will improve public health in the future by interests. reducing tobacco use. Using the tobacco settlement money for what it was intended -to provide smoking prevention programs, Tobacco-related illnesses are not only devastating for the patient, especially for kids and to help smokers stop smoking, is the they are extremely expensive, costing Oregonians$1.5 billion in wisest use of these funds. medical expenses and lost productivity in 1996 alone. As former Surgeon General, I know tobacco use is the nation's Smoking among youth is increasing.Unless efforts are made now number one preventable cause of premature death and disease. to intervene,the cycle of addiction will continue—driving up future The devastating effects of smoking are clear—thousands of lives medical costs and cutting short the lives of productive citizens. have been lost and billions paid to provide health services to Measure 89 Doesn't Help Solve the Problem persons with tobacco-related illness. Despite this, tobacco com- panies continue to addict thousands of new smokers every year. We are opposing Measure 89 because if we don't commit to After a drop in the number of new youth smokers, smoking is prevention, we won't solve the problem. Measure 89 fails to do again on the rise among young people for most of the last the job. Measure 89 fails to adequately support tobacco-use decade. We need to make investments in smoking prevention reduction in Oregon. efforts—and to use the settlement for what it was intended: to Join DOCTORS from Around the State in Voting reduce the damage that tobacco use inflicts on Oregon Measure 89 fails to do that. NO on MEASURE 89 1 strongly urge you to vote NO On Measure 89. Join Us in Supporting Tobacco Settlement Dollars Sincerely, for Tobacco Prevention C.Everett Koop,M.D,Sc.D Andrea Kielich,MD (This information furnished by Dr.C.Everett Koop.) David Kliewer,MD Bruce Thomson,MD Mark Rampton,MD Gary Goby,MD Donald Austin,MD Tom Becker,MD Jay Kravitz,MD Bernard Kliks,MD Bruce McLellan,MD David Gilmour,MD (This information furnished by Donald F.Austin,MD.) (This space purchased for$500 In accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 In accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 49 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 89 Arguments ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION The OREGON HEALTH CARE ASSOCIATION: HUMAN SERVICES COALITION OF OREGON Caring for the Frail and Elderly Opposes Measure 89 because... Urges a NO Vote on Measure 89 Because... It Doesn't Devote Enough of the Tobacco Settlement It Fails to Devote Enough of the Tobacco Settlement Money to Tobacco Prevention to Tobacco Prevention The Human Services Coalition of Oregon(HSCO)is comprised of & organizations who are dedicated to advocating for low-income We Should Stop the Special Interest Money Grab! Oregonians access to health care and social services.Yet,HSCO The Funding Does NOT Go to the Right Places is opposed to Measure 89. Nearly 50%of all tobacco related illnesses end up in Long Term Why is that? Care facilities across the state of Oregon. The funding from Measure 89: Measure 89 is not enough to help any State program AND its inadequate to properly fund tobacco prevention—the long-term Would prevent any significant funding, from the Tobacco solution to tobacco related disease. Measure 89 short-changes Settlement, from going to tobacco prevention programs in Oregon's frail,elderly and disabled citizens. Oregon. Stop the SPECIAL INTEREST Money Grab Measure 89: Measure 89 designed by special interest groups will take the millions of Tobacco Settlement dollars to fund a arab-baa of pet Is constructed in a way that provides so little funding, it rome t .Now we have to fight to get it back, or Oregon seniors won't really help the programs Oregon cares about.And, will be seriously hurt.Tobacco costs the Oregonians hundreds of we know the importance of making a real investment in millions of tax dollars every year in medical costs,lost wages,and human services. productivity. The Tobacco Settlement was SUPPOSED to help Measure 89: this problem by funding areas most impacted by tobacco use. And, instead Measure 89 is just another measure that promises Doesn't make good sense.If we would spend a responsible one thing.but delivers something else. amount of the Tobacco Settlement on tobacco prevention now, we would save Oregon tax dollars and Oregon lives. NOT Enough funding for TOBACCO PREVENTION After all, decreasing future tobacco use was a key Not only does this measure fail to direct money where it should element of the Tobacco Settlement. go, but it hardly funds tobacco prevention–the REAL purpose of the settlement money.Oregon should be concentrating on stop- ping smoking through prevention, not through funding a litany of VOTE NO ON MEASURE 89 non-related programs. Reports from the US Centers for Disease Tobacco Settlement Dollars for Tobacco Prevention Controls AND former Surgeon General C.Everett Koop promote prevention as being key.Measure 89 does NOT provide enough (This information furnished by Gina Mattioda,co-chair of HSCO.) money for tobacco use reduction. Show the Legislature their MONEY GRAB is WRONG! Show the Legislature that TOBACCO SETTLEMENT DOLLARS Should be Used to make a Genuine Commitment tcrTOBACCO PREVENTION! VOTE NO!on MEASURE 89 Please join with the Oregon Health Care Association in defeating this Measure (This information furnished by Jonathan Eames, Oregon Center For Assisted Living,Oregon Health Care Association.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 50 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 89 Arguments ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION GOVERNOR KITZHABER RECOMMENDS Measure 89 does nothing to expand healthcare A NO VOTE ON MEASURE 89. coverage for uninsured Oregon children. I oppose Measure 89 because I believe funds from the tobacco The Oregon Pediatric Society opposes Measure 89. settlement should pay for health-related programs. There's simply no good reason any child in Oregon should be Oregon legislators had a good idea when they decided to invest without healthcare.Yet legislators who passed Measure 89 failed Oregon's windfall.from the national tobacco settlement in a trust to include needed funding to pay for low-income children's health- fund and only spend the earnings from the trust, rather than care coverage–or any other Oregon Health Plan program. spend the money as fast as it's received.But in drafting Measure Through the Oregon Health Plan, Oregon has expanded health- earnings among a variety of programs.89,legislators sabotaged their good idea by divvying up trust fund care coverage to thousands of low-income Oregon children. Because the federal Children's Health Insurance Program The programs Measure 89 would fund are worthy and I sought matches state dollars on a nearly three-to-one basis, children's and got funding for most of them in the current state budget.But healthcare is a cost-effective investment. However, limited state I believe tobacco settlement funds should be used to finance low- funds last year left more than 61,000 Oregon children without income health care.After all, the costs paid by the state to treat healthcare. low income Oregonians for tobacco related illnesses was the The programs included in Measure 89 do not qualify for federal basis for the state's law suit against the tobacco companies.That matching funds.That misses the opportunity t use tobacco should be our first priority for using tobacco settlement receipts. set- tlement funds to leverage additional benefits for Oregon. Unfortunately,Measure 89 does not spend a penny of tobacco There is a better alternative.The Oregon Pediatric Society sup settlement funds on the Oregon Health Plan. ports Measure 4.It provides a stable base of long-term funding for But another Measure on the ballot, Measure 4,does.It takes the Oregon Health Plan programs. Measure 4 specifically requires legislature's idea of investing tobacco settlement dollars in a trust the legislature to use earnings from the Oregon Health Plan Trust fund and directs all earnings from the trust to Oregon Health Plan Fund to"maximize funding for expanding children's health cover- Programs. Measure 4 will help provide for these important age under the Children's Health Insurance Program:' programs. The Oregon Pediatric Society believes Measure 4 wisely invests None of the programs Measure 89 would fund qualify for federal the state's share of tobacco settlement funds where it can do the matching funds.But nearly every dollar of funding for health care most good for most Oregonians.Measure 4 puts the first priority provided by Measure 4 will be matched by almost two dollars from for healthcare on Oregon's children and it maximizes matching the federal government. funds available through federal healthcare programs, including Measure 4 uses tobacco settlement revenues for appropriate the federal Children's Health Insurance Program. priorities. Measure 89 does not. I urge you to compare the Measure 89 puts funds into legislators' pet programs and measures and join me in voting NO on Measure 89 and yes on fails to maximize settlement dollars.The Oregon Pediatric Measure 4. Society urges you to vote NO on Measure 89 and vote YES on John Kitzhaber Measure 4. Governor (This information furnished by James K. Lace, M.D., F.A.A.P., Oregon (This information furnished by John A.Kitzhaber,M.D.) Pediatric Society.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 51 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 89 Arguments ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION Oregon Association of Hospitals and Health Systems Two Legislators Explain Opposes Measure 89 Why They Recommend a Because It Fails to Direct Any Tobacco Settlement Funds NO Vote on Measure 89 to Oregon Health Plan Programs We are a Republican and a Democrat, an urban legislator and The state's share of the national tobacco settlement provides one from rural Oregon.We oppose Measure 89 and encourage Oregon a unique chance to secure stable, long-term funding for you to take a close look why.We think you'll agree Measure 89 is Oregon Health Plan programs.The settlement resulted from the not the best investment Oregon can make with its share of the state's lawsuit seeking reimbursement of its expenses paid to national tobacco settlement. cover treatment of tobacco-related illnesses for low-income Estimates are that Oregon will get more than $2 billion over 25 Oregonians. So it's logical to use the settlement to pay for low- years under terms of the settlement. Last year, most legislators income health care agreed that it's wiser to invest tobacco settlement funds in a trust Yet Measure 89 provides not a penny to and just spend the interest rather than pay out all the money as Oregon Health Plan programs fast as we get it.A trust fund will continue to produce revenues for Measure 89 distributes earnings from a tobacco settlement the state long beyond the 25 years tobacco companies will be making payments. trust fund to a wide range of programs-many with little connec- tion to the lawsuit that led to the settlement.Yet it fails to provide Measure 89 creates that kind of trust fund.But it spends trust fund any funding for the Oregon Health Plan.The Oregon Health Plan earnings on programs that, while laudable, don't make best use has worked to expand coverage and keep health care costs in of the newfound funds. Oregon among the lowest in the nation. While nationally the Measure 89 fails to invest any of the trust fund's number of uninsured has risen to 18 percent, the number of earnings on Oregon Health Plan programs Oregonians without health insurance has been reduced to 10 for low-income Oregonians. percent-thanks in large part to the Oregon Health Plan.Since the Oregon Health Plan was implemented,the rate of uninsured We are chief petitioners on another measure, Measure 4.It also children in Oregon has been cut from 20•percent to just 6 percent. creates a trust fund with tobacco settlement revenues. However, But the Oregon Health Plan is in risk.The current state budget our measure uses earnings for Oregon Health Plan programs– left 61,000 children in Oregon without health care - despite the programs that qualify for federal matching funds. Nearly every fact that the federal government will pay 72 cents of every dollar dollar Measure 4 generates will be matched by two or more it costs to cover uninsured children. None of the programs sup- dollars from the federal government. ported by Measure 89 qualifies for similar federal matching funds. None of the programs funded by Measure 89 Examine Measure 4,an alternative to Measure 89,that directs qualifies for federal matching funds. tobacco settlement trust fund earnings to Oregon Health Plan Since it's inception,Oregon Health Plan funding has been threat- programs.It makes better use of tobacco settlement funds. ened by budget limits. Our measure puts settlement dollars to The OAHHS urges you to vote NO on Measure 89 and work forever, providing a guaranteed base of support for health YES on Measure 4 care programs helping Oregon's most vulnerable citizens. Measure 89 neglects that priority and it fails to maximize federal (This information furnished by Kenneth M.Rutledge,Oregon Association of funds available to help pay for health care for low-income Hospitals and Health Systems.) Oregonians. VOTE NO ON MEASURE 89! Senator Eugene Timms(R-Burns) Senator Lee Beyer(D-Springfield) (This information furnished by State Senator Lee Beyer, State Senator Eugene Timms.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 52 Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 90 Proposed by referendum petition to be voted on at the General adequate rates of depreciation of the several classes of property Election, November 7,2000. of each telecommunications utility.The rates shall be such as will provide the amounts required over and above the expenses of maintenance,to keep such property in a state of efficiency corre- sponding to the progress of the industry. Each telecommunica- tions utility shall conform its depreciation accounts to the rates so ascertained and determined by the commission.The commission may make changes in such rates of depreciation from time to time IVIN.Wyn as the commission may find to be necessary. ARM (2) Notwithstanding ORS 757.355,in the following cases the commission may allow in rates,directly or indirectly,the return of x,� "vrlL1tltDCfeS rc�35 i�llrt�mil and a return on amounts on the utility's books of account which � 1titti�tted lnvesimerrts in Cktttaiit reiirktct-gtltity the commission finds represent undepreciated investment in [a] *' utility[plant,including that which]property that has been retired s s from service: l�i�� ��"� � "No`s,itttfe rejects auttt€artz►ttg hies c0 1�preCjeted inyestrrtents rt erin (a)When the retirement is due to ordinary wear and tear,casu- fi8lfd � alties,acts of God,acts of governmental authority;or kJ� Y,lDtlrr 1 ±`pYShlt�lts ubllc-uttl[ty rae tlerfved,frorn (b) When the commission finds that the retirement is in the thi trtlt�an+ rroperty ntat presently used fir fro- public interest. Ut11lrst!!tlsssen malt auihcfze #ltat SECTION 3.The amendments to ORS 757.140 and 759.135 ) ' tltfls �►Of�it# retrettng crtd8pte [rti lttvesi by sections 1 and 2 of this 1999 Act apply to public utility and ttty pie thai tts lerwtefir8d ft�r sspsctfied tast3rts° telecommunications utility property retired from service s �11tp allttlA!puE�rc artt#tlotmu� before,on or after the effective date of this 1999 Act. lrt ['tfttprly (f3fdrt fr£yrrt s�'rsl SECTION 4.The amendments to ORS 757.140 and 759.135 � F �9ljgd tstiTtB Applies tp property retired by sections 1 and 2 of this 1999 Act apply to orders of the 1f� ,� �5r tte Public Utility Commission entered before, on or after the effective date of this 1999 Act. �� fi�tA,I�A� `fher is rttr!♦handcar eflt (srt cr� fr+rttiil8rt#exl3eraclrtur car reuet~u8s NOTE: Boldfaced type indicates new language; [brackets and italic]type indicates deletions or comments. TEXT OF MEASURE AN ACT Relating to recovery of investment in retired utility property;creat- ing new provisions;and amending ORS 757.140 and 759.135. Be It Enacted by the People of the State of Oregon: SECTION 1.ORS 757.140 is amended to read: 757.140. (1) Every public utility shall carry a proper and ade- quate depreciation account.The Public Utility Commission shall ascertain and determine the proper and adequate rates of depre- ciation of the several classes of property of each public utility.The rates shall be such as will provide the amounts required over and above the expenses of maintenance, to keep such property in a state of efficiency corresponding to the progress of the industry. Each public utility shall conform its depreciation accounts to the rates so ascertained and determined by the commission. The commission may make changes in such rates of depreciation from time to time as the commission may find to be necessary. (2)Notwithstanding ORS 757.355,in the following cases the commission may allow in rates,directly or indirectly,the return of and a return on amounts on the utility's books of account which the commission finds represent undepreciated investment in [a] utility[plant, including that which]property that has been retired from service: (a) When the retirement is due to ordinary wear and tear, casualties,acts of God,acts of governmental authority;or (b) When the commission finds that the retirement is in the public interest. SECTION 2.ORS 759.135 is amended to read: 759.135. (1) Every telecommunications utility shall carry a proper and adequate depreciation account. The Public Utility Commission shall ascertain and determine the proper and 53 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure Na. 90 EXPLANATORY STATEMENT Measure 90 would change Oregon law to allow regulated utili- ties (electric, phone, gas, water)to charge rates high enough to give the utilities profits on"retired"plants and property no longer providing service,including plants that have stopped working.The Measure is retroactive and would allow rates giving utilities prof- its on the Trojan nuclear plant, which shut down permanently in 1992. Measure 90 would have these effects: 1. It would reinstate a 1995 order of the Oregon Public Utility Commission (Commission)giving Portland General Electric Co.(PGE)profits on the closed Trojan nuclear plant by allow- ing PGE to charge ratepayers approximately$304 million for "return on investment"or profit on Trojan. 2. It would nullify the decision of the Oregon Court of Appeals that present law (enacted by voters by initiative in 1978) prohibits utilities from charging rates giving them profits for retired plants, including Trojan. 3.It would allow utilities to charge rates high enough to receive, at the same time,profits on retired plants and also profits on the plants the utilities build to replace them. Measure 90 would apply to all public utilities regulated by the Oregon Commission. Measure 90 seeks to bypass, as to retired plants,the existing statute,enacted by Oregon voters in 1978,which states: No public utility shall, directly or indirectly, by any device, charge,demand,collect or receive from any customer rates which are derived from a rate base which includes within it any construction, building, installation or real or personal property not presently used for providing utility service to the customer. Measure 90, however, would authorize the Oregon Commission to allow utilities to receive profits on plants,including those which have stopped working or are otherwise retired before the end of their expected lives. Measure 90 is retroactive and would apply to all utility plants and property retired in the past. The Trojan nuclear plant was permanently closed in 1992, 19 years before the end of its expected life. In 1995, the Oregon Commission allowed PGE to charge ratepayers approximately$304 million to give PGE stock- holders a"return on investment"or profit on Trojan.(This assumes no future change to the rate of return the Oregon Commission approved for PGE.) By the end of 1999, PGE ratepayers had paid approximately $150 million to PGE for Trojan profits. In 1998, the Oregon,Court of Appeals reversed the 1995 Oregon Commission order,concluding that present law(the 1978 ballot measure) prohibits utilities from charging rates to receive profits on plants not providing service, including Trojan.While the Oregon Supreme Court was reviewing this decision, the 1999 Oregon Legislature passed HB 3220. PGE then asked the Supreme Court to reverse the earlier Court decision,on the basis of HB 3220.Oregon citizens then submitted 53,489 valid signa- tures to subject HB 3220 to a statewide referendum.Measure 90 is the referendum on HB 3220. Measure 90 is not an initiative. Committee Members: Appointed by: Bob Jenks Chief Petitioners Daniel W.Meek Chief Petitioners Jay Dudley* Secretary of State Representative Jim Hill* Secretary of State Charles Davis Secretary of State *Member dissents(does not concur with explanatory statement) (This committee was appointed to provide an impartial explanation of the ballot measure pursuant to ORS 251.215.) 54 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 90 Arguments ARGUMENT IN FAVOR ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION Portland General Electric (PGE), the Citizens' Utility Board of AARP URGES OREGONIANS TO Oregon (CUB) and the staff of the Oregon Public Utility VOTE"NO"ON MEASURE 90 Commission (OPUC) have resolved a major cost issue involving MEASURE 90 IS UNFAIR TO OREGONIANS the retired Trojan plant.The plan,.if approved by the Commission, will save PGE customers a$10.2 million in the first year. In 1978, Oregon voters passed a ballot initiative to prohibit utility The agreement provides a way to take all of the remaining companies from charging customers for facilities that are not Trojan investment off the books,so that consumers will no longer presently being used to provide service to customers.Measure 90 pay for PGE's investment in Trojan through their monthly electric seeks to overturn the established position of Oregon voters. If bills. enacted, Measure 90 would allow a utility to impose charges on Trojan was closed in January 1993 for economic reasons. customers for facilities that have been shut down and are no Although the plant is closed, a portion of customers'electric bills longer being used to provide service. goes toward recovering PGE's initial investment in Trojan, and to MEASURE 90 WILL RAISE ELECTRICITY RATES paying a return on that investment–the"interest"customers pay on the amount remaining on PGE's books.The issue of return on Measure 90 will allow Portland General Electric(PGE)to recover investment became the center of the debate. It is pending in a $304 million in profits on the Trojan nuclear plant which is no court case and is affected by the November 2000 Ballot Measure longer in operation. PGE closed the plant in January, 1993.The 90. company then asked the Oregon Public Utility Commission(PUC) The new agreement addresses the issue by retiring the invest- to allow it to continue to charge customers for Trojan's expenses ment and ending the return on investment. and the profits it would have earned had the plant continued to To retire this investment, PGE would apply amounts it has on operate.The PUC granted PGE's request. its books as credits to customers over time, plus a substantial contribution from its shareholders, to the remaining Trojan bal- MEASURE 90 OVERTURNS SUCCESSFUL ance.PGE's credits to customers include settlements of contracts COURT CHALLENGES with other utilities and benefits from the 1997 merger with Enron. The PUC's decision was successfully challenged in district court Ongoing decommissioning costs at Trojan are not affected by the and the court of appeals. Both the Marion County Circuit Court agreement and the Oregon Court of Appeals upheld the position of Oregon Ballot Measure 90 will remain on the November ballot but has voters.Nevertheless,in the spring of 1999, PGE decided to side- less significance with the Trojan investment removed from prices. step Oregonians and persuaded the legislature to validate the (This information furnished by Cindy M. Finlayson, Portland General company's previous request. In so doing, the legislature passed Electric.) House Bill 3220(now known as Measure 90)which legalized the Trojan profits. A law already exists in the state which allows utility companies, like PGE,to recover certain costs related to shutting down utility plants.This is not at issue.What is at issue is Measure 90 which will allow any utility company to raise rates and collect ongoing profits on a facility which has been closed and is no longer pro- viding service to customers. OREGON VOTERS MUST SEND A MESSAGE TO THE LEGISLATURE BY VOTING"NO"ON MEASURE 90 (This information furnished by Lois Smith, AARP Advocacy Representative,AARP Oregon.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 55 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 90 Arguments ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION You didn't build it!You didn't break it! VOTE NO ON 90 You shouldn't have to pay for it! In 1978 over 60% of Oregon voters enacted Ballot Measure 9, • In 1978, Oregonians overwhelmingly passed a statutory initia- preventing private utilities from charging ratepayers for utility plant tive prohibiting electric and telephone utilities from charging which does not provide service. ratepayers for utility plant or equipment not providing service to Unfortunately 22 years later,voters of Oregon have to protect customers.Measure 90 repeals this law and allows private themselves all over again because the state legislature and utility rates to include profits on retired utility property not our Governor decided that its more important to enrich providing service. stockholders than protect you. Vote No on 90 In the last legislative session, Measure 90 was passed, and • Oregon state courts have interpreted the 1978 statutory initia- signed into law by Governor Kitzhaber, so Portland General tive as prohibiting private utility rates that include a"return on" Electric could charge ratepayers, out to the year 2011, or profit on plants or equipment not providing service.Measure $304,000,000 in profits for the dead Trojan Nuclear Plant.This is 90 would overturn these state court decisions and allow in addition to ratepayers paying for Trojan's decommissioning, Enron/PGE to collect from ratepayers$304 million in profit clean up and replacement power costs. on the abandoned Trojan Nuclear Plant. If that's not bad enough,Measure 90 sends a message to all Vote No on 90 privately run electric and telephone utilities in Oregon that • Measure 90 would apply retroactively to all retired utility they too won't have to worry about being financially account- property.It would enable the Public Utility Commission to able for mismanagement. The�too can be rewarded for failure reward electric and telephone utilities for failure by forcing ratepayers to pay for utility property no longer in service, No one asked you whether you wanted to build, operate and just like Trojan. decommission the Trojan Nuclear Plant. Those decisions were Vote No on 90 made by PGE's management. In the private sector, if a corpora- tion screws up, shareholders are supposed to bear the cost, not • When stockholders invest in utility common stock, they elect its customers.Measure 90 is the goose which lays the golden management and share in the rewards of good decision mak- egg,for it not only does it reward PGE for failure by bailing ing and the costs of bad decision making.That's the way it's out its shareholders but it makes them rich at your expense! supposed to be.Measure 90 turns this on its head by forcing Measure 90 opens a Pandora's box.Utilities will no longer have utility ratepayers to pay for mismanagement while rewarding to be concerned about whether an asset provides service, as stockholders for failure. Measure 90 forces ratepayers to ratepayers will get to pay for it regardless of whether it works or become stockholders against their will. not;and the corporate icing on the cake is that ratepayers get no Vote No on 90 voice in decision making at all. • For far too long electric utilities have had their way with the Rewarding utility shareholders for bad decision making is Legislature and the Public Utility Commission. Again and bad for the ratepayers.If you didn't build ityouu didn't break again.public interest groups have had to turn to the courts and it,-you shouldn't have to pay for it. Oregon's initiative and the referendum process to protect Just say NO on 90! ratepayers. The buck stops with you! The bottom line is simple: You didn't build it! You didn't break it! You (This information furnished by Andrew V.Reid.) shouldn't have to pay for it! Just say NO on 90 Don't Waste Oregon htto://www.teleport.com/-dwoc Lloyd Marbet Candidate for Secretary of State www.marbet.org (503)637-3549 (This information furnished by Lloyd Marbet,Don't Waste Oregon.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 56 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet-Statewide Measures Measure No. 90 Arguments ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION RALPH NADER URGES"NO"ON 90 UTILITY REFORM PROJECT The$304 Million Trojan Nuclear Ripoff LLOYD MARBET and DAN MEEK Continues the Cheating of Utility Ratepayers say Measure 90 is a fraud on Oregon ratepayers, sponsored by the "NO"ON 90 Oregon Legislature.Its immediate effect will be to charge ratepay- ers $304'million to give profits to Portland General Electric Co. Don't be fooled by the alleged"settlement"on Trojan (PGE)stockholders for the abandoned Trojan nuclear plant,which profits trumpeted by PGE and the newspapers. broke down in 1992. We are full parties in the lawsuits. The Explanatory Statement adopted by the impartial committee We did not settle anything! appointed by the Oregon Secretary of State,states: We are fighting the$304 Million Trojan Ripoff! "Measure 90 would change Oregon law to allow regulated utilities (electric, phone, gas, water) to charge rates high Measure 90 is the Legislature's billion dollar gift to the utilities, enough to give the utilities profits on "retired" plants and bought with nearly $1 million in utility campaign contributions to property no longer providing service, including plants that legislative candidates in 1998. have stopped working.The Measure is retroactive and would A 69-31%statewide vote in 1978 adopted an initiative(Measure 9) allow rates giving utilities profits on the Trojan nuclear plant, that prohibited utilities from charging ratepayers for plants that do which shut down permanently in 1992. not work.Measure 90 destroys that initiative. Measure 90 would have these effects: The Explanatory Statement, adopted by the impartial committee 1. It would reinstate a 1995 order of the Oregon Public Utility appointed by the Oregon Secretary of State,explains: Commission (PUC) giving Portland General Electric Co. In 1995,the Oregon PUC allowed PGE to charge ratepayers (PGE)profits on the closed Trojan nuclear plant by allowing approximately $304 million to give PGE stockholders a PGE to charge ratepayers approximately $304 million for return on investment'or profit on Trojan" "return on investment"or profit on Trojan. 2. It would nullify the decision of the Oregon Court of Appeals and that present law (enacted by voters by initiative in 1978) "In 1998, the Oregon Court of Appeals reversed the 1995 prohibits utilities from charging rates giving them profits for PUC order, concluding that present law (the 1978 ballot retired plants, including Trojan. measure) prohibits utilities from charging rates to receive 3. It would allow utilities to charge rates high enough to receive, profits on plants not providing service, including Trojan" at the same time,profits on retired plants and also profits on We won in the courts,upholding the 1978 initiative.So the utilities the plants built to replace them." pulled out their wallets, bought their candidates, and had the The way for a utility to maximize profits under Measure 90 is to Legislature pass HB 3220 to: build plants that break, then replace them with more plants that — destroy the 1978 initiative break.This is not free enterprise. This is welfare for monopoly — allow PGE to charge ratepayers an additional $304 corporations, paid for in your utility bills. million for profits on the Trojan nuclear plant Ralph Nader and the Pacific Green Party say: — allow other electric, gas, phone, and water utilities to VOTE"NO"ON 90 charge ratepayers for profits on plants that don't work. (This information furnished by Daniel Meek, Utility Reform Project We,OSPIRG,and the Citizens Utility Board(CUB)then collected (www.utilityreform.com).) over 53,000 valid signatures to put this to the voters. On August 24, PGE and CUB announced a "settlement"of the Trojan case,which would allow PGE to keep$240 million in Trojan profits it has already collected (which includes interest) and to continue charging ratepayers for Trojan in the future.We did not agree to this. Don't be fooled by the press coverage. More Information: Contacts: www.voters.net dan@meek.net www.marbet.org marbet @mail.com (This information furnished by Daniel Meek, Utility Reform Project (www.utilityreform.com).) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251,255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 57 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 90 Arguments ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION CIVIC GROUPS URGE OREGONIANS TO PROTECT CONSUMERS VOTE NO ON MEASURE 90 VOTE NO ON MEASURE 90 The 1999 legislature made a big mistake passing HB 3220.The In 1995, the PUG approved allowing PGE to charge customers bill, pushed by Portland General Electric (PGE), allowed the millions of dollars in profits on the closed Trojan nuclear power utility to charge$304 million in profits on the closed Trojan nuclear plant.The Citizens'Utility Board(CUB), a non-profit organization plant. HB 3220 was passed despite a voter-approved law supported by thousands of ratepayers,opposed that decision.We prohibiting utilities from charging for facilities not providing believed a 1978 ballot measure prevented utilities from earning service. Over 2,000 volunteers collected signatures to refer the profits on plants not producing electricity. bill to the ballot as Measure 90 to stop it from becoming law. We exercised our rights. We sued. Oregon citizens have the MEASURE 90 IS UNFAIR right to challenge decisions by state agencies that are not The legislature passed HB 3220 to short-circuit the courts.After consistent with the law. Trojan closed, the Public Utility Commission (PUC)decided that We won--first in Oregon Circuit Court and then in the Oregon PGE could charge profits it would have earned had the plant Court of Appeals.The courts ruled that the PUC did not have the remained open. The Citizens' Utility Board, the Utility Reform authority to allow Trojan profits after the plant closed. Project and Lloyd Marbet sued, arguing the decision was not lawful. The Oregon Circuit Court and the Oregon Court of PGE went to the legislature and changed the law--retroac- Appeals agreed. But PGE got the legislature to pass HB 3220, tively. PGE lobbied the 1999 legislature to pass a bill that gave retroactively giving the PUC authority the courts said it did not the 1995 PUC the authority to allow Trojan profits. We were have. It's not fair for the legislature to pass a retroactive law to surprised.We did not kndW that the 1999 legislature could change benefit special interests. the authority of a state agency in 1995.We always thought that MEASURE 90 IS UNNECESSARY government agencies had to comply with the law as written when After consumers won in court,;PGE was purchased twice.Enron they make a decision. and Sierra Pacific both bought PGE knowing that, under current More than 2000 volunteers stopped that law from going into' interpretation of state law,they cannot earn a profit on Trojan. effect and referred it to voters as Measure 90.This gives MEASURE 90 IS UNFRIENDLY TO CONSUMERS Oregonians a chance to say no to retroactive lawmaking. If HB 3220 becomes law,every utility will have a perverse incen- Recently CUB settled our lawsuit with PGE. If the PUC tive to make bad investments knowing they will be able to collect approves,customers will see rates decrease by$10.2 million this profits anyway. Utilities should not be able to charge to collect year.If the 1999 legislation had become law,we would have had profits on bad investments. no court case to settle and rates would be higher. VOTE NO ON MEASURE 90. A separate lawsuit challenging Trojan profits, but not involving ALLIANCE FOR DEMOCRACY, PORTLAND CUB, has not been settled.The citizens behind it deserve their CITIZENS'UTILITY BOARD OF OREGON day in court.Measure 90 would take it away. DON'T WASTE OREGON CAUCUS JOIN CUB ECUMENICAL MINISTRIES OF OREGON AND GRAY PANTHERS, PORTLAND VOTE NO ON 901 OREGON AARP OREGON COMMON CAUSE (This information furnished by Bob Jenks, Citizens' Utility Board of OREGON CONSUMERS LEAGUE Oregon.) OREGON LEAGUE OF CONSERVATION VOTERS OREGON PEACEWORKS OREGON STATE COUNCIL OF SENIOR CITIZENS OREGON STATE PUBLIC INTEREST RESEARCH GROUP PACIFIC GREEN PARTY UNITED SENIORS-OF OREGON UTILITY REFORM PROJECT (This information furnished by Jeff Bissonnette,No on 90 Committee.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 58 Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures I Measure No. 91 Proposed by initiative petition to be voted on at the General EXPLANATORY STATEMENT Election, November 7,2000. This measure amends the Oregon Constitution to remove from statute the limitation on the amount of federal taxes that individ- BALLOTTITLE ual income taxpayers can deduct in computing Oregon taxable income and to allow corporate income taxpayers to deduct federal taxes in computing Oregon taxable income. 3 itr. Ea�rCi€ sl 1M) [ Under current statutory law, Oregon personal income taxpay- � � ers,including individuals,may deduct up to$3,000 of their federal income tax liability on their state income tax return.A deduction is not allowed for any amount of federal income taxes that is in ?t9 "ifs* excess of $3,000. Oregon corporate income taxpayers are not sftstmak # rtitet�tte1S currently allowed to deduct any amount of their federal income "Ofl persaat�t, �" r[cc� taxes from Oregon taxable income. This measure wo aId allow a personal income taxpayer or a n fctal � fits r1�it corporate income taxpayer to deduct from Oregon taxable income the entire amount of federal income taxes the taxpayer has paid ��a ft3ltiStft[ttt;3l tttirtr� ltt„' on income subject to Oregon income tax. This measure also Et €�s � Y � i� In #r� 1tialetut would prohibit local governments or other taxing districts from rtTtf , tdet�drrrallyftrtfitd.0 requiring Oregon taxpayers to pay income taxes on federal S ,� t�s p�tjg5n tt� # income tax payments. tsU?f �txWt � � This measure would apply to tax years beginning on or after tra� rsq�t art `�►��� January 1,2000. t � � d Committee Members: Appointed by: Litt,IUIe �Gtr •8�1'e�tY�,1Xt t�ix errs s�t't�ort '� ��, 1�r�'t, Becky Miller Chief Petitioners Bill Sizemore Chief Petitioners tTl /lC `11�Ik tt ua �� ate Senator Verne Duncan' Secretary of State Representative Jeff Merkley' Secretary of State t fir, toe Ertl C � pp �el � Fred Miller Members of the Committee 'Member dissents(does not concur with explanatory statement) (This committee was appointed to provide an impartial explanation of the l�E tt ballot measure pursuant to ORS 251.215.) td'et krt� �� fedlt tt #Ia�j)�r, lift# �tttefri� �i� � € z The rn�aStat"��xa�rem#3 rn�tt�tcttlgtt t���te��ltaf ��� ;; E TEXT OF MEASURE BE IT ENACTED BY THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF OREGON: Section 1. No Oregon taxpayer shall be required to pay to the state,a local government,or other taxing district,income taxes on money paid to the federal government as federal income taxes.All federal income taxes paid against a taxpayer's federal income tax obligation for tax years beginning on or after January 1, 2000, shall be fully deductible against income on the taxpayer's Oregon income tax return for the year in which the taxes were paid.This section applies only to federal income taxes on income subject to tax in Oregon. Section 2. This Act supersedes any Oregon law with which it conflicts. Section 3.If any phrase,clause,or part of this Act is determined to be invalid by a court of competent jurisdiction;the remaining phrases,clauses and parts shall remain in full force and effect. 59 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet-Statewide Measures Measure No. 91 Arguments ARGUMENT IN FAVOR ARGUMENT IN FAVOR Four compelling reasons why common sense Oregonians CONGRATULATIONS!YOU'RE RICH! should vote"YES"on Measure 91 If you're like most working and retired Oregonians,the news that 1)Double taxation is wrong.Plain and simple.No one should be you're rich may come as quite a surprise. Looking at your bank forced to pay income taxes on their income taxes. Currently, account,you probably had no idea that you are one of those"rich" Oregon taxpayers can only deduct$3,000 of their federal income people,who will benefit from Measure 91. taxes on their state tax returns.Everything over$3,000 is double How do Measure 91's opponents justify calling so many everyday taxed by the state of Oregon.Even the federal government does people rich? Easy.They call pretty much everybody with a pay- not levy income taxes on our income taxes, but allows us to deduct all our state income taxes on our federal tax returns.The check"rich"Truth is, hundreds of thousands of individuals and Oregon legislature,however,raises hundreds of millions of dollars couples with taxable incomes exceeding $20,000 will receive a every year double taxing our incomes. tax break under Measure 91.Since when does a$21,000 taxable income make you rich. 2)The timing of Measure 91 is perfect.For the last decade,state IT'S EASY TO CALCULATE HOW MUCH YOU'LL SAVE spending has been growing at about four times the rate of infla- tion.State spending is growing much faster than our incomes.In Opponents are saying that the Measure 91 tax break will be tiny fact the current budget grew so much this cycle that. if See for yourself.Total the amount of federal income taxes you Measure 91 passes the state budget for this biennium will and, if applicable,your spouse pay.Your savings under Measure still be hundreds of millions of dollars greater than the last 91 equals nine percent of all your federal income taxes above the budget. Measure 91 would not actually reduce state spending, $3,000 you can currently deduct. Do the math and you'll see. but only slow the rate at which it is growing. Double taxation is taking quite a bite out of your income,isn't it? 3)Oregonians have already voted on this issue three times.Each THE POLITICS OF ENVY time, voters voted overwhelmingly to make federal income taxes fully deductible on their state income tax returns.So why is there Tax and spenders decided they needed a new strategy for a old currently a$3,000 cap? Because the state legislature decided to "sk tax cutting measures.Voters are r i longer fooled by the old overrule the voters and impose a cap anyway because they "sky is falling"rhetoric of the past.Fear isn't working anymore,so wanted to increase state revenue. "in fact. the legislature they are trying envy. imposed the cap only a few months after the people last .The goal of this new"envy strategy"is to pit groups of tax- voted not to have a cap.Measure 91 sends a clear message to payers against each other to persuade each voter to reject the state legislature.Don't ignore the clearly expressed will of the his or her own tax cut because someone else,who is paying people! It places a prohibition against double taxation in the state more taxes,might get a larger tax break. Constitution where the legislature can't overrule the will of the people. Don't be fooled.At a time when the state has more money than at any time in our history, and can easily afford a tax cut, Measure Don't be fooled by the other side's scare tactics. 91 will permanently remove the artificial limit the legislature has Vote"YES"on Measure 91. placed on the.deductibility of federal income taxes, and end the evil of double taxation.And you don't have to be rich to benefit (This information furnished by Bill Sizemore.) from that. (This information furnished by Tony Nathalia.) (This space purchased for$500 In accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 6 0 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 91 Arguments ARGUMENT IN FAVOR ARGUMENT IN FAVOR MEASURE 91 IS NOT RETROACTIVE MEASURE 91 DOES NOT ELIMINATE THE KICKER Opponents of Measure 91 are saying that ending double taxation Opponents of Measure 91 have falsely claimed that the measure is a good idea, but doing it retroactively will be too tough for the would eliminate the kicker, the income tax refund taxpayers state to handle. receive if state income tax revenue exceeds projections. Their However,Measure 91 is not retroactive claims are on one hand laughable,and on the other hand patently false. In February of this year,the U.S.Supreme Court officially decided If Measure 91 affects the kicker at all it would only be that federal income taxes are considered"paid"on the due date because taxpayers would'receive instead of the kicker, an of the tax return for that year. Regardless of when the tax was income tax break about four times as large as the kicker withheld from your paycheck,or when you sent in your estimated That's why claiming that Measure 91 would eliminate the kicker is tax payment to the IRS, it is not considered"paid" until the due date of the return. laughable.Opponents of Measure 91 are really saying:Taxpayers won't receive the kicker income tax cut because they will receive Measure 91 says that you may deduct all of your federal income instead a tax cut four times as big as the kicker.The question is, taxes on your state income tax return.This deduction may be therefore, this year do taxpayers want the kicker or a tax break taken for the year in which the taxes were,paid. four times as large as the kicker? So, if you pay taxes through withholding,your 2000 taxes will be In subsequent years, Measure 91 would not affect the kicker at considered"paid"on April 15, 2001 You will have"paid"them in all. Here's why: Projections of revenue coming into the state are 2001.You will,then, under Measure 91, be able to deduct those calculated based on a set of economic assumptions. If Measure taxes for the year in which they were paid, which was 2001. 91 passes, its requirement that federal income taxes be fully You will deduct them on your 2001 tax return when it is due on deductible for all Oregon taxpayers would simply be one of those April 15,2002. assumptions.Therefore, the kicker would be triggered in future Had the Supreme Court not officially stated that taxes were"paid" years just like it currently is. on the date they are due, Measure 91 would still not be retro- The hypocritical thing about claims that Measure 91 will elim- active because tax returns for the year 2000 aren't even due until inate the kicker is that they are primarily coming from those five months after the election. groups that lobby hardest for the legislature to not return the On your 2000 state tax return, you will be able to deduct up to kicker to the taxpayers but to keep it and spend it $3,000 of your federal taxes, as the law currently allows. Under Don't be fooled.Claims that Measure 91 will eliminate the kicker Measure 91, federal income taxes for the year 2000 will be fully are designed to scare uninformed voters.The kicker will not go deductible on your 2001 tax return. away if Measure 91 passes.In fact, the sponsors of Measure 91 have worked hard to insure that kicker refunds are always (This information furnished by Becky Miller,Oregon Taxpayers United.) returned to the taxpayers. If Measure 91 passes federal income taxes will be fully deductible and the kicker will remain in place for future years! (This information furnished by Leesa Beaudoin.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 61 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 91 Arguments ARGUMENT IN FAVOR ARGUMENT IN FAVOR WHOSE AGAINST MEASURE 91? "And he will take the tenth of your seed, and of your vine- yards,and give to his officers,and to his servants...And you When sorting through all that campaign literature and evaluating shall cry out in that day because of your king which you shall all those TV and radio ads, sometimes it's helpful to consider the have chosen you; and the LORD will not hear you in that source of the information. Sometimes, it's quite revealing to dis- day."(I Sam.8:15-18) cover whose paying for all those very expensive ads. Since the federal income tax was initiated in 1913,the percentage Measure 91 is no exception. A lot of money is being spent to of our income that goes to taxes has gone from roughly 10 persuade Oregonians that they should continue to allow the state percent (which it was for decades) to around 45 or 50 percent. legislature to double tax their incomes. Where's that money Some of this increase seems justified by the increase in popula- coming from? tion density,and resultant increased administration costs of urban Here's your answer:Public employee unions government reg- areas.But most of this increase is because civil government now ulated utilities and very large corporations are all throwing performs many functions once delegated to families, local com- big money into the anti-Measure 91 pot. munities,churches,and voluntary associations. Predictably, the public employee unions are major opponents of The Bible is the standard by which all men's actions must be Measure 91. Public employee unions have a vested interest in properly evaluated and governed.This standard tells us that civil higher taxes. The more taxes everyone else pays, the more government's job is to restrain certain sins by punishing evildoers money they have to divide among their members. (Rom.13:4)and to praise the righteous(2 Pet.2:14).Some taxa tion is necessary for the various layers of civil government to do PGE also donated big bucks to the campaign to defeat Measure these jobs.But the Bible describes a government that takes more 91.PGE is a government regulated utility, and therefore must be than 10% of the people's income in taxation,as oppressive and very careful to not tick off the government. PGE management tyrannical(see above quote). routinely joins the big government coalition to oppose tax cuts for PGE customers.It's not like you're going to get mad and Two things will happen as taxes are lowered.First,the population buy your electricity somewhere else. will have more money to do the tasks it should not have given over to the State.These tasks include most education,health care and Huge corporations like INTEL have donated tens of thousands of welfare.Second, the State will no longer be able to afford to do dollars to the campaign opposing Measure 91.Yes, this is the those tasks. It's a win-win scenario, and that's why we support same INTEL that demanded a huge tax break for itself, tens of Measure 91. millions of dollars, in fact,to build a plant here in Oregon.INTEL has quite the gall.INTEL demands a huge multi-million dollar A man once said that giving money and power to politicians is like corporate tax break for itself,then opposes a tax break for giving whiskey and car keys to teenage boys.Its time to put these everyday working Oregonians. boys on the wagon. It's interesting to note that very few individuals and very few small Prepared by the Parents Education Association, a family-based, businesses contributed money to the campaign against Measure Biblical alternative to the National Education Association. 91.Mostly public employee unions and large corporations. (This information furnished.by Dennis R. Tuuri, Parents Education On the other hand thousands of everyday people and small Association.) businesses contributed money to the campaign to pass Measure 91 and end double taxation. Makes you wonder, doesn't it? (This information furnished by Mary Nathalia.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state.warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 62 CONTINUED I Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 91 Arguments ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION VOTE NO ON MEASURE 91! At our clinic we take care of over 8000 patients, nearly 6000 of According to Measure 91's Fiscal Impact Statement.... whom have no health insurance.Many of the other 2000 patients are covered by the Oregon Health Plan. We are one of ten "The measure may result in a reduction of state-shared so-called "safety net clinics" in Oregon (technically "Federally revenues to local governments:' Qualified Community Health Centers").These clinics do their very WHAT FUNDS MAY BE LOST? best to stay in business and thereby serve many of the roughly 400,000 Oregonians who have NO coverage.WE ARE NOT A • RURAL FIRE PROTECTION & EMERGENCY MEDICAL FREE CLINIC. Every patient is expected to pay what they can, SERVICE providers are currently eligible to receive state and our patient revenue is a substantial part of our over-all grants for the purchase of emergency medical equipment budget. such as Jaws of Life,ambulances,defibrillators and training But without public funding we would not be able to help the folks, for emergency services personnel. mostly women and children,who have the most need. • 9-1-1 EMERGENCY COMMUNICATIONS currently receive Those public dollars include federal and state health care funds. state funds to ensure the operation of a statewide 9-1-1 Sys- A significant portion of the federal funding depends on matching tem. Statewide 56 primary public safety,answering points state dollars, usually one state dollar for three federal dollars. rely on this state funding to provide 9-1-1 service. • RURAL HEALTH DISTRICTS that operate hospitals in rural My concern is that if Oregon voters pass Measure 91, a consid- erable edera amount of our funding will clinic lost including substantial communities currently receive state cost based reimburse- federal matching dollars. Since our clinic has already stretched ment for Medicaid clients. private funding sources, where do we go to continue operating? • TRANSPORTATION FOR SENIORS AND PERSONS WITH What kind of cutbacks will we face? Do we discontinue prenatal DISABILITIES to medical appointments and grocery stores. care? Do we drop our diabetes treatment program? Do we just close the doors earlier each day? One sure thing, those cut- • LIBRARIES currently receive state grants to establish, backs will be substantial. And that will happen at the very time develop or improve public library services for children; 117 when health care costs are again going up dramatically! out of 124 libraries applied for grants in 1999-2000,and 109 grants were awarded. Please consider all the ramifications of this measure when you • WATER & SEWER providers currently receive state grants vote. to construct public infrastructure such as water treatment, Marcus Simantel,Board Chair storage and distribution,and wastewater collection. Virginia Garcia Memorial Health Center,Cornelius,OR DON'T TAKE THE RISK THAT STATE BUDGET CUTS WON'T (This information furnished by Marcus Simantel, Virginia Garcia Memorial TRICKLE DOWN TO LOCAL GOVERNMENT PROGRAMS! Health Center.) VOTE NO ON MEASURE 91! (This information furnished by Greg Baker, Executive Director, Special Districts Association of Oregon.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 63 CONTINUED t Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 91 Arguments ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION Associated Oregon Industries, Dear Friend, representing 19,000 businesses,urges a As members of the Explanatory Statement Committee for NO vote on Ballot Measure 91. Measure 91, we cast dissenting votes against the statement Associated Oregon Industries has lived by a set of Guiding selected for the Voter's Pamphlet because the facts you need to Principles for nearly one hundred and six years. One of these know were excluded. Principles is: These facts include the following: "To promote the health of Oregon's economy and business • New Corporate Deduction: the measure creates a new community by keeping taxes low and simple" deduction for corporations that reduces corporate income tax We believe that people work harder and invest more when they by a third; • Retroactive:the measure is designed to be retroactive,requir- can retain a larger portion of what they earn.We believe govern- ing dramatic service cuts over a few months to balance 18 ment should promote work;savings and private investment;and months of revenue cuts; stable, sensible policies to facilitate the efficient exchange of • Regressive: the measure makes Oregon's tax system more goods and services. regressive:a family of four earning $50,000 saves 18 cents a Knowing this one might ask why we oppose Measure 91. The day; a similar family earning $200,000 saves $10.47 a day. answer is easy.This measure,while appealing,goes too far. Also, in the first year families earning$50,000 or less actually pay higher taxes because they lose the "kicker' refund. Here's why: (Source: The Oregonian). • We believe the 18% cut in programs such as K-12, higher • Uncle Sam gains at Oregon's expense: Because Oregon education and the Oregon Health Plan will damage Oregon's taxes are deductible on a federal return, Oregonians will pay economy. more in federal taxes under this measure. • Oregon is already a low-tax state: It surprised us and might • We believe the elimination of $1.5 billion from the State's surprise you to learn that Oregon's per capita state tax burden General Fund will destabilize the State and damage the quality (from all sources) is one of the lowest in the country and is of life we enjoy. lower than in adjoining states.Oregon ranks 38th,Washington • We believe the fiscal uncertainty and economic instability 8th, California 9th, and Idaho 24th. (Source:the nonpartisan, created by this measure is poor tax policy. nonprofit Tax Foundation) • Huge Service Cuts:This measure cuts about a billion dollars • We believe Measure 91 will make it more difficult for entrepre- per year from the State's General Fund.This necessitates huge neurs to take risks and create jobs and wealth. cuts in K-12 education, health care, transportation and public Measure 91 may be appealing.But is goes too far. safety programs that comprise the bulk of the General Fund. With this measure,the state's per capita revenue would drop to Good tax policy promotes balance between livability and 48th in the nation,down in the ditch with low-service states like livelihood. Louisiana,Texas,South Dakota, and New Hampshire. Say NO to economic instability. If you, like us, value•a state with quality public schools, parks, good roads and safe communities, please join us to defeat this Say NO to fiscal uncertainty. measure. Say NO to Measure 91! Sincerely, (This information furnished by Richard M. Butrick, Associated Oregon Representative Jeff Merkley and Senator Verne Duncan Industries.) Vote"No"on Measure 91 (This information furnished by Sen.Verne Duncan,Rep.Jeff Merkley.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 64 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 91 Arguments ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION Measure 91 is a Threat to Oregon's Public Higher Education The Coalition of Oregon Adoption Agencies(COAA)is comprised The signers of this statement are teachers in the Oregon of 24 licensed adoption agencies, many of whom assist in the University System.We work hard to help Oregonians to a future placement of Oregon's special needs children.COAA is extremely that is richer culturally and economically and that contributes to concerned that if Measure 91 passes there would be devastating the well-being of all Oregonians. effects for Oregon's children.Presently there are more children in the foster care and adoption systems than current funding can For the past twenty years,our work has been made harder-first adequately serve.There are 6500 children in foster care on any by.recession and then by tax-cut measures. given day in Oregon. This measure would severely cut crucial funding for caseworkers resulting in children languishing in foster • Students and their families have had to pay much higher tuition, so that access to higher education has been made care rather than finding permanent homes.Abused and neglected children must go through fhe court system before they can safely more difficult for working-and middle-class families. return home or move onto another family. • Low salaries have made it harder to attract and retain the best Research shows that children have a better chance of succeed- scholars and teachers. ing and avoiding the juvenile or mental health systems when they • Buildings and facilities have deteriorated because of a lack of are expediently placed into a loving, permanent home.Last year money to maintain them. 922 Special Needs children were placed into adoptive homes. It is well known that preventative services cost taxpayers less in the At last, in 1999, the Legislature passed and the Governor long run.This process of insuring children's safety requires many approved a budget to repair the damage of Measures 5 and 47. resources,including expertise,time and money. However, Measure 91 threatens to damage Oregon's public uni- versities far beyond anything we have seen before. Another area impacted by Measure 91 is services for foster and adoptive families.With the increasing number of children in foster Access to higher education is critical to Oregon and its citizens. care, Oregon must consider foster and adoptive families as Higher education is vital to the state's economy. Although precious resources. In order for an adoptive placement to be Oregonians spend less through taxes on public higher education successful, families require education, training, support and than the citizens of eight out of ten states do, Oregonians have supervision.With decreased funding, these services will be sig- inherited a system well worth preserving and developing.But that nificantly reduced.The result will be fewer families,less-prepared will not be possible if Measure 91 passes. families, and more failed adoptions. Oregon families wanting to In the interests of the future of the state, we urge a NO vote on become foster or adoptive parents will endure delays and Measure 91. increased frustrations in trying to achieve the goal of bringing chil- dren into their home. Ultimately this further hurts Oregon's Colleen F. Johnson, Professor of Economics, Eastern Oregon children. University* Maureen Sevigny, Associate Professor of Management, Oregon • Oregon's foster and adoptive families need our continued Institute of Technology* support. Ann B.Tedards, Associate Professor of Music, the University of • Oregon's abused and neglected children have suffered Oregon* enough,let's not let them down.They deserve the best we can Gary H. Tiedeman, Professor of Sociology, Oregon State offer. University,*President, Interinstitutional Faculty Senate* • Measure 91 Hurts Children...please Vote NO! Robert S.Turner,Associate Professor of Biology,Western Oregon (This information furnished by Kathie Stocker, Co-President, Coalition of University* Oregon Adoption Agencies(COAA).) Craig Wollner, Professor of Social Science, Portland State University* *Institutions are named for identification purposes only and do not represent positions on the measure by the institutions. This statement was paid for by the signers. (This information furnished by Colleen F.Johnson,Maureen Sevigny,Gary H.Tiedeman,Ann a Tedards,Associate Professor of Music, University of Oregon, Robert S. Turner, Jr., Craig Wollner, Professor, Social Science; Professors United to Save Higher Education.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 65 CONTINUED 10 Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 91 Arguments ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION Commissioner Sorenson Urges a No Vote on Measure#91 Most Oregon taxpayers get no benefit from Measure 91! Dear Oregon Voter, According to the calculations of the legislative revenue office, M name is Peter Sorenson and I live in Eugene. I'm an elected most Oregon taxpayers will receive zero reduction in their state Y g taxes from Measure 91. Lane County Commissioner and former elected Oregon State Senator.I also served as an elected volunteer board member and Based on Measure 91's original intention and its likely interpreta- Chair of the Board of Education at Lane Community College.My tion, it will actually raise the taxes of most Oregonians in its first two children attend Eugene public schools. year! Here is what would happen for the average Oregon family When I was in the Legislature, I served on the Education of 4: Committee, which has jurisdiction over schools, colleges and YEARLY INCOME TAX IMPACT universities. $20,000 $25 tax increase Measure 91 would be a wrecking ball on Oregon's public $30,000 $72 tax increase schools. $50,000 $86 tax increase This proposal would shift dollars from Salem to Washington DC. SOURCE: The Oregonian,July 23,2000 For individuals who itemize their deductions, any increased state After the first year, here is how it would work for the average income tax refund which might result from Measure 91 may be family of 4: taxable as income for federal taxes.As a result,our investment in YEARLY INCOME YEARLY TAX"SAVINGS" government would move away from Oregon.This would devastate schools and do nothing to help family or personal income. $20,000 $0 This Bill Sizemore proposal is a regressive income tax.The fig- $30,000 $0 ures speak for themselves. $40,000 $0 Who loses: $47,000 $2A With a family of four and an income of$30,000, your combined $50,000 $ taxes would increase by$72. $100,000 $11,, 175 With an income of$50,000 and a family of four, your combined $200,000 $3,820 taxes would increase by$86. $500,000 $13,625 Who benefits: SOURCE:LEGISLATIVE REVENUE OFFICE With a family of four and an income of$100,000 per year, com- bined federal and state taxes would be cut$797.• And if you own your own home and deduct your mortgage inter- A family of four with an income of$200,000 per year,would get a est,you would get even less! combined tax cut of$1627. But even though most Oregon taxpayers will see no benefit,it will This measure is complicated. If you'd like more information, I cut over $2 billion from Oregon's General Fund every two-year want to personally invite you to contact me at 541-485-6726, budget cycle.That will translate into an approximate 20%cut in sorenson@efn.ora.or P.O.Box 10836, Eugene,Oregon 97440. things that all Oregonian count on and care about,such as: Thanks, • K-12 public schools • Health care Peter Sorenson • Public safety This is the most recent of a long list of bad legislation favored by • Services for seniors and disabled special interests.IT MUST BE DEFEATED. Public colleges and universities Measure 91 is unfair to Oregon's middy;class,and (This information furnished by Peter Sorenson.) will have a serious impact on the future of our state and communities. Vote NO on Measure 91! Too Little Benefit.Too Great a Cost. www.ouroregon.org (This information furnished by Shannon Floyd, The Committee for Our Oregon.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 66 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet-Statewide Measures Measure No. 91 Arguments ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION The League of Women Voters of Oregon Urges a Organizations In Every Part of Oregon, No Vote on Measure 91 From Every Walk of Life, The League of Women Voters of Oregon is a grassroots, nonpar- Have Joined Together to Say: tisan organization which encourages the informed and active VOTE NO ON MEASURE 91 participation of citizens in government. Since 1920, the League This is a small sample of those who have joined in has worked to inform voters, improve our political process and opposition to Measure 91: strengthen our Democracy. Unfair to Most Taxpayers,Who Would Get No Benefit League of Women Voters of Oregon Eugene Area Chamber of Commerce Measure 91 is a change in Oregon's tax system that is unfair to Oregon Catholic Conference the vast majority of Oregon's taxpayers. It would reduce resources to the state by over $1 billion every year, yet most Senator Ron Wyden Oregon taxpayers would receive nothing in tax reductions.The University of Oregon Alumni Association bulk of the benefit is at the highest income levels.In fact,this mea- Christian Church(Disciples of Christ) sure may even increase taxes for many middle and lower income Roseburg Police Employees Association taxpayers.This violates the most basic value of our tax system: fairness to the average Oregonian. Bend Chamber of Commerce Harming Services All Oregonians Count On Reverend William R.Ellis,Jr. Eugene Police Employee's Association Measure 91 would force an approximate 20% reduction in Jewish Federation of Portland Community Relations Committee Oregon's General Fund. Public schools and higher education, Oregon Education Association health care, services such as those for the elderly and disabled and public safety makes up 96% of the General Fund. This Portland Gray Panthers extreme and sudden cut severely impacts services Oregonians Children First for Oregon count on for the future of our state,our economy and our citizens. Oregon Consumer League Damaging Oregon's Constitution Tigard United Methodist Church A basic mission of the League of Women Voters is to defend the The American Jewish Committee,Oregon Chapter constitution,the basic framework of our democracy.Measure 91 Coalition for School Funding Now would amend our Constitution, placing in it a measure that is not Oregon Health Care Association only poor public policy, but one that is poorly drafted, confusing Oregon Farm Bureau Federation and unclear in its effect. Oregon AFL-CIO Please Join the Oregon League of Women Voters in Rabbi Daniel Isaak Voting NO on 91 Oregon School Boards Association (This information furnished by Paula Krane,President,League of Women Confederation of Oregon School Administrators Voters of Oregon.) Oregon Public Employees Union,SEIU Local 503 Alzheimer's Association,Oregon Trail Chapter Oregon Council of Police Associations Oregon State Police Officers'Association Oregon Building Officials Association Oregon Council,American Electronics Association Human Services Coalition of Oregon Oregon Advocacy Coalition of Seniors and People With Disabilities United Seniors of Oregon Oregon AFSCME Council 75 Oregonians for Public Safety Oregon State Fire Fighters Council Too Little Benefit.Too Great a Cost.Vote NO on Measure 91 www.ouroregon.org (This information furnished by Shannon Floyd, The Committee for Our Oregon.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 67 CONTINUED 0 Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pemphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 91 Arguments ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION OREGON BUSINESS AND LABOR AGREE: AN URGENT MESSAGE FROM OREGON'S ENTIRE SCHOOL MEASURE 91 IS BAD FOR ALL OREGON! COMMUNITY Many might think it unusual to see leaders of the business com- So many work hard for good schools. munity and organized labor joining together in Oregon's Voters • Students Pamphlet. But while there are issues we may differ on, we are Parents united in opposing Measure 91 as a bad deal for all of Oregon. School Board members Measure 91 sounds simple.When you look a little deeper, how- Seniors who volunteer ever,it becomes clear that this is unfair and damaging to business Teachers and working people alike. Educational support employees As tax relief,it leaves out most Oregon taxpayers,espe- And all of us have a stake in them. cially the middle class. In fact, most Oregon taxpayers • Businesses who count on schools for a strong economy get nothing at all. • Neighborhoods that count on schools for healthy communities That's not fair to our members and our employees–the working • Oregonians who count on schools as the most critical element families of Oregon. of a successful future. Measure 91 is also bad for Oregon business. To succeed, Oregon's public schools have endured a difficult decade. For compete and provide Oregonians with good jobs, businesses some,there is finally the prospect of progress. large and small depend on a strong education system,safe com- munities, a strong health care system and a state that functions But Measure 91 will stop our schools dead in their tracks.With a well.The 20% reduction in funding forced by Measure 91 would 20%cut in state funding,there is no way to avoid it.Larger class mean unavoidable harm to those critical services,to our state and sizes. Outdated books. Lost programs like art and music. Lost our future. opportunities for every student in Oregon. Hurting Oregon's ability to do business hurts all of us. And all for a Measure that offers not a penny And that's just what Measure 91 would do. to most taxpayers. Perhaps seeing who has joined together to sign this statement Oregon's school community is made up of very different groups. surprises you.But with its unintended consequences and hidden But every one of them want you to know that Measure 91 is unfair, unfairness, that is nothing compared to the unpleasant surprise and will strike a harsh blow to our schools,our kids and our future. you will get if Measure 91 passes. And that's not in anyone's best interest. Please join Oregon's businesses and VOTE NO ON 91 Oregon's hardworking families: Coalition for School Funding Now! VOTE NO ON 91 Mike Salsgiver Tim Nesbitt Oregon Education Association INTEL Oregon AFL-CIO Confederation of Oregon School Administrators Harold Pollin Nancy Padilla Oregon School Boards Association Portland Airport Sheraton Oregon Public Employees Union Oregon School Employees Association Bob Shiprack American Federation of Teachers Oregon State Building and Construction Trades (This information furnished by John Marshall, Oregon School Boards Association; James K Sager, Oregon Education Association; Debbi (This information furnished by Nancy Padilla, Oregon Public Employees Covert,President,American Federation of Teachers-Oregon;Carol Turner, Union, SEIU Local 503; Michael Salsgiver; Harold Pollin; Tim Nesbitt, Coalition for School Funding Now!,Ozzie Rose, Confederation of Oregon Oregon AFL-CIO;Bob Shiprack, Oregon State Building and Construction School Administrators; Ed Edwards, Oregon School Employees Trades.) Association.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. ss CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 91 Arguments ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION Newspapers throughout Oregon Talk About Measure 91 MEASURE 91:UNFAIR TO OREGON'S SENIORS "According to calculations by the Legislative Fiscal Office, the Measure 91 Leaves Oregon's Seniors Behind measure would cut about$2 billion out of the projected$11 billion Many Oregon seniors-especially those on fixed incomes--are general fund for 2001-2003. Figuring inflation, that would leave concerned about taxes.But the tax"cut"in Measure 91 provides the state 22 percent below what it needs to support today's services. Which 22% of Oregon's teachers and troopers don't LITTLE NO financial relief these seniors.The way Measure 91 works s leaves most seniors s out, while giving billions in tax you like?" The Sunday Oregonian,8/27/2000 breaks to those making over$100,000 a year and corporations. "The worst of the lot would cut state revenue by about$1 billion a In fact in it's first year Measure 91 could actually RAISE the year by making federal taxes fully deductible on Oregon income total tax bill for many seniors. tax returns.The current limit for federal deductibility on Oregon Measure 91 Threatens Things Oregon's Seniors Count On returns is$3,000.Eliminating that limit,as Measure 91 proposes Measure 91 means over $2 billion in cuts to Oregon's General will primarily benefit the wealthy;more than half of all Oregonians already deduct less than the$3,000 cap." Fund every budget cycle.This will include services such as: Eugene Reister Guard,7/23/2000 . Health care and the Oregon Health Plan "This regressive measure is a bad deal for a majority of ' Programs like Project Independence, which help seniors stay Oregonians.That much is clear. But the wording of the initiative in their homes instead of having to enter nursing homes itself is vague...The one certainty is this measure would make a ' Public safety programs mess of budgets and Oregon's progressive tax system:' Oregon seniors are the foundation of our society.These men and Salem Statesman Journal,8/4/2000 women have worked hard their entire lives to provide for their fam- "The Bill Sizemore tax measure would put the state, especially ilies and communities.The last thing they need is a measure that education, in serious financial trouble! is so unfair to them. Grants Pass Daily Courier,7/20/2000 United Seniors of Oregon "If it passes,the courts, not Sizemore,will decide what the mea- Oregon State Council of Senior Citizens sure says.And what it says is not clear.That is no way to write tax Portland Gray Panthers law." Oregon Advocacy Coalition of Seniors and Russell Sadler,Medford Mail Tribune,8/6/2000 People with Disabilities And the Alzheimer Association,Oregon Trail Chapter "Maybe the passage of this measure wouldn't make the sky fall. All Urge: But it would definitely cause the Oregon sky-- and the Oregon Vote No on Measure 91 quality of life and opportunity and fairness--to drop a lot lower." The Sunday Oregonian,August 27,2000 (This information furnished by Jim Davis, Oregon Advocacy Coalition of Seniors and People with Disabilities, Alzheimer Assoc., Oregon Trail www.ouroregon.oro Chapter, Oregon State Council of Senior Citizens, United Seniors of (This information furnished by Shannon Floyd, The Committee for Our Oregon,Portland Gray Panthers.) Oregon.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 69 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 91 Arguments ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION United States Senator Ron Wyden Urges Oregonians to Vote A MESSAGE FROM THE OREGON PTA NO on Measure 91 PLEASE VOTE NO ON MEASURE 91! To the People of Oregon: How much do we value our children's future? We share basic values.A strong work ethic.A fair shake for all, Is it worth nothing? and not just the privileged few.Respect for the elderly who have If this measure passed, that's what most Oregon taxpayers will done much to make Oregon special. get.Nothing. My support for these values is behind this request to join me Is it worth$24 a yearn in voting NO on Measure 91. I know that Measure 91 sounds attractive,but I believe it's just not If this measure passed,that's what a family of 4 making$47,000 fair to Oregon's hard-working middle class families and seniors. will get.$24. As far as I can tell, most Oregon taxpayers will see very little tax That is what Oregon's middle class will get from Measure 91. benefit from Measure 91.That's not my idea of tax reform.It is just Little or nothing. the same old political shell game that Oregonians are tired of. Is that worth what Measure 91 will cost? What we definitely know about Measure 91 is that it will signifi- Measure 91 could mean hundreds of millions in cuts to in the cur- cantly reduce critically needed funds for rlublic safety, schools, rent school year, and a $2 billion cut in the next state budget. and more affordable health care.There is no program that cannot That's about 20%. be made more efficient, but these cuts go way beyond trimming fat. Is little or nothing to most Oregon taxpayers worth schools open- ing next fall with an increase in size of three to four children?Is it Having devoted much of my life to working on behalf of older worth the loss of school counselors? Is it worth your school Americans, I am particularly disturbed by the impact of Measure district being unable to afford to make necessary repairs to school 91 on the elderly. Seniors on a fixed income get little tax relief buildings? Is it worth schools having to close earlier in the year? under Measure 91,but this measure will cut needed services like Project Independence that keep seniors out of nursing homes. Is it worth putting thousands of children in Oregon at risk of los- ing their health care benefits? Is it worth reducing protection for My bottom line on Measure 91: It offers little benefit at too children in abusive homes? great a cost. The Oregon PTA is dedicated to helping our schools,working for Please join me in voting NO on Measure 91 our children and protecting Oregon's future. We believe that (This information furnished by Senator Ron Wyden.) Measure 91 is not worth it.We hope you agree. Vote no on Measure 91 Little benefit.Too great a cost. Kathryn Firestone, President Lisa Laursen Thirkill,Vice President for Legislation The Oregon PTA (This information furnished by Kathryn Firestone,President,Lisa Laursen Thirkill,VP Legislation;Oregon Congress of Parents and Teachers.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 In accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant thb ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 70 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 91 Arguments ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION BUSINESSES THROUGHOUT OREGON THE OREGON HUMAN SERVICES COALITION OPPOSES OPPOSE MEASURE 91 MEASURE 91 What is your vision of a successful Oregon future? Measure 91:A Terrible Deal for Oregon Whatever that vision is, it is a successful economy that enables Measure 91 is a bad deal for all of us. It does little or nothing us to achieve it. for middle-class Oregonians. Almost all of the benefits of this All businesses large and small, big city and small town - increased tax deduction go to the wealthy or to corporations.Yet depend on a number of things if Oregon is to prosper: all Oregonians will feel the effects, with significant impacts on services, like education,that all Oregonians depend on. • A well-trained workforce; But some will feel the effects even more than others • Healthy,safe communities; • A business environment that attracts investment, talent and If cuts were made across the board,it would mean a cut of about customers. 20% in"human services"What are"human services"? Here are Measure 91 threatens those things. It is a risky cut to vital ser- some examples: vices that will damage our economic future. It is also unclear: • Helping seniors lead independent lives through programs like there are unanswered questions of when the measure will actu- Project Independence, Meals on Wheels,and in-home care. ally be effective, and whom its provisions will cover.A yes vote Investigating reports of child abuse and neglect, and, when would place a measure filled with unintended consequences into our Constitution. necessary,placing children in foster care-or helping them find adoptive homes. That is why businesses throughout Oregon urge you to vote NO on Measure 91. Providing health insurance to 330,000 children, seniors, preg- nant women,and working families at or near the poverty line. Bad for business.Bad for Oregon Would Measure 91 mean the end of the world?No, it wouldn't. VOTE NO on 91 Associated Oregon Industries But it would mean a lot to over 80,000 people who would lose health care coverage;to over 12,000 seniors and people with Bend Chamber of Commerce disabilities who would lose assistance;to children who need Eugene Area Chamber of Commerce the hundreds of child protective workers who would be laid off;and to foster parents whose already low reimbursement (This information furnished by Terry S.Connolly,Eugene Area Chamber of payments would be cut. Commerce;Gary Peters, Bend'Chamber of Commerce;Richard Butrick, That's a high price to pay for a measure that gives no tax cut to Associated Oregon Industries.) most Oregon taxpayers. Oregon's Human Services Coalition Urges You to Vote"NO"on Measure 91. (This information furnished by Gina Mattioda,co-chair of HSCO.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 71 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 91 Arguments ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION Should Middle and Lower Income Oregonians Educators say Pay a Higher Tax Rate than the Wealthy? Vote no on Measure 91 That's Just What Measure 91 Would Do! As educators in schools throughout Oregon,we have the chance By Jim Edelson,Licensed Tax Preparer to help children achieve the future we all wish for them.Because and Small Businessman we are in the public schools every day,we know how much more As a small business person and a middle class Oregonian, I am challenging Measure 91 will make that progress. like most of my neighbors:when it comes to taxes, I am willing to The budget cuts of Measure 91 are just too large to avoid a pay my fair share.But I want to make sure that it is fair. serious impact: I am also a licensed tax preparer, so I took a close look at • Measure 91 will increase class sizes at a time that kids need Measure 91 to see if it was a good deal for me, and if it was a more individual attention,not less. good deal for the average Oregonian.And it isn't–not even close. . Measure 91 will eliminate programs like art and music that Because of the way it works, Measure 91 would mean that mid- are an important part of a well-rounded education. die and lower income Oregon taxpayers would be taxed at an Measure 91 will make it difficult to afford up-to-date books effective rate that is higher than those Oregonians making the most money.The"official"tax rate for people making more than and materials. $11,800 is 9%.But most Oregon taxpayers will get no tax reduc- And for all that, Measure 91 will not give most Oregon tax- 1JM. And because higher income taxpayers get huge tax payers any tax reduction. reductions from Measure 91 the real tax rate they would pay is lower than the real tax rate most of us will pay. Vote No on Measure 91 In fact,the effective tax rate for income over$285,000 would be Larry Wolf, middle school teacher reduced to only 5.44%.Who would have ever thought that, in Chenowith Oregon, the working poor's income could be taxed at a 40% Chris Nelson,high school teacher higher tax rate than the highest incomes. Albany That is not only unfair.It is ridiculous. Marlene Payne, middle school teacher Even those who want to see tax reductions and a limited govern Beaverton ment can agree that Measure 91 is a tax scheme that makes no Carolyn Ramey,school counselor sense for the Oregon taxpayer.Please join me in voting No on 91. Seaside (This information furnished by Jim Edelson.) Gail Rasmussen,admin.asst. Eagle Point Eric Nelson, high school teacher Klamath Falls (This information furnished by Larry Wolf,Carolyn Ramey,Marlene Payne, Gail Rasmussen,Eric Nelson,Chris Nelson.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 72 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No.' 91 Arguments ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION MEASURE 91 IS NOT THE ONLY ONE TO WORRY ABOUT! THE UNIVERSITY OF OREGON ALUMNI ASSOCIATION Measures 91,93&8 are bad ideas for Oregon in many different URGES A NO VOTE ON MEASURE 91 Please help to protect Oregon's investment ways.But there are some things they have in common: in higher education! • They all offer little or no benefit to middle class Oregon Since 1876, the University of Oregon has offered high quality taxpayers. education, research and public service to the people of Oregon, • They all hurt basic values and services that all Oregonians strengthening the state economy and helping,to develop a well- count on and care about. educated citizenry.Measure 91 would jeopardize the University's • They are all vague or misleadingly worded, and filled with ability to achieve these important goals for all Oregonians. unintended consequences. That is why the University of Oregon Alumni Association is urging • They all amend the constitution. all Oregonians to vote NO on Measure 91. The 1999 Legislature reversed the trend of divestment in higher • They don't add up,and they certainly won't work. education and provided the first significant increase in public Measures 91,93&8: funding for Oregon's universities in a decade, beginning the Far Too Little Benefit.Far Too Great a Cost. process of restoring adequate support and demonstrating a com- mitment to the State's young people and its future. Measure 91 www.ouroregon.org would halt this progress by creating a 20%reduction in the state (This information furnished by Shannon Floyd, The Committee for Our budget, resulting in a huge loss for universities. Oregon.) Oregon relies on its universities for the development of a solid workforce and financial foundation for our future. Measure 91 would harm not only the quality of higher education in Oregon,but would damage the quality of our workforce, a risk that we, as a state, cannot take. And all for a measure that offers little or no benefit for the great majority of Oregon taxpayers. Please join us in casting a vote for Oregon's future by voting No on Measure 91. (This information furnished by James Perry, University of Oregon Alumni Association.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 73 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election.Voters'Pamphlet--Statewide Measures Measure No. 91 Arguments ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION No on 91 THE OREGON FARM BUREAU FEDERATION Oregon Health Care Association opposes Measure 91. URGES A NO VOTE ON MEASURE 91 Nursing homes,assisted-living, and residential care facilities Measure 91 Threatens Oregon's Farming Economy provide needed care for thousands of elderly and disabled As farmers,we tend to be self-reliant.We work very hard to feed Oregonians.Unfortunately,there is already a long term care not only our own families, but the world.And we are proud of our funding crisis in Oregon.Measure 91 would not only make this role as an important part of Oregon's economy and heritage. crisis worse but it'would destroy any hope of fixing the problem. We also believe in paying our fair share of taxes--no more and Oregon's seniors are at grave risk from this unfair, no less. costly measure. But Measure 91 is not a tax cut for most Oregonians. Measure 91 puts a huge hole in the budgets that sustain quality Not only is it unfair--it is a serious threat to Oregon's long-term care for Oregonians. Critical services for thousands farmers. of people will STOP if Measure 91 passes. Almost 15,000 Just like all Oregonians,we rely on strong schools,an affordable Oregonians stand to lose the assistance they need from Oregon health care system and safe communities. All these will be Project Independence and other essential long term care programs. � affected.But Measure 91 could also have negative impacts on the Department of Agriculture and funding for important agricultural Measure 91 does NOT provide tax relief research done at OSU and its experiment stations.There is also for most Oregonians. the OSU Agricultural Extension Service program and the need to The fact is,most Oregon taxpayers will get nothing.Even families expand the Veterinary School to a four-year program. earning nearly $50,000 will only see a $24 a year cut in their These are vital to Oregon's farmers—vital to our ability to com- taxes. Corporations and wealthy taxpayers receive most of the pete and survive in the world market. Many of these programs benefits from this measure.Why would we vote for teacher cuts, have been given short shrift through the years.The cuts Measure less money for police, and a crippling cut in health care services 91 would force could be devastating to agriculture for the elderly to when most taxpayers get nothing back for it? Measure 91 is bad for farmers and unfair to all Oregonians. The cost is much too high for the small benefit. Please join the Oregon Farm Bureau Federation and The benefit is too little to see potentially thousands of Oregon Vote NO on Measure 91 seniors and people with disabilities LOSE their services perma- nently. Families with elderly parents or grandparents, who are (This information furnished by Andrew Anderson, Oregon Farm Bureau already struggling to make ends meet, will see their finances Federation.) overwhelmed and the care of their loved ones severely limited. VOTE NO ON BALLOT MEASURE 91 WE JUST CAN'T AFFORD IT! (This information furnished by James Carlson, Oregon Health Care Association.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 74 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 91 Arguments ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION FORMER JUDGES OPPOSE PLACING KEEP HIGHER EDUCATION AFFORDABLE&ACCESSIBLE MEASURE 91 IN THE CONSTITUTION VOTE"NO"ON MEASURE 91 It is Unfair and Unclear Measure 91 is an extreme measure.Taking$65 million from the Fellow citizens: state appropriations the public universities received in the cur- As former judges,we have a deep respect for the State's funda- rent budget will damage our universities. This retroactive mental governing document–the Oregon Constitution. budget reduction will force program cuts or tuition increases right now.Measure 91 will close the door to higher education for That is why we hope you will join us in voting No on Measure thousands of Oregonians this year. 91. Measure 91 will hurt Oregon universities for years to come. The Constitution establishes our basic system of government and A$175 million cut in the next Oregon University System appro- protects our fundamental rights.Unlike a simple statute,it cannot priation will mean more tuition increases and program cuts next be changed by the Legislature. Only a vote of the people can year to make up the difference.Tuition for Oregon residents is change the Constitution. already the highest in the West. Pushing it even higher will price We believe that the Constitution should be reserved for many people out of our universities. matters of fundamental importance. We believe it is entirely Measure 91 hurts Oregon families twice. First, the bottom 53 inappropriate, and dangerous, to crowd the Constitution with percent of Oregon taxpayers receive no tax cut from Measure 91 provisions that could easily be dealt with statutorily. but they do lose their"Kicker."Then,our universities will be forced Measure 91 is a classic example of a proposal that does not to hit these same families with higher tuition and fewer programs. P P P That makes Measure 91 a lose-lose proposition for Oregon belong in the Constitution.The issue of deductibility of Federal families. taxes is not the kind of matter of grave, permanent importance that belongs in our basic governing document. Moreover, Measure 91 hurts Oregon. Making it more difficult for public Measure 91 is so poorly drafted that even its author has no firm universities to help Oregonians succeed in our economy and opinion about the meaning of all of its provisions. society hurts all of us. We happen to disagree with Measure 91 as a matter of tax policy. Vote FOR Oregon—Vote NO on Measure 91 It gives nothing or very little to middle-class families,while under- David Frohnmayer Don VanLuvanee mining services – from education to public safety – that all President, U of O* President,Oregon State Board Oregonians depend on. of Higher Education But even if we agreed with Measure 91 as a matter of tax Paul Risser policy,we would oppose placing it in the Constitution. President,OSU* Tom Imeson Immediate Past President We hope you will join us in voting"No." Daniel Bernstine Oregon State Board of (This information furnished by The Honorable Betty Roberts, The President, PSU* Higher Education Honorable George M.Joseph,The Honorable Jacob Tenzer.) Betty Youngblood Joseph W.Cox President,WOU* Chancellor Oregon University System* *Titles used for identification purposes only,and do not constitute a position on this measure by any institution of the Oregon University System or the Oregon State Board of Higher. Education. (This information furnished by Shannon Floyd, The Committee for Our Oregon.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 75 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 91 Arguments ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION OREGON'S HIGH-TECH INDUSTRY OPPOSES MEASURE 91 OREGON'S RELIGIOUS COMMUNITY URGES A Unfair tax measures have no place in Oregon, especially when NO VOTE ON MEASURE 91 they do serious damage to things we all count on.That is why A tax cut should be fair to all Oregonians the American Electronics Association urges Oregon voters to vote NO on Measure 91. Regardless of the differences in our backgrounds, religions or political beliefs, Oregonians are committed to basic principals of Undermining Oregon's Success fairness and acting in the best interest of our entire State.It is for Over the past decade, the high-tech industry in Oregon has this reason that we urge a NO vote on Measure 91. grown to be the state's leading industry, providing 77,000 jobs, a Measure 91 promises a tax break to Oregonians by allowing for payroll of more than $4 billion, and a contribution of millions of the deduction of federal income tax on state and corporate tax dollars in taxes to state and local governments. returns. However, this measure is unfair and only benefits the That is an Oregon success story that we all can be proud of.But wealthiest Oregonians, while most Oregon taxpayers would receive nothing. Measure 91 would undermine that success–especially when it comes to our schools. The question to ask when considering a tax cut is who gets the Undermining Oregon's Schools benefit, and who pays the cost? Does it benefit Oregon's hard working, low-income and middle-income men and women?The Our industry's top priority in the state is to ensure a strong edu- answer for Measure 91 is no. cational system, from kindergarten through college.The impacts And all Oregonians will pay the cost. of Measure 91 on state spending for schools will harm Oregon's quality of life for our companies and for our workers'families. Measure 91 would result in a loss of over$2 billion dollars per The most important asset any high-technology company has is its budget cycle for schools, health care, and services for people.And we can't attract and keep good people at our com- seniors,the disabled and those in genuine need. In this year panies if the educational system in Oregon begins to deteriorate. alone, funding could be cut by 24%.These are services that all Oregon's current economic prosperity is a direct result of a grow- Oregonians depend on regardless of income.To trade these away ing high-tech economy in the state.Such good times are threat- for a tax cut that few will see makes no sense for 'Oregon ened if we go backwards on our commitment to education. taxpayers. Strong schools+a strong high-tech economy=a strong Fairness is a virtue worth voting for. Please join us and vote No Oregon on Measure 91. Measure 91 +Oregon=a future at risk (This information furnished by The Rev. Daniel E. H. Bryant; Reverend William Ellis, Jr.;Emily Georges Gottfried, American Jewish Committee, Keep Oregon on the right track-say NO to Measure 911 Oregon Chapter; Pastor David Knapp; Robert Horenstein, Jewish Federation of Portland Community Relations Committee; Rabbi Daniel (This information furnished by Jim Craven, Oregon Council, American Isaak;Reverend Wes Taylor.) Electronics Association.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 76 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 91 Arguments ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION We oppose Measure 91 because it is a cruel hoax on Oregon tax- DEMOCRATS AND REPUBLICANS AGREE: payers.As alumni of Portland State University,we believe Oregon Measure 91 Benefits Too Few,Costs Too Much should have a fair tax system that funds programs like higher and Cuts Too Fast education.in our opinion,Measure 91 doesn't measure up. By John Kitzhaber and Mark Hatfield -It will provide tax relief for upper income households and little or One of us is a Democrat, the other a Republican. In philosophy no relief for middle income Oregonians. and on issues there are many areas where we disagree. -It will cut the State budget by an estimated 24%and that is sim- But no matter your philosophy, some ideas are so bad that both ply too much.Imagine if your household budget were cut by 24%. sides of the political spectrum can agree. Even State government can't withstand a cut that size without Measure 91 is one of those bad ideas. hurting the State's economy. -It will hurt Oregon's colleges and universities at a time when we Creating an unlimited deduction of your federal tax bill on your need to provide opportunities for all high school students to state taxes sounds like a fine idea, until you realize what it would attend college. really do. We all were able to get a great education at PSU;one that pre- It is a tax"cut"that most Oregon taxpayers won't see A family pared us for the world of work.While we paid our tuition,we know of four making $46.000 gets nothing A family of four making that part of our education was supported by tax dollars paid for by $500,000 would get$13.625. hard working Oregonians.We appreciated that support then,and Even if you like tax cuts, a measure that leaves out the we believe that today's generation of college students deserve the middle class isn't fair. same support.Without a strong public higher education system, many people won't be able to afford a college education. And it certainly isn't worth the high cost to a Oregonians. In Oregon's next budget, it will cut over$2 billion. Common sense We urge a no vote on Measure 91.This measure isn't fair and it says you can't cut that much money out of services without won't help average Oregonians. adversely affecting schools, health care, public safety and the environment. (This information furnished by Joan C.Johnson, Denise Duncan, Roger Capps,Marjorie Terdal,Chris Groener,Gary D.Salyers,Julie Kopet;alumni Few get the benefit.All pay the cost. of Portland State University.) Finally, the measure is most likely retroactive and affects this year's taxes.If so, it would immediately cut about 30%out of the last six months of a 24-month budget:That would be chaos. Why the words most likely? Because the measure is so unclear that a court will have to figure out what it means. And if this measure is passed it will be made a part of our Constitution! Retroactive or not, Measure 91 represents grossly unfair tax policy, terrible public policy and would leave a legacy of worse schools,higher tuition,limited economic development and greatly reduced health care for the young and vulnerable.Whether you are a Republican, Democrat or Independent, this is not our Oregon.We urge you: VOTE NO ON 91 (This information furnished by Mark Hatfield,John A.Kitzhaber,M.D.) (This space purchased for$5001n accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 77 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 91 Arguments ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION Vote NO on Measure 91 MEASURE 91 SENDS MONEY OUT OF OREGON Measure 91 is unfair to the vast majority of Oregon taxpay- To My Fellow Oregonians: ers: This measure sounds like a tax cut, but most Oregon Like you, I am a taxpayer.I also deal with taxes for my living(no, taxpayers would receive nothing at all.In fact,people earning over I don't work for any government).There is a fact about Measure $200,000 would receive nearly half the tax cut, while business 91 that you need to know before you vote.Measure 91 WOULD would receive an entirely new tax break. On the other hand a INCREASE FEDERAL TAXES PAID BY OREGONIANS. household of four with an income of $47,000 per year would receive only$1.66 a month. Measure 91 increases the state deduction for federal taxes.There But while most Oregonians will see little or no tax benefit is also a federal deduction for state income taxes. What this from Measure 91, all of us will feel the negative impact. It means is that for every$100 you"save"on.Oregon taxes,you pay would mean a loss of$2 billion dollars to Oregon's General Fund between$15 and$40 more in federal taxes.OREGON LOSES$ every budget cycle.That is about a 20%cut to programs such as -WASHINGTON D.C.GETS$. public schools, health care and services to seniors,children and Why should you care? You would pay less taxes, wouldn't you? the disabled. These are vital services important to Oregon, its (Well, maybe not, but let's pretend we are all wealthy enough to people and its future. save taxes from Measure 91.)Why should you care if Washington A measure that gives nothing to most taxpayers and takes away D.C.gets money and Oregon loses money? important things from all Oregonians is unfair, extreme and makes no sense. Think about the things that state and local government does that Please vote No on Measure 91. YOU USE...Can't think of any?What about public schools?Ever use a park? Call the police? Now think about the things that More than 1,000 Oregonians from 19 counties across Oregon YOU USE that are courtesy of Washington D.C. Not many, are Signed petitions to submit this voter's pamphlet statement, there?A lot of tax dollars go to to Washington D.C.–and a lot get including: lost on the way back.SHIFTING TAX$TO WASHINGTON D.C. Baker, Benton,Clackamas,Clatsop, Deschutes, TAKES VALUE AWAY FROM YOU. Douglas,Jackson,Jefferson, Lake, Lane,Lincoln, Marion, Multnomah,Tillamook, Umatilla, Union,Wasco,and Now think about control over government. I don't agree with Yamhill and Washington Counties Measure 91, but isn't it great that in Oregon we as voters can Because We Care About Oregon PAC, actually decide what our government will do?When was the last Beverly Stein,Chair time you got to vote on a federal initiative petition. SHIFTING TAX $TO WASHINGTON D.C.TAKES CONTROL AWAY FROM YOU. (This information furnished by Beverly Stein, Because We Care About KEEP VALUE AND CONTROL IN OREGON Oregon PAC.) VOTE NO ON MEASURE 91 (This information furnished by Jaime Sanders.) (This space qualified for by a petition of 1,000 Oregon voters in accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 78 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No.. 91 Arguments ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION Somewhere, Robin Hood must be turning over in his grave. Oregon State Treasurer Jim Hill The man made famous for"robbing the rich to give to the poor, Urges you to vote NO on Ballot Measure 91 could not fathom the likes of Ballot Measure 91,the"Welfare For On it's surface Ballot Measure 91 sounds fair, but don't be The Rich"measure authored by Bill Sizemore. fooled. It provides tax breaks for Oregon's wealthiest indi- Of course,that's not what supporters are saying about it.They are viduals and corporations,and provides no real middle class quick to throw out the phrase"end double taxation!"in the hopes tax relief.A family of four earning$47,000 would save only$24 a year,while those earning would pay save$13,625 a year.Large that you'll look no further.Proponents of Measure 91 want you to out of state corporations would pay millions less in taxes every believe it will save you money. year. But that all depends on who "you" are. Because the facts are Measure 91 will have a serious impact on public services. simple: Examples of the cuts this measure would force include closing • If you make in the range of$30,000 per year or less,you schools early, increasing class size,taking police off our streets, save absolutely nothing. In fact, you'll lose money under and forcing thousands of women and children to lose their health- Measure 91.That's because Measure 91 will eliminate the"kicker' care coverage through the Oregon Health Plan. Measure 91 rebate—there won't be a surplus to divvy up—and you could reduces the state budget by$1 billion a year,which is about end up paying more in federal income taxes because your state 20% of the state's general fund budget. Such a drastic cut tax liability has been lessened. would have severe,long-term'consequences. • If you are the"average"Oregon family—a family of four, Currently our public schools are overcrowded and in disrepair. making about$45,000—you will save under$2 per month. Our children are relying on outdated,textbooks and many vital programs have been dropped from school curriculum.Oregon's So where does the$2 billion per biennium savings go? it goes four-year high school dropout rate has soared to nearly one-third directly to out-of-state and foreign corporations and Oregon's of all students.Measure 91 will further harm Oregon children wealthiest citizens,those making over$100,000 a year. by denying our public schools hundreds of millions of dol- In return,we would see large cuts in education,public safety and lars in basic funding. health care funding.Again,don't let Measure 91 proponents fool If Measure 91 takes effect this year,it would cut the current you with phrases like "a little belt tightening" Education, public state budget by$870 million,forcing immediate and devas- safety and health care make up over 75 percent of Oregon's tating cuts to schools and essential public services. General Fund.It's simply not possible to make a$2 billion cut in the General Fund without impacting those areas. I have served Oregon with pride for 20 years.Recently, however, I have seen our state succumb to the power of special interests Let poor Robin Hood rest in peace.Don't steal from the poor to whose main objective is not to reduce government but do away give to the rich.Join us and Vote NO!on Ballot Measure 91. with it entirely.Measure 91 is another example of this dangerous Merrilee Petersen,Grants Pass and shortsighted ideology. AFSCME Local 2619(Southern Oregon Head Start) I ask you to join me in voting NO on measure 91.It may be Tina Turner-Morfitt,Salem the most important vote you make this year for the future of AFSCME Local 2376(Dept.of Corrections) our state. (This information furnished by Don Loving,Oregon AFSCME Council 75.) Jim Hill Oregon State Treasurer (This information furnished by Jim Hill,Oregon State Treasurer.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 79 Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 92 Proposed by initiative petition to be voted on at the General (c)If an organization,without the employee's permission, uses Election,November 7,2000. for a political purpose money collected for it by means of payroll deduction from the employee's paycheck,the organiza- tion shall pay to the state treasury a civil penalty of not less BALLOT TITLE than double the amount of money spent in violation of this section,and in addition shall refund to the employee double the amount of money that was taken from him or her and used for a political purpose, plus all attorney fees and costs expended �IL " to recover the funds.For purposes of this section,money also shall be deemed to have been spent for a political purpose if the money is commingled with money which is wholly or in part 'fl{at12ATif?N• used for a political purpose. k l ' F` 1s8°"4l "Yes`wot8 pralblt payrall dedtctlorts (d) Nothing in this section shall be construed as authorizing ���lC� w�ut spectflo artntaal wiftf�n �;rrrj toyee Payroll deduction for political purposes if doing so is prohibited in Oregon law. xz g (e)If any phrase,clause,or part of this section is invalidated by ` `� "too +t�ta r�teli'f&�tzrrtt tams�pWem- f� X11 dodcic�ns for pt�liti es a court of competent jurisdiction, the remaining phrases, clauses, and parts shall remain in full force and effect. tttu#iott rider cu6q:n fawn payroll �t�l{its art fj tt prA it aia itort ed trr .wry#ing by aart44i,a reerrii nt or l±cd l� tr; 1 �irO# require P+lt#lt✓a tr�trilawrGons, letlut trrsrra ter pout al pu'r es • �b ate ttployat�tlftiiation Afrplies.to t �sftioM,arts AM ct f�rr•pallilcal purposes",if any. ot" € �par€t t�rspttyllrfdlrectl}«�.rc�tf#rlEtutrtrnS tc�car�tl�stss or tl�oo�ttee pa_:.M 'l b ring �rtdeponder�# axperadl irtras sctpperf (opr candtclatear-laalstt mentxxraas t>r pro- rtltta t } 30swlulprtalttes ftt +rotatitts. 9° ilrfATE QaAC,IIME'J#C�.hits•cttoas€tr�will require s# t�s tt ' 1t Ctt e F ?�ditU eS dt,$ 6FU i3ri ally t+ Up4#ate .tYt�payroll system . Measured rsqufre local rsvermertt•.expenttititres taf #„`l��rtlt�annually to�tpdaie ire payrr system.:. �rsrt tlel on sts [toot gouerr� €sent rvenus. TEXT OF MEASURE BE IT ENACTED BY THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF OREGON: THE CONSTITUTION OF THE STATE OF OREGON IS HEREBY AMENDED BY ADDING THE FOLLOWING SECTION: Section 1. No money shall be deducted from an employee's paycheck and used for a political purpose without the employee's prior written permission. (a) For purposes of this section, money shall be deemed to be used for a political purpose if any portion of the money, includ- ing in-kind contributions and pass-through contributions through an affiliated organization,is contributed to a candidate or political committee or party, or spent lobbying an elected official, or is spent, including independent expenditures, sup- porting or opposing a candidate for public office or a ballot measure,including efforts to collect signatures to place a mea- sure on the ballot, and any efforts, including but not limited to direct mail and media campaigns, to solicit signatures for ini- tiative petitions or to discourage electors from signing initiative petitions. (b) For purposes of this section, written permission shall only be deemed to be granted by the employee,if the authorization is granted by the employee freely and renewed annually on a form which is used exclusively for this purpose. The state legislative assembly shall establish safeguards to insure that no personal information,the revealing of which might endanger the privacy or safety of an employee, is contained on the form or made available to the public. 80 CONTINUED�. Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 92 EXPLANATORY STATEMENT Ballot Measure 92 would add a new section to the Oregon Constitution prohibiting public and private employee payroll deductions if any portion of the money will be used for a political purpose, unless the employee freely gives written permission each year on a form used only for that purpose.The measure would also restrict the use of payroll-deducted funds by any orga- nization that receives them without first obtaining the required employee authorization. Organizations that use payroll deduc- tions include unions,charities,insurance companies and financial institutions. Under current law,an employer may deduct wages from payroll if the deduction is either authorized in writing by the employee,or authorized by a collective bargaining agreement, or required by law. Neither unions nor any other.organization can require politi- cal contributions. Ballot Measure 92 provides that money spent on the following political activities shall be considered"money used for a political purpose:" • Making contributions to a candidate, political committee or political party; • Lobbying an elected official; • Supporting or opposing a candidate or ballot measure; • Collecting signatures to place a measure on the ballot; • Soliciting signatures for an initiative petition or discouraging voters from signing an initiative petition. The measure's restrictions apply to payroll-deducted funds that are: • Used directly for a political purpose; • Used indirectly through in-kind contributions that are used for a political purpose; • Commingled with other money used in whole or in part for a political purpose;and/or • Passed through to any organization that uses the money in whole or in part for a political purpose. This measure imposes a civil penalty,payable to the state trea- sury, on organizations that violate the measure, of not less than double the amount of money spent for a political purpose,includ- ing any non-political funds which are commingled with political funds. In addition,the organization must refund to the employee double the amount spent in violation of this measure, plus attor- neys fees and costs incurred in getting the refund. The measure requires the Legislative Assembly to establish safeguards so that personal information(for example,addresses, and phone numbers)about the employee would not be put on the form used to authorize payroll deductions, or made available to the public if revealing the information could endanger the privacy or safety of the employee. Ballot Measure 92 does not authorize payroll deductions for political purposes if otherwise prohibited by Oregon law. Committee Members: Appointed by: Becky Miller Chief Petitioners Bill Sizemore Chief Petitioners Tim Nesbitt Secretary of State Margaret Olney Secretary of State Representative Lane Shetterly Members of the Committee (This committee was appointed to provide an impartial explanation of the ballot measure pursuant to ORS 251.215.) 81 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 92 Arguments ARGUMENT IN FAVOR ARGUMENT IN FAVOR OPPONENTS OF MEASURE 92 ARE IT'S TIME TO STOP THE SCHOOLYARD BULLY TRYING TO FOOL VOTERS A decade ago,the U.S.Supreme Court issued a landmark deci- Measure 92 stops corporations and unions from forcing workers sion in Communication Workers v.Beck.In what has come to be to make political contributions against their will. Measure 92 known as Beck rights, the Court said that workers cannot be doesn't prevent employees from contributing to any political cause forced to pay any dues or fees beyond those necessary to per- they wish. It merely requires organizations to get employees' form collective bargaining. permission before extracting money from their paychecks for But the decision left a cant loophole,and as a result,unions have politics. found many creative ways to continue to confiscate money from A few powerful labor unions oppose Measure 92 because they workers' paychecks to fund the union bosses' favorite political know most employees would not voluntarily contribute to their causes. union's political fund, if they had a choice. Think of it like the school and bully.Before the y y Beck decision,the There is no doubt that what is currently going on is wrong. bully would take your lunch money and not give it back.After the Extracting political"donations"without an employee's permission Beck decision,the bully can still take your lunch money, but you is immoral.It's un-American. at least have the right to try to get it back.If you can. How could Measure 92's opponents ever hope to defeat such a Most workers do not know they can try to get their money back. good, common sense idea?They hope to convince voters that Those who do, and who want their money back are often forced Measure 92 will have unintended consequences like hurting to resign from their union first.Such is the case with Oregon pub- charities that use voluntary payroll deductions to raise money. lic employees.They must either belong to their union and pay But this is merely a campaign ploy–an attempt to change the political dues,or give up any involvement in their union's activities, subject.The truth is,about the only way a charity would ever be including voting on their own contracts or receiving liability insur affected by Measure 92 is if it says it is collecting money fora ante coverage: charitable purpose, but using it instead for politics. Otherwise, Some choice. charities will not be affected by Measure 92. Adding insult to injury, the union will go on taking and spending In 1992, voters in Washington state overwhelmingly passed a those workers'money on politics, so the workers will have to go measure similar to Measure 92, requiring employee permission through the whole process of getting their money back again the before deducting money from their paychecks to run political cam- next year.And the next.And the next. paigns.The result was a real eye-opener.More that 80 percent of It's high time we stopped the bully from stealing workers' lunch the public employees in Washington refused to contribute part of money.Vote yes on Measure 92. their wages to the public employee unions'political funds, once they were given a choice. (This information furnished by Becky Miller,Oregon Taxpayers United.) That's why some unions in Oregon are spending millions to retain their ability to confiscate employees'money without permission. But don't be fooled.Measure 92 protects workers. It insures that no employee will be forced to contribute against his or her will to a political cause they don't personally support. And of course,that's the way it ought to be! (This information furnished by Becky Miller,Oregon Taxpayers United.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$5001n accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 82 CONTINUED Official 2000 General election Voters'Pamphlet--Statewide Measures Measure No. 92 Arguments ARGUMENT IN FAVOR ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION UNIONS PUT UP ROADBLOCKS TO EMPLOYEES EXERCIS- LEAGUE OF WOMEN VOTERS OF OREGON ING THEIR BECK RIGHTS URGES A"NO"VOTE ON MEASURE 921 If you are a union member who deeply disagrees with your union's political activities, here's a little experiment for you to try. Measure 92 is an unfair unnecessary attack on the individual Ask your union or the Labor Relations Board what you have to do rights of working Oregonians.Please join us in keeping Measure to get back the money they took from your paycheck to pay for 92 out of Oregon's Constitution. those political activities.Ask if you will still be part of the union if . 92 takes away individual rights.The Constitution is there to you don't allow any of your dues to be used for politics.See what protect our rights, but 92 would take rights away. All union they say. members in the United States have the freedom to"opt out"of You will probably be surprised to learn how difficult it is to keep their union's political contribution;even the U.&Supreme court your union from using your money to fund those activities.Here's says so.Thousands of Oregonians already"opt out;'and thou- what may happen: sands more use their power and responsibility to change from within what they don't like about their union's political activities. 1)You will probably get forced out of your union.You will still have This measure would use the Oregon Constitution to limit to pay dues to the union, but you won't be allowed to participate individual freedoms to make these choices and changes. in union activities. • 92 does not belong in the Constitution.According to some 2)Your union may tell you that money they spent to support or legal experts, amendment 92 is unconstitutional.The highest oppose ballot measures was part of the collective bargaining courts in other states have rejected similar laws because they process,so you can't get it back. limit workers'rights to join together and participate in politics. 3)You may be told you only have a two week period each year These measures would face similar challenges in Oregon,and during which you may send a letter asking for your refunds.That that means they could be in court for years.We do not need to period may have already passed. If not, your letters may be spend millions in tax dollars to defend amendments that take ignored. away rights. 4) If you do get your letter in on time,your union will likely under- Please say "no" to 92, and keep the Constitution fair for state the amount spent on political activities and you will have to everybody.. sue to recover your own money. LEAGUE OF WOMEN VOTERS OF OREGON 5)Next year,you get to go through it all over again. (This information furnished by Paula D. Krane, President, League of Sound far-fetched?It's not.These things happen all the time,and Women voters of Oregon.) they are happening right here in Oregon.I should know.I've been a member of a labor union for 16 years and even served as vice- president. It's high time we protected the rights of Oregon's workers by ending forced political contributions.Please join me in supporting Measure 92. (This information furnished by Jean Nations.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 83 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 92 Arguments ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION OREGON PTA SAYS: Don't let 98 and 92 interfere with DON'T LET MEASURE 92 the Firefighter-MDA partnership HURT OUR CHILDREN'S EDUCATION Fires aren't the only thing firefighters take on every day.We If this measure passes,children and education in Oregon will also partner with the Muscular Dystrophy Association to combat suffer. It will place a tight restriction on the amount of work that neuromuscular diseases that affect millions of Americans. charities such Boys and Girls Clubs, Scouts organizations, and We work hard for our money.And it feels good to know that United Way agencies are able to accomplish on behalf of our voluntary contributions help families dealing with mus- Oregon's children.We all need these voices to meet the living and cular dystrophy. But amendments 98 and 92 could end our learning needs of our kids. partnership with MDA. Because Measure 92 restricts contributions to political work, Through our paychecks every month,we make contributions that these charities, along with teachers' unions who work for better pay for things like research, physical therapy, support groups for education,will have to comply with a cumbersome annual written families and even summer camp for kids.This partnership has authorization process. This is hardly a reduction in the level of been going strong since 1954. governmental bureaucracy—in fact,it is a level of paperwork that would severely affect organizations that improve education in Amendment 92 would interfere with our giving to MDA.Why? Oreaon. Because like many charities, MDA works to pass legislation that would help its members.For example,MDA has been successful The substantial amount of time required for the paperwork in getting better long-term health care and better access in public process would cut into the work these dedicated advocates are facilities for people who use wheelchairs.Amendment 92 would able to do on behalf of Oregon's children.In addition,the expense force the MDA to collect written permission from each and every of acquiring written permission year after year would be a strain one of us every year just to use our money to continue their mis- on the funds that wo ld be better spent improving our schools and sion.That's a waste of the money we give them — money that services for kids. could be used to help the people in need. The Oregon PTA (Parent Teacher Association) relies on the Please vote"no"on amendments 98 and 92. voices of charities and teachers to join us in speaking out for all of our children.We simply can't do it alone. They make giving difficult for firefighters. We need to work together to ensure that our children's education They take money away from people who need it. is supported with quality curriculum, and that there is adequate They don't belong in Oregon's Constitution. funding to cover the educational needs of our children.We also work on health issues that affect our children, and on social Signed, concerns such as school safety. Bob Livingston PROTECT THE VOICES THAT Oregon State Fire Fighters Council SPEAK FOR OREGON'S CHILDREN! Steven Kenney Vote NO on measure 92 Muscular Dystrophy Association, Inc. Kathryn Firestone, President (This information furnished by Steve Kenney, Regional Director Muscular Lisa Laursen Thirkill,Vice President for Legislation Dystrophy Association;Bob Livingston,Oregon State Firefighters Council.) The Oregon PTA (This information furnished by Kathryn Firestone,President,Lisa Laursen Thirkill,VP for Legislation;The Oregon PTA(Oregon Congress of Parents and Teachers).) r (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$5001n accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 84 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 92 Arguments ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION Measure 92 threatens programs that help seniors "Measure 92 will cost taxpayers over 1.5 million dollars to fix something that isn't broken. When bad legislation comes along that could affect senior citi- It is a wasteful and mean-spirited attack zens in a negative way,we want to let you know about it.This is on Oregon's working men and women:' one of those times. —Jim Hill,State Treasurer Measure 92 will hurt charities that help seniors and other people.Every pay period,thousands of working Oregonians vol- Measure 92 is an ugly attempt to silence the voices of untarily donate money to hospice programs,The American Red Oregon workers,thereby strengthening the power of special Cross, and other charities that help seniors.Amendment 92 puts interest groups. Measure 92 is an attempt by one political fac- limits on payroll deductions, placing millions of dollars of aid at tion to keep hardworking Oregonians from participating in their risk. government.The supporters of this dangerous measure want you to think they are protecting workers'rights,but in fact the opposite If this measure passes, charities like senior meal programs that is true —they see Oregon's working men and women as their receive donations through payroll deductions would be limited in political enemy. how they could help us with this money.If they were to use any of it to speak to their legislators on our behalf—which many of them Measure 92 will cost Oregon taxpayers 1.5 million dollars each do—these busy groups would have to obtain written permission year.The supporters of Measure 92 will tell you this is a small slips from each and every contributor every year. That's thou- percentage of tax dollars,but as Oregon's Chief Financial Officer, sands and thousands of permission slips.It's expensive to do all I disagree.1.5 million dollars could buy thousands of new school- of that unnecessary work. books or put many more police officers in our communities. Measure 92 is another example of nickel-and-diming our These non-profit groups should be spending their time help- precious resources to promote special interests.It is a waste ing people not tracking down permission slips. of valuable taxpayer dollars. This measure will not even save taxpayers money. It will cost Measure 92 is an attack on privacy rights. It would require us millions of dollars See for yourself in the Financial Im acct employees to inform their boss of their political and charitable Statement at the beginning_of this section donations if they participate in workplace giving. No one should Please join us in opposing Measure 92. It is bad for seniors and have to explain to their boss which organizations they choose bad for Oregon. to support. Measure 92 is an intrusion to the privacy we all cherish. Signed, The sponsors of Measure 92 are attempting to use the Oregon State Council of Senior Citizens Oregon Constitution to further their own political interests. United Seniors of Oregon Measure 92 is a waste of money.Measure 92 is an unfair and Gray Panthers of Oregon Advocacy Coalition for Seniors and People with Disabilities underhanded attack on Oregon's working families. Measure 92 is bad politics. (This information furnished by Jim Davis, Oregon State Council of Senior pin me in voting NO"on Measure 92 Citizens, United Seniors of Oregon, Gray Panthers of Oregon,Advocacy Please 1 9 Coalition for Seniors&People with Disabilities.) Jim Hill Oregon State Treasurer (This information furnished by Jim Hill,Oregon State Treasurer.) (This space purchased for$500 In accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 85 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 92 Arguments ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION "I can make 50 phone calls and Bill Sizemore's 92 and 98 will hurt Oregon workers raise quite a lot of money very quickly." Special interests are using both 92 and 98 to block real Bill Sizemore,Sponsor of Measures 92 and 98 reforms Why are corporate donations not addressed by Quoted in The Oregonian, May 17, 1997 these measures?We work hard for our money—we should Our constitution should embody the highest principles of good be able to use it for political g_uri2oses like anyone else government.These principals should be fair and apply equally to Sizemore, the sponsor of 92 and 98, is singling out payroll all citizens. Measures 92 and 98 are not fair, and do not apply deduction because he knows we have to gather our smaller equally to all citizens.They are meant to eliminate the voices of contributions together in order to be heard in the political arena. working people from participating in the political process. Sizemore's supporters can write$50,000 checks to his cam- Consider this. paigns,while most of us can only contribute a little at a time. • Some sponsors of measures can raise money to further their Payroll deduction helps us pool our funds.Take that away, political agenda with a few phone calls to big contributors. and you take away our right to be heard. Working people of more modest means must pool their Sizemore says these measures will protect us,but we are already resources in small amounts in order to be heard above the protected from.having to make political contributions. Many of clamor of corporate and moneyed interests. us already exercise that right. In fact. Sizemore knows we are • Working people use payroll deductions for personal banking, already protected.He signed an official Explanatory Statement in making charitable contributions and to support their unions and this very Voters'Pamphlet that says,"Under current law...Neither professional associations.The Sizemore measures 92 and 98 unions nor any other organization can require political contribu- are meant to eliminate these options. lions"(Measure 92 Explanatory Statement,second paragraph). • Measures 92 and 98, by attacking the use of payroll deduc- The real aim of this measure is to silence us — working tions, attempt to still the voices of employees, while they do Oregonians. Please vote "no" on 92 and 98 and preserve our nothing about the free flow of checks,cash and gifts that come freedoms. from wealthy contributors and corporations. Signed, These attempts to restrict participation of working Oregonians in Veda Shook. Flight Attendant, Flight Attendants 39, Portland the political process of their state is a betrayal of the initiative Barbara Ramirez Clerk,Teamsters 206, Eugene system which was established to broaden participation in govern- Robert Stewart,City Plumbing Inspector, Plumbers and ment. This repeated attempt to restrict the collective voice of Steamfitters 290, Florence working people,while leaving unaffected the major sources of big GGayla Asanov Custodian,Service Employees 49,Corvallis money contributors,should be rejected by voters. Carol Bridges Operator,Communications Workers of America Don't Let Our Constitution Be Used for Unfair Politics 7904,Salem Joseph Tam.Civil Rights Investigator,Oregon Public Employees Vote"No"on Measures 92 and 98. Union 839, Portland Lawrence Perry,President Dick Fisher,Wireman, Electrical Workers 280,Jefferson Oregon Common Cause Ron Lopez Community College Instructor, State,County and Municipal Employees 3763,Ontario (This information furnished by Larry Perry,Chair,Oregon Common Cause.) Mike Sullivan. Roll Turner,Steelworkers 8378, McMinnville Rito Sanchez.Shoemaker, United Food and Commercial Workers 555, Portland Robert Whitehead Bread Checker, Bakers and Grain Millers 114, Hubbard Jim Wilson,Carpenter, Carpenters 2067, Medford (This information furnished by Tim Nesbitt,Oregon AFL-CIO Committee on Political Education.) (This space purchased for$5001n accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 In accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 86 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet-Statewide Measures Measure No. 92 Arguments ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION GOVERNOR KITZHABER URGES YOU UNITED WAY ASKS FOR YOUR`NO'VOTE ON 92: TO VOTE"NO"ON AMENDMENT 92 IT WILL TAKE RESOURCES AWAY FROM OREGONIANS IN NEED Amendment 92 is being billed as a way to protect workers'rights — but it does just the opposite. I care deeply about workers' The United Way is Oregon's largest human services fund-raising rights,and this amendment is unnecessary and unfair.I invite all organization. Our agencies help seniors, children, disabled citi- Oregonians to join me in keeping 92 out of Oregon's Constitution. zens, and many other people with special needs.Because manv of our non-profit member agencies inform the legislature on Workers don't need this"protection:' matters that affect the people we serve our work and theirs is Supporters of 92 say workers need this law to protect them from being orced to make a contribution to their union's political fund. considered "political" and would be seriously impacted by 9 amendment 92. This simply is untrue.All workers in the United States have the right to"opt out"of paying for their union's political activities,and If amendment 92 passes, it will require.United Way and the courts as high as the U.S.Supreme Court have reinforced those individual non-profit agencies who provide services to collect a rights.In addition to having ample legal protections, union mem- signature to approve our legislative contacts from every supporter bers have the power and responsibility to change what they don't we already have—that's thousands and thousands of redundant like about their union's political activities. signatures, every year. It's intrusive to workers'privacy. At best,this requirement would distract from our focus on When I look at 92, 1 see an amendment that is intrusive to work- delivering meals to senior citizens and helping children learn ers'privacy.See for yourself in the Explanatory Statement: If 92 to read.At worst,it would make workplace giving campaigns becomes part of our Constitution, every worker who makes a so cumbersome and risky,that non-profits would stop using political contribution via payroll deduction will have to report it to it.And that would be devastating to the people we serve. his or her employer. I believe that political contributions are a Please vote"no"on 92. deeply personal matter.Would you want to disclose your political activities to your employer? Would you want your neighbors to Signed, have to? Members of the Board of Directors,and Staff It's unfair to charitable organizations. The United Way of the Mid-Willamette Valley I am concerned about amendment 92's effects on charitable orga- Russell Beck, Executive Director nizations. Hard-working Oregonians have long used payroll Robert Ruck, Chair of the Board deduction as a simple and effective way to contribute to groups Gregory Astley like United Way, Habitat for Humanity, and the Oregon Humane Randall Franke Society. Amendment 92's requirement for written permission George Gent would make that process unnecessarily-cumbersome. This is Tom Golden unfair to charities,to the populations they serve,and to the work- Carolyn Gorsuch ers who wish to keep their contributions a personal matter. Judy Grant PROTECT OREGON'S WORKERS AND CHARITIES Delilah Ginther VOTE"NO"ON AMENDMENT 92 Stacy Hartline V George Jennings Governor John A.Kitzhaber,M.D. Paul Krissel Jennifer Larsen Morrow (This information furnished by John A. Kitzhaber, M.D., Governor of Keeta Lauderdale Oregon.) Kay Marikos Ed Martin Raquel Moore-Green Don Myers Lee Pelton Bruce Rogers Ted Stang Betty J.Youngblood (This information furnished by Paul Krissel,Member of the Board.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 87 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlat—Statewide Measures Measure No. 92 Arguments ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION Measure 92 is a violation of my privacy, A Teacher Speaks Out Against 92 and maybe yours,too. Every Oregonian should have the right to have his or her This law will require me to sign a form and give it to my employer voice heard.It's not right that only certain groups–those with big every year if I want to make a political contribution through payroll money or•backed by corporations–have a voice. deduction. Amendment 92 will force me to reveal to whom I'm Measure 92 is a poorly crafted solution for a problem that donating money. This measure may affect you, your family, doesn't even exist.I am an elementary school teacher and I love and your ei neighbors and friends as well. my job.I'm also a member of the Oregon Education Association. Measures 98 and 92 are unnecessary: I choose to participate to have a voice in the policies that shape I should know,I have exercised my right to"opt out"of contribut my students'education. rq to my union's political fund without any hassle whatsoever. Laws already exist that say I can't be forced to contribute to my This law would not protect my right to"opt out,"but it would make Association's political or legislative activities.The truth is,I do par- "opting in" more difficult than ever before.That's not fair to me ticipate because so much of what happens in my classroom is or to any other Oregon worker who would be targeted by this now based in politics—how my school is funded, what bench- measure. marks my students must pass, and whether my students have The law says my job is secure-regard less of whether I contrib utP enough to eat. and I have seen firsthand that it's true. No employee can be 92 is cumbersome forced to contribute to a union's political campaign.So says the Annual permission slips and the extra work they would require for U.S. Supreme Court; so says the Official Ballot Title Summary; the school administration and individual teachers would shift the and so says Bill Sizemore in the Explanatory Statement he signed focus from working together for students to working out political off on.That kind of backup is good enough for me. differences. Please vote"no"on 92. Measure 92 does not belong in Oregon's Constitution It's It doesn't give me rights.It takes my rights aw_y unfair, far-reaching and inappropriate And it's a bad lesson to teach Oregon's students. Sincerely, Please join other Oregon public school teachers and me. Danielle Fischer Vote NO on 92. (This information furnished by Danielle Fischer.) Sincerely, Kelvin Calkins Elementary School Teacher (This information furnished by Kelvin Calkins.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 88 CONTINUED 0 Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 92 Arguments ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION DON'T WASTE PUBLIC FUNDS Don't Silence Police Officers and the Work we do for Our Communities VOTE"NO"ON MEASURE 92 Say No to 98 and 92 Measure 92 will set up an expensive, useless archive of paperwork.As public employers,we believe this will increase our These measures would hurt Oregon communities. costs and reduce our ability to serve the higher education needs If Measures 98 and 92 pass, we will be shut out of the political of Oregonians. process, and Oregon will lose valuable input that has made our streets safer for everybody.We have worked hard to pass laws to Measure 92 is contrary to the Higher Education Protect Oregon's communities,including: Administrative Efficiency Act.Since the passage of SB 271 in 1995, we have saved more than $3.5 million a year by stream- • Passing legislation that broadens drunk-driving laws to include lining personnel, contracting, purchasing and other business driving under the influence of inhalants; functions.We have supported more than 2,000 Oregon resident • Making drunk driving a felony if the driver has previously been undergraduate students each year with the savings. Now, convicted of three or more drunk-driving offenses; Measure 92 would eat into these efficiency savings, by requiring • Proposing legislation that would keep convicted felons from the creation and storage of a paper form for thousands of our possessing body armor that could be used to shield them when employees each year,and redirection of support staff from impor- they commit their next crime. tant duties to this"make-work"project. 98 and 92 are unfair. Measure 92 is a solution without a!problem. Under the labor Measures 92 and 98 would single us out and threaten our free- agreement we have negotiated with our employees,any classified dom to participate in the political process. worker who wants to pay for representation costs only,and avoid These measures are unnecessary. any other expenses of union membership, can do so.Our elec- We already have the right not to participate.The right to"opt out" tronic payroll system automatically makes the deduction without of political dues is protected under the law.We simply want to pro- continuing cost.Measure 92 would replace this efficient,agreed- tect our right to"opt in"without a big hassle. to process with cumbersome,old-fashioned paper forms,one for every employee, one for every year.This is exactly the kind of Every day we put our lives on the line protecting and serving costly, useless program the authors of this measure say they Oregonians. oppose. We are asking for your help now to protect our rights as equal cit- DON'T WASTE TAX DOLLARS izens under the Oregon Constitution. VOTE"NO"ON MEASURE 92 Help us make Oregon's communities safer for everybody. David Frohnmayer Paul Risser Daniel Bernstine Vote"no"on 98 and 92. President, U of O* President,OSU* President, PSU* Association of Oregon Corrections Employees Betty Youngblood Bend Police Association President,WOU* Joseph W.fox Federation of Oregon Parole and Probation Officers Hillsboro Police Officers Association Chancellor Keizer Police Association Oregon University System* Lane County Peace Officer's Association *Titles used for identification purposes;only,and do not constitute Lincoln Co.Deputy Sheriff Association a position on this measure by any institution of the Oregon Multnomah County Corrections Officers Association University System or the Oregon State Board of Higher Oregon Council of Police Associations Education. Oregonians for Public Safety Oregon State Police Officers'Association (This information furnished by Grattan Kerans.) Portland Police Association Redmond Police Officers Association Roseburg Police Employees Association Tigard Police Officers'Association Springfield Police Association Eugene Police Employees Association Deschutes County Sheriff Employees Association (This information furnished by Martin Larner,Oregonians for Public Safety.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- [accuracy e printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ent by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. or truth of any statement made in the argument. 89 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 92 Arguments ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION Measure 92 Unfairly Restricts Our Right Public Service Workers Say NO to Measure 92 to Use Payroll Deductions To Support the Organizations of Our Choice We are the workers who provide public services throughout our state.We are proud of the work we do for you and we are proud Measure 92 is unfair to us as workers and citizens Like Measure union members. 98. this constitutional amendment unfairly restricts our right to gill Sizemore's Measures 92 and 98 will hurt rank and file union use payroll deductions to support the organizations of our choice members.They attack our rights to make small political contribu- Through payroll deductions, we pool our resources to make our tions through payroll deductions. Some people may be able to voices heard on issues that affect our lives.We use payroll deduc- write checks to candidates or for ballot measures of$10,000, or tions to support our unions and to make contributions to charities. more. We cannot. Only by setting aside a small amount each But Measure 92 would unfairly restrict the right of these organi- month are we able to get our story told.Taking that right away zations continue to represent our interests and to fulfill the is UNFAIR. purposes for which we support them. In our union, members make the rules. We don't need Bill Measure 92 is so restrictive that: Sizemore to tell us how to operate our union. • Each of us and our co-workers would have to sign separate This measure is UNNECESSARY. Many union-represented permission slips before our union could write a letter,to a legis- workers decide not to make political contributions through our lator or even urge our own members to support or oppose a union.That's their choice and federal law.The way this measure piece of legislation;or, is written,it would deprive thousands of hard-working Oregonians • Employers would have to approve separate payroll deductions a public voice. for the funds we authorize for political advocacy. This would Please VOTE NO on 92. inject politics into our workplaces breach the r_ ivacy of our political choices and give employers control over our participa- Ellen Jackson,Office Worker, Klamath Falls tion in the political process. Glenda Short,Trainer, Eugene Charles Spray, Physician,Salem It is unfair to single out working people and attempt to limit Nancy Magill,Case Manager, Portland our right to participate in the political process by restricting Deborah Dombrowski, Library Worker,Corvallis our use of payroll deductions. Melody Williamson, Office Worker, Independence But Measures 92 and 98 are not only unfair; they are also Bart Lewis,Accounting Technician, Eugene unnecessary.We already have the right to opt out of paying Barbara Hopkins,Office Worker,Salem for political expenditures with which we disagree. Mike Wendel, Maintenance Worker,Bend Mark Gronso, Electrician, Pendleton Please join us in rejecting these unfair and unnecessary constitu- Monty Walters, Mental Health Specialist,Ashland tional amendments.Protect our right to use payroll deductions to Gwelda Shepardson,Case Manager, Roseburg support the organizations of our choice. Karen Cummins,Child Protective Services,Coos Bay Vote"No"on Measures 92 and 98. Rosalie Pedroza,Oregon Health Plan,Salem Sue Martinez, Cook, Eugene Cindy Sloan Linda DeLucia, Employment Claims, Portland Meat Wrapper Randy Davis, Maintenance Worker, Clatskanie United Food and Commercial Workers 555 Alice Grimes, Retired Library Worker, Medford Salem Larry Williams,Apprenticeship Representative,Springfield Rosanne Richard, Project Coordinator,Salem Paul tyn Kym Lamb, Case Manager, Portland Fire Captain John Ekberg, Natural Resource Specialist,Corbett International Firefighters 1395 Geraldine Ruatta,Case Manager, Grants Pass Springfield Vickie O'Reilly, Employment Specialist,Beaverton Oakley Taylor Jesse Backman, Forestry Worker, Bay City Oiler-Fire Protection Elizabeth Duell,Office Worker,Salem Paper,Allied,Chemical, Energy Union 8-406 All members of Oregon Public Employees Union,SEIU Local 503 Bend Britt Cornman (This information furnished by Terrence Cavanagh, Oregon Public Production Worker Employees Union,SEIU Local 503.) Machinist Lodge 1005 Aloha (This information furnished by Tim Nesbitt,Oregon AFL-CIO Committee on Political Education.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. i accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 90 CONTINUED o Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 92 Arguments ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION Democrats outline far-reaching effects of Measures 98 and 92 Republicans Oppose Unnecessary and Unfair Constitutional Amendments Because these two measures are poorly written and far-reaching, they have a broad base of opposition. A wide variety of "No"on 92 and 98 Oregonians who may not agree on everything — Democrats, Some people will be surprised at the strong Republican opposi- Republicans, charities, environmental groups, businesses and tion to these measures.The truth is,the wide variety of opposition unions — are all supporting a "no" vote on these measures. to 92 and 98 reflects the far-reaching consequences these pro- Here's why: posed Constitutional amendments will have on Oregon. • 98 and 92 aim to block the participation of working Oregonians 92 and 98 are unnecessary and unfair. These measures are from the political process.Everyone has the right to be heard, unnecessary because all workers already have the option to not no matter where they stand on the issues. fund their union's political activities.They're unfair because they • 98 and 92 would weaken charities.By placing restrictions and single out one group and take away their ability to participate in the risk of penalties in the way of charities that advocate for the the political process. people they help, these measures will reduce the amount of They hurt charitable organizations. Because many charities work they can do.We need these charities to provide support speak up on behalf of their members in order to be effective,their for the thousands of Oregonians who benefit from them. work is considered"political"by these measures would be subject • 92 brings politics into the workplace.If this measure passes,all to the stringent rules set forth by both amendments. For groups Oregonians who contribute via payroll deduction will have to like the United Way and the Muscular Dystrophy Association,that tell their employer when they decide to make a political contri- means fewer funds from the generous Oregonians who have bution.That's a violation of privacy. been contributing from their own paychecks for years. Keep the Constitution fair for everybody.Vote"no"on 98 and 92. If Oregonians with special needs can count less on charities for Earl Blumenauer,U.S.House of Representatives support,chances are they will need more public services to make Bill B lumen ,Secretary of State up the difference.With our state budget constrained as it is, one Y Y wonders where the money would come from to provide these Kate Brown,Senate Democratic Leader services. T,my Corcoran,State Senator Peter Courtney,State Senator No matter the politics of working Oregonians,it is not right Peter DeFazio,U.S.House of Representatives to unfairly single them out and take away their rights. Randall Edwards,State Representative It's not right to make funds harder to raise for charities like Dan Gardner,State Representative the United Way,Muscular Dystrophy Association,and groups Avel Gordly,Oregon State Senator that help senior citizens.These groups provide a valuable Gary Hansen,State Representative public service and need our"no"vote on these measures. Darlene Hooley,U.S.House of Representatives Elaine Hopson,State Representative Join us in voting NO on 98&92. Randy Leonard,State Representative Kathy Lowe,State Representative Jack Roberts,Oregon Labor Commissioner Mark Simmons,Majority Leader,Oregon House of Jeff Merkley,State Representative Representatives(Elgin) Hardy Myers,Attorney General Barbara Roberts, Former Oregon Governor Max Williams,State Representative(Tigard) Diane Rosenbaum,State Representative Lane cklun ly,State Representative(Dallas) Kurt Schrader,State Representative Vic B utter,S State Representative(tario)) Frank Shields,State Senator Tom Butler,State Representative(Ontario) Jim Hill,State Representative(Hillsboro) Peter Sorenson,Lane County Commissioner Bill Witt,State Representative(Portland) Beverly Stein,Chair,Multnomah County Board of Commissioners Randy Franke,Marion County Commissioner Cliff Trow,State Senator Vicki Walker,State Representative (This information furnished by Jack Roberts,Labor Commissioner.) David Wu,U.S.House of Representatives Ron Wyden,U.S.Senate (This information furnished by Barbara Roberts, Former Governor of Oregon.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 91 CONTINUED Off icial 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide"Measures Measure No. 92 Arguments ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION We,the undersigned Community Advocates, MEASURE 92 IS UNNECESSARY,UNFAIR,AND A THREAT Environmentalists and Educators, TO ALL WORKERS'PRIVACY: urge you to vote"no"on 92. We have offered our endorsement here because our organiza VOTE"NO"ON 92! tions and the community we work to support all stand to lose Signed,the working men and women of: under Measure 92.The additional paperwork, accounting prac- AFSCME,Council 75 tices and risk of penalties mandated by this measure would make American Federation of Teachers-Oregon working to fulfill our missions more difficult and in some cases Association of Engineering Employees of Oregon nearly impossible. Please consider the valuable services we provide as you consider your vote. Association of Western Pulp&Paper Workers OR/ID Council Please Vote No on 921 Bricklayers&Allied Craftworkers Local 1 Cement Masons Local 555 ENVIRONMENTAL: Columbia Pacific Building&Construction Trades Council Environmental Federation of Oregon Communications Workers of America Local 7901 Forest Service Employees for Environmental Ethics Friends of-the Columbia Gorge Elevator Constructors Local 23 Oregon Environmental Council Heat and Frost Insulators&Asbestos Workers Local 36 Oregon League of Conservation Voters IBEW Locals 48, 112,280,659,932, 970 Oregon Natural Resources Council International Alliance of Theatrical&Stage Employees Local 488 Oregon State Public Interest Research Group International Longshore and Warehouse Union-Columbia River Pacific Rivers Council District Council Recycling Advocates Sierra Club International Union of Painters and Allied Trades Dist.Council 5 Ironworkers Locals 29 and 516 COMMUNITY ADVOCATES Basic Rights Oregon Laborers Locals 121,320,483 Coalition for a Livable Future Lane,Coos,Curry, Douglas County Building Trades Council Community Alliance of Tenants National Association of Letter Carriers Branch 82 Eugene-Springfield Solidarity Network Northwest Oregon Labor Council,AFL-CIO Mid-Willamette Valley Jobs With Justice Operating Engineers Local 701 Oregon Action Oregon AFL-CIO Oregon Common Cause Oregon Consumer League Oregon Education Association Portland Jobs with Justice Oregon Machinists Council, District Lodge 24 Portland New Party Oregon Nurses Association Rural Organizing Project Oregon Public Employees Union,SEIU Local 503 Victim Offender Reconciliation Program/Community Mediation Services of Polk County Oregon School Employees Association Western States Center Oregon State Building and Construction Trades Council EDUCATORS Oregon State Fire Fighters Council Association of Oregon Faculties Pacific Northwest Regional Council of Carpenters Confederation of Oregon School Administrators Painters and Tapers Locals 724, 1236, 1277 Oregon Education Association Pendleton Building Trades Council Oregon School Boards Association Pineros y Campesinos Unidos del Noroeste(PCUN) Portland Community College Faculty Federation Plasterers Local 82 Portland State Advocates Salem Keizer School Board Portland Community College Federation of Classified Employees The Oregon PTA Local 3922 Portland Fire Fighters Association Mark Abrams,Vice-Chair, Portland School Board Roofers Locals 49, 156 Gordon Matzke, Faculty Member,Oregon State University Salem Building Trades Council Henry Sayre, Faculty Member, Oregon State University William Smaldone, Willamette University Professor and Salem SEIU,Oregon State Council, Local 49 City Council Member Sheet Metal Workers Local 16 (This information furnished by Roger Gray,Coalition Against Unnecessary Southern Oregon Area Local,American Postal Workers Union and Unfair Constitutional Amendments.) Teamsters Joint Council#37 United Association of Plumbers and Steamfitters Local 290 United Food and Commercial Workers Local 555 United Steelworkers of America WA/OR/ID State Conference of Bricklayers and Allied Craftworkers (This information furnished by Grant 2adow,IBEW Local 48.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 92 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet--Statewide Measures Measure No. 92 Arguments ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION OREGON CONSERVATION AND ACLU OF OREGON RECOMMENDS A ENVIRONMENTAL GROUPS "NO"VOTE ON MEASURE 92 URGE YOU TO VOTE"NO"ON 92 Measure 92 would use the Constitution to mandate an unneces- Oregon voters support innovative solutions. sary and unfair process in Oregon.The American Civil Liberties One of the things that make Oregon great is that we have healthy Union recommends a"no"vote on this measure. political debates.People on all sides get to weigh in on the issues, IT'S UNNECESSARY and we end up with innovative solutions like the Bottle Bill. Measure 92 is not innovative reform. Workers won't benefit from this measure because the law already It requires working Oregonians to jump through special hoops just protects them from having to make political contributions.Several to participate in the political process. It forces them to disclose high courts including the United States Supreme Court have their political payroll deductions—their own hard-earned money upheld the right of all workers to opt out of making political —to their employers and the government.That is an invasion of contributions.Thousands of Oregonians already do so. privacy that is unfair to place on any group, and it's even worse IT VIOLATES PRIVACY when it's applied to some groups and not others. Amendment 92 violates privacy by bringing politics into the work- Amendment 92 puts nonprofits like ours at risk. place.Year after year, employees would have to file forms with When we work to preserve treasures like Mount Hood and Steens their employer in order to make a political contribution through Mountain,we often need to speak with elected officials.Because payroll deduction. Think of the possible effects: HMO workers this is political work, it would be very risky for us to accept the might be afraid to go against their employers' political views – much-needed payroll-deducted funds that have supported the those who do could be harassed. The Constitution is there to environmental community for years. protect privacy, not violate it. Amendment 92 could inhibit the following activities: IT LIMITS THE RIGHT TO BE HEARD •Protecting Oregon's farm and forest lands Measure 92 singles out workers' methods of giving — without •Protecting wilderness habitat even addressing the ways businesses and corporations give. •Protecting Mt.Hood from development •Enforcing clean water laws Putting unnecessary obstacles in front of workers is not fair. Everyone has the right to be heard. •Preserving Steens Mountain •Monitoring chemical incineration at Umatilla IT DOESN'T BELONG IN OREGON'S CONSTITUTION Please join us in saying no to this unfair amendment. Laws similar to measures 92 and 98 have been overturned in Oregon's Constitution is there to protect our rights,not take Nevada and Ohio because they limit the rights of working people them away. to participate in the political process.Here in Oregon,they could Vote"NO"on 92! be tied up in courts for years, if they pass. KEEP THE OREGON CONSTITUTION Signed, FAIR FOR EVERYBODY Environmental Federation of Oregon PROTECT THE PRIVACY OF OREGON'S WORKERS Forest Service Employees for Environmental Ethics Friends of the Columbia Gorge VOTE"NO"ON MEASURE 92 Oregon Environmental Council Oregon League of Conservation Voters David Fidanque,President Oregon Natural Resources Council American Civil Liberties Union of Oregon Oregon State Public Interest Research Group (This information furnished by David Fidanque, American Civil Liberties Pacific Rivers Council Union of Oregon.) Recycling Advocates Sierra Club (This information furnished by Carol Porto,Chair,Sierra Club.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 93 CONTINUED OfflL411120MGeneral'Election'Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide.Measures Measure No. 92 Arguments ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION We,the undersigned charities,advocates and businesses, Commissioner Sorenson Urges a No Vote on Measure 92 urge a"NO"vote on proposed Constitutional amendment 92. Workplace giving programs make it easy for businesses and their Dear Oregon Voter, employees to contribute to the charitable organizations of their My name is Peter Sorenson and I live in Eugene. I'm an elected choice. Measure 92 would put that valuable funding source at Lane County Commissioner and former elected Oregon State risk.The limited resources and staff time should be spent working Senator. toward their mission, not compromised by unnecessary paper Lane County Commissioners recently voted to pass a Workplace help support Oregon's charities and nonprofit s and the great Justice Resolution that guarantees workers the right to organize. t work they do. I was a strong advocate for that resolution. Vote No on Measure 921 With measure 92, Bill Sizemore would undermine the benefits CHARITIES/ADVOCATES: that charities and others gain through the use of voluntary worker Advocacy Coalition for Seniors and People with Disabilities payroll deductions. American Association of University Women of Oregon Measure 92 uses a Constitutional amendment to mandate com- American Civil Liberties Union plex internal auditing systems for workplace donations. it would Canyon Crisis Center require tracking of each donation separately and new permission Children First for Oregon forms annually. Few employers would choose to be involved in Ecumenical Ministries of Oregon House of Zion Ministries, Inc. this costly and cumbersome process. Human Services Coalition of Oregon Measure 92 would require charities to use their limited resources League of Women Voters of Oregon to collect written permission slips from donors. The costs and Mid-Valley Women's Crisis Service difficulties involved would drastically reduce the amount of money Muscular Dystrophy Association, Inc. charities currently receive. Oregonians would lose vitally impor- National Committee for Responsive Philanthropy tant services that charities provide.This measure would harm Oregon Alliance of Children's Programs our charities and all those they serve. Oregon State Council of Senior Citizens Oregonians for Public Safety Measure 92 would require employees to fill out a form whenever Portland Gray Panthers they contribute to a politically active group.This measure could Salem Childbirth Education Association discourage political involvement. Political participation is a per- United Seniors of Oregon sonal decision.We rely on the Constitution to protect privacy, not United Way of the Mid-Willamette Valley to invade it. United Way of Columbia County Similar measures have been overturned or tied up in court in Willamette Valley Child Care Federation other states for years.Oregonians would be harmed by the huge BUSINESSES: expense of defending a constitutional amendment that interferes Associated Business Systems with our rights. B'For Publishing Services Thanks, B.D.Consulting, Inc. Bennett, Hartman&Reynolds Attorneys at Law Peter Sorenson Brice's Catering C&E Systems, LLC This is the most recent of a long list of bad legislation favored by Celilo Group special interests.IT MUST BE DEFEATED. Charles R.Williamson,Attorney,Kell Alterman&Runstein, LLP (This information furnished by Peter Sorenson.) Clackamas County Veterinary Clinic Discover Mortgage-North Greeley Branch FamilyCare, Inc. Labor's Community Service Agency, Inc. LGD Insight, Ltd. Mark E.Horstmann,CPA Microtech Systems Pac/West Communications Portland Teachers Credit Union Smith,Gamson Diamond&Olney Attorneys at Law The Bentley Gilbert Firm Three Rivers Farm Unions-America.com Wiser&Associates BUSINESS ASSOCIATIONS: National Electrical Contractors Association (NECA),. Oregon- Columbia Chapter Oregon Association of Hospitals and Health Systems Oregon Credit Union League Osteopathic Physicians and Surgeons of Oregon (This information furnished by Mike Fahey,President Discover NW Union Mortgage;Gina Mattioda,Co-Chair,Human Services Coalition of Oregon.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 94 CONTINUED ,y> Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet--Statewide Measures Measure No. 92 Arguments ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION Caregivers for the Elderly and Disabled Say:No on 92 and 98 Traditionally,Oregonians have been against any ballot measures We provide care for the elderly and disabled. that target a single group. We prepare and feed meals.We help our clients with medical Supporters of Measure 92 are hoping you overlook that fact when treatment and taking prescriptions. We bathe and dress our you vote. clients.We do the tasks that allow our clients to maintain their Measure 92 is also a proposed constitutional amendment, and dignity and live independently. Our state's elderly and Oregonians have been clear that we don't wish to clutter the disabled remain in their homes and are not shipped off to Oregon Constitution with this kind of nonsense. Because nursing homes because of the work we do. Measure 92 is another misleading proposal that might sound OK For us to provide adequate care,we need to have a voice at first reading, but is actually full of unintended consequences. on the job. Our jobs are publicly funded by the legislature. Measure 92 proponents want you to believe this is a simple mea- Politicians won't understand what it takes to properly care for the sure,and that it would"only"require unions to get written annual elderly unless we can tell those legislators.We need to educate authorization from their members in order to collect dues money them about working conditions because politicians set the work used for political purposes. rules.We need to tell them about patient needs because they set In fact, Measure 92 is a thinly-veiled attempt to single out union the funding levels for patient care. members and deny them a freedom of choice that all other Measures 92 and 98 effectively silence our voices because Oregonians enjoy. we fund our political activity–like educating legislators on care for Moreover,Measure 92 is a solution in search of a problem.Union the elderly--through payroll deductions.We can't write$50,000 members already have the right to"opt out"of political dues checks to politicians–most of us make about$8/hour.We just if they so desire. want to have our voice heard so we can improve the quality of care our clients receive and so we can improve our training, Here's an example.In Oregon,AFSCME represents about 20,500 benefits and working conditions. public employees. Of that total, roughly 3,500 are 'fair share" We oppose Measures 92 and 98.Measures 92 and 98 are members—those who, for whatever reason, choose not to join unfair and unnecessary.Working people need a voice. the union but are still covered by its contracts. Each year, 'lair share" members receive a letter outlining our political program, Caregivers for the elderly and disabled: and are offered a rebate on that portion of their dues.On average Esther Doramus, Eugene 425 request that rebate. And at AFSCME, we even offer a Risa Northway,Oregon City similar rebate to dues-paying members. Rita Sparks, Eugene The point is, there's already a "fair" system in place. But Diane Chandler,Coos Bay Measure 92 threatens charities and other groups that receive vol- Kimberly Powell, Eugene untary deductions,all because of how"political money"is defined Caroline Mitchell,Bandon in the measure. Tena Vasquez,Oregon City (This information furnished by Risa Northway.) Don't be misled by Measure 92.It's not for Oregon, and it surely has no place in the Oregon Constitution.Join us and Vote NO on Measure 92. Lanny Spriggle,Pendleton AFSCME Local 1393(Umatilla Co.Road Dept.) Robin Mariani,Portland AFSCME Local 189(Portland 911 Dispatch) (This information furnished by Don Loving,Oregon AFSCME Council 75.) (This space purchased for$5001n accordance with ORS 251.255.)' (This space purchased for$5001n accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 95 Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 93 Proposed by initiative petition to be voted on at the General participating voters who voted"Yes"on this 2000 Amendment.For Election, November 7,2000. purposes of this section and subject to subsection(5)of this sec- tion, the following shall require only approval by a majority of those voting in the election:(i)a measure to renew an expiring tax BALLOT TITLE levy, which levy solely funds police, fire, or 911 emergency services,the rate or amount of which levy is not greater than the rate or amount of the expiring levy;and(ii)a measure to increase the state motor vehicle fuel tax. }NSTY#OAto Y0ITE) MUST (b)The ballot title and official voters pamphlet explanatory state w��` 1kP,Fi+ �fEIll 7 (I $,FEES; f1{RI S men t fora measure to adopt a new tax,fee or charge;to approve C'�tAlN A jECtitAL'AERCNTAC�i ! a bond measure; or to increase an existing tax, fee, or charge, shall begin with the words:A"Yes"vote on this measure is a te, "";rs" vote means ycytrs apprQye' vote to increase taxes. The question submitted to voters also fates, fees art itn pprov. !per>tentag+e, may repeal recent shall clearly describe the proposed new tax, fee, or charge, or iCtere5 increase thereof;if the measure is a bond measure, a projection of the total cost of the bond, including interest thereon;and rev- ll" �Jf reialr)5 VV: Ciflt ru1S fctr! enue the measure would produce annually. apprvinf�tnore�tGS,fees, afn#zirts preipusly approved c Nothing in this section shall affect taxes levied for the repay- ........... ta"M4 100 ( ) g ment of bonded indebtedness approved by voters in an election Ss�M ►RY ftrriancls066 stltutlon Ourren.ytrotersapprrtvetaxes held prior to Nov.7, 2000,or the issuance of refunding bonds to by m jartt}#vlate,not a1l•t1ew;lnoreased taxes, fees require'Voter pay such bonded indebtedness. This section does not require approval Isle 3sur • re€ttreS lroter apprcivat after Wovernlaer 7, voter approval for the issuance of, or the levy of taxes to pay, CTIT€}ai ritb tt new trtCteaBad t fees by same per"nt ge thf bonds issued to repay bonds issued prior to the effective date of vpfet5 paSSln #hls ttieasure- eules repealtttt'refund cif oar- this section or issued in conformance with this section. taln repeltt tttas, fee ino easap unless +caters approve #norease. titp S ac3Crte cliarge �,Bonded.Indebtedness,.pitbtC safety (2) For purposes of this section, any elimination, limitation, or la�rtt#S frestrt new a}pr#val reetu em.en l P ublic rots Writ required In reduction of a tax exemption,credit,deduction,exclusion,or cost- Ilt�ted;ctrcltrtstances.•IWstaGilshes Standards fctr taxpayrar ehal-,,, of-living indexing shall be considered a tax increase. nS)e,jttdl�t rtrteW cif tax rrteasure :tiler changes, (3) The following revenues shall not be considered new or "'IMP, Additic�rtal Co tS to thr'State increased taxes,fees,or charges for the purposes of this section: r tfte't+tuber 2t) Generallectlon as"a'result c5# t11iS user fees charged by Peoples' Utility Districts or port districts; rr,Ouro ere flrrtteti t4 be trtlllltn.Costs fir eact :tuture mass transit fares;college or university tuition and fees;incurred finer 8t$c#t srt are est+ttlated to be $ S million jjidj sled fir charges and assessments for local improvements as defined by inflation. Article XI Section 11b of this Constitution; increases in charges for government products and services solely to pass through E1ec orts.,costs to Ic)ca#' t t fi#tttents foie t e ltilave 0r 20t?2 increased costs of wholesale inputs that are not government faetleral Electidr)are eStltiiated tQ'be$26;4 million. is IV,,each employee labor costs, or otherwise under the charging govern- futurs enteral eteetion Bite estimated tit beif 13,2 rnjllirrn,Wf sted: ment's control;fines or forfeitures for violation of law;lottery rev- ftar ttlapon enue; fees paid to official business and trade associations by �e"ems tirt tt [te anri'local rvetitte depends tin haul rriany those engaged in that business or occupation; earnings from tfaxe&,tees arty! harestftiit wars new+r,tncread fn the pagt interest, investments, donations, or asset sales; and fees or twfi years are not appkE+tretl .by vo ers l at the 0l} C,ertQral: charges for products or services which may be legally obtained lectidn from a reasonably available source other than government, pro- vided that the new or increased fee or charge for the product or service is not greater than the average private sector charge for the same product or service in the same market. (4)(a)If in the two years previous to the effective date of this sec- tion,MEASURE an existing tax,fee,or charge was increased more than three percent (3%), or a new tax, fee, or charge was adopted or first imposed; the increase in the existing tax, fee, or charge, to the Be it enacted by the People of the State of Oregon: extent it exceeded a three percent increase,and any new tax,fee, The Constitution of the State of Oregon is amended by creating a or charge, shall be either repealed or submitted to the voters for new,Section 32a in Article I,which section shall read: approval at the next election, if the new or increased tax, fee or charge was not approved by at least the percentage of voters Section 32a.People's right to approve all taxes.The purpose required in paragraph(a)of subsection(1)of this section.If a,new of this 2000 Amendment is to ensure that new taxes and tax tax fee or charge was imposed,or an existing tax,fee, or charge increases,which further deprive citizens of income and property, increased in the two years previous to the effective date of this are hereafter directly approved by the people.Therefore, except section,and the new tax,fee,or charge or increase in an existing as provided in Section 6 of Article IX,any new tax,fee,or charge, tax, fee, or charge, was not approved in conformance with this or increase in an existing tax, fee, or charge, shall require section, and not approved by voters at the next election, the approval by the people,as follows: amount of the new tax,fee, or charge or excessive increase col- lected shall be refunded to the payer.Taxes to pay voter approved bonded indebtedness,and taxes,fees,and charges listed in sub- levied,and no existing tax,fee or charge shall be increased by the section (3) of this section are exempt from the requirements of state or any local government or taxing district, unless the new this paragraph(a)of this subsection(4). tax,fee,or charge,or increase thereof is first approved in an elec- tion held on the first Tuesday after the first Monday of November (b) Provided that the amount of a fee or charge does not exceed of an even numbered year, or any other election held on a date the actual cost of providing the product or service, the following which the state legislative assembly has designated as an annual fees and charges may be increased at a rate not greater than the election date on which measures may be placed on the statewide rate of inflation since the effective date of this section, without a ballot by initiative petition, and the new tax, fee, or charge, or public vote:(i)charges and fees in effect on or before December increase thereof, is approved by not less than the percentage of 6, 1998;(ii) charges and fees first adopted or first effective after 96 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet--Statewide Measures Measure No. 93 December 6, 1998, if adopted in accordance with this section. to challenge it, and/or the election authorizing its imposition, by (5) Nothing in this section shall be construed as nullifying the court action commenced in any county in which the taxing entity requirement in Section 11 of Article XI of this Constitution that is located.If the election is held,a tax,fee,or charge is imposed, elections for property tax measures, which are voted on in an or a bond is approved, in material violation of this section or any election held on a date other than the general election, achieve implementing legislation, the court shall declare the tax, fee, or commenced within not less than fifty percent(50%)voter participation to be valid. charge or bond void.Such an action shall ninety(90)days after the earlier of(i)the date on which the elec- (6)(a) This section shall not require a vote of the people when tion approving the tax,fee,charge or bond is held;or(ii)the date increases in government revenue occur solely due to a change in on which the tax, fee, or charge is first imposed or the bond is federal tax law, increases in income,or other changes in the cir- approved for issue. The court shall award reasonable attorney cumstances of individual taxpayers. Nothing in this section shall fees and costs to the prevailing taxpayer,or if the action is found be construed as authorizing an increase in the tax on a property to be frivolous,to a prevailing government party. tax in an amount greater than allowed under Article XI of this (12) If any phrase, clause, or part of this Amendment is invali- Constitution. dated by a court of competent jurisdiction,the remaining phrases, (b) If, after the effective date of this section, a government tem- clauses, and parts shall remain in full force and effect. If any porarily suspends or voluntarily lowers a tax,fee, or charge;the provision of this Amendment is found to violate or infringe upon a tax,fee or charge may be increased later,without a public vote,to right of any person or group under the U.S. Constitution, the the rate or amount it would have been under this section had the provision shall remain in full force and effect for all other persons suspension or reduction not occurred. or groups for which no infringement had been found. (7)(a)Subject to Section 1 a of Article IX,the Legislative Assembly and Governor may override this section and call for a special elec- tion date other than the date(s)set forth in subsection (1)of this section,or may enact by law particular taxes,or authorize partic- ular local taxes, fees, or charges without a vote of the People if such taxes are approved by a three-fourths vote in each house and signed into law by the Governor. Any tax authorized or enacted by such action shall be designated for a specific purpose and shall be in effect no longer than twelve months.Any tax,fee, or charge imposed under this subsection shall be subject to referendum. (b)Subject to Section 1 a of Article IX of this Constitution,if a local Emergency is declared by the Governor,the affected city,county, or local taxing district may override this section for a period not exceeding twelve months, if: (i) the override is approved by not less than a three-fourths vote of the members of the local gov- erning body,and(ii)the continuation of the tax for any remainder of the twelve months is approved by voters voting in an election held within ninety (90) days of the date the emergency is declared, and otherwise adopted in conformance with this section. (8)The public shall be given reasonable opportunity to comment on the proposed ballot title for any measure to create a new tax, fee,or charge or increase an existing tax,fee,or charge.The bal- lot title may be challenged in court, and shall be rejected if it is biased, inaccurate, not easily understood, or does not comply with paragraph(b)of subsection(1)of this section. (9)A government that levies taxes,fees,or charges in violation of this Section 32a shall refund the amount of any tax,fee,or charge collected in violation of this section, plus interest,to taxpayers in the twelve months following the determination of violation.Interest paid shall be computed as the cost of living change plus six per- cent per year, compounded for the period from collection of the tax,fee,or charge to payment of the refunds.If the cost of issuing the refund is more than twenty percent(20%)of the amount of the refund,a credit may be issued to the appropriate taxpayers. (10) Because governments have at times been creative at redefining terms,or otherwise creating new funding mechanisms in order to circumvent limitations placed upon them by the people, the legislature, in implementing this section, and the courts in interpreting it,.shall apply the strictest scrutiny to any new or renamed government funding mechanism; and shall require in every reasonable circumstance voter approval as required in this section for new or increased taxes, fees, or charges, regardless of the creativity used by the government in designing or naming the funding mechanism.Under this section,certificates of partici- pation and all such funding mechanisms shall be subject to the same limitations and requirements as a bond measure. (11)Any Oregon taxpayer affected by a new or increased tax,fee, or charge or bond issue subject to this Section 32a has standing 97 CONTINUED Official 2600 General 100ididrt Voters' Patfiphi*-�-StAtewide Measures Measure No. 93 EXPLANATORY STATEMENT Measure 93 would amend the Oregon Constitution to require approval by no less than the percentage of voters approving this measure for new or increased taxes,fees or charges proposed by state and local governments, unless exempted. For example, if this measure passes by sixty percent, it will require sixty percent approval of future taxes, fees and charges. It also requires a refund of certain past collections. Oregon law generally requires voter approval for property taxes, and allows voters to refer other taxes. Fees and charges generally are not subject to voter approval. Voter approval.of new and increased taxes, fees and charges can be given only at the biennial general election or at an annual election if the legislature permits approval of statewide initiatives at that election. However, simple majority approval is required to renew certain police, fire, and 911 levies and for state gas tax increases.All ballots,including those that propose fee and charge increases, must state"A'Yes'vote on this measure is a vote to increase taxes.' Affected charges range widely from photocopy fees,to parking fees,to sewer and water charges.However,the measure exempts a variety of charges, including Peoples'utility and port districts; mass transit; college and university; charges for anything pro- vided by government which is available from the private sector if the governmental charge does not exceed the average private sector charge in that market;and inflationary increases in certain charges which were in effect on December 6, 1998 or which are approved by voters as the measure requires. Governments must refund voter approved levies and other fees lawfully imposed or increased more than three percent after December 6, 1998 unless they are exempt or approved by a sim- ple majority of voters at the next election. The measure does not require voter approval for: increases which result from changes in income, federal tax laws, property values or other changes in individual taxpayer circumstances; actions which alter the distribution of revenues among govern- ments; and voluntary payments to governments which are not imposed, assessed or levied, such as rent for government prop- erty or loan payments. Certificates of participation and similar financing techniques which may be developed in the future are subject to the same lim- itations and requirements as a bond measure;this does not add new requirements for bonds. This measure permits the state to impose temporary charges for not more than one year without voter approval.State tempo- rary charges must be:for a specific purpose,approved by a three- fourths vote of each house of the Legislative Assembly, and signed by the Governor. The measure permits local government emergency taxes for not more than one year if the Governor declares a local emer- gency, the local governing body approves the tax by a three- fourths vote, and the tax is approved by voters as the measure requires within 90 days after the declaration of emergency. This measure prescribes procedures for tax elections, ballot title review, the refund of unlawfully collected taxes and court challenges. Committee Members: Appointed by: Patti Milne Chief Petitioners Bill Sizemore Chief Petitioners Mayor Helen Berg Secretary of State Harvey Rogers Secretary of State Fred Miller Members of the Committee (This committee was appointed to provide an impartial explanation of the ballot measure pursuant to ORS 251.215.) 98 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet=Statewide Measures Measure No. 93 Arguments ARGUMENT IN FAVOR ARGUMENT IN FAVOR Measure 93 prohibits new or increased taxes and fees without In 1992, voters in Colorado passed a ballot measure that, like voter approval. Measure 93 would send the following clear and Measure 93, required voter approval of new or increased taxes. simple message to elected officials across the state: It's our The measure is referred to in Colorado as the"Tabor"measure. money-.If you want more of it from now on you'll have to as The political and cultural elite in Colorado were afflicted with the us first. same kind of hand wringing and high anxiety that is currently Opponents of Measure 93 have said that requiring voter approval afflicting the political class in Oregon over Measure 93. of new taxes and fees robs elected officials of their power to public perspective over Colorado's"Tabor"measure has changed govern.They say we should let the people we elect decide how dramatically since 1992. much money it takes to run government. The problem is, we've been doing that now for decades. The Following are excerpts from a Nov. 7, 1999 editorial in i P g Denver Rog&Mountain News.These comments are written to result has been an unbelievable increase in the rate of growth of voters in the state of Washington,who were also facing a No New government spending.And it's not just been taxes that have gone Taxes Without Voter Approval Measure. up.Much of the growth has been in the imposition of new fees or huge increases in existing fees.There are literally thousands of "Maybe it's time that opponents looked on the bright side.If government fees in Oregon. Fees have become government's they will give their new tax initiative a chance,they might find secret weapon. Politicians know we won't let them increase a it actually strengthens the political process, rather than major tax. So they just get us $10, $25, or$100 at a time with destroys it.That's clearly what has happened in Colorado more fees than you can count. since the passage of Tabor. Here,shifting responsibility for taxes from politicians to the public hasn't resulted in auto- Requiring voter approval of new or increased taxes and fees will require governments to live within their budgets just like our matic rejection of every spending plan. families have to live within ours. However, if they find they need But while Tabor hasn't straitjacketed government, it has additional money,rather than just take it from us,they will have to accomplished a number of good things. It has heightened persuade a majority of us that they need it. interest in elections and government policy; it has given Measure 93 is an idea whose time has come.A number of other public officials mandates they otherwise would have lacked; states have passed similar laws, and the results in those states it has shrunk voters'sense of helplessness over the use of have been surprisingly good. Voters have not said "No" to their hard-earned taxes; and last, but hardly least, it has reasonable requests for money. By the same token, politicians strengthened the fiscal responsibility of state and local have stopped looking to tax increases as the first way to solve government:' every problem. These are the words of a newspaper that once opposed requiring Pass Measure 93 and you the voter will decide how much of your voter approval of new taxes.Their advice to Washington voters is money government takes from you. good advice to voters and policy makers here in Oregon. The sky won't fall and the world won't end if we give voters the (This information furnished by Becky Miller,Oregon Taxpayers United.) right to accept or reject new taxes and fees. It will be good for Oregon, just like it has been good for Colorado and the other states that have adopted similar policies. (This information furnished by Becky Miller,Oregon Taxpayers United.) (This space purchased for$500 In accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 In accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 99 CONTINUED vmctatZavwUenerafBectionVoters'Part'rphfet-Statewide'#Aeasures Measure No. 93 Arguments ARGUMENT IN FAVOR ARGUMENT IN FAVOR The passage of Measure 93 will require ballot titles for measures Your Money,Your Choice! regarding tax or fee increases to begin with the words:a"YES" vote on this measure is a vote to increase taxes:' Vote"YES"on 93 Imagine A "YES" vote on 93 would merely allow hard working Oregonians a chance to vote on most new tax and fee increases. Put a stop to unclear ballot titles! Vote YES on 93. Imagine that A simple and democratic idea,the time for which has come. every time you read a ballot title you will know what a"YES"vote really meant. Measure 93 simply starts with the premise that "your money belongs to you:'What a-concept! Put a stop to sneaky back door political tactics!Vote YES on 93. Imagine if you were never again confused about what voting Vote "YES" on 93 and stop local taxing districts from using "YES"or"NO"would do. exploding water and sewer fees to pay for programs that politi- Put the people back in charge!Vote YES on 93.Imagine if it were cians know YOU would NEVER approve of. required by law that a ballot title and official voters pamphlet Atlas Oregon believes that your Money represents your Life.To explanatory statement had to actually EXPLAIN, in plain english, take more of your money is to take more of your Life.To take what a measure would do. more of your Life is to put a limit on your choices in Life. Imagine Measure 93 A"YES"vote on 93 will put Choice back into taxing decisions. Oregonians have for years been concerned about the actual YOUR CHOICE!Not the choice of some powerful lobbyist. results of their votes.Many times the people are faced with pur- Vote"YES"on 93,it is your money, it should be your choice! posely confusing language filled with double negatives.However Vote"YES"on 93 and the debate will be forever changed. the citizens now have some protection in the form of Measure 93. Currently the"taxing class"believes that they deserve a certain Just think...it was up to the people,not the politicians,to suggest portion of your money.However bypassing Measure 93,YOU will this common sense approach to campaign laws. retain the right to CHOOSE how much money you will send away The people of Oregon have placed Measure 93 on the ballot.A to the various levels of government. yes vote on 93 will tell the politicians that the people want to have Atlas Oregon believes you have the right to"own yourself". UNDERSTANDABLE ballot titles. Ted Piccolo, Director"Atlas Oregon.' Ted Piccolo,atlasoregon @aol.com (503)289-6200 (503)289-6200 atiasoregon@aol.com (This information furnished by Ted Piccolo,Taxpayer Protection PAC.) (This information furnished by Ted Piccolo,Atlas Oregon.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 100 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 93 Arguments ARGUMENT IN FAVOR ARGUMENT IN FAVOR LET THEM SAY"PLEASE" It's Your Money Long ago,some colonials thought the consent of the governed What is the one secret that Government officials hope you will not was a better idea than the divine right of kings.Against all odds, discover before you vote this November? they rebelled against taxation without representation. Much to "The taxes you pay are really your money!" their surprise,their"radical"idea became a founding principle of American government. Believe it or not, this comes as a surprise to many people. Since then,our government has grown far beyond the one the Whatever the Government takes from your paycheck was once Founders overthrew.Taxes have risen far higher than what the actually yours.You earned it when somebody else decided that King ever took.Fewer and fewer people feel that their own inter- the work of your mind and body were valuable enough to pay you ests are represented in the halls of power. for.Politicians know that once you realize this,you will understand why Measure 93 is both fair and necessary. Measure 93 offers Oregonians a chance to halt that cancerous Before the Government takes your money,don't you think It ought growth. When those who benefit from higher taxes claim that to ask you for permission? making them ask before reaching into your pocket is a dangerous, radical idea, don't believe it. Read this clearly written, two-page We think so too! amendment and judge for yourself. The Government takes your money for countless programs you People who take your money without your permission are may or may not agree with.The decisions made in smoky back- thieves, no matter what gang they belong to. Measure 93 will rooms by politicians and special interest groups eventually come make it harder for government to steal what is yours. out of someone's pocket.Measure 93 gives the people a chance Measure 93 will require honest ballot titles for new tax to say: measures.They will have to tell you up front when a"Yes"vote will "You will not raise our taxeswithout our approval!" raise your taxes.They will have to be unbiased, accurate, and „You will not assess new fees and surcharges without easily understood. convincing us that it is necessary!" Measure 93 will leash government's"creativity"at calling new taxes something else,by subjecting any new or renamed funding "Politicians do not have the final authority to tax Oregonians, mechanism to strict scrutiny.It makes reasonable exemptions for that authority belongs to the citizens of Oregon:' fire, police and some other services. It includes a twelve-month A new Legislature meets every two years and the result is always escape clause for genuine emergencies. higher taxes and fees. It is time for the people who shoulder the The consent of the governed is still the better idea.If you think tax burden in Oregon to have a direct voice in how it is done. government should ASK YOU before taking your money, vote At a minimum,voters deserve the chance to veto excessive "Yes"for Measure 93. tax increases. (This information furnished by Bruce Alexander Knight,Libertarian for US Please vote YES on ballot measure 93. It is an important step House of Representatives,District 3.) toward building an accountable government. Remember,it's your money! Furnished by the Libertarian Party of Oregon For more information call 1-800 829-1992 or visit our web site at www.lporegon.org The Libertarian Party of Oregon is the third largest political party in the state.Libertarians are fiscally conservative and socially tol- erant,we believe that government should be limited to protecting our freedoms while ensuring personal accountability. (This information furnished by Eric Winters,Libertarian Party of Oregon.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- [accuracy printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the t by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. or truth of any statement made in the argument. 101 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 93 Arguments ARGUMENT IN FAVOR ARGUMENT IN FAVOR LOOK WHO OPPOSES MEASURE 93 WHAT A DISCONNECT! Measure 93 stops the government from increasing taxes and fees Why should governments be allowed to increase taxes and fees whenever they want to; they have to get the voters'permission any time they want? Public officials may know how much money first. Who could disagree with that? After all, it's the people's government needs, Iaut how could they ever know how much my money.They should have a say in how much of it government family needs? takes from them. Some tax increases mean some kids won't get new shoes.Some But look who opposes Measure 93.It reads like the"Who's Who kids won't go to college.Some elderly people won't be able keep of Tax and Spenders:'The public employee unions. Big govern- their house warm in the winter. Are we supposed to just let ment groups.Politicians. politicians take what they need and then adjust our family But what are they afraid of?measure 93 doesn't stop tax and fee budgets accordingly?Do we trust politicians that much? increases. It simply requires governments to get voter approval Remember the recent vote on the legislature's gas tax increase. first. Governor Kitzhaber lobbied for a gas tax increase.A majority of That's really what leadership is all about.True leaders don't force our state legislators voted for it, too. But after AAA and Oregon the people to do something.They persuade the people to willingly Taxpayers United collected the signatures to let voters decide the follow them. issue, the gas tax increase received less than 15 percent of the vote! The only reason for political leaders to fear Measure 93 is if they What a disconnects The governor and the legislature voted want to increase taxes and fees that the people don't want for it big time and the voters turned it down big time The increased,or they want to do things with taxpayer dollars that the taxpayers do not support. governor and the legislature were obviously completely out of touch with the people. Other states that have adopted lays like Measure 93 have seen Measure 93 gives voters the right to vote on most new or good results. increased taxes and fees.New taxes and fees would have to be Here's what they've found: approved by at least the same majority approving Measure 95. Voters don't always say "No:' They support the things they So,if Measure 95 gets 60 percent of the vote,new taxes and fees believe in. will require at least 60 percent voter approval. Voters get more involved in government decisions. It's time we stopped giving politicians a blank check.It's time we There's less voter apathy. reminded them that it's our money they're spending. Governments become more fiscally responsive and account- able when they know they can't have more money just because g they want it. If you want more of our money,you'll have to persuade us Voter turn-out in elections increases. first that you truly need it. If you make your case,we'll approve additional funding.If you don't,we won't. Only elitist politicians would see these as bad things–those who would use the power of government to coerce its citizens. Requiring voter approval of tax increases is working well in other states.it'll work in Oregon. Public officials who want to lead by persuasion and by the build MEASURE 93 ing of consensus, rather than by force and coercion should IT'S GOOD FOR GOVERNMENT embrace Measure 93. It simply lets government have as much AND GOOD FOR TAXPAYERS money as we the people willingly give them.No more and no less. It requires our elected officials to lead us, not dictate to us.To (This information furnished by Bill Sizemore,Oregon Taxpayers United.) persuade us, not force us. And that's what living in a free society is all about. (This information furnished by Becky Miller,Oregon Taxpayers United.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 102 CONTINUED Official,2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet-Statewidb'Measures Measure No. 93 Arguments ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION SPECIAL DISTRICTS ASSOCIATION URGES YOU TO The Oregon Library Association says VOTE NO PROTECT YOUR LOCAL LIBRARY. ON MEASURE 93! Vote NO on Measure 93. WHAT TYPES OF SPECIAL DISTRICTS CAN BE EFFECTED Oregonians love their libraries! by this measure? Fire districts, ambulance districts, 9-1-1 emergency communi- In the last two years, Oregon voters have shown their love of cation districts, health & hospital districts, parks & recreation libraries by passing measures to support these local libraries... districts, library districts, water districts, sewer districts, port Sweet Home Public Library districts, transportation districts, and even cemetery mainte- Tillamook County Library nance districts! WHAT TYPES OF FEES MIGHT YOU BE ASKED TO VOTE ON Deschutes County Library if this measure passes? Fern Ridge Library • Rodeo Stall&Corral Rental Fees Jefferson County Library • Library Card Replacement Fees • Overdue Book Fines Eugene Public Library • Interlibrary Loan Fees Stayton Public Library • Opening and Closing of Gravesite Fees • Burial Plot Purchase Fees Josephine County Library • Ditch Maintenance Fees Klamath County Library • X-Ray Fees • Firewood Gathering Permit Fees Scappoose Public Library • Swimming Pool Filling Fees If Measure 93 passes,these local library measures could be • Picnic Kit Use Fees invalidated--thrown out the window! WHO PAYS the cost of a special district election? Library supporters might have to start all over again,going back Special districts do with TAXPAYER OR RATEPAYER MONEY! for another public vote on measures that have already passed. HOW MUCH could these elections cost you? Even then, libraries could still lose. Under Measure 93, voters According Measure 93's Fiscal Impact Statement ... "Election would have to pass their local library funding measures by at least the same margin as Measure 93 gets in November. Costs to local governments for the November 2002 General Election are estimated to be$26.4 million.Costs for each future Any future library funding measure, anywhere in Oregon, would general election are estimated to be$13.2 million,adjusted for have to meet that same arbitrary requirement. inflation.' Oregon's libraries offer a lifetime of learning to everyone, long DON'T LET YOUR TAX DOLLARS BE SPENT ON after school is done.But libraries work only when their doors are EXPENSIVE ELECTIONS open.Help keep them that way., VOTE NO ON MEASURE 931 Vote NO on Measure 93. (This information furnished by Greg Baker, Executive Director, Special (This information furnished by Terry Rohe, President, Oregon Library Districts Association of Oregon.) Association.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argumen t. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 103 CONTINUED Official2000 General Election Voters'Pamiphlet=Statewide Measures Measure No. 93 Arguments ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION The League of Women Voters of Oregon Urges a COMING TO YOUR BALLOT(IF MEASURE 93 PASSES) No Vote on Measure 93 Measure 93 will force Oregonians to vote on hundreds of The League of Women Voters of Oregon is a grassroots,nonpar- state and local fee increases of 3%or more. tisan organization which encourages the informed and active Here's just a small sampling of state fees that could be on participation of citizens in government. Since 1920, the League your general election ballot: has worked to inform voters, improve our political process and strengthen our Democracy. Receive:Cable or ITFS Access Membership Amends the Oregon Constitution to Network II Facility use fees Eliminate"Majority Rule Network II Programming:Educational member satellite discount One person, one vote and majority rule are basic values of Ed-Net Service Fees American democracy.By requiring a"supermajority,"Measure 93 Compass Services-Plus 120 violates those principles by ensuring that a minority of voters Satellite Downlink System Installation-3.7 meter steerable would be able to prevent the wishes of the majority in a wide dual-band downlink variety of elections.That also makes the vote of the majority less valuable. Gateway Videoconferencing Site Scheduling Service:Out-Of-State non-Ed-Net sites Disrupting Our Elections System Field Burn Regulation Fee Measure 93 could force Oregon voters to vote on a dizzying array Animal Disposal License of fees, charges and taxes.The ballots of all Oregonians could Water Quality Mgmt.Fee become complicated and difficult to navigate, with a potential of Stack Burning Fee hundreds of measures each General Election. Many of these would be public votes on fees that most Oregonians do not pay. Field Burning Fee Unfair Commercial Feeds Regulatory Fee Measure 93 would give people"veto"power over fees they do not Weather Modification pay, and that other Oregonians count on. Portland voters would Brand Inspection Fees vote on things like grazing fees,while rural Oregonians would get Miscellaneous One Day Horse Sale to vote on things that are only important to urban Oregon. It Weights&Measures Development License Type B Scale makes no sense,and is unfair. 401-1,160 lb.capacity Wastes Millions of Taxpayers'Dollars Nursery Certification Fee Measure 93 would cost Oregon taxpayers$35 million in the next Pesticide Applicator License general election alone. Animal Disposal License Commercial Feeds Regulatory Fee Please join the Oregon League of Women Voters in Voting NO on 93 Livestock Auction Market License Exotic Animal Permit (This information furnished by Paula Krane,President,League of Women Veterinary Prod.Registration Voters of Oregon.) Garbage Feeder License Weights&Measures Special Test Collect Nursery License Nursery Dealers, Florists&Landscapers Grain Warehouse License Cardlock-Facility License LPG Installation/Company Polygraph Licensing Race Meet License Fee Notary Public Filing Fee Remember,this is just a fraction of the fees Measure 93 could bring to the Statewide ballot! www.ouroregon.org (This information furnished by Shannon Floyd, The Committee for Our Oregon.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. I accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 104 CONTINUED Official.2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet-Statewide Measures Measure No. 93 Arguments ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION COMING TO YOUR BALLOT(IF MEASURE 93 PASSES) COMING TO YOUR BALLOT(IF MEASURE 93 PASSES) Continued... Continued... Bean, Pea&Hay Inspection Fee-Dried beans,dried peas, Falconry License split peas,lentils,and similar commodities Oil and Gas Fees Ginseng Dealers Metal Mines Export Hay Certification Clandestine Drug Lab License Renewal-Biennial Hops Inspection Residential Care Facilities Apiary Registration Fees Special Nuclear Material Unsealed(Facility) Seed Sampling Fees Use of Xenon Gas(Facility) Retail Product Peddler License High Doserate Brachytherapy(Source) Wholesale Produce Dealer License Radiopharmaceutical Therapy(Facility) Nursery Research.Assessment Radioactive Materials Licenses-Annual Retail Food Establishment License Instrument Calibration Christmas Tree License Acres of Trees Basic Charge Well Logging(Source) Imported Timber Inspection Fee Death Certificates Virus Fruit Tree Cert Fee Divorce Certificates Pest&Disease Reimbursement/Certificate Tanning Device Registration-Annual Fluid Milk Distribution License EMT Reciprocity Certification-Biennial(Basic&Paramedic] Bakery License Bed&Breakfast Annual License Poultry/Rabbit Slaughter License. Ambulance Vehicle License-Annual Shellfish Grower License Temporary Restaurant License Food Storage Warehouse License Total Body Piercing Custom Meat Processing License Dental Hygienist License-New or Renewal Slaughterhouse License Funeral Establishment License Fee-Biennial Nonalcoholic Beverage License Veterinarian Initial&Renewal License Fee Dairy Operators License Circuit Court Fee Schedule Animal Food Processor Professional Fundraiser Registration Fee Retail Manufactured Frozen Dessert Charitable Trust and Corporation Reporting Fee Egg Fee Bingo and Raffle License and Reporting Fee Egg Breaker Permit Geothermal Permit Application Reciprocity Application Fee Grazing Application Fee Architect Registration Fee Lottery Telephone Line Installation (Digital) Architect Renewal Fee Charter Boat Licensing Fee Heirloom Birth Certificate Deschutes Boaters Permit Electrical Master Permit Inspection Fee Extra Vehicle Parking Permit Restricted Energy Electrical License Endorsement Exam Fee Group Picnic Limited Journeyman Railroad Electrician License Non-traditional activity–Champoeg Amphitheatre,without Electrical Special Restricted Energy License admission fee, up to 1,000 people Limited Journeyman Elevator Service Electrician License Petroleum Load Limited Journeyman Manufacturing Plant Electrician License Wholesale Fireworks Remember,this is just a fraction of the fees Measure 93 Record of Criminal History could bring to the Statewide ballot! Fingerprint Card www.ouroreegon.org Remember,this is just a fraction of the fees Measure 93 could bring to the Statewide ballot! (This information furnished by Shannon Floyd, The Committee for Our Oregon.) www.ouroregon.org (This information furnished by Shannon Floyd, The Committee for Our Oregon.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 105 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 93 Arguments ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION COMING TO YOUR BALLOT(IF MEASURE 93 PASSES) A Message from Governor John Kitzhaber,M.D. Continued... In few places in our nation is the exercise of democracy as vigor- RV/Org Park Re-inspection Fee ous as in Oregon.We are proud of our tradition of open debate, Electrical Limited Sign Contractor License and of making our voice heard on the ballot. Water Treatment Installers License Exam Fee Some issues are more fundamental than the question of the day. Boilers and Pressure Vessels Inspector There are times that the basic foundations of the democratic Certification Renewal Fee process are at stake.And that is the case with Measure 93. Amusement Rides Inspection Measure 93 claims to be about taxes and fees. In fact, it would Elevator Contractor's License change our basic political system in ways that should concern Radioactive Waste Transport Fee every Oregonian. Emergency Response Planning It would overturn the basic principle of majority rule.Measure 93 Life Settlement Brokers Application would put in our constitution permanent veto power for a minority Foreign Bank License Fee of voters, who would be able to block the wishes of the majority Merger Approval Application Fee on what investments we should make as a state,or as community. Investment Adviser License It would turn our general election ballot into an obstacle course, Tuition Protection Fund Initial Capitalization (one-time) crowded with hundreds of fees and costing millions in extra elections costs. LEDS Search Fees Public Housing Agencies And Measure 93 would have voters making decisions on fees that are not only paid willingly by those they affect, but are vital to a Solid Waste Permit Fee profession or industry. Is it fair for all the state's voters to be Oil Spill Prevention-Facility Fee(annual) making decisions on a fee they do not pay and may know very Hazardous Waste Generator Fees little about–especially when that vote could have a devastating Wastewater Discharge Fee effect on someone else's livelihood? Air Contaminant Fee-Application Fee Over the course of our history,tremendous sacrifices have been Asbestos Certification Fee-Notification Fee made to establish and protect our democracy. I hope you will agree with me that it is too precious to be changed in such a Dry Cleaner Environmental Response thoughtless way. Industrial Air Emission Fee-Emission Fee Hazardous Substance Remedial Action Fund Please join me in voting no on Measure 8 On-Site Subsurface Fees John Kitzhaber,M.D. Heating Oil Tank Cleanup Assistance (This information furnished by John A.Kitzhaber,M.D.) Sewage Works Operator Certification Fee-Reciprocity Fee Trailer Park Rental Vessel Permit Sauvie Is.Parking Permit Resident angling license Resident Commercial Boat license Food Fish Canner license Resident Wildlife Propagation,Annual Hunter Education ATV Class II Permit DMV Trip Permits Aircraft Registration Approach Road Permit fee Remember,this is just a fraction of the fees Measure 93 could bring to the Statewide ballot! www.ouroregon.org (This information furnished by Shannon Floyd, The Committee for Our Oregon.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 106 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 93 Arguments ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION Organizations In Every Part of Oregon, A MESSAGE FROM THE OREGON PTA From Every Walk of Life, MEASURE 93 WILL BLOCK YOUR COMMUNITY'S Have Joined Together to Say: EFFORTS TO IMPROVE YOUR LOCAL SCHOOLS! VOTE NO ON MEASURE 93 If you care about improving your local schools, beware of This is a small sample of those who have joined in Measure 93. opposition to Measure 93: Measure 93 would make it difficult, if not nearly impossible for League of Women Voters of Oregon communities to pass local levies or bonds to repair schools,ease Oregon Council,American Electronics Association overcrowding, restore programs or buy new books. It will require Oregon Advocacy Coalition of Seniors and People with Disabilities a supermajority to pass any local levy or fee, no matter what it is for. Oregonians for Public Safety Bend Chamber of Commerce That means a minority of voters will have permanent veto power over improving your local schools.And-we don't even know what Reverend William R.Ellis,Jr. that supermajority would be! The measure says that it will be Rabbi Daniel Isaak whatever percentage votes yes on Measure 93.If 70%votes yes Eugene Police Employees'Association on Measure 93,then 30%of voters will be able to block any local University of Oregon Alumni Association effort to help schools (or any other community need, for that Oregon State Police Officers'Association matter). Christian Church(Disciples of Christ) MEASURE 93 COULD ALSO CANCEL SCHOOL Oregon Council of Police Associations IMPROVEMENTS VOTERS HAVE ALREADY APPROVED! Oregon State Council of Senior Citizens Measure 93 is retroactive for two years.That means if you worked Oregon School Boards Association hard to pass a local levy to help lower class sizes buy new books or restore programs like art and music your schools are in Jewish Federation of Portland Community Relations Committee finger of losing the money voted for and given to it. Oregon Building Officials Association Human Services Coalition of Oregon If that levy passed by less than the new(undefined)supermajor- ity,there would have to be another election.And if it doesn't pass Oregon Education Association again, the money would have to be refunded – even if it has Oregon State Fire Fighters Council already been spent on what the voters approved! Portland Gray Panthers Measure 93 makes no sense. And something this hurtful to Oregon Catholic Conference schools certainly doesn't belong in our constitution. Oregon Consumer League VOTE NO ON MEASURE 93! Tigard United Methodist Church Kathryn Firestone,President Coalition for School Funding Now! Lisa Laursen Thirkill,Vice President for Legislation Oregon AFL-CIO The Oregon PTA Oregon AFSCME Council 75 Confederation of Oregon School Administrators (This information furnished by Kathryn Firestone, President, Lisa Laursen 9 Thirkill,VP Legislation;Oregon Congress of Parents and Teachers.) Roseburg Police Employees Association American Jewish Committee,Oregon Chapter OPEU,SEIU Local 503 Oregon Police Chiefs for Safer Communities Tigard Police Officers Association Too Little Benefit.Too Great a Cost. Vote NO on Measure 93 www.ouroregon.org (This information furnished by Shannon Floyd, The Committee for Our Oregon.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 107 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 93 Arguments ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION Support your local sheriff... MEASURE 93 WILL CANCEL SCHOOL firefighter,police chief,police officer,corrections officer, AND LIBRARY LEVIES and all the dedicated people who keep VOTERS HAVE ALREADY APPROVED! your community safe: Few things bother voters more than having their wishes VOTE NO ON 93! ignored,and their votes overturned. Measure 93 says it's about taxes and fees.But there is more to it But that is just what Measure 93 would do! than meets the eye. Measure 93 could make it difficult or We are just a few of the thousands of Oregonians who worked nearly impossible to make critical public safety investments for every community in Oregon. very hard to pass local levies for our communities'schools and libraries. For many of us, these measures were the only way to Because it will require a"supermajority"for nearly any tax or fee avoid serious cuts in the classroom,or to keep our libraries'doors in Oregon,Measure 93 would put a huge roadblock in the way of open. keeping our communities safe. It would mean that a majority of Not only did we pass these levies, but we did so under the voters would be unable to approve public safety levies and bonds for things such as: "double majority"requirement.In communities across Oregon,the voters spoke. • Increased patrols • Rural and urban police protection But if Measure 93 passes, if could cancel these elections. • Adequate jail space to keep criminals out of our neighborhoods That's like changing the rules after the game has been played. • Fire protection Measure 93 could even force our hard-pressed schools to refund the money, even if it has already been spent on what voters said Levies and bonds are a good way for voters to make sure that they wanted it spent on. their money is being spent directly on their priorities.Why would we make it more difficult for ourselves to decide as a community This makes no sense. It's not fair.And we certainly shouldn't put what we want to invest in? it in our Constitution. Measure 93 makes no sense for the safety of our communities. PLEASE VOTE NO ON MEASURE 93 That is why Oregon law enforcement says (This information furnished by Chuck Keil;Katharine S.Danner,Ashland PLEASE,VOTE NO ON 931 Schools Foundation.) Sheriffs of Oregon Oregon Police Chiefs for Safer Communities Oregon Council of Police Associations Oregon State Police Officers Association Association of Corrections Employees Oregon State Fire Fighters Council (This information furnished by Stan Robson, Sheriffs of Oregon;Steven Winegar, Oregon Police Chiefs for Safer Communities; Ronald M. Anderson,Vice President,Oregon State Police Officers'Association;Gary Harkins, Association of Corrections Employees; Martin Larner, Oregon Council of Police Associations;Bob Livingsten,Oregon State Fire Fighters Council.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 108 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 93 Arguments ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION Oregon Mayors'Association Urges Oregonians: MEASURE 93 IS NOT THE ONLY ONE TO WORRY ABOUT! VOTE NO ON MEASURE 93 Measures 91,93&8 are bad ideas for Oregon in many different Voting on almost everything that affects your pocketbook... ways.But there are some things they have in common: sounds good, right? But Measure 93 is a constitutional amend- . They all offer little or no benefit to middle class Oregon ment that is vague,poorly thought out and has many unintended consequences.That's why the Oregon Mayors'Association urges taxpayers. you to vote"NO"on Ballot Measure 93. • They all hurt basic values and services that all Oregonians Here are some of the details that trouble us: count on and care about. It's unfair.Almost every tax,fee or charge increased or imposed - They are all vague or misleadingly worded,and filled with unin- since December 6, 1998 is subject to repeal and a public vote.No tended consequences. matter how large or how small,or the reason for the increase,Q • They all amend the constitution. if it has already been approved by voters;it's all the same. • They don't add up,and they certainly won't work. If the tax, fee or charge isn't approved by voters, it must be refunded. If there isn't enough money in, say, the sewer fund to Measures 91,93&8: refund a sewer charge, then the money must come from some- Far Too Little Benefit.Far Too Great a Cost. where else.That means other public services will be hurt. www.ouroregon.org It's expensive. Measure 93 will actually cost a lot of tax dollars. (This information furnished by Shannon Floyd, The Committee for Our Elections are expensive;the official estimate is that Measure 93 Oregon.) will cost local taxpayers $26.4 million in the November 2002 election alone.And this measure doesn't differentiate between a vote on a 10-cent library fee and a$10 million water project.It will cost money to track down the people to whom money must be refunded.And the lawsuits to figure out what the language in this measure really means is going to cost us--the taxpayers--a lot. It's unnecessary. Oregon's Constitution already says that taxes have to be approved by the people or the Legislature.We already vote on property taxes.In almost every city,we have a referendum if people don't like what the city council does.And, you can vote us out of office.The voters already have the power;this measure is unnecessary. Measure 93 hurts Oregon's cities and taxpayers. Please vote"NO"on Measure 93. (This information furnished by Mayor Mary Nicholson, Milton-Freewater, President,Oregon Mayors'Association.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 109 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet-Statewide Measures Measure No. 93 Arguments ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION FORMER JUDGES OPPOSE PLACING OREGON RECREATION&PARK ASSOCIATION MEASURE 93 IN THE CONSTITUTION OREGON PARKS ASSOCIATION It undermines our democracy OPPOSE MEASURE 93 Fellow citizens: The Oregon Recreation & Park Association and Oregon Parks Association, organizations representing over 500 professional As former judges,we have a deep respect for the State's funda- members that provide park and recreation services throughout mental governing document—the Oregon Constitution. the state,oppose Measure 93. That is why we hope you will join us in voting NO on Measure Measure 93 is another attempt to throw a roadblock in front of 93. efforts to provide services that Oregonians have time and again supported in their communities. This Constitutional Amend- The Constitution establishes our basic system of government and ment prohibits raising certain fees unless public agencies hold an protects our fundamental rights.Unlike a simple statute,it cannot expensive election first.To ask voters to approve hundreds of fee be changed by the Legislature. Only a vote of the people can increases for everything from copying costs to pool usage fees is change the Constitution. neither reasonable nor prudent when taxpayers are requiring Measure 93 not only changes our Constitution,but it threat- more efficient use of tax dollars.Measure 93 will increase the cost ens to disrupt our election system and runs counter to basic of providing essential services for Oregonians who can least American principles,such as majority rule. afford to pay. Because it requires"supermajority"approval for taxes and fees, Measure 93 will complicate the ability of local Park and Measure 93 means that a minority of voters will have veto power Recreation agencies to provide basic services for youth-at-risk, over the majority.And Measure 93 would place hundreds of small senior citizens and adult sports. It could eliminate arts and sum- fees on the state and local level.It will make Election Day expen- mer day camps for kids; programs for the physical or mentally sive and confusing for voters.We certainly shouldn't be amending challenged;after school activities;and other essential recreation our Constitution to do that. services that Oregonians depend upon. But even if we agreed with Measure 93,we would vehemently Examples of recreation program fees that you may soon be oppose placing it in the Constitution.It has no place there. voting on: We hope you will join us in voting"No on Measure 93:' • Youth soccer, baseball and basketball • Athletic field,park and facility rentals (This information furnished by The Honorable Betty Roberts, The • Swimming pool admissions Honorable Jacob Tanzer.) • Quilting,dog obedience,dance classes • Children's summer camps Measure 93 will cost Oregon communities millions of dollars in increased election costs. It will give a minority of voters the ability to block the majority will when it comes to repairing/improv- ing park facilities. It will be retroactive; potentially forcing communities to make financially ruinous "refunds"even if the money has been spent on what voters told their local governments to spend it on! Again, we are faced with a vague, ambiguous measure that doesn't solve any problems,creates more bureaucracy,increases costs and distracts government from providing important park and recreation services. Don't let them fool you. VOTE NO ON MEASURE 93. (This information furnished by Stephen A. Bosak, Oregon Recreation& Park Association,Oregon Parks Association.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 110 CONTINUED-0 Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 93 Arguments ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION As graduates of Portland State University, we urge a no vote on Forget the Terwilliger curves on Interstate 5 in Portland at rush Measure 93.This measure won't save taxpayers money and will hour.You want to see real gridlock?Vote for Ballot Measure 93. create a bureaucratic nightmare for higher education administra- True,it's a different kind of gridlock!Measure 93,if passed,would tors.This comes at a time when we need to reduce the cost of higher education so more people can obtain a college degree. create.true government gridlock. Moreover, it would waste thou sands of taxpayer dollars on elections. This measure will force voters to approve many college and Measure 93 requires a public vote any time a government agency university fees that you simply don't care about. It could force wants to raise a tax or fee by more than 3 percent. It is also votes and political campaigns focused on increases like university retroactive to December 1998,which creates other problems. parking fines, overdue library fines, computer usage fees for students, fees for university activities, and student organization What kind of fees are covered by Measure 93? Any and every fees.What a waste of time and money!Measure 93 doesn't make kind.If your local library needs to raise its overdue book fee from any sense to us and we hope it doesn't make any sense to you, 25 cents to 30 cents, you have to hold an election. If your park either. district needs to add a dime to the swimming pool fee to cover Please vote no on Measure 93.It won't save you any money and inflation,you will need to hold an election.Get the idea? it doesn't belong in the Oregon constitution. The retroactive part makes it worse. If your library added that extra 5 cents since December 1998,you have to go back and vote (This information furnished by Joan C.Johnson, Denise Duncan, Roger on it.And if it doesn't pass that vote, Measure 93 would require Capps, Marjorie Terdal, Chris Groener, Gary D.Salyers,Jennifer T.Eller; the library to make refunds! Can you imagine the administrative alumni of Portland State University.) and bookkeeping nightmare Measure 93 could cause by forcing libraries, swimming pools and the like to chase down customers from two years ago to refund them 10 or 15 cents?What a waste of time and money!Yet this is exactly what Measure 93 would do. Think about this:what significant taxes or fees are there that we don't already vote on?We already vote on property taxes,school bonds, police and fire levies and so on. Through the initiative system, we vote on income taxes almost every two years.The point is,if it is a significant tax or fee,we already vote on it. If you want gridlock,stick to the freeways!Vote NO!on Measure 93. Terry Woodward,Coos Bay AFSCME Local 2892(City of Coos Bay) (This information furnished by Don Loving,Oregon AFSCME Council 75.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 111 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 93 Arguments ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION Oregon State Treasurer Jim Hill Urges you to vote NO on Ballot Measure 93 Oregon voters are savvy and not easily fooled.Two years ago, they sent a message loud and clear that they don't want Bill Sizemore to lead Oregon's state government. Now you have another chance to send that message again and reject his form of government by voting no on Measure 93. Measure 93 calls once again for amending the Oregon Constitution to require voter approval of new or increased taxes, fees or charges proposed by state and local governments,and to require a refund of past collections. Governments must refund voter approved levies imposed after December 6, 1998, unless they are exempt or approved by voters at the 2002 General Election. Measure 93 is so poorly written and difficult to interpret that it is nearly impossible to determine the revenue impact. Conservative estimates put the revenue impact to the state, cities, counties and school districts at more than $200 million.Because this measure is so confusing,that number could easily increase. Oregonians have already spoken about this issue. Voters rejected a similar ballot measure in 1994, which required a vote on all new taxes and fees.It was bad for Oregon then, and it is bad for Oregon now. Don't be tricked by the power of special interest groups whose main objective is not to reduce government,but to do away with it entirely. Let's work together to find positive solutions to our problems and differences, and reject confusing, self-serving measures that do nothing but divide Oregon and move us in the wrong direction. Voters overwhelmingly rejected Bill Sizemore in his bid for governor in 1998 and at the same time rejected his form of government. It is time once again to send a message.Vote NO on Measure 93. Jim Hill Oregon State Treasurer (This information furnished by Jim Hill,Oregon State Treasurer.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 112 Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 94 Proposed by initiative petition to be voted on at the General sentenced under any repealed provision of law listed in Section 2 Election, November 7,2000, above, who would have otherwise been within the jurisdiction of the juvenile court and who did not receive a waiver hearing shall be subject to juvenile court jurisdiction,unless waived to a circuit, BALLOT TITLE justice or municipal court of competent jurisdiction pursuant to ORS 419C.340 et seq.,and unless the person requests not to be resentenced. (c) Any person charged or convicted of an offense, the sen tence for which is dictated by any repealed provision of law listed in Section 2 above,who has not been sentenced as of the effec- FtwbJ�IIS, � five date of this Act, shall be sentenced in accordance with the Oregon Revised Statutes and the rules of the Oregon Criminal Justice Commission that were in effect on March 31, 1995.Any MLTC3F "1r8 � k 8;":ftc Cspls•1rrtfiCtr .t11 such person who would have otherwise been within the jurisdic- tion of the juvenile court,but for a repealed provision of law listed ts#tltfGttt ." in Section 2 above, shall be subject to juvenile court jurisdiction, � ;� ;,� sly rette: rtgry unless waived to a circuit,justice or municipal court of competent ssf>lencferlerrt Y!E?18t1t end t�lher felalies� 1eitCaf `.exJst ; Jurisdiction pursuant to ORS 419C.340 et seq. ftl SECTION 4: Notwithstanding the repeal of 137.707,any person who was entitled to a hearing pursuant to 420A.200 et seq. UIICtI,���testft ?j' s'IUCuC 1Y'�retn "second look"shall retain the right to such a hearing. t� se�te�1 #r �r2�yiprt, �C�nt te1°n€ies, ctfnsts��r a� t�t�yy�"Sf q#���TII�11>: '�7l:ikFE�E�`rx irtlCll#�d&tl$1"pl�7k'rf"�,"fJ�. r$�U1i'E�pE;rr15 dor3�te�hrvt� flat # Y�€pgr + t -. iui as rvqu tfl s�f�es�" rtl�+�s;;��..ta��•"f7':when., flfrr�:�frai�l�ftst � }�>`os+aout�st as�d�J hd�ctre,i'epeais tfi�se atatiftes,tug; persott� �erttsrtt� u�lr;fe�tlirta # resetlt�nced u�t �� �ertet�gt�itis ��� "�►1�kt, �FtT tote ��1 t1 . ��t�. �s `i�4y eos wit tl 'es ��91f;;� rl!ttj3J'C� - 2�it�7f,Wit#�[{!tl!t1#�• �}���d�� 1't4f�:�t 2{� � f�n+rl�ep�yr�tt t;s�� ��5�sist�lforf i�vlll d� �t• 1�6 3p b;at it t ,Ord 24e, t1 oc� ty t�� ���yertty�s{ €rztirs ltf Irty ?y=yyya }Yth } r 9tgt.: �` ��t��>�a�yryaar��f��t�311Ip�sT���T( €t�y �1€c�l�rtr�deCa.wtI[yfyr�yTsjB . ..�$i,•.�l�ti,�;Rt�7 S�4ie������ ffir rM���•3� hir�7la ir�. . y spa y t•yy�y,, �.y }y. ,.i p aa11 y.,� {fin 3� �7i 'ice dn7 t ntec e C ff tt3K�er$wilt IIG;jfiV S Ili iion j.�e r, -fit ZO£30 d €� [�t� �1,s iar sppQels�f nstw t�sn�lt��rt�wt!#be ��e�t��fir°pr�s�a�tteirng etizajstiesns�taJ)fists e€ o ffriersci l e�a slate.... 1 r rttf tl til e . TEXT OF MEASURE AN ACT SECTION 1: This Act shall be known as the"Judicial Discretion Act of 2000." SECTION 2: ORS 135.240(4) and (5), 137.700, 137.705, 137.707, 137.712, 138.222(4)(c)and 419C.067 are repealed. SECTION 3: (a) Any person sentenced under any repealed provision of law listed in Section 2 above,shall be resentenced by the Court of conviction in accordance with the Oregon Revised Statutes and the rules of the Oregon Criminal Justice Commission that were in effect on March 31, 1995, unless the person requests not to be resentenced.The Court shall hold the resentencing hearing as soon as practicable after the effective date of this Act, but not later than 90 days,with priority given to those persons who have been incarcerated the longest pursuant to any repealed statute. Any person resentenced under this subsection shall receive credit for any time served. (b) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, any person 113 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 94 EXPLANATORY STATEMENT "Pe et ation/al 1st degree 2yr&10mo-10yr&10mo 8yr&4mo Measure 94 repeals mandatory minimum sentences estab- lished by Ballot Measure 11, approved by voters in November Unlawful Sexual 1994 and effective April 1, 1995. Measure 11 covers murder, Penetration/ manslaughter,assault,kidnapping,rape,sodomy,unlawful sexual 2nd degree iyr&4mo-3yr&9mo 6yr&3mo penetration, sexual abuse and robbery. Measure 11 requires Sexual Abuse/ persons sentenced for these crimes serve the full sentence.The 1 st degree 1 yr&4mo--3yr&9mo 6yr&3mo sentence cannot be reduced for any reason. Measure 11 also requires that a person 15, 16 or 17 years old charged with Robbery/1st degree 2yr&10mo-6yr 7yr&6mo committing one of these crimes be tried as an adult. Robbery/2nd degree probation-2yr&6mo 5yr&10mo The Legislature added these crimes to Measure 11:attempt or Arson 4yr&10mo-10yr&10mo 7yr&6mo conspiracy to commit aggravated murder or murder,arson, using a child in a display of sexually explicit conduct, and compelling Using a Child in a prostitution. Measure 94 will repeal these mandatory minimum Display of Sexually sentences. Measure 94 will also repeal the requirement that a Explicit Conduct 1yr&4mo-3yr&9mo 5yr&10mo person 15, 16 or 17 years old charged with committing one of Compelling Prostitution 1yr&4mo-3yr&9mo 5yr&10mo these crimes be tried as an adult. Measure 94 requires that all persons sentenced to a manda- Committee Members: Appointed by: tory minimum sentence be resentenced unless the person Representative Jo Ann Bowman Chief Petitioners requests not to be resentenced. Resentencing would be under Emily Simon Chief Petitioners laws in effect on March 31,1995.Resentencing must occur within Steve Doell Secretary of State 90 days after Measure 94 becomes law. Representative Kevin Mannix Secretary of State Any person who is presently charged or convicted of a crime James M.Brown Members of the Committee that would be subject to a mandatory minimum sentence but who (This committee was appointed to provide an impartial explanation of the has not yet been sentenced will now be sentenced under the laws ballot measure pursuant to ORS 251.215.) in effect on March 31, 1995. Measure 94 requires that a person 15, 16 or 17 years old and who was tried as an adult for committing one of these crimes will now be subject to the jurisdiction of juvenile court for resentenc- ing unless waived to adult court. Under laws in effect in March 1995,juvenile court jurisdiction ended when the person reached the age of 21 years. This chart compares the range of presumed sentences to be used under Measure 94,with the current mandatory minimum sentences.The presumed sentence is the range of prison time the court may impose.The presumed sentence is imposed most of the time.However,for substantial and compelling reasons,the court may set higher or lower sentences. Range of Current Mandatory Presumed Minimum Crime Sentences Sentences Murder 1Oyr-22yr&5mo 25yr Attempt or Conspiracy to Commit Aggravated Murder 4yr&10-10yr&10mo 10yr Attempt or Conspiracy to Commit Murder 2yr&10mo-6yr 7yr&6mo Manslaughter/ 1st degree 4yr&10mo-10yr&10mo 10yr Manslaughter/ 2nd degree 1 yr&4mo-3yr&9mo 6yr&3mo Assault/1st degree 2yr&10mo-10yr&10mo 7yr&6mo Assault/2nd degree 1yr&4mo-3yr&9mo 5yr&10mo Kidnapping/ 1st degree 4yr&10mo-10yr&10mo 7yr&6mo Kidnapping/ 2nd degree 2yr&10mo-6yr 5yr&10mo Rape/1st degree 2yr&10mo-10yr&10mo 8yr&4mo Rape/2nd degree iyr&4mo-3yr&9mo 6yr&3mo Sodomy/1st degree 2yr&10mo-10yr&10mo 8yr&4mo Sodomy/2nd degree iyr&4mo-3yr&9mo 6yr&3mo 114 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 94 Arguments ARGUMENT IN FAVOR ARGUMENT IN FAVOR Yes on 94 will Repeal Measure 11 REPEAL Measure 11 Fiction vs.Fact:What the supporters of Measure 11 The TRUTH about Measure 11 want Oregonians to believe... • Passed in 1994 using scare tactics that"crime was out of con- FICTION: Repealing Measure 11 will automatically release trot" However, the F.B.I. determined violent crime between 1,000's of criminals onto Oregon streets. Measure was NOT increasing in Oregon. FACT:Measure 11 offenders will be resentenced under the suc- Mea 1 11 is(t Qsg tri sentencing law that also applies cessful Sentencing Guidelines adopted by the legislature in 1989. children 15+ (tried in adult court). The minimum sentence (Read"SUMMARY"of measure under"BALLOT TITLE".) under measure 1 is 5 years 10 months with no probation, parole,or early release. FICTION:Measure 11 only targets violent and repeat criminals. • Measure 11 does not allow any consideration of the circum- FACT: Measure 11 is a Ong-strike law, meaning a minimum stances involved in any given situation, therefore, usurping sentence of nearly 6 years, including children 15+ (tried in adult rightful authority from the courts and the Jury. court) with no early release for good behavior. Over 56% are • Assault 2=fistfight even for self-defense!–5 years 10 months. first-time offenders, many are nonviolent crimes.A judge cannot • Kidnapping 2=forcing a person to the other side of a room!!– consider any circumstances during sentencing. 5 years 10 months. FICTION: The crime rate was increasing before Measure 11 (The Oregonian:10/1, 10/19/94;8/21/95;6/23,8/20/97;7/5/00) became law. Who wrote Measure 11?And why? FACT:Oregon's crime rate remained constant between 1980 and • Representative Kevin Mannix wrote Measures 10, 11,and 17, 1995 according to the F.B.I.The Sentencing Guidelines put more financed by corporate money,and all promote prison labor. repeat and serious offenders behind bars for longer terms, not - Inlik Oregon Enterprises is a state-owned $19 million busi- Measure 11.Drug crimes are not under Measure 11. ness using prisoners-jobs law abiding Oregonians need! (Summary Report of Campaign Contributions and Expenditures, FICTION:It's cheaper to house offenders than to rehabilitate. 1994 General Election; 1994 General Election Voters'Pamphlet; FACT: We are spending $90 million a year to imprison 3,400 The Business Journal, 11/26/99;1999-2000 Oregon Blue Book, Measure 11 inmates.A $1 Billion prison-building project is cur- p.45; The American Prospect Sept./Oct.1999) rently underway.Money that used to fund successful rehabilitation STOP Oregon's slave labor market programs has been cut. For the first time in Oregon's history, more is spent on prisons than schools. Measure 94 will reduce taxes • Increase the tax base by converting non taxed prisoner jobs FICTION:Inmates live a life of luxury in prison. into free market taxed income jobs that law abiding people FACT: Rules are very strict. A cell for 2 at Oregon State need to support their families. Penitentiary measures less than 2 sheets of plywood.At another . Inmates will be resentenced (not retried) under the highly prison 200 inmates watch one 19"TV. Inmates can be punished successful Sentencing Guidelines. up to 6 months in isolation. Health care is almost nonexistent. . It costs over $90 million a year to keep 3,400 Measure 11 Four teenage girls under Measure 11 committed suicide in 1998. adults and children in prison.(The Oregonian 10/1/94;Dept.of (See The Oregonian "Study: Violent Criminals Getting Longer Corrections statistics) Terms" (10/1/94); "Dumb on Crime" (8/20/97); "School Funding • Save$153.6 million in bond repayment costs. Suffers as State Locks Up Money for New Prisons" (8/18/96); TheAmericanVoice.com(541-826-9050)and "Dying at Hillcrest"(2/22/98). ChristianMed!aNetwork.com (541-899-8888) have information Vote YES on 94 and bring JUSTICE back to Oregon! available to learn more about prison labor and it's destructive effects on the people of Oregon,their children and their future. (This information furnished by Vern Beardslee,Southern Oregon Citizens Be Smart on Crime-Vote YES on 94!!! to Repeal Measure 11.) (This information furnished by Frank Hayes.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 In accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 115 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 94 Arguments ARGUMENT IN FAVOR ARGUMENT IN FAVOR Oregon Public Health Association and My son Aaron is in prison for 7-and-a-half years because a car he Oregon Pediatric Nurse Practitioners Association loaned to an acquaintance was used in.a robbery.Aaron wasn't Urge you to vote Yes on Measure 94. even there when the crime was committed. But because of When Oregon approved mandatory sentences, publicity focused mandatory sentences, he's doing over 7 years.Worse yet, he's on getting hard-core criminals off the street.Few realized the law been in an adult prison since he was 17. applied to anyone 15 and over. It happened in 1996. Once passed the 1995 and 1997 Legislature changed the law Aaron was 17. drastically. Mandatory sentences now apply to those who are Aaron was at a party with friends. Responsible adults were pre- simply in the presence of someone who commits a violent act. sent.A young man asked to borrow a car. Even worse,judges are not able to set sentences that are appro- priate Even though he knew he shouldn't,Aaron let him use the car.In for a youth's actions or needs. the end,that was his crime. As public health professionals, we believe prevention and early intervention must be an integral part of our efforts to keep our The young man supposedly took Aaron's car to the store. He communities safe. returned two-and half hours later. We are spending $28,000 a year per child to keep them in Over a year and a half later the police arrested Aaron for prison.That money could be spent more wisely on programs that the robbery of two young women. Despite the fact that two reduce crime and build better adults. eyewitnesses said Aaron was not even there, Aaron was con- - victed along with the young man who did commit the robbery. Give judges the discretion to place young people in pro grams that help them become responsible and accountable The judge in the case said he was shocked the case was even adults. brought by the government prosecutor.He said there was clearly reasonable doubt that Aaron was involved. A recent Oregonian article (Feb. 24,2000) reported that most But because Aaron was tried alongside the man who did commit youths serving time under Mandatory sentences do so in isola- the crime, he was found guilty. tion, to keep them separated from the hardened adult criminal populations. Now Aaron is 22.He has spent nearly 3 years in an adult prison. • They do not have access to appropriate educational and My son was an outstanding student and had nearly completed his treatment opportunities. coursework at a Portland Chef School. Now he is forced to live • They do not interact with others. alongside hardened,career criminals in an adult facility. • They do not receive drug and alcohol counseling. If the judge in Aaron's case had the discretion to set a more Studies show that youthful offenders who do hard time have appropriate sentence, Aaron would be free today. But under a much higher recidivism rate than those who spend time in Oregon law,the judge had no leeway and was forced to sentence juvenile facilities and receive proper educational and counseling Aaron to a mandatory sentence. services. No other child should have to face what Aaron has been through. We can do better for our children,even those who run afoul No other family should suffer as we have. of the law.We must allow judges to set appropriate sentences for Please Vote YES on Measure 94. youthful offenders. For as any parent knows, while you must Cindy Weight, Hillsboro sometimes punish, you must also provide an opportunity to Aaron's mom become responsible. (This information furnished by Cynthia E.Weight.) Oregonians would never abandon their children. Yet that's exactly what we do with mandatory sentences. Please join us in returning justice and balance to our court system.Please Vote Yes on Measure 94. (This information furnished by Cathi Lawler, Parents Against Cruel & Unusual Punishment.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 116 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures - Measure No. 94 Arguments ARGUMENT IN FAVOR ARGUMENT IN FAVOR Judge L.L.Sawyer Endorses Measure 94 Measure 94 Brings Justice Back to Our Courts I am a recently retired judge with 40 years of experience, still Over the past decade,politicians and government prosecutors serving as a Senior Judge.Since the enactment of Measure 11, have unleashed unprecedented attacks on our Bill of Rights to I have heard cases where I was forced to hand down a manda- expand their own powers–at the expense of the rights of citizens. tory sentence, even when the facts supported a far different The result of this power grab: punishment. By electing judges, the voters put great trust in our ability to - Our prison system has exploded, costing us millions and fashion a sentence which will punish, rehabilitate when possible, millions of dollars to build prisons for first-time offenders,no and,most of all protect the public. matter the circumstances of their case. • Prosecutors and politicians now determine sentences When forced to deliver sentences of over 7 years for first-time instead of judges. offenders, or children who made a drastic mistake and can be • Our constitutional rights have been eroded. rehabilitated, or mothers who commit a crime to feed their It's Time to Brina Justice Back By Passing_Measure 94• children and are then ripped away from those same children,then these goals are not being met. • Judges will again be able to consider the age, previous The mandatory sentencing law known as Measure 11, and record and intent of the accused when setting sentences expanded by the Legislature in the past two sessions, ties the within certain sentencing guidelines hands of judges, making them nothing but puppets for,sentenc- First-time offenders will not be treated as career criminals. ing. Under mandatory sentences, the length of prison stay is engraved in stone,no matter the age of the defendant or whether Children between 15 and 18 who can be rehabilitated can the defendant stands a good chance of being rehabilitated. get a second chance before being locked up with career criminals. Before mandatory sentences,judges used sentencing guidelines • Judges, not government prosecutors and politicians, will that ensured criminals would be locked up.These guidelines still regain control of the courtroom. gave judges the right to set the length of incarceration depending Measure 94 Puts Judges Back in Control of the Courtroom on the circumstances of the crime and the defendant's age.That's what judges are elected to do. Measure 94 returns that right to No one believes criminals should get off lightly. But when judges. 67%of the people convicted under the current harsh sentenc- Our court system should be fair and balanced Prosecutors and ing laws are first-time offenders, then we have taken fairness defense attorneys should be able to present their cases fairly. and balance out of our courts. Once guilt has been determined,the judge should hold the power We elect judges to make wise decisions in the courtroom.By to weigh the facts and fashion the punishment to fit the crime. passing Measure 94, we return the balance between judges, Mandatory sentences shift the weight of power into the hands of government prosecutors and the rights of the accused. prosecutors. Measure 94 doesn't let criminals off easily. Measure 94 It's time to bring back balance. merely allows the judge to decide the sentence based on the It's time to return control of the courtroom to the judge. circumstances of the crime. Vote Yes on Measure 94. In the criminal justice system,every case should be decided Judge L.L.Sawyer on its own merits. Ashland Please vote yes on Measure 94. Bring Justice Back to (This information furnished by Loren Sawyer.) our Courtrooms. (This information furnished by Gary Swanson-Davies, Barbara Palen, Richard Nelson,Terry Stein,Sylvia Simms,Barb Jones.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 117 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 94 Arguments ARGUMENT IN FAVOR ARGUMENT IN FAVOR If you want judges – not politicians and prosecutors – in Sentencing is the single-most important act the government charge of our courtrooms, takes against citizens because liberty is at stake.Therefore, Vote Yes on Measure 94. sentencing should be done carefully, thoughtfully, and individually to insure that justice is served. If you believe first-time offenders should not be treated as Mandatory sentencing laws prevent the careful consideration harshly as career criminals, of factors that allow a judge to fit the punishment to the crime Vote Yes on Measure 94. and the offender. For that reason, Families Against Mandatory Minimums,a national organization dedicated to restoring judges' If you object to children ages 15 to 18 being treated as career traditional role in the courtroom,endorses Measure 94's sentenc- criminals,even if they have never been in trouble before, ing reforms. Vote Yes on Measure 94. • Mandatory sentencing laws shift sentencing discretion from If you voted for mandatory sentences before because you judges to government prosecutors, undermining the traditional believed it would only apply to hardened criminals, checks and balances in the criminal justice system. Vote Yes on Measure 94. • Mandatory sentencing laws create a "one-size-fits-all" sen- tence for totally different defendants.First-time offenders receive If you believe government prosecutors and politicians are the same harsh sentences as career criminals. grabbing power and working to take away your constitutional rights, • Mandatory sentencing laws prevent judges from considering all the factors of each case including intent,the circumstances of the Vote Yes on Measure 94 crime,and the potential for rehabilitation. If you want judges – not politicians and prosecutors -- to . Mandatory sentencing laws force judges to hand down sen- decide sentences based on the age of the defendant, the tences that are wildly disproportionate to the offense.A fist-fight circumstances of the crime and the defendant's previous can result in a prison sentence of 6 years without parole. criminal record, • Mandatory sentencing laws apply to minors as young as 15, Vote Yes on Measure 94 sending them to prison before they can even drive or vote. If you want to bring balance and justice back to our courts, . Mandatory sentencing laws fall disproportionately on minorities Vote Yes on Measure 94. and those with the fewest resources to spend for top-notch attorneys. (This information furnished by C.Dennis Williams,Cathi Lawler,Bill Lawler, e. Let judges judge. Linda Swanson-Davies,Donna Frey.) Give them the power to impose sentences that are appropriate to the offense and the offender. Vote Yes on Measure 94 (This information furnished by Julie Stewart, Families Against Mandatory Minimums.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 1118 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 94 Arguments ARGUMENT IN FAVOR ARGUMENT IN FAVOR Measure 94 is endorsed by: My son is in mail for seven years all because of ten days • Oregon Pediatric Nurse Practitioners Association My 16-year-old son will spend the next 6 years in jail having con- • Oregon Public Health Association sensual sex with his girlfriend.That's why we are urging Oregon • Oregon ACLU voters to pass Measure 94. • Ecumenical Ministries of Oregon(representing over 250 When my son Justin met his girlfriend,she told him she was 15. churches and religious groups) He was 16 at the time. • National Association for the Counsel of Children • Families Against Mandatory Minimums One day after school,they had sex at a friend's house. • PAC-UP • National Association of Defense Lawyers Soon after,the girlfriend's read her diary and discovered what had • Oregon CURE happened. Despite the fact several prosecutors turned the case • Oregon Criminal Defense Lawyers Association down, my son was arrested and charged with second-degree • A.Philip Randolph Institute rape.It turns out the girl was only 13. All these groups endorse Measure 94 because they know Justin was 3 years and 10 days older than his girlfriend, 10 days our criminal justice system is out of balance.They have seen the over the age requirement that would have made his actions legal devastating effects of the current system on families and first-time in the eyes of the law. offenders. Justin was received a mandatory,sentence of 75 months.The They have watched politicians and government prosecutors judge thought that sentence was unfair.He sentenced my son to use fear and intimidation to control the courtroom. three years.The prosecutor appealed.Now the Oregon Supreme Court says under current law Justin must serve the full 75-month They have seen judges lose the ability to decide cases based on sentence. the age,previous record,the circumstances and the intent of the accused. Measure 94 would allow judges to determine the length of sentence.Current law gives them no leeway. They have seen unprecedented building of new prisons, wasting valuable tax dollars that could be used to turn the lives of first-time When children are incarcerated like adults,even when they have offenders around before they become hardened criminals. never been in trouble with the law,our criminal justice system is out of balance. Measure 94 Puts Judges Back In Control of the Courtroom. No one believes criminals should get off lightly. Measure 94 Brings Fairness Back to the Criminal Justice But no one believes that young,first-time offenders should serve System. the same sentences as career criminals. Measure 94 Will Save the State over$250 million in reduced Help us bring justice back to our courts. prison construction costs. Let's put judges back in charge of the courtroom. (This information furnished by Jo Ann Bowman,State Representative.) Please vote yes on Measure 94. Jim Thorp Justin's father (This information furnished by James E.Thorp.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 119 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 94 Arguments ARGUMENT IN FAVOR ARGUMENT IN FAVOR A criminal justice system should be one of checks and MANDATORY SENTENCES: balances. In Oregon, government prosecutors, have more DESTRUCTIVE TO SOCIETY. power than judges.That's wrong.And that's why we need to DESTRUCTIVE TO OREGON. pass Measure 94. We Oregon Voters were made many promises of great things We, the voters of Oregon, were misled into allowing this power if we approved the Mandatory Sentencing Law in 1994.Every shift when we voted for mandatory sentences for all people age one of those promises has failed to come true. 15 and up in 1994. • We were promised there would be justice for all,when in fact Since 1994 the Legislature has drastically changed what we the justice system is more out of balance now than ever. passed.We have stood by helplessly as prosecutors and politi- cians have run amok with more power than we ever imagined. this law, but the majority are non-violent offenders have had The current system has proven over the past five years to be far their lives and their loved one's lives destroyed. too expensive: • We were promised rehabilitation and treatment programs • Too expensive in terms of tax dollars being used to incar- weren't needed with this law as they were a useless waste cerate people who would be better served by treatment and of time and money,when years of research has proven just rehabilitation, while saving our prison beds for truly violent the opposite to be true. offenders. • We were promised it would be cost effective when in fact the • Too expensive in the cost of lives ruined by incarcerating cost of this law has exceeded the benefits in every way. children with adults and non-violent offenders with violent We were warned that mandatory sentences were full or ones. ry inequities and hidden costs... and those warnings have We must bring justice back to Oregon by returning to the sen- been realized: sible,fair and equitable sentencing guidelines that were in effect We were warned that the immense cost of implementing this prior to 1995. measure would grow annually, thereby dwindling the tax These guidelines made it necessary for all branches of our judi- dollars left available for education and health care. cial system to share in the power of sentencing, with the final We were warned that the judicial system would lose the decision resting with the people we elect to make those decisions –judges. ability to make the punishment fit the crime,and it has. These guidelines allowed for the checks and balances necessary • We were warned this law would not deter crime and it has to keep one branch of our judicial system from having too much not. In fact, states without mandatory minimum sentencing power. laws have seen crime drop much faster than Oregon has. We must bring justice back to Oregon before it is too late; • We were warned this law was so poorly drafted that it would, before too much damage has been done. at tremendous cost,cause years of expensive litigation and create more injustice than it sought to remedy.That's exactly We can bring justice back to Oregon's courts by voting YES what we have experienced. on Measure 94. • We were warned this law would have a devastating conse- Betty Moore quence on the youth of our communities and we've all seen Grants Pass that happen throughout Oregon. (This information furnished by Betty,!.Moore.) We must bring justice back by voting Yes on Measure 94. Karen Cain,Wolf Creek (This information furnished by Karen Cain.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 120 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Electiori Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 94 Arguments ARGUMENT IN FAVOR ARGUMENT IN FAVOR If you are concerned about public safety. I urge you to vote THE ACLU OF OREGON URGES YOU yes on Measure 94. TO VOTE"YES"ON MEASURE 94 John Dilulio is a respected criminologist and a devout early pro- Oregon's sentencing laws currently do not allow judges to fit ponent of incarceration. On March 12, 1999, however, he wrote the punishment to the crime.We have a "one strike and you're an article in the Wall Street Journal entitled"2 Million Prisoners out"method of sentencing that does not work for Oregon. Are Enough:'Dilulio's research also suggests that the nation has Measure 94 returns control of courtrooms to judges. In for keeping the prison population around`coaxed out'on the public safety value n incarceration:'and even calls many cases under current law,judges are forced to sentence first d two million and aiming to reduce it over the next decade. Measure 94 will help time offenders to very lengthy prison terms for relatively minor accomplish that goal. crimes.This has stripped judges of their right to deliver fair sen- tences that fit the crime. Measure 94 is tough,but fair. Measure 94 will allow judges to consider the whole pic- I am certain Dilulio would take issue with Oregon's current sen- ture.We need to be tough on crime but at the same time we need tencing,where young first-time offenders are sentenced for minor to make sure that juveniles who have never been in trouble with offenses to five years and 10 months to the brutality of prison rape the law don't get treated like career criminals. and violence that, despite the best efforts of dedicated correc- When we impose mandatory sentences on first-time juvenile tions personnel,still occur in our adult prisons. offenders and lock them up with adults, we end up producing One thing criminologists know for certain is that people tend to hardened criminals when they come out of prison.This is not only grow out of their antisocial behavior,so incapacitating the violent wrong, it's expensive and it puts all of us at greater risk. offenders through incarceration for long periods is sound public The facts should fit the crime.Currently,prosecutors coerce policy. Under Measure 94, this incarcerating the violent will not guilty pleas to lesser crimes because the accused can't afford to change.The problem with the current sentencing structure is risk the chance they might be convicted of the more serious that it catches far too many young,first-time offenders who charge and spend many years in prison. When a first time pose no threat.It brutalizes them and makes them worse.It must be reformed. offender"cuts a deal"rather than have a jury decide their guilt or innocence, the justice system stops working.Judges and juries We as taxpayers end up paying the price as the Oregon state should decide what happens to the accused, not prosecutors. corrections budget surpasses the state's higher education Measure 94 restores balance to our criminal system. budget.We also pay the price when they return to our communi- Measure 94 puts judges back in charge,restores balance, ties 5 years and 10 months later. and brings justice back to the courtroom. It's about giving Measure 94 is a measured effort to curb the excesses of current judges the right to set sentences based on the individual's crimi- sentencing structure and make the Oregon criminal codes tough, nal history,the crime committed and the circumstance surround- but fair.I urge you to vote yes on Measure 94. ing that crime. Chip Shields LET'S.MAKE THE SYSTEM WORK Executive Director VOTE"YES"ON MEASURE 94 Better People Portland,Oregon For more information write ACLU of Oregon PO Box 40585, Portland,OR 97240 This information furnished by Chip Shields, Executive Director, Better or www.aclu-or.org eople.) (This information furnished by David Fidanque, American Civil Liberties Union of Oregon.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 121 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 94 Arguments ARGUMENT IN FAVOR ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION The consequences of having Measure-11 Law is like being an CRIME VICTIMS UNITED ASKS YOU TO VOTE NO ON umpire at a baseball game--One team does not like the call so it MEASURE 94 fires the ump, and then takes over the decision making process themselves--Which team do you think they're going to favor. Measure 94 retroactively slashes sentences for violent crimes: robbery,assault,kidnapping,rape,manslaughter,attempted Remember if you think the "ONE STRIKE YOUR OUT LAW" murder and murder. with a minimum 5 years, 10 months Mandatory Sentencing, and If Measure 94 is passed, over 3000 of Oregon's violent crimi- the Judge's hands tied, could not happen to your teenage Son, nals will be resentenced under more lenient guidelines.The Daughter,or Grandson,YOU'RE WRONG-It will change your life forever. sentences of most will be reduced and the sentences of many will be reduced by as much as one-half to two-thirds. (This information furnished by Candice Jenkins.) An estimated 800 to 1300 criminals, including kidnappers, rapists,child molesters and killers, will be released within days of the election. Virtually all future violent criminals in Oregon will receive more lenient sentences. The minimum prison term for murder will be reduced from 25 years to 8 years:for forcible rape.from 8 years to 2 years and 4 months. In many cases,judges have no choice but to give the minimum sentence. The cases of many violent youth offenders,even murderers and rapists, will be tried in juvenile court. If convicted they will be released at age 21. Make no mistake,innocent people will pay dearly if Measure 94 is passed. Measure 94 proponents have used extensive misrepresentations to advance their cause.They want you to believe that Measure 11, which Measure 94 repeals, affects petty offenders. Untrue. Measure 11 addresses sentences for the most serious crimes of violence and sexual abuse. They want you to believe that youth are sent directly to adult prison and get no rehabilitation under Measure 11. Untrue. All convicted youth go to the Oregon Youth Authority (OYA) where they receive education,counseling and treatment.Any youth who wants to emerge a better person can stay at OYA until age 25. Many more blatant misrepresentations are documented at www.crimevictim,sunited.org/measurell/ m isrepresentations.htm. Please keep in mind when making your decision that th liv s innocent pep In a depend on your vote. In the following pages, you will read statements from a sma sample of thousands of victims. VOTE NO ON MEASURE 94 (This information furnished by Steve Doell,Crime Victims United.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 122 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 94 Arguments ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION IF MEASURE 11 IS REPEALED, MY DAUGHTER'S RAPIST Giving MY SON'S MURDERER the chance to be RELEASED WILL ALMOST CERTAINLY BE RELEASED WITHIN NINETY in FOUR YEARS is too big a risk to take.That's why I'm voting DAYS OF THE ELECTION. NO on Measure 94. In July 1995, my nine year old daughter was drugged with three On May 21, 1998, KIP KINKEL murdered my son, Mikael. My powerful narcotics. rayed, and left unconscious.The 43 year old son was sitting at a cafeteria table with friends,enjoying his junior rapist was arrested,convicted,and sentenced under Measure 11 year in high school.Kip Kinkel walked in with hundreds of rounds to nine years in prison.Before Measure 11. the typical sentence of ammunition; after already shooting my son twice, he put the for this rapist would have been just three years. gun to his head and shot him a third time! In the past,the rapist made threats against me and my children. My son died immediately. I moved them to another town while waiting for the trial.They were Let me tell you about my son. He had a terrific imagination, and taken out of school in the middle of the year, and it was very loved to entertain his friends with pranks and his technological difficult for them. abilities. He was engaged to be married to his girlfriend – My daughter is now fourteen years old and is looking forward to together,they planned to join the Oregon National Guard.He was starting high school.She wants nothing more than to enjoy these full of promise,energy,and ability. years as a carefree teenager.She hopes to have four more years Now, let me tell you about his murderer.The first three words in before the rapist is released in the year 2004. She will then be Kinkel's black journal were "Hate drives me" He said he"hated eighteen years old and will have graduated from high school.She every person on earth." After killing his own father, he shot his deserves to enjoy these years free from fear. own mother seven times, killing her. He methodically cleaned up If Measure 11 is repealed, my daughter's rapist will almost the mess, set bombs around his house, killed my son, then certainly be released within ninety days of the election and another student,and wounded dozens more. we may have to relocate again. If Measure 94 passes Kip Kinkel–and thousands of other Please vote no on Measure 94 so my daughter and other child violent criminals – will have to be resentenced under victims of violent crime may have a few more years to grow up in Oregon's old more lenient sentencing laws! peace and safety. It takes more than a few years for victims of That means my son's murderer would be released at age 21 –in violent crime to recover from the trauma and begin to rebuild their less than four years–if he were sentenced as a juvenile! Even if lives.Measure 11 helps to provide that needed time. the prosecutor could convince the judge to sentence him as an VOTE NO ON MEASURE 94! adult,Kinkel could serve as little as ten years. Carol Wyatt Voting yes on 94 gives my son's murderer the chance to fulfill Crime Victims United what he wrote in his journal: "I am evil. I want to kill and give pain without cost:' (This information furnished by Carol Wyatt,Crime Victims United.) If you think Kip Kinkel should serve his full sentence, please join me in VOTING NO ON 94, an ill-considered, poorly-thought out measure. Michael A.Nickolauson (This information furnished by Michael A. Nickolauson, Crime Victims United.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 123 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 94 Arguments ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION VOTE NO ON MEASURE 94! ON AUGUST 25, 1997, 1 WAS STABBED 13 TIMES WITH A On July 14, 1995 my twenty one year old daughter, my only BUTTERFLY KNIFE AND WITH BARBER SCISSORS BY MY child, was murdered by her former partner in the presence of OWN SON. their two year old son. My daughter's body has yet to be recov- He was almost 16, at 6'1" and 220 lbs. The questions most ered. I cannot explain the trauma and grief of losing a child by people ask me are:Was he on drugs?Was he in prior troubles? homicide.The pain is ever present. Any troubles in the family?The answers are"No". He was never The justice system cannot compensate for the loss of a child, nor molested,abused,neglected or any of the other things people try a child's loss of his mother. But by fair, just, and equitable to rationalize as the cause of violent behavior. Good kids come sentencing it lends value to the victim's life and some peace to the from bad families.Bad kids come from good families. surviving family. He's serving 15 years for Two Counts of Attempted Murder, My daughter's son deserves to be protected from this criminal. Assault 1,and Assault 2 at McLaren Youth Facility and may stay This child is serving a TRUE LIFE SENTENCE,forever deprived there until he is 25. of his mother,and stigmatized for life that his father murdered his From the attack I've been left partially disabled.My mother died mother, a murder that he witnessed. not long after my attack and my father suffered a heart attack.The Measure 11 ensures that this criminal will serve a minimum of 6 year old son of a family friend was placed into counseling twenty five years of his life sentence before being eligible for because he was having nightmares that my son would come and release.if Measure 11 is repealed this offender could receive kill him and his baby sister. as little as a ten year sentence. In ,considering his five years People who were once close have drifted away because they are served and"good time",this criminal could be released when our afraid.They're afraid my son will turn on them next. I feel their little boy is as young as nine or ten years old. worries are valid. I wasn't the only person he was going to kill Be aware that by eliminating Measure 11 in totality, ALL serious He was going to kill everyone in the family AND in his girlfriend's offenders sentenced under Measure 11 will be RESENTENCED, family. including MURDERERS, RAPISTS AND CHILD ABUSERS. If If Measure 11 is repealed,I will have to go through the trauma Measure 11 is repealed many of these criminals will be released of a new trial and look,once more,at the bloody weapons he immediately. As voters, we will NOT be able to go back and was using to kill me.If sentenced in juvenile court,he may be correct that wrong.It will be a done deal! released immediately. I believe that voters want to stay strong in sending their message I can never trust him again.I'm terrified for the rest of my family, that Oregonians demand CONSEQUENCE to people who but more so for YOUR families. If you met him, you would never CHOOSE to commit heinous acts. know he's capable of killing. He's intelligent, witty, profound, believe that Oregon voters will not repeal Measure 11. trustable,... and very Deadly. I pray he doesn't end up in your neighborhood. Please Vote No On Measure 94! VOTE NO ON MEASURE 94 Susan Panek Donna Mainord,C.H.T. (This information furnished by Susan Panek.) Victim Assistance Volunteer (This information furnished by Donna Mainord,Crime Victims United.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of"this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 124 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet-Statewide Measures Measure No. 94 Arguments ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION HOW VIOLENT DOES A PERSON HAVE TO BE? How the Criminal Justice system squandered my father's life. On November 18, 1994 a complete stranger stabbed my hus- June 25,1996 was a day that changed not only my life, but also band, Andrew McDonald, to death. This stranger's attack was the lives of my family and an entire community.It was the day my unprovoked. His rampage resulted in two homicides that night– father, an innocent, law-abiding citizen, was brutally stabbed he also slit the throat of his`best friend' 16 times. My father, Paul Rivenes, owned a small grocery store I too was assaulted with his knife as was another person who was in Hubbard,Oregon.On that Tuesday afternoon,which I will never trying to defuse this man's fury.In all,he stabbed us more than 40 forget, three men decided they wanted beer money so they times. planned the robbery and murder of my father.They preyed on him because (in their words) they knew he was older and alone This has devastated me, Andy's mother, his brother, and other and would be an easy target. family and friends. Two of these men had extensive criminal records including Horrifying facts about the perpetrator's past emerged during the assaults among many other criminal acts. The criminal that penalty phase of the trial. was the decoy and distracted my father so the other could butcher him had a conviction for Assault II with a knife. His rap sheet was filled with violent behavior. He had stabbed another'friend'a few years before for drinking the last beer in the Had Measure 11 been in effect when these men committed cooler. The victim's friends had to hold his intestines intact their prior crimes of violence my father might be alive today. because they were'falling out'as they rushed him to the hospital: These men would have been held accountable for their previous The perpetrator was convicted for Assault II,given PROBATION, acts and been locked away,taken out of society so they could not which he violated 3 times and because of that,was resentenced assault or harm innocent,law-abiding citizens. in 1991 to 5 years in prison. By voting for Measure 94,you would be making a statement that HE WAS BACK ON THE STREETS IN'93! the lives of my father and other innocent, law-abiding citizens mean nothing. If Measure 94 is passed the prison term of at Other testimony revealed that he had chased his father-in-law least one of my father's killers could be cut in half.The 29 down a hospital ward with a butcher knife, kicked his pregnant years he got for planning my father's murder would be cut by 50%. wife in the abdomen, and knifed strangers on walks in the Rose That means he would be out on the street sooner, given a City neighborhood in Portland.He hit corrections officers,threat- chance to kill again. ened lives,and terrorized people. Because of these men my life will never be the same.But at least How violent does a person have to be before they are locked up they are being held accountable for their crimes and cannot to secure our safety? commit such a vicious act again. MUST WE WAIT UNTIL THEY COMMIT A MURDER? Don't take the risk of squandering another human life. By ren it's too late. PLEASE VOTE NO ON MEASURE 94 Had Measure 11 been in effect,with its mandatory minimum Julie Hedden sentences, my husband would be alive today. Measure 11 Daughter of murder victim Paul Rivenes keeps VIOLENT CRIMINALS OFF THE STREETS! If Measure 94 passes,it will cost lives.Maybe yours or someone's (This information furnished by Julie Hedden,Crime Victims United.) you love. I URGE YOU TO VOTE NO ON MEASURE 94! From a person who knows all too well. Debra Oyamada Crime Victims United (This information furnished by Debra Oyamada,Crime Victims United.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- rr ent by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 125 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 94 Arguments ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION MY DREAMS ENDED ON MY DAUGHTER'S 20TH BIRTHDAY. Here's what one of KIP KINKEUS VICTIMS has to say about Now,the nightmare is back with Measure 94,which would permit Measure 94. the EARLY RELEASE of the criminal who killed my daughter. Before you think about voting yes on 94,please read what I have On August 11, 1996,my daughter Natasha was on her way to her to say. 20th birthday party with two friends. A woman who was a On May 21, 1998, 1 was finishing my junior year at Thurston High convicted felon and high on druas ran a red light and drove her School in Springfield, Oregon. My boyfriend and I were in the truck directly into Natasha's side of the car. school cafeteria. 1 stood up to hug him and wish him a happy My daughter inhaled her own vomit because the rescuers had birthday. difficulty removing her from the wreckage. After fourteen days, Suddenly, a bullet ripped through my boyfriend's chest and Natasha died of fatal injuries to her brain, lungs and abdomen. through my right hand, and then another bullet entered my lung. My daughter was innocent and had her whole life to live.But her Those bullets-and 49 other rounds that day-were courtesy of life was cut short by a 37 year old ex-con drug addict who used my schoolmate, Kip Kinkel. drugs and got behind the wheel of a car, drove at high speeds, After 10 days in the hospital, I still have scars that don't heal-on committed hit and run, lied to the police, endangered and aban- my hand, my body,and heart.Remember, I'm one of the"lucky" doned her own sons,jumped bail,and was a fugitive from the FBI ones:I SURVIVED. for more than a year. Measure 94 would require Kip Kinkel to be resentenced under In 1998, a jury took less than two hours to convict her unani- Oregon's OLD sentencing laws.That means KIP KINKEL would mously on eight charges, including Manslaughter I. be RELEASED WHEN HE TURNS 21,if he were sentenced as a I am extremely grateful for Oregon's ex'stin sentencing laws juvenile!!!And even if the prosecutor could convince the judge to under Ballot Measure 11.Under our existing sentencing laws,the sentence him as an adult-which is not guaranteed-Kip Kinkel criminal who killed my daughter will serve every day of her 10 would almost certainly be allowed early release. year sentence for Manslaughter.But if Ballot Measure 94 passes, I am terrified that one day I will have to go through Kip Kinkel's the killer will go back before the court,likely to be re-sentenced to wrath again. If Kip Kinkel is resentenced, I will be living in fear just 60-70%of her original Manslaughter sentence! every day, along with my family and fellow victims, that if he is Who wants Measure 94 to pass? Defense attorneys and family released,he will hunt us all down. members of convicted criminals! That's because Measure 94 1 just wonder if the supporters of Measure 94 have really thought would allow most criminals convicted under Ballot Measure 11 to this through. Do they really want Kip Kinkel to get out of prison be resentenced to SHORTER PRISON TERMS. early? Do they really want crime victims like me - and family A mother should be able to send her child out on her birthday and members of the deceased-to have to live in fear of his release? have her come home.But my daughter will never come back. GIVING KIP KINKEL A CHANCE TO GET OUT AT AGE 21 IS Please vote NO on Measure 94. TOO BIG A RISK TO TAKE. Marlene Wirtanen That's why I'm asking YOU to Vote NO on Measure 94. Jennifer Alldredge (This information furnished by Marlene Wirtanen,Crime Victims United.) Springfield,Oregon (This information furnished by Jennifer Alldredge,Crime Victims United.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 126 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 94 Arguments ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION MEASURE 94 UNDERMINES JUSTICE Honest citizens of Oregon: In the eight years since my 12-year-old daughter Lisa's murder, I As a juvenile corrections worker, I'd like to offer my perspective have come across hundreds of cases of victims denied justice,as on Measure 11 and Measure 94. our family was.Her killer served just 28 months under the very sentencing guidelines that Measure 94 seeks to restore.Her Since Measure n passed in 199f I've witnessed firsthand the i mother, brother, and our families were sentenced to life without Positive changes n the mindset of incarcerated youth. Before, Lisa and without the joys she would have brought us–birthdays, they had the notion of invincibility, knowing the law allowed them graduations,wedding,grandchildren and love. years of criminal activity without serious consequence.Too often the same youths rolled in and out of our institutions several times, The approval of Measure 94 would result in hundreds if not thou- finally ending up in prison or dead on the streets. sands of additional miscarriages of justice.I want to tell you about one of them. Since Measure 11,we have youths long enough,early in their criminal careers that we can make some headway with treatment Brian Lawler had been involved in gang activity, had been and expose them to lifestyle choices which don't involve physical arrested,and was well known to police prior to the crime,but had or sexual violence.Often we offer the first stable environment that never been convicted. they've ever known.The extra time Measure 11 has afforded us On May 5, 1995, Brian Lawler, with no provocation whatsoever, gives these youth a chance to change their mindset and accept attacked Dave Clarke with a baseball bat. He hit Clarke three our efforts at turning their lives around. times. Clarke, Mount Hood Community College student body One myth claims that we are locking up'first time offenders'. treasurer and a straight-A student,suffered permanent brain and The fact that many offenders have never been convicted before vision damaae.The attack ended his college career and his plans does not mean that they have spent their lives singing in the for the rest of his life.He suffers from ongoing seizures. church choir.Working at Hillcrest Youth Correctional Facility,I see The day before sentencing,Brian Lawler and his brother commit- every file arrest after arrest and suspended sentence after suspended sentence. ted a burglary for which he was convicted of Aggravated Theft, Lawler pled guilty to Assault I and Assault III. He received a 90 What Measure 94 calls'first time offenders'actually means'first month sentence for Assault I. The judge sentenced him,to 14 time in a locked facility'.There's a huge difference.While these additional months for the Assault III and 12 additional for the criminals and their enablers are crying fora 'second chance', Aggravated Theft.Only the Assault I is a Measure 11 crime. they've already had multiple chances. If Measure 94 passes, Brian Lawler will be resentenced. As a In my daily contact with incarcerated youth, I hear honest "first time offender,his 7 1/2 year sentence will be cut in half and reluctance to re-offend, and warnings to their younger siblings he will be released from McLaren Youth Facility. Meanwhile, about Measure 11.Where in the past they recruited at risk youth Dave Clarke still has brain and vision damage and seizures,and into criminal activities,they now dissuade them. will for the rest of his life. Repealing Measure 11 would be counterproductive for the very Brian Lawler's mother, Cathi Lawler, is chief petitioner on youth the supporters of Measure 94 claim to want to help.Their Measure 94. efforts would be better spent working towards prevention and post-sentence opportunities. VOTE NO ON MEASURE 94 VOTE NO ON 94. Steve Doell, President Thank you Crime Victims United www.crimevictimsunited.org Robert Blacksmith (This information furnished by Steve Doell,Crime Victims United.) (This information furnished by Robert Blacksmith,Crime Victims United.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 127 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 94 Arguments ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION MEASURE 94 LETS VIOLENT YOUTH OFFENDERS WALK AT THE MEASURE 94"JUDICIAL DISCRETION"DECEPTION AGE 21 Measure 94 proponents want you to believe that Measure 94 Measure 94 would overturn the convictions of Kip Kinkel and allows a judge to choose a fitting sentence from a wide range of 350 other criminals who were under 18 when they committed their sentences.This is a deception. crimes.Measure 94 requires that these criminals be returned to a In 7/29/2000 letter to The Oregonian, Measure 94 chief peti juvenile court and retried under procedures that existed prior to In Lorraine Heller wrote: the passage of Measure 11.Unless"waived"by the judge to adult court,these dangerous criminals would be released on their 21st "For murder the guideline range was 10 years to 22 years and 5 birthday. months while under Measure 11 the sentence is 25 years...The The murder of Scott Bell and the brutal beating of Tim Hawley imoortant difference is that under the guidelines.judges were free attest to the difficulty, prior to Measure 11, of convincing juvenile to sentence within a specified ranae.' court judges to allow even the most dangerous youth to be tried Does this make you think that a judge can choose a sentence in adult court. from 10 years to 22 years? If so, you were deceived. For a con- Scott Bell was lured to a remote location near Mt.Hood,shot in victed murderer who is a"first-time offender", in the vast majority the head execution-style and buried in a shallow grave, of cases,the range of sentences available to the judge starts Scott's killer admitted committing the murder to acquire Scott's at 10 years and ends at 10 years and one month! car.After a Clackamas County judge refused to waive him to adult To receive the 22 year sentence,the murderer has to have com- court,the killer bragged that he"got way with murder". mitted three prior violent crimes.And even then he is eligible for a The murderer walked out of McLaren Youth Facility at age "good-time"reduction. Here is the effect of Measure 94 on minimum prison terms for Tim Hawley was brutally beaten by three youths outside the some Measure 11 crimes. Lloyd Center as he and his fiancee were leaving a movie theater. • Forcible rape would drop from 8 years,4 months to 2 years,5 Hawley was tackled, beaten and kicked in the head until months. unconscious,then thrown down a flight of stairs. In order to save his life, doctors had to remove the front portion of • Manslaughter II would drop from 6 years, 3 months to Hawley's brain. PROBATION. Eight years later,Tim Hawley is still severely disabled. Murder would drop from 25 years to 8 years! The two primary participants both had substantial juvenile For more, see www.crimevictimsunited.org/ court records.One was on probation for raping a 4 year-old. measurel l/sentencingcomparison.htm. The other perpetrator had been previously referred to juvenile Why are "minimum prison terms" important? Because in most authorities for participating in a similar gang beating. cases,judaes are forced to give the minimum sentence to"first- Nonetheless,the juvenile court judge again refused to waive time offenders", even first-time kidnappers,first-time rapists either youth to adult court for trial. and first-time murderers. And even if the "first-time offender' These criminals were released from custody before age has had numerous run-ins with the law but was never convicted 21 of a serious crime. Don't turn back the clock to the failed policies of the past. The proponents of Measure 94 are betting that they can fool you into believing that a judge can choose from a wide range of VOTE NO ON MEASURE 94. sentences. Steve Doell DON'T BE DECEIVED. Crime Victims United www.crimevictimsunited.org VOTE NO ON MEASURE 94 (This information furnished by Steve Doell,Crime Victims United.) Joanne Vaughn Crime Victims United www.crimevictimsunited.org (This information furnished by Joanne Vaughn,Crime Victims United.) i (This space purchased for$500 to accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 128 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 94 Arguments ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION MEASURE 94 WOULD RETURN TO A BROKEN SYSTEM MEASURE 94:A RETREAT IN THE WAR AGAINST CRIME In 1989 Oregon's legislature adopted"sentencing guidelines". In 1994, 1 sponsored Measure 11 because,like you, I was fed up The sentences established were not what the legislature thought with weak sentences for violent crimes.Measure 11 received 66% just, but rather were based on limited prison space. Between of the vote. Measure 94 throws out Measure 11, and will return 1958 and 1988, the number of prison beds actually decreased violent criminals to the streets. while the state's population tripled. Before Measure 11,murderers actually served an average of less Almost everyone who worked on sentencing guidelines knew than 9 years in prison, and rapists actually served less than 3 the sentences were low,especially for violent offenses.We simply years in prison.Measure 11 requires that each murderer serve at Tacked adequate space to house our most violent offenders for an least 25 years in prison and each first-degree rapist serve at least appropriate time.The legislature was told that, once the public 10 years in prison.Other violent crimes also receive mandatory understood what kind of sentences were actually imposed, they minimums. might change the law. In 1995 they did when 66% of voters Measure 11 is not a'three strikes and you're out" law and was approved Measure 11. never presented as such. Measure 11 lets the crime define the Sentencing guidelines restricted the maximum sentence a time served. fudge could give a violent offender.With the exception of murder, Since Measure 11 went into effect in 1995, the rate of violent upon certain findings, judges could and did give probation (no crime in Oregon has gone down every year,for a 23%reduction prison time) for violent felony offenses, including forcible rape, in five years. armed robbery,and brutal assaults.It's no wonder that criminal defense attorneys and convicted criminals like sentencing This means 72,000 Oregonians have not been murdered, raped, guidelines. robbed, assaulted, or kidnapped, largely because Measure 11 Opponents of Measure 11 say it took discretion away from the violent criminals have been incarcerated rather than caught and courts. That is very misleading. Measure 11 did take away a released. court's ability to impose probation and lesser sentences for At present, over 3,200 violent criminals are incarcerated as a violent crimes.It did not take away a court's discretion to impose result of Measure 11.Measure 94 requires that all of these violent greater sentences in some circumstances or concurrent criminals be re-sentenced within 90 days, under the old, weak sentences for multiple offenses. And in 1997, the Oregon sentencing laws.This is an incredible burden on police,prosecu- Legislature returned discretion to judges by passing Senate Bill tors,the courts,victims and their families,and taxpayers.Virtually 1049. all of these violent criminals will have to be provided with If Measure 11 is repealed the violent crime rate in Oregon will taxpayer-paid lawyers to represent them in the re-sentencing increase significantly.The opponents of Measure 11 will never cases. , acknowledge what they have done.Unfortunately,thousands When the old,weak sentencing laws are applied to these violent of victims will find out the hard way. Some will die;many will criminals, nearly 1000 of them will be eligible for immediate have physical and mental scars that will last their entire lives. release from prison. Don't let this happen. For more information, please refer to Measure 11 and Measure Let's not dismantle a system that is working and replace it with 94 on my Web Site, Kevin.Mannix.com. sentencing guidelines that were broken the day they became law. Please vote NO on Measure 94 to continue to protect our families, VOTE NO ON MEASURE 94. our neighborhoods,and our schools from violent criminals. Steve Doell Kevin L.Mannix Crime Victims United State Representative www.crimevictimsunited.org (This information furnished by Kevin L.Mannix,Justice For All.) (This information furnished by Steve Doell,Crime Victims United.) i 7 (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 129 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet-Statewide Measures Measure No. 94 Arguments ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION OREGON'S PROSECUTORS URGE YOU TO VOTE NO ON THE OFFICERS OF THE PORTLAND MEASURE 94. POLICE ASSOCIATION As Oregon's elected prosecutors we deal daily with the devasta- URGE YOU TO VOTE tion caused by violent crime.Measure 11 requires criminals con- NO ON BALLOT MEASURE 94 victed of the most serious and violent felonies to serve a minimum The men and women of the Portland Police Association know term in prison ranging from just under 6 years years (for child how crime impacts people.The victims are not statistics.They are molestation)to 10 years(for manslaughter)in prison. your friends,families,and neighbors. MEASURE 94 WILL RESULT IN IMMEDIATE RELEASE OF Everyday, members of the Portland Police Association work OVER 800 KILLERS,CHILD MOLESTERS,AND ROBBERS! with the victims of the criminals which Measure 94 would put back Measure 94 would not only completely repeal Measure 11,requir- on the street: ing judges to impose much more lenient"guidelines"sentences, • Violent criminals who have raped women and children. but all 3000 of the worst criminals in Oregon would have to be Repeat predators who find the weak and innocent to prey re-sentenced within 90 days.Judges will have NO CHOICE but to IMMEDIATELY release at least 800 of these killers, rapists, and upon. robbers. Worse yet, the wounds of all 3000 crimes will be • The worst offenders of the prison system who have repeat- re-opened as each of these criminals gets a new sentencing pAly or violently destroyed peoples lives. hearing,forcing the victims to revisit the horror of the crimes. The Portland Police Association's motto is: MEASURE 94 IS BASED ON FALSE ASSUMPTIONS AND MIS-STATEMENTS Maintaining the Vigil Don't mistake Oregon's sensible sentences-which range from 6 We have dedicated our lives to maintaining the vigil to protect the years for child molestation to 8 years for rape to 25 years for citizens who live, work, and visit the City of Portland.We know murder, for the far more drastic"three strikes laws"that exist in what criminal violence does to the lives of the citizens we have California or federal mandatory drug sentences. sworn our professional lives to protect and serve.The Portland JOIN YOUR LOCAL D.A.AND THE Police Association is proud of the job the criminal justice system OREGON DISTRICT ATTORNEY'S ASSOCIATION AND has done,with the common sense of Measure 11 to lock up vio- VOTE NO ON MEASURE 94 lent criminals.Common sense members of the public have sat on juries and heard the evidence. They have found the criminals Scott Heiser,Benton County guilty! Terry Gustafson,Clackamas County Joshua Marquis,Clatsop County Since Measure 11 was passed by the voters of the State of R.Stephen Atchison,Columbia County Oregon,crime has gone DOWN! Paul Burgett,Coos County • Vicious rape has gone DOWN! Gary Williams,Crook County Michael Dugan,Deschutes County • Violent robbery has gone DOWN! Jack Banta,Douglas County • Brutal assault has gone DOWN! Timothy Colahan,Harney County John Sewell,Hood River County Measure 11 has provided the officers of the Portland Police Mark Huddleston,Jackson County Association a tool that has helped us to protect y Clay Johnson,Josephine County The men and women of the Portland Police Association urge Edwin Caleb,Klamath County you to help protect the weak,the innocent,and the unprotected. Doug Harcleroad,Lane County The officers, sergeants, detectives, and criminalists of the Jason Carlile,Linn County Portland Police Association ask that you,too, Dale Penn,Marion County David Allen,Morrow County Maintain the Vigil William Porter,Tillamook County Christopher Brauer,Umatilla County VOTE NO ON MEASURE 94 Russell West,Union County (This information furnished by Kurt R.Nelson,Portland Police Association.) Daniel Ousley,Wallowa County Bob Hermann,Washington County Thomas Cutsforth,Wheeler County Bradley Berry,Yamhill County (This information furnished by Joshua Marquis, Oregon District Attorney's Association.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 130 CONTINUED t. Official 2000 General Election Voters'.Pamphlet-Statewide Measures Measure No. 94 Arguments . ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION MADD OREGON ASKS YOU TO VOTE NO ON MEASURE 94 DON'T SEND THE WRONG MESSAGE! IL The volunteers of Mothers Against Drunk Driving Oregon, When voters passed Measure 11 in 1994, critics predicted the (MADD Oregon), ask you to vote NO on Measure 94, a cost of new prisons to house all the prisoners would break the measure that repeals minimum sentences for violent felonies and budget.Instead,violent crime rates have fallen every year and the requires resentencing of those already serving time for past cost of prisons is expected to be a quarter of what was predicted. crimes. Across the country,crime rates have been falling because states This measure flies in the face of our mission:"To stop impaired have passed tough sentencing laws. Although these laws vary, driving, support the victims of this violent crime and prevent their message to potential criminals is the same:IF YOU DO THE underage drinking." CRIME,YOU'LL DO THE TIME. Measure 94 would provide early release to those now serving Now some Oregonians want to send a different message.They time for crashes where Oregonians were seriously injured, dis- want to repeal Oregon's tough sentencing law and return to the abled for the rest of their lives,or killed. days when criminals knew they could be arrested and convicted Measure 94 would reduce the penalties for those who choose, and still do little or no jail time,even for violent crimes. despite warning after warning, to commit these crimes in the DON'T BE FOOLED! future. Ballot Measure 94 won't just amend Measure 11, IT WOULD Impaired drivers who kill innocent people are often convicted REPEAL MEASURE 11. of Manslaughter II. Under Measure 94, the penalty for Manslaughter II can be as low as PROBATION. Not only that, but it is RETROACTIVE. This means over three thousand criminals already convicted of violent crimes will be The victims and the families of victims will never get their lives eligible for early release, many of them immediately. back to where they were before the crash.Measure 11 gives them Measure 11 does not apply to drug crimes or property crimes. some recompense for what they have suffered. Measure 94 Some people confuse Measure 11 with California's"Three Strikes would deny them this little bit of justice. and You're Out"law, which applies to all felonies. MEASURE 11 MADD volunteers throughout Oregon have worked tirelessly to ONLY APPLIES TO CRIMES AGAINST PEOPLE, WHERE improve the safely of our citizens by increasing awareness of the VIOLENCE IS USED OR THREATENED. seriousness of impaired driving.We work with law enforcement, Significantly, Measure 11 applies to nearly all serious crimes the State Legislators and with the many victims to make Oregon where guns are used.Many supporters of Measure serious 94 also sup - changing better place to live and raise families without the fear of a life. port tougher gun laws, yet REPEAL OF MEASURE 11 MEANS changing tragedy due an impaired driver's thoughtless act. SHORTER SENTENCES FOR PEOPLE WHO USE GUNS IN Measure 94 would undermine our long years of effort. VIOLENT CRIMES. Measure 94, if passed, would gut life-threatening offenders back MEND IT,DON'T END IT! on the road sooner.With greatly-reduced penalties for those who commit these felonies in the future, more innocent people would Measure 11 isn't perfect. It was designed as statutory law, not a be maimed and killed. constitutional amendment, so that modifications could be made MADD Oregon asks that you consider the safety of your loved based on experience.In fact, major improvements were made by ones and of all law-abiding Oregonians. the 1997 Legislature.But a complete repeal of Measure 11 will tilt the scales of justice back in favor of the criminal. Vote NO on Measure 94. VOTE NO ON MEASURE 94! Jeanne Canfield,Vice Chair MADD Oregon --Jack Roberts,Oregon labor commissioner (This information furnished by Jeanne Canfield, Mothers Against Drunk (This information furnished by Jack Roberts.) Driving Oregon.) i (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in.accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 131 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet=Statewide Measures T Measure No. 94 Arguments ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION PARENTS OF MURDERED CHILDREN,INC. Fellow Oregonians: OPPOSES MEASURE 94 1 ask you to oppose Ballot Measure 94. Parents of Murdered Children, Inc.is a national organization with In 1989, felony sentencing guidelines made Oregon a "just 2,000 Oregon members.Our members have suffered the greatest of losses and felt the deepest of pains. desserts"state:punishment is to fit the crime.As a private citizen, I chaired the panel the Legislature charged to develop the guide- We want you to understand the trauma that Measure 94 lines, which scaled punishment by crime seriousness and would inflict on us. offender's criminal history.Sentences for serious crime went up a Measure 94 forces survivors of homicide back to court for a new lot compared with prior law. sentencing g earing.A sentencing hearing is a traumatic,wrench- As a private citizen, I voted against Ballot Measure 11—not ing experience for families.They once again come face-to-face because 1 viewed its sentences overall as too severe but because with the criminal who shattered their lives.They often hear their I don't favor our making major General Fund spending decisions loved one torn down while the murderer is portrayed in glowing outside the Legislature's budget process. Oregonians decided terms. otherwise,as they are entitled to do.As Attorney General, I have Families and friends that have gone through this ordeal worked successfully to defend Measure 11 against constitutional should not be forced to go through it'again. attack, and to compel sentences required by Measure 11 when not imposed. If the family is"fortunate",the murderer receives a just sentence. In 1997 my office, with District Attorneys and others, helped This is a critical step toward healing–it tells the family that our develop legislation giving more sentencing options for some less community values the life of their murdered loved one.Measure serious offenses.I believe that effort previewed the way we should 94 would slash that just sentence,leave the family betrayed, approach Measure 11 change: a careful effort to ensure sanc- and deepen fresh wounds. I tions are always"just desserts,"especially for youth offenders. In the cases of youth murderers,it would be even worse.Measure Judged by that goal, we can further improve Measure 11. 94 would force the family through a"waiver"hearing,and in Measure 94,however,is not the way to do that.Measure 94 would many cases through an entire new trial and sentencing hear- reverse all Measure 11 policy decisions, including its sentences ing. This process could stretch out over years, requiring the for the most serious crimes.Those sentences are stern but just; family to dredge up painful memories again and again. we should retain them. Measure 11 has spared Oregon families the heartbreak that our Measure 94 would also compel resentencing thousands of members have known. One of my son's murderers had a prior offenders within a short time,with huge impact on our judicial sys- conviction for stabbing an innocent girl. He was released from tem, jails and victims; and would immediately release over 800 custody after less than three years. Authorities said he was offenders, many convicted of very serious crimes. capable of murder,but they could not hold him. Measure 11 gave us the ability to hold people like that. Again, our policy goal, which I strongly support, should be to Measure 94 would take it away. ensure Measure 11 always achieves"just desserts"sentencing. We can, and should, get to that goal without throwing out all What message would we send by the early release of the killers Measure 11 sentencing policy. of innocent men,women and children? I ask you to join me in voting against Ballot Measure 94. PARENTS OF MURDERED CHILDREN,INC.ASKS YOU TO Attorney General Hardy Myers VOTE NO ON MEASURE 94. Mary Elledge,Chapter Leader (This information furnished by Hardy Myers.) Parents of Murdered Children,Inc. (This information furnished by Mary Elledge,Parents of Murdered Children, Inc.) (This space purchased for$500 In accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 132 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet--Statewide Measures Measure No. 94 Arguments ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION MEASURE 94: A BAD IDEA WITH A LOT OF BAD Democratic Women For Justice Urge You to Vote No On 94 CONSEQUENCES. As victims' advocates we have fought long and hard for those As the elected District Attorney of Multnomah County and a most vulnerable, abused children and battered women.Measure citizen of Oregon, I ask you to vote No on Measure 94. 11 gives us a tool to put the perpetrators of violent crimes against • Measure 94 will let out of prison or significantly reduce the women and children behind bars so their victims can be safe. sentences of many very dangerous criminals. One out of four women say they've been victims of domestic • In Multnomah County alone it is estimated that 700 - 800 of violence or stalking by a spouse,partner or date at some point in these criminals will have to be resentenced within 90 days their lives, according to a new report by the National Institute of these measure passes. Justice. When such incidents escalate to brutal assaults, if rapes and murders,we need the protection and justice that • Measure 11 works. At the time of its passage, the violent Measure 11 provides. felony crime rate in Multnomah County was growing. Almost For children the news is even more grim: according to the U.S. from.the day of its passage that rate has gone on a steep Department of Health and Human Services, one girl in four and decline. In Portland alone, comparing 1994 to 1999, one boy in six has been sexually abused by age 18.The average reported cases of Murder,Rape,Robbery and Aggravated age of child sexual abuse:eleven.A typical pedophile will abuse Assault dropped more than 2500 a year. dozens of children before they are arrested.Again,Measure 11 • We have successfully worked with the legislature to provides the tool for keeping these predatory sex offenders improve Measure 11. We will certainly continue to work if off the streets. further improvements are necessary. Fortunately, society is taking a much more proactive stance in • Measure 11 has never included drug or property offenses. stemming this epidemic.We must continue our zero tolerance It has only applied to the most serious person felonies in our for the perpetrators of these heinous crimes. Measure 94 is law. a giant step backwards. If Measure 94 passes hundreds of Oregon's most violent predators will be resentenced and • Measure 94 is one-side)and it is not fair to victims.Victims eligible for release. will be told that the criminal who hurt them or their family mem- ber must be resentenced to what in most cases will be much In a criminal justice system that provides every protection for the shorter sentences,including outright release in many cases. criminal the victim is often overlooked. We urge our fellow Democrats and Victims' Advocates to filter through the • Measure 94 will transfer most juveniles back to juvenile rhetoric and join us in preserving mandatory minimum court and then reduce the time a juvenile can be kept under sentences for violent criminals,child molesters,rapists,the juvenile jurisdiction from 25 to 21 years of age. This will most violent of batterers and murderers. include the most violent juvenile offenders including murderers, rapists and armed robbers. Please join us to ensure that we never go back,VOTE NO on Measure 94. The changes Measure 94 will make are dangerous. The cases where we will see this danger are Murder, Manslaughter, Democratic Women For Justice Forcible Sexual Assaults,Armed Robberies and kidnappings. Rosanne M.Sizer Botkin I ASK YOU TO VOTE NO ON 94.THERE IS TOO MUCH AT Mary L.Donna Henderson STAKE. Stacy J.Heyworth (This information furnished by Michael D.Schrunk.) Tiana G.Tozer Charlotte Comito Christine Kirk (This information furnished by Charlotte Comito, Tiana Tozer;Democratic Women for Justice.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 133 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 94 Arguments ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION Oregon AFSCME Corrections Officers Oppose Measure 94 HOUSE SPEAKER LYNN SNODGRASS SAYS VOTE AGAINST As significant members of the Oregon Corrections community MEASURE 94 and a critical part of the Public Safety team, we agree that the HOLD JUVENILE OFFENDERS ACCOUNTABLE mandatory sentencing law (passed in 1994 as Measure 11) As Speaker of the House, I am writing to vigorously oppose needs modifications.This year's Measure 94 repeal doesn't do Measure 94.Measure 94 sends the wrong message at the wrong that! time. Oregon AFSCME Corrections represents the vast majority of Since the passage of Measure 11 in 1994, the Oregon Corrections Officers and other Corrections staff in the state prison Legislature has passed several laws to carry out the will of voters. system. We understand all of the problems – from the inside. During the last legislative session, we adopted groundbreaking There are things to be"fixed,"but Measure 94 won't do that. legislation to prevent juvenile crime and help at risk youth stay on Measure 94 has several flaws: the right path. • Measure 94 doesn't have the flexibility it needs. In some Measure 94 would undermine this effort in two ways. cases, less violent crimes may need to be dealt with less harshly. First, it sends the message to at-risk youth that they can commit We feel that judges need more discretion in these cases.Measure serious crimes without paying serious consequences.Second, it 94 proponents claim it gives judges discretion, but it still leaves could mean the release of hundreds of convicted violent and sex iudges no leeway in these cases. offenders who may lead impressionable youth down the wrong • Measure 94 is retroactive.As written,Measure 94 could lead path. to releasing dangerous,violent criminals back into our society.We Let's send a consistent message to the youth of our state: know.We supervise these criminals 24 hours a day.M 20'would Be a constructive citizen and we will provide all the help we can. re-offend immediately,causing untold harm to Oregonians. • Measure 94 puts an unfunded financial burden on local But choose a life of crime,and we will hold you accountable. government.Under Measure 94's retroactive clause,each inmate VOTE NO ON MEASURE 94 originally sentenced under Measure 11 must be re-sentenced. This requires transporting thousands of inmates back to their Lynn Snodgrass county of conviction and housing them in local jails.To make room, Speaker of the House we would have to release local dangerous criminal defendants (This information furnished by Lynn Snodgrass,Speaker of the House.) awaiting trial. What should happen?We believe ALL Oregon law enforcement professionals shoujd sit down with victims' advocates, defense attorneys, and legislators to accomplish the goal of improving Measure 11 without putting Oregonians at risk. In 1997 Senate Bill 1049 made some improvements and we can do it again. Join us in voting NO!on Measure 94. Oregon AFSCME Corrections Tina Turner-Morfitt, Intake Center Jim Reynolds,Oregon Women's Correctional Center Kevin Jackson, Snake River Correctional Institution Hermann Green, Columbia River Correctional Institution (This information furnished by Don Loving,Oregon AFSCME Council 75.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 134 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 94 Arguments ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION Oregon Chiefs of Police and Sheriffs Say NO on 94 WHO WOULD MEASURE 94 HURT MOST? As Chiefs of Police and Sheriffs,we are responsible for protecting If Measure 94 passes,most of Oregon's 3000 worst criminals will communities in Oregon.The men and women in our charge will be released early.800 to 1300 will be released within 90 days of have to cope with the fallout from Measure 94. the election.Some of them will commit new violent crimes.Who The resentencing requirement of Measure 94 will result in the will the new victims be? early release of 800 to 1300 people convicted of violent and sex Violent criminals target those most vulnerable.The poor,children, crimes. Our officers will face personal danger as they re-arrest women,and minorities will pay disproportionately for Measure 94. those who re-offend.They will be the ones to deal with the addi- A large percentage of the criminals to be released by Measure 94 tional victims of violence,and to notify victims'families. are child molesters. Children will pay disproportionately for By taking the most dangerous criminals off the streets, Measure Measure 94. 11 enhanced the ability of police officers and deputies across Measure 94 requires resentencing 306 rapists.Women will pay Oregon to protect you. It allows us to spend more time stopping disproportionately for Measure 94. i crime before it happens.Measure 94 would take us back to the days when our officers arrested violent criminals only to see them Minorities are victims of violent crime far beyond their numbers. I back in the community after a short sentence. FBI statistics show that an African-American is SIX TIMES MORE Among our many duties, the Sheriffs of Oregop are responsible LIKELY TO BE MURDERED than a Caucasian. Minorities will for county jails.This is where people who commit non-Measure 11 pay disproportionately for Measure 94. crimes are housed. At a time when we already have to release Measure 94 proponents say our criminal justice system is racist. offenders early for lack of space, Measure 94 requires that we What is their excuse for slashing the sentences of the 2357 deal with 3300 offenders convicted of violent and sex crimes violent criminals who are Caucasian?Some of these criminals in a period of 90 days! committed racially-motivated crimes! If Measure 94 passes, these offenders all have to be resen- Victims of all races suffer the same from violent crime.When we tenced.They all have to be trans{2orted from prison to the county are assaulted or raped,we hurt.When we are murdered,we die. of conviction.They all have to be housed in county jails.We don't And when violent criminals do these horrible things, wS have the room, we don't have the resources, and Measure 94 deserve justice. makes no provisions. What effect will released violent criminals have on minority com- Measure 94 would stress the entire law enforcement system. munities? What kind of influence will they be on at-risk youth? And why?Measure 11 is working as designed.The most danger- One unspeakable tragedy tells the story. ous criminals are where they can't hurt innocent people.Violent crime rates have steadily declined. The resources of local law Chad Render was an African-American student-athlete at enforcement can now be focussed on prevention. Portland State University. He maintained a 3.26 GPA despite working 32 hours per week in a nursing home. He aspired to be Vote No on 94 an architect. Oregon Police Chiefs For Safer Communities On July 27, 1997,a violent adult criminal recruited a 15-year-old Sheriffs of Oregon to commit a robbery. During the robbery, he murdered Chad (This information furnished by Steven Winegar, Oregon Police Chiefs for Render. Safer Communities;Stan Robson,Sheriffs of Oregon.) If Measure 94 passes, the ringleader's sentence will be reduced and he will come back into the community.The community has lost Chad Render forever. Violent crime is a heavy burden on minority communities. Measure 94 will make it worse. VOTE NO ON MEASURE 94 (This information furnished by Willie Brown.) (This space purchased for$500,in accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 135 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 94 Arguments ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION MEASURE 11 IS WELL WORTH THE COST MEASURE 11 OPPONENTS PLAY LOOSE WITH THE FACTS The Measure 94 financial impact statement shows the cost of Measure 94 sponsor Lorraine Heller:"Oregon has Measure 11, Measure 11 for the 2001-2002 budget year to be about $48 the mandatory minimum sentencing law that hands out prison million. terms for 23 crimes deemed to be violent but that include fistfights This is less than one percent of the 5 billion dollar state annual and shoplifting:'(Oregonian, 1/15/1999) budget. Truth:Measure 11 does not cover fistfights unless they are really Each Oregonian will pay about $15 in 2001-2002 for fitting assaults in which the victim suffers significant injury and the sentences for violent criminals. attacker has a prior conviction. Measure 11 does not cover shoplifting or theft under any circumstances. Measure 11 does In other terms,it costs you less than one cent per year to keep cover robbery, assault, kidnapping, rape and other sex crimes, one robber,one kidnapper.one rapist,or one killer in prison. manslaughter,attempted murder and murder. Is preventing additional violent crimes and having a criminal Measure 94 sponsor Jo Ann Bowman:"No one who has com- justice system that criminals take seriously worth$15 per year to mitted murder, rape, child molestation, or any vicious crime is 1 youd going to get out because Measure 11 has been repealed.' This analysis does not take into account the Measure 11 savings (Channel 2 News,4/1/2000) from not having to re-arrest those who re-offend,investigate their Truth:All 3000+,Measure 11 offenders will be resentenced under new crimes,pay their new lawyers,pay for their new trials.It also a system that provides for much shorter sentences.Most, inciud- does not take into account public and private medical and insur- ina rapists and murders will have their sentences significantly ance savings gained from Measure 11. reduced. An estimated 800 to 1300 will be released within 90 How does Measure 11 spending impact education? days of the election. From the web site of Measure 94 sponsor Cathi Lawler:"First Education costs each Oregonian about$890 per year compared time offenders, youth included, are incarcerated with hardened, to$15 for Measure 11.The impact of Measure 11 on education repeat offenders.They share the same cells:' is that it educates people not to assault,rob,kidnap,rape or kill other people. Truth: All youth offenders are sent to youth facilities run by the Oregon Youth Authority where they can stay until age 25.A In 1994, the voters of Oregon were told that Measure 11 would small number (7 as of 8/1/2000)are in adult prison because cost$92 million per year for prison construction and$101 million they assaulted other youth or staff or refused treatment. Even per year for operating costs, a total of $193 million. 66% of those sent to adult prison are segregated from"hardened repeat Oregon voters approved these expenses.The actual cost has offenders". been far less and the violent crime rate has dropped signifi- cantly.The taxpayers of Oregon are getting their money's worth Measure 11 opponent Emily Simon: "it doesn't give people from Measure 11. treatment options for example for juvenile sex offenders...You get treated like an adult and you go to prison." (KPAM radio, $48 million a year is a lot of money, but it is money well spent 5/11/2000) when you consider the number of people not robbed,the number of children not abused, the number of women not raped, the Truth:Treatment provided by the Oregon Youth Authority includes number of people not killed because the citizens of the State of drug and alcohol rehabilitation,violent offender treatment,psycho- Oregon no longer tolerate violent crime. logical services,anger management and education. VOTE NO ON MEASURE 94 For more,see www.crimevictimsunited.org/measurell/ misrepresentations.htm. (This information furnished by Howard Rodstein,Crime Victims United.) VOTE NO ON MEASURE 94 Howard Rodstein Crime Victims United (This information furnished by Howard Rodstein,Crime Victims United.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 136 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 94 Arguments ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION MORE MEASURE 94 MYTHS HOW TO RIDE A BICYCLE Fiction: "The percentage of first-time offenders [is] 60%" (A OUT OF THE OREGON STATE PENITENTIARY February 2 letter to The Oregonian from Measure 94 sponsor Eugene Register-Guard,July 27,2000 Cathi Lawler) A letter from an Oregon prison inmate appeared.He wrote: Fact:The 60%figure comes from the Department of Corrections. "Voters passed an unfair law in 1994 that is putting 15 year olds The DOC has stated that their records do not include juvenile in prison for a minimum of six years. It's called Measure 11, crimes,do not include out-of-state crimes,do not include out of Oregon's flawed mandatory minimum sentencing law....I am country crimes and do not include some serious misdemeanors well aware that one simple mistake can land a person in prison (e.g.,domestic violence and drunk driving). for a minimum of 70 months" In a random sample done by the Multnomah County District Eugene Register-Guard,August 1 Attorney's office, 84% of the Measure 11 criminals had a prior criminal record.Among the 16%of"first-time offenders"were two Eugene resident Thomas F.Becker replied: who had long histories of child molestation.For the remainder, it was first convictions for robbery, rape, child molestation and "I was quite amazed at the chutzpah of Oregon State manslaughter. (For details see www.crimevictimsunited.org/ Penitentiary inmate...We don't know what his crime was,but measurell/measurel1study.htm) imagine it involved more than 'one simple mistake:...The provisions of Measure 11 apply only to the most heinous Fiction:"For murder the guideline range was 10 years to 22 years criminal activity: murder, manslaughter, assault, kidnapping, and 5 months while under Measure 11 the sentence is 25 years... rape,sodomy, robbery and sexual abuse.' The important difference is that under the guidelines,judges were free to sentence within a specified range:'(A July 29 letter from Eugene Register-Guard,August 16 Measure 94 sponsor to The Oregonian) The parents of the inmate replied indignantly: Fact: For a convicted murderer who is a"first-time offender", in "Since we know what happened, we don't appreciate Becker the vast majority of cases, the sentence range available to the 'imagining'our son's situation...Becker includes robbery(steal- judge starts at 10 years and ends at 10 years and one month! ing your neighbor's bike) and assault (defending yourself Fiction: "Mandatory minimum sentencing has quadrupled the against the school bully with a pocket knife) in his list of prison population in recent years."(A July 28 letter printed in the "heinous crimes"covered by Measure 11:' Eugene Register Guard.) Reality check: Stealing a bike is not a Measure 11 crime, not Fact: According to statistics from the Oregon Department of even close.Self-defense is never a crime. Administrative Services,the prison population was 7290 in April, You don't have to 'imagine'the inmate's situation. Here are the 1995,when Measure 11 went into effect.The estimate for July 1, facts. 2000, was 9861.That is a growth of 35%, hardly a quadrupling. As of April of this year;just half the total growth going forward is The inmate,age 21,was convicted of Sex Abuse I for molest- attributed to Measure 11.The rate of growth is slowino. ing a 5-year-old girl. He told police the molestation took place The proponents of Measure 94 want to sell you their fiction. over a one year period. Find the facts at If Measure 94 passes. his 6-year, 3 month prison term will be www.crimevictimsunited.org/measurel l/misrepresentations.htm. slashed to no more than 15 months and he will be released in 2001. VOTE NO ON MEASURE 94 This criminal inmate, like many other violent criminals and sex (This information furnished by Howard Rodstein,Crime Victims United.) offenders, is attempting to create a fictitious bicycle in your imaa- inati n.Once they create it,they'll ride it right out of prison. VOTE NO ON MEASURE 94 (This information furnished by Howard Rodstein,Crime Victims United.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 137 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet-Statewide Measures Measure No. 94 Arguments ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION WHY I OPPOSE MEASURE 94 Justice believe that fitting punishment is an essential component of justice. Measure 94 changes the minimum prison term for forcible rape from 8 years and four months to 2 years and four months. It changes the minimum prison term for murder from 25 years to 8 years. In many cases, judges have no choice but to give the minimum term. Which prison term would you find just if your daughter were raped or your brother murdered? Protection of Innocent People Measure 94 reduces minimum prison terms for robbery, assault, kidnapping, rape and other sex crimes, manslaughter, attempted murde r and murder by one-half to two-thirds. Over 3000 criminals convicted of these crimes,including 480 sen- tenced for assault, 147 for kidnapping, 314 for rape, 187 for manslaughter, 145 for attempted murder,and 107 for murder will be resentenced(numbers as of 8/2000).Most will have their sen- tences reduced and 800 to 1300 will be released within 90 days of the election. With hundreds of additional violent criminals on the streets imme- diately and thousands eventually, there will be many additional innocent victims. Deterrence Opponents of Measure 11 say that long sentences do not deter crime. They may not deter everyone, but (.believe that they deter some people. Each crime deterred is at least one fewer victim of rob- bery,assault, kidnapping, rape, manslaughter, attempted murder or murder. The deterrent effect will continue to increase as people become more aware that violent crime is not tolerated in Oregon,butbutonly if we stand firm. Measure 94 Is Extreme The sponsors of Measure 94 claim that they are concerned with cases involving "fistfights and shoplifting" (neither of which are Measure 11 offenses). Then why does their measure slash sentences for rapists and murderers? Even if you share some of their concerns, slashing sen- tences for rapists and murderers is a horrible idea! VOTE NO ON MEASURE 94 Gordon McDonald Crime Victims United www.crimevictimsunited.org (This information furnished by Gordon McDonald,Crime Victims United.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 138 Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 95 Proposed by initiative petition to be voted on at the General the improved job performance. Election, November 7,2000. (d) For purposes of this section,job performance shall mean the degree to which the appropriate knowledge of the teacher's students increased while under his or her BALLOT TITLE instruction. (e) No provision of this section shall be construed as requiring a school district to dismiss one teacher and keep another AMENDS CONSTFTU*n0WN STUDENT Lii_ARNNG if doing so would result in the district retaining a teacher �� I7ETERMFNESTEAGHR PAY;QUAfMtFFGATIQNS, less qualified to teach the actual subject(s) to be taught, Nib Sl`NF©Rl7Y"0ITRMINE RETENT.ItSNI than the teacher dismissed. (f) Granting an across the board cost of living pay,increase to RESULT O `'YES°"VOTE-='Yas>'Vote rdqufres stud'nt l6arning, all teachers in the district,which increase is not in excess not seniod.t determines teaohar pay; qualif', a iottS, student' of the increase in the consumer price index,or its succes- learning determfre retention, sor index, for the preceding year, shall not be prohibited under this section, provided that the base on which the RESUiTO.-"•�+It;7VOTE-1 vuteMair%ourrent',lawsfor.pay-' increase is made is pay based on job performance, not irTg, retaining teachers by qualifications, irt,ppng pet c3t'rme seniority. f�dLtCatiC3n,SerTtoi'ity. (2) The provisions of this section shall not be applied so as to S#MM+tIRY;Amends Coilnstitutlw Zurrenll y, senior+tt.and host- conflict with a collective bargaining agreement in effect on or grade to study im Y de#ermine.t3ubliC'SOfit�1 teacher.pay Jt before the effective date of this section, or applied in a man - seorif}r Measure reruirs public sctTtTCTI teacher'S pair,job, ec�1-! ner which would cause a provision of this section to conflict rity to based on Increase in Students'appropri,to kri0 tedge with the U.S. Constitution. Neither a collective bargaining white under teeGherS irl5tr++ctiCtn.R11ows perforrnrtCe-t3asied pey' agreement signed after the effective date of this section, nor increases,: certairr WCross-the-board cost-rrt living lrtC eases: an extension to a collective bargaining agreement, which retention of mast quatifled.teacher of sub' 't Wtten[syoffs+fur. extension was signed after the effective date of this section, Prahibits automatic pay,trioreases tol3 tetarTtTOn based•on rtiDr, shall contain a provision that conflicts with this section. ity.Appfjss#o new or,ext rtded coilc�ctWei argairring egreerriertts signed on/ /ter tJavembee (lbt? (3) If any phrase,clause,or part of this section is invalidated by a court of competent jurisdiction, the remaining phrases, ESTIMATE'OF'FtNANCFAI» IMPACT: State. xfaerTdtturaa on clauses, and parts shall remain in full force and effect. If any higher educe#iprj she tYslrt7eted t irrcrBeSe 9.t,fst},t1t3U tUring provision of this section is found to violate or infringe upon the the? fl€&t ttrre8 years and ,:�,OAQ per year after:#)Tea. right of any individual or group under the U.S.Constitution,the Local school distriotS and Ct�rTrT�'aTlrTkty id 1 eg s distrlrits expendi- provision shall remain in full force and effect for all other tures are es#imated to-irtcreaSe$;3 i 0,006 during the first#'Tree persons or groups for which no infringement has been found. years and ViTs,46#S,tJ r year.aftt r.that:; . These xpenditure 5 W1 tt.pay fdr a�idrtionel#cStlrTg cif studerT ,in order ttT n7eur #eWCht3r.perforrranie. There is tto irrTpact orT state or locl.goverrrTient tsr revenues. TEXT OF MEASURE BE IT ENACTED BY THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF OREGON: The Constitution of the State of Oregon is amended by adding the following section: Section 1.(1)Whereas it is in the best interest of the children in the Oregon public school system that teachers be paid based on performance rather than seniority, and that the best teachers be retained when reductions in staff occur; pay and job security of public school teachers shall be based on job performance,not on seniority. (a) For purposes of this section, if a school or school district experiences a reduction in teaching staff, retaining one teacher over another teacher based on time on the job shall be considered job security based on seniority. . (b) For purposes of this section, automatic step or pay increases based on time on the job shall be considered pay based on seniority. (c) For purposes of this section, increasing a teacher's pay based on the teacher having completed one or more post graduate college courses,or having received one or more post graduate degrees,shall be considered pay based on seniority.If the post graduate study improves the teacher's job performance,the teacher may be paid more based on 139 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet-Statewide Measures Measure No. 95 EXPLANATORY STATEMENT Ballot Measure 95 amends the Oregon Constitution by adding a provision that changes the method by which all public school teachers,whether or not in a collective bargaining unit, are paid and laid off. Under current law, a public school or school district may use length of time teaching and additional college course credits to determine a teacher's pay, including pay increases. This measure prohibits public schools or school districts from paying a teacher based on length of time teaching or on additional college courses taken. Instead, this measure requires public schools and school districts to base a teacher's pay,including pay increases,on that teacher's job performance. The measure defines job performance as the degree to which the appropriate knowledge of the teacher's students increased while under the teacher's instruction. The measure does not address how or by whom appropriate knowledge will be defined or measured. The measure also changes the basis for determining which teachers are retained when layoffs occur.Under current law,pub- lic schools and school districts may use the length of time teach- ing as one factor in determining which teachers are retained when a layoff occurs.The measure requires that the increase in students'appropriate knowledge while under a teacher's instruc- tion be the sole determining factor when making layoff decisions, unless doing so would result in the public school or school district retaining a teacher less qualified to teach the subject needed. The measure allows cost of living pay increases to public school teachers,limited to the consumer price index.For the pur- poses of this measure,"public schools"include public elementary schools,public secondary schools,community colleges,state col- leges and state universities, and all state and local institutions that provide education for patients or inmates. The measure applies to collective bargaining agreements signed or extended.after November 7,2000. Committee Members: Appointed by: Rob Kremer Chief Petitioners Becky Miller Chief Petitioners Marc Abrams Secretary of State Monica A.Smith Secretary of State Karla Wenzel Members of the Committee (This committee was appointed to provide an impartial explanation of the ballot measure pursuant to ORS 251.215.) 140 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 95 Arguments ARGUMENT IN FAVOR ARGUMENT IN FAVOR IT'S ALL ABOUT SENIORITY! KEEP OUR BEST TEACHERS Most Oregonians are shocked when they learn that about 95 per- It was a real eye opener for me the last time the Portland School cent of public school teachers' salaries are based solely on District chose to lay off a few hundred school teachers as a way seniority. Not how well they teach. Just how long they've been to finance pay raises for the remaining ones. there. Never mind the politics of the district's decision to grant pay raises Good teachers are not rewarded. Incompetent teachers are financed by laying off teachers. It was the way the lay-offs protected.What's best for the kids is not even factored into the occurred that shocked me. Like most voters, I was a bit naive equation.It's all about seniority. about the way such decisions were made.l assumed the district Nowhere is that more obvious than when lay-offs occur. would ay off the worst teachers and keep the best.Was I ever wrong! When a reduction in staff is required, do schools keep the best When a school district in Oregon reduces the size of its teaching teachers?The answer may surprise you. staff, teaching skill and job performance are not the factors that Thanks to collective bargaining contracts the teachers union has determine who will go and who will stay.Pretty much all that mat- forced down the throats of every school district in the state, ters is teacher seniority.The teachers who have been there the schools automatically keep the teachers who have been there the longest are the ones who stay.The teachers who are newest are longest; even if they are the least competent, and even if some the ones who are let go. It's written right into the contracts the of the brightest and best must be laid off to protect those with teachers union makes with the districts. seniority. A newer teacher may be brilliant,creative and energetic.The kids That really is how it works.No reward for a job well done.Just pay may love their classes and actually attend and learn.But none of and job security based on seniority.Sure, teachers get an extra this matters. The teachers who have been there the longest thousand bucks or so each year for extra college courses or stay,even if they're incompetent The new ones are let go. degrees.But even that policy is a farce. How does this policy benefit the kids?Truth is, it doesn't. Thanks once again to the teachers union, extra college classes Measure 95 gives all Oregon school districts something they don't have to be related to subjects the teacher actually teaches. desperately need the ability to keen the best,most qualified Math teachers can get paid extra for taking college courses in teachers. Instead of school districts being forced to accept the Modern Feminist Philosophy or Medieval Basket Weaving.That's union's seniority system when lay-offs occur; Measure 95 really how it works. requires the district to ignore seniority and keep the teachers Nothing in the current system is designed to improve the quality most qualified to teach the subjects for which teachers are of the education our kids receive.The current system is designed needed. merely to reward seniority. If you're like me, you probably thought that's the way they did it Measure 96 would fix all that.Teachers would be paid based on already. It's not. More than 95 percent of the time, seniority is the increase in the appropriate knowledge of students under the pretty much all that matters. teacher's instruction. For teaching. And if lay-offs occur, school VOTE YES ON MEASURE 95 districts would keep the best teachers, not just those who have been there the longest.It's that simple. (This information furnished by Bill Sizemore,Oregon Taxpayers United.) For once,there would be some accountability in public education. Some reward for a job well done. (This information furnished by Becky Miller.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 141 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 95 Arguments ARGUMENT IN FAVOR ARGUMENT IN FAVOR YOU GET WHAT YOU PAY FOR MEASURE 95 IS THE ULTIMATE IN LOCAL CONTROL Our current system of paying teachers is designed to reward If ever there was an opportunity for local school districts,parents, teachers for one thing: seniority.The longer they've been there, teachers, and school boards to start having some control over the more they get paid. student learning,this is it. When you reward something you tend to get more of it If Imagine the community getting to design a tailor-made teacher you don't reward something you get less of it. compensation package that reflects the values of the local That's exactly what's happening in our schools.The teachers who community! Imagine the community being able to decide what have been there the longest get more money and more job students are expected to learn, and then being able to reward security–regardless of whether they are doing a good job. those talented teachers who get the job done! What we aren't getting more of is student learning. You can't do that right now. Right now you have to pay all teachers the same, whether they are the best teacher your child Studies consistently show that how long a teacher has been has ever had or the worst teacher your child has ever had.That's teaching has no relationship to student learning.What that means not fair. is we are rewarding something that has nothing to do with It's not fair to teachers and it's not fair to our kids. the purpose of our schools! y It's pretty obvious that the best way to get more student learning Measure 95 doesn't specify a curriculum that kids are expected –which is the purpose of our schools–is to tie teachers'pay to to learn. It doesn't specify how much teachers will be paid. It student learning. In other words, the more students learn, the doesn't specify how student learning will be measured.It doesn't more the teachers will be paid. include–or exclude–ways to include the wide variety of factors that affect student learning.That's because we believe those are And in fact where this has been tried it has worked! North decisions that are best made by the people who are living in those Carolina, which offers financial incentives to teachers for situations,not by some statewide bureaucracy and not dictated in improved student learning, has shown the greatest student the state constitution. improvement in math and reading in the nation over the past ten Measure 95 will end the cookie cutter teacher pay system we years. have in Oregon that rewards teachers simply for getting older. It It's time we put our money toward the thing we really are empowers local communities to reward teachers for teaching after: student learning. And that's exactly what Measure 95 what those local communities value. does. It's time we had real local control of Oregon schools. With Vote YES on Measure 95. Measure 95,we will have it. (This information furnished by Becky Miller,Chief Petitioner.) (This information furnished by Becky Miller,Chief Petitioner.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 142 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 95 Arguments ARGUMENT IN FAVOR ARGUMENT IN FAVOR BEHIND THE CURTAIN TEACHERS:ARE THEY GOOD GUYS OR BAD GUYS? By now, you've been exposed to television and radio ads telling Good luck figuring that out, if you listen to the teachers union. you what a lousy idea Measure 95 is and how unfair it would be On the one hand,the teachers union tells us that teachers are not to pay our hardworking, dedicated teachers based on student learning. motivated by money,only by the selfless desire to teach kids. But let's take a peek behind the curtain and see what's really On the other hand,they tell us that passing Measure 95 will result going on. in those same teachers abandoning real teaching and instead forcing their students to memorize useless facts on a test, all in The NEA,the national teachers union,and its Oregon affiliate,the the quest for more money for themselves. OEA, hate merit pay.They know as well as you and I that the Right. current seniority based pay system undermines public education. But as unions, they know they cannot survive a pay system that Let's get real, now.The fact is most teachers ARE motivated by rewards job performance.For these unions to remain powerful, the selfless desire to teach kids.Most teachers are doing a great teacher pay and j_ob security must be based on teacher job.Most teachers are loved by their students. senioritl not job performance. And most teachers would–just like the rest of us–like to be able Here's why: to earn more money for doing an outstanding job, but they can't The purpose of the teachers union is to bargain with school because their union requires that they all be paid the same. districts to get higher pay for teachers. Measure 95 is not some black magic spell that will overnight The seniority based system is so critical to the teachers transform your child's wonderful teacher into a self-centered, union because it allows the union to demand higher pay money-hungry jerk.All it will do is get rid of a teacher pay system raises than school districts can afford to Day.You see, when that isn't serving the kids or the teachers well and replace it with the union demands higher salaries than the district can afford,the a system that will reward good teachers for a job well done. higher salaries must be financed by either increasing taxes or Please vote YES on Measure 95. laying off as many existing teachers as it takes to save enough money to pay the remaining teachers the higher salaries. (This information furnished by Becky Miller,Chief Petitioner) But why would teachers allow their union to demand pay raises so large that some of them will lose their jobs? They wouldn't, unless, of course, everybody knows in advance who would get laid off and who would stay.With a seniority based system,they do. Those who have been there the longest stay, and newer teachers are let go;all regardless of job performance. The end result of the seniority based system: Fewer teachers, crowded classrooms, and constant demands for more money for schools.All thanks to a system that rewards teachers for hanging around, not for doing what all good teachers strive for every day: Teaching kids. (This information furnished by Bill Sizemore,Oregon Taxpayers United.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. tas CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 95 Arguments ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION THE OREGON PARENT TEACHER ASSOCIATION ASKS YOU Oregon's Teacher of the Year TO VOTE NO ON MEASURE 95 Urges You To Vote No on Measure 95 Measure 95 is a bad idea for Oregon's schools. It is unfair and It Doesn't Help Teachers Or Students unnecessary.And it erodes local control of our schools.Measure I was named Oregon's Teacher of the Year in 1998. 1 was 95 says that teachers will be paid based on the "academic deeply honored and humbled by that recognition because Oregon performance"of their students.But there is no definition of student has thousands of dedicated public school teachers. progress or of how the progress would be measured, nor any description of how to create or implement such a testing system. Measure 95 does not reward good teachers. It is poorly Furthermore, local communities will have no say in this process. written, vague, unrealistic and unfair. It does nothing to improve Measure 95 is unfair. Instead of encouraging collaboration our public schools or teaching quality.It is a risky scheme that between teachers, it fosters competition. Instead of letting local takes millions of dollars away from our schools real needs– school districts work with principals,teachers,parents and school adequate funding. Measure 95 doesn't provide more dollars for boards to find its own answers to ensure the best education for all public education. It doesn't put back lost programs. It doesn't our students,this creates more bureaucracy.Measure 95 doesn't decrease class sizes.It doesn't even improve student learning. ensure that a quality education will be available for all students. I Measure 95 does not promote critical thinking or a well- Measure 95 is bad for students. Some of our best teachers rounded curriculum that prepares students for the new century. choose to work with some of our most challenging students with Measure 95 simply forces teachers to prepare students for severe special needs.Measure 95 does not take into account the more standardized tests. Standardized tests measure only a challenges these teachers face and could easily discourage a small portion of the successes teachers see each day in the teacher who wants to work in these most difficult and challenging classroom. situations. In my teaching career I've taught thousands of students. No Measure 95 is fiscally irresponsible. Measure 95 costs the two are alike.Each is a unique individual who learns at his or her state $22 million dollars per year.This is money that would be own rate.Each needs some individualized attention.Measure 95 better spent reducing class size, hiring more teachers, fixing says student progress must be identical for a teacher to be leaky roofs or buying new textbooks. successful.That is unfair and unrealistic. • Don't risk losing our wonderful teachers who have the Measure 95 works against what teachers do best–teach- patience, perseverance and skill to work with difficult or mg! Please join me in voting no on Measure 95. challenged students. Sincerely, • Don't risk losing the local control your school board has in determining the best way to hire and fire the teachers in your Nicki Hudson school. Oregon Teacher of the Year,1998 • Don't risk harming students who may need the most help. (This information furnished by Nicki Hudson.) Support our teachers and ALL of Oregon's students. Please vote No on Measure 95. Kathryn Firestone,Oregon PTA President Lisa Laursen Thirkill,Vice President for Legislation (This information furnished by Kathryn Firestone,President,Lisa Laursen Thirkill, V.P.;Oregon PTA.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an.endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 144 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet-Statewide Measures Measure No. 95 Arguments ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION The Oregon State Council of Senior Citizens Urges You Oregon's Business and Marketing Teachers To Oppose Constitutional Amendment 95 Urge Oregonians to Reject the Red-Tape of Measure 95 Don't fall for Measure 95. The proponents would like you to We help to prepare thousands of students for careers in the believe that they want to reward good teachers and get rid of business world.One of the principles we teach our students is the inadequate teachers.We've studied the issue and want to tell you less red-tape and bureaucracy,the more successful the business the truth about Measure 95. will be.Measure 95 takes away the ability of parents and local They Say:"Measure 95 will help schools get rid of bad teachers:' school boards to determine what is best for our schools and replaces it with a costly state bureaucracy. The Truth:Nobody wants to see a bad teacher in our classrooms, least of all other teachers. The Oregon Legislature has ended • Measure 95 takes away millions of dollars that are desperately teacher tenure and poor performing teachers are shipped out if needed in our classrooms. At a time when Oregon's schools they don't shape up.Measure 95 contains nothing that will weed need more funding,that doesn't make good business sense. out bad teachers. • Measure 95 establishes a statewide system of teacher pay that They Say:"Measure 95 will make our schools more efficient,like takes away the decision-making ability of locally elected school ' boards and gives it to a new state bureaucracy.Schools don't a business: need more rules and regulations. The Truth: Measure 95 will add another level of bureaucracy to our public school system.The non-partisan budget analysis by Measure 95 is an experiment with unknown results.It can't b tested, changed the Department of Administrative Services concludes that and improved—it is an Amendment our Measure 95 will cost taxpayers $47 million dollars to implement Constitution that makes our children guinea pigs for unproven and $22 million dollars a year.Think of how many teachers our ideas.That's no way run a school schools could hire or how many new books or computers we The Oregon Constitution is not the place to etch in stone how or a business. could buy with that money! our teachers should be paid. We don't need more state mandates and bureaucracy. We should be able to decide They Say: "Measure 95 will help us more accurately measure locally how to run our schools and pay our teachers. student performance" Bureaucracy is bad for public schools and business. The Truth:Measure 95 sets up a system where standardized test Don't tie the hands of our teachers and students scores are the only way to measure the performance of a student. Measure 95 does not take into consideration any external factors Don't add another layer of bureaucracy that impact our students.Students don't all have the same skills to our public schools and abilities—some have special needs which can impact their Vote"NO"on Measure 95 progress. Still others live in poverty, come to school hungry, or come from troubled families, which can affect their progress. Dan Thompson,President Measure 95 draws attention away from these kids who need Oregon Marketing Educators Association special help and reduces their value to a score on a standardized test. (This information furnished by Dan Thompson, President, Oregon Marketing Educators Association.) Don't deal another blow to our public schools. The Oregon State Council of Senior Citizens urges a"NO" vote on this amendment to Oregon's Constitution. (This information furnished by James A. Davis, Oregon State Council of Senior Citizens.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 145 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 95 Arguments ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION Dear Oregon Voter: The Oregon Alliance of Children's Programs Urges You I ask you to oppose Measure 95—an unfair and unnecessary To Protect Oregon's Children by Voting No on Measure 95 measure that threatens our public school system. Measure The Oregon Alliance of Children's Programs is committed to the 95 amends Oregon's Constitution and requires public school well-being of Oregon's children,youth and families.We are com- teachers, community college professors and instructors, and mitted to the enhancement of the children of Oregon and our college and university professors to be paid based on student members by striving to provide quality programs and services.We "academic performance"This destroys Oregon's current system touch the lives of over 58,000 children and families annually with of hiring and evaluating the best teachers for our students. It the help of committed staff and community volunteers. The eliminates criteria like experience and educational background. Oregon Alliance of Children's Programs opposes Measure 95 The language of the measure is vague and does not because it is unnecessary and unfair! g give clear direction as to how teachers will be evaluated for compensation We believe that every child is an individual and that every child or how students will be measured for"academic performance" counts.Measure 95 would force teachers to give less attention to Measure 95 forces Oregon to rely on a system that bases teacher students with special needs--which means that some will be left pay on the performance of students on standardized tests.But it behind.THAT IS UNFAIR.THAT IS UNNECESSARY. doesn't say which tests or give any description on how to create Measure 95 is an unfair scheme. and implement a teacher evaluation system.Further,the measure gives no indication how progress will be measured in special Measure 95 sends a message to teachers that their pay is based education,physical education or other electives. I on the progress of the entire class, not the progress of individual Not every child learns at the same pace. This measure would students. No one wants a system where one child may be encourage teachers to avoid the most challenging classrooms at sacrificed because they didn't catch on as quickly. a time when we need to ensure high expectations for all students. . Measure 95 says that the only kind of progress worth • Measure 95 does not address the real problems in our schools rewarding is the kind that can be measured on a standard- such as a lack of parental involvement, lack of adequate fund- ized test. ing,overcrowded classes and violence on school campuses. Different students learn things at different times and in different • Measure 95 does not give school districts a choice in the ways.If teachers are forced to leave one student behind to focus teachers they want to keep.It reduces local control and creates on the rest of the class,we are failing all students. more bureaucracy. • Measure 95 does not create more ways for teachers to give • Measure 95 will leave our at-risk and special needs more individual attention to students who need it. Instead, it students behind. requires them to spend their time filling out needless paper- At a time when our students need more individualized attention, work that has nothing to do with learning. Measure 95 creates more bureaucracy, more tests and more urge all of my fellow Oregonians who want the best public paperwork for our teachers to fill out.Teachers will have less time schools to join me in voting No on Measure 95. to give one-on-one attention. Sincerely, Measure 95 will hurt, not help, the neediest children in Oregon. We urge you to vote "NO" and protect the most Governor John A.Kitzhaber,M.D. vulnerable children in our schools. (This information furnished by John.A. Kitzhaber, M.D., Governor of Janet Arenz, President Oregon.) Oregon Alliance of Children's Programs (This information furnished by Janet Arenz,President, Oregon Alliance of Children'Programs.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 146 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 95 Arguments ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION Oregon's Public School Leaders Fellow Oregonian: Urge a"NO"Vote on Measure 95 As Superintendent of Public Instruction,I strive every day to make Measure 95 is unrealistic and unfair sure that all students in Oregon's public schools have an equal chance to learn the academic and life lessons that enrich our Public school teachers, administrators and parents are working Young people and improve the quality of life for all our citizens. together to ensure that our children are ready to face the chal- lenges of the 21 st Century.That's why we oppose Measure 95. We are lucky here in Oregon--lucky to have good,quality teachers Measure 95 does nothing to address the real problems and dedicated students who want to learn. I am proud of our facing our schools.It is a solution in search of a problem. public school system and the educational opportunities that are afforded to Oregon's children. That's why I am opposed to • Measure 95 takes away local control from parents, Measure 95. teachers,principals and our communities. There are some things that we can all agree upon. Oregonians • Measure 95 does not address the funding crisis our place great value in the education of our children in public schools face..Instead,it will create a new state bureau- schools. But Measure 95 fails to live up to the promises and cracy that will cost$47 million dollars to implement and obligations we must meet to educate our children. $22 million dollars per year to run. • Measure 95 does nothing to ensure more parental Measure 95 will not make our schools more efficient. involvement and greater accountability from students Education is about much more than just test scores and grade- for their own actions. point averages. Measure 95 sends the wrong message to • Measure 95 does nothing to help schools get rid of students and teachers that each individual student's skills are not inadequate teachers. valued. Parents, teachers and principals know that the most important Measure 95 will not help schools get rid of bad teachers. No part of the education process is the ability to spend time, one is Oregon is more concerned with making sure that our one-on-one, with individual students. Measure 95 will prevent public schools have the most talented and qualified teachers teachers from doing what they do best—TEACHING. Under educating our students.Measure 95 will do nothing to make sure Measure 95, teachers will spend more time filling out unneces- that only the best teachers are instructing our students. sary paperwork and less time giving individualized attention to Measure 95 dismisses the value of experienced teachers, students. training and education.It does nothing to improve the quality of Don't let the proponents of Measure 95 fool you. It does nothing public education in Oregon. In fact, it will hurt our students, hurt to ensure that only quality teachers are in our schools. Oregon our teachers and hurt our schools. law ended teacher tenure and our schools have the tools to get I urge all Oregonians to reject this unnecessary and unfair rid of bad teachers. Amendment to Oregon's Constitution. Students don't need more tests,more red-tape and more bureau- cracy.It's not good for students and it's no way to run an efficient school. Measure 95 will introduce politics into our classrooms. Stan Bunn And that's the last thing our students need. Superintendent of Public Instruction Measure 95 is a solution in search of a problem (This information furnished by Stan Bunn, Superintendent of Public We urge you to vote"NO"on Measure 95 Instruction.) Kelly Hood,President Confederation of Oregon School Administrators (This information furnished by Kelly Hood, President, Confederation of Oregon School Administrators.) (This space purchased for$500 In accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 147 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 95 Arguments ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION The Oregon Consumer League Opposes Measure 95 University Women Say Don't Listen to the for five reasons: Empty Promises of Measure 95 Measure 95 is unnecessary The sponsors of Measure 95 would like us to believe that they School districts already have the power to terminate poor teach- have all the answers to the problems our public schools face.They ers.Measure 95 does nothing to improve schools. say that if we pay our teachers and professors according to how Measure 95 is wasteful well their students do on standardized tests, all of the problems Measure 95 adds a new level of bureaucracy,costing$47 million will be solved.Oregonians are too smart to fall for this. dollars to implement and then $22 million dollars a year. That We all know about the problems that our schools face. Oregon money belongs in the classroom, not creating more bureaucracy. has a school funding crisis.Parents need to get involved with their Measure 95 is unrealistic children's schools.We have to reduce class size;teachers can't Standardized tests aren't the answer. Children need to do more be expected to teach and be in control when they have 35 or 40 than memorize facts—they also need to learn to cooperate with students in a class.Our kids need to learn to have respect for their others and to think clearly—skills not measured on tests alone. Peers and realize that violence isn't the way to solve problems. Measure 95 sidetracks Oregonians from the real issues our What does Measure 95 do about these very real problems schools face that our schools face?NOTHING! Schools need real solutions, not attempts at a quick fix that cost It makes no sense to say that the solution to the problems in our millions of dollars.Oregon's schools need solutions to the school schools is performance pay.Even the best teachers can't control funding crisis, smaller classes and more teachers--not Measure how quickly each student progresses.If every child learned at the 95. same pace,all the students in a class would get the same scores Measure 95 takes away local control on tests. The Constitution is not the place to tell communities how to pay Measure 95 is nothing more than empty promises.It is undefined teachers,or which teachers to hire or fire.Let our locally elected and dangerously vague.WHO is going to be evaluating our teach- school boards do their job. ers and students?HOW will academic performance and progress Vote "No" on this proposed amendment to Oregon's be measured? Standardized test scores are not the best way to Constitution. judge our students and teachers. Jason Reynolds,Oregon Consumer League Don't vote for an unnecessary ballot measure that doesn't do anything for our public schools. (This information furnished by Jason Reynolds,Executive Director,Oregon Vote"No"on Measure 95.Send a message that Oregonians Consumer League.) can't be tricked into doing things that harm our schools. Kappy Eaton American Association of University Women of Oregon (This information furnished by Kappy Eaton, American Association of University Women–Oregon.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 148 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 95 Arguments ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION The Oregon Education Association Professors and Faculty at all of Oregon'Public Asks You To Vote No On Measure 95 Colleges and Universities Say Measure 95 is Dangerous Because Every Child In Oregon Counts! Oregon's public colleges and universities have educated thou- Measure 95 is unrealistic and unfair.In a perfect world,student sands of Oregonians and prepared them for careers in everything achievement would be easy to measure. All parents would be from agriculture to zoology.Oregon's public colleges and univer- involved.Each student would come to school ready to learn.The sities are recognized around the world for the quality education reality, however, is that students don't learn in exactly the same they provide for so many Oregonians. Measure 95 puts our way, at exactly the same pace. Every child in Oregon is unique institutions of higher learning in great jeopardy! and in Oregon's classrooms teachers work hard to meet the Oregon's schools face competition from universities all over the different learning rate of each child. Even the best teacher can't United States and the world.We must fight to keep Oregon's best control how quickly a student progresses – some have special and brightest students.Our schools must work hard to attract the needs or live in troubled families.Measure 95 ignores these facts best minds in the world to educate our students. If Measure 95 and creates an unrealistic picture of teacher salaries and student passes,Oregon's schools will be at a distinct disadvantage. measurement. Vote No on 95 Measure 95 sends a message to our students that they are worth only as much as their score on a standardized test. Measure 95 is undefined and unnecessary. It creates a Worst of all, Measure 95 requires that we spend millions of dol- statewide bureaucracy for teacher pay based on some yet-to-be lars creating more tests for our students, instead of investing defined standardized test. It removes decision-making by local those valuable dollars in our higher education system. school boards on how each of their teachers should be paid and Every Oregonian should be able to go to college. Measure 95 will cost millions of dollars to implement.These are dollars better takes dollars that could be used for scholarships and grants spent on the real problems of Oregon's public schools. for deserving students and instead adds a new layer of Vote No on 95 bureaucracy for our students and professors to wade Measure 95 does not address the real problems facing through. Oregon's schools. It does nothing to provide adequate and sta- Teachers will be filling out forms when we could be giving our ble school funding. It does not reduce class sizes. It does not students help in the laboratory.We will be telling our students increase parental involvement.It doesn't restore lost programs or about yet another test when we could be preparing them for the supply updated textbooks.It doesn't even assure that only quality business world. teachers are in our schools. Measure 95 is a bad deal for Oregon's colleges and Vote No on 95 universities.Our students deserve to have the best educational opportunities right here at home.Oregon cannot afford to lose our Please join thousands of Oregon public school teachers and me. best and brightest students. Vote NO on Ballot Measure 95. James K.Sager, President Support our state colleges and universities. Oregon Education'Association Vote"No"on Measure 95 (This information furnished by James K. Sager, President, Oregon Greg Monahan, President Education Association.) Association of Oregon Faculties. (This information furnished by Greg Monahan, President, Association of Oregon Faculties.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 149 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 95 Arguments ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION OREGON'S SCHOOL BOARDS SAY SUPPORT Working Families Agree this Amendment to our PUBLIC EDUCATION--VOTE NO ON MEASURE 95! Constitution is Dangerous MEASURE 95 IS UNREALISTIC! Oregon's working families enjoy a quality public education system Mure 95 is unrealistic.It is a bad solution in search of a nonex and the right to bargain collectively with their employers.Our pub- Measure schools and collective bargaining rights are put in harm's way istent problem. Improving student achievement is the major goal of all Oregon public schools. Skilled, competent and effective by Measure 95. Measure 95 is a constitutional amendment that teachers are essential, and so is active parental involvement, that would require that public school teachers be paid based on a reasonable class sizes, safe school environments and quality system that ignores the progress of an individual student and only instructional materials.Measure 95 does nothing to provide these rewards standardized test scores. resources.Measure 95 will cost$47 million dollars to implement Measure 95 attacks the right of public employees and$22 million dollars a year after that! to bargain collectively Measure 95 does nothing to improve schools and student • Measure 95 amends Oregon's Constitution to limit the rights of achievement!Our public schools can't afford Measure 95! an entire class of employees, public school teachers, from MEASURE 95 IS UNFAIR! exercising their right to bargain collectively with local school districts. It mandates that teachers be paid based on the Measure 95 is unfair to students with disabilities, students with "academic performance"of students.No other factors,such as limited English-speaking capacity, and students who are at the experience, education and overall job performance, can be greatest risk of dropping out of school.These students need the taken into consideration when negotiating contracts.It ties the most help from our best teachers. But Measure 95 will make hands of our teachers and our school districts. There is no teachers compete for the best and brightest students in their room to negotiate. classrooms. Measure 95 costs public schools millions of dollars and Measure 95 leaves our neediest students behind! weakens public education MEASURE 95 IS UNNECESSARY! Measure 95 will cost millions of dollars to implement,directing scare school funds away from the classroom.We can't expect Measure 95 is unnecessary! Teacher performance is already our children to learn if there are too many kids in a classroom. evaluated and determined by local school boards.The Oregon Measure 95 won't do anything but give more tests to our kids. Legislature ended teacher tenure and Oregon law requires That's not what public education in Oregon needs. continuing educational development and training for teachers. Measure 95 will create a new and expensive state bureaucracy Measure 95 is bad for schools, working families and the that replaces local community control over teacher quality and children of Oregon. performance issues. Please join us in voting"NO"on 95: Measure 95 is too expensive and unnecessary! • American Federation of Teachers PLEASE VOTE NO ON MEASURE 95! • AFCSME Cliff Kuhlman,President • Jobs With Justice • Laborers Local 483 Oregon School Boards Association • Northwest Oregon Labor Council (This information furnished by Cliff Kuhlman, President, Oregon School Oregon AFL-CIO Boards Association.) Oregon Education Association • OPEU • Oregon State Building and Construction Trades • Oregon State Firefighters Council • SEIU, Local 503 • SEIU,Oregon State Council (This information furnished by Morgan Allen, Oregonians Against Unfair Schemes for Our Schools.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 150 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 95 Arguments ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION An Oregon Teacher State Treasurer Jim Hill Urges a"No"Vote on Urges You to Vote No on 95 Ballot Measure 95 It Hurts Students Calls it"Fiscally Irresponsible" It Doesn't Belong In Oregon's Constitution As Oregon's Treasurer, our state's chief financial officer, it is my Measure 95 rewards the best and brightest students and lob to oversee the sound investment and wise spending of your tax dollars.Making sure that Oregon has good public schools has hurts others. Under Measure 95,teacher salaries will be based also been a top priority for m during upon standardized student test scores.I teach special education high school students. How will a statewide, standardized test Measure 95 is fiscally irresponsible ponsiblle e and will do nothing to career in public service. measure my students?This hurtful measure sends the message improve the quality of our public schools. to teachers and students that the only kind of progress worth Oregon's public schools are experiencing a funding crisis. measuring is the kind that can be measured on a standardized Classes are too large and teachers are using outdated books to test. Every day in my classroom I see progress. But, most of it educate our students.We need to make sure that every available can't be measured by a single test written by someone who public dollar is being put to good use so that our students can be doesn't know my students or me. competitive in an increasingly global economy.Measure 95 takes desperately needed dollars out of the classroom and instead Measure 95 does not belong in Oregon's Constitution. spends millions of dollars to increase state bureaucracy. Oregon's Constitution is no place for an.unrealistic and unfair ballot measure: Neither should it be the place where teacher Measure 95 will cost $47 million dollars to implement and $22 salaries are determined! Local school boards and administrators million dollars each year thereafter.And what is this money used should be the decision-makers over local issues.What works in for? New textbooks? Smaller class sizes? More teachers? NO! Portland may not work in Albany.What works in Eugene is not The money is used to create and implement a new system of always right for Medford. standardized testing for our public schools. Measure 95 is not Please Vote No on Measure 95. sound financial management of state resources! It Hurts Students.It Hurts Teachers. Measure 95 does not address the real needs of our students It Doesn't Belong in Oregon's Constitution. or schools.Oregon needs real solutions that increase funding for Sincerely, our schools, involve parents, and decrease class size.We don't need schemes that threaten the progress of students. Judy Smith,Oregon teacher Oregon's students, teachers and public schools are Oregon's (This information furnished by Judy Smith.) greatest natural resource.Our students deserve better than some multi-million dollar scheme that does nothing to improve the quality of our education system. That's why I am opposing Measure 95. Let's give Oregon's children a strong start in life by providing them a quality public education. Protect our students, protect our teachers and protect public schools. Please join me in voting "no"on Measure 95. Jim Hill Oregon State Treasurer (This information furnished by Jim Hill,Oregon State Treasurer.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 151 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 95 Arguments ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION Oregon's Head Start Teachers ask you to Human Services Coalition of Oregon stand up for Oregon's Children Opposes Ballot Measure 95 by Voting"NO"on Measure 95 The Human Services Coalition of Oregon works with public, Measure 95 will do nothing to help the children of Oregon. private and non-profit groups to ensure that the basic needs of all We all know what our young children need to ensure that they are Oregonians are met.We know that education is the key to ending prepared for their first day of school. Kids need someone to the cycle of poverty in our state.Measure 95 does not strengthen encourage them to read and to show them the joys and opportu- public schools or make our communities stronger. nities that learning can mean for them. But most of all, our Measure 95 is Unnecessary youngest children need extra, one-on-one attention to give them an extra boost that can mean all the difference in their schooling. Measure 95 is not what our public schools need. There is a Measure 95 will disrupt our efforts to help those young children school-funding crisis in Oregon.Parents and communities need to make their critical first steps in the education process.And that's get more involved with public schools and kids.Our students need why we're asking you to vote no on Measure 95. smaller classes so teachers don't have too many students in a Measure 95 is an unrealistic way to measure our students. room.The issue of school violence is very real and needs to be Every day we work with young children who may not have had addressed.Measure 95 does not do anything to solve these very breakfast; who live in poverty or come from challenged families. real problems that our schools face. These students need teachers who can spend extra time helping Measure 95 is Unfair them through a reading lesson or with a math problem.Measure 95 wastes teaching time.Measure 95 will force teachers to spend Measure 95 is unfair to all of the hard-working students and valuable time filling out more forms or preparing young children dedicated teachers in our public schools. Even the best teacher for a battery of intimidating standardized tests.We should not be cannot control how quickly their students'progress.Each child is measuring 5 and 6 year olds by how well they do on a state test. an individual with their own special skills and needs.Measure 95 creates a one-size-fits all system of student and teacher mea- Measure 95 is unfair to our students. Every child in Oregon surement that does not fairly judge the performance of our deserves the best possible start to their education.They deserve schools. to be in classrooms where teachers can give them all the extra help and attention they need. Even the best teachers need to Measure 95 is Undefined have the freedom to spend time with the students who need it the Measure 95 says it will set up a system to measure the perfor- most. Measure 95 takes flexibility away from our teachers and mance of students and teachers. But, Measure 95 is undefined ultimately harms our most vulnerable students. and dangerously vague.It does not define how student progress Protect the educational opportunities for all our children. will be measured or who will be scrutinizing and evaluating our teachers.Without a system in place,how can we be sure that our Vote"No"on Measure 95 teachers and students will be fairly treated? Annie Soto Measure 95 creates more bureaucracy and barriers and does Oregon Head Start Association nothing to help our schools (This information furnished by Annie Soto, Oregon Head Start Support our Public Schools,Teachers and Students Association.) Please Join the Human Services Coalition of Oregon and Vote"No"on Measure 95 Gina Mattioda, Co-Chair Human Services Coalition of Oregon (This information furnished by Gina Mattioda, Co-Chair, Human Services Coalition of Oregon,(HSCO).) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 152 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters''Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 95 Arguments ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION Protect Oregon's Community Colleges Oregon's Seniors Speak Out Against Measure 95 By Voting"NO"on Measure 95 We've been through public schools. Our children have been We can all be proud of our seventeen regional community through public schools. And our grandchildren are in public colleges and the educational opportunities they create for schools right now.If you care about public education,we urge Oregonians. Measure 95 would create an expensive you to oppose Ballot Measure 95. bureaucracy that would weaken Oregon's Community College system. Oregon's schools are one of our most important public institu- tions.Schools are the cornerstones of our communities.They are Measure 95 wastes tax dollars that could be spent improving a place where all children have a chance to learn and grow our Community Colleges and keeping tuition affordable.With equally. tens of thousands of students currently enrolled, Oregon's But Measure 95 would take a wrecking ball to public schools Community Colleges must keep costs low and run as efficiently in Oregon. as possible.Measure 95 requires Community Colleges to create and implement a whole new series of standardized tests for Measure 95 says that our parents, teachers and locally elected students.We should be focusing on education and not on more school boards are not the best people to make decisions about paperwork.Oregon should not be spending$22 million dollars a the schools our children attend. Instead, it amends Oregon's year to give more tests to our students. Constitution and says that teachers have to be paid based on the Measure 95 is unnecessary and unfair to Oregon's performance of their students on standardized tests. Community Colleges. Oregonians can be proud of our That's just not fair!There are so many reasons why a student may Community College system. Oregon enjoys better-educated or may not do well in a certain subject.Does the student come to citizens and better-trained workers because of Community school hungry? Does the child take responsibility for doing their Colleges.Young people who may not be able to afford college homework?Is there anyone at home who helps the child with his otherwise are given an equal opportunity because of our or her reading lesson or math problems? Community College system. Measure 95 changes all of that. It takes our community college network that pays dividends for Student achievement and "academic performance" is part of a business and communities and ties it up with more paperwork larger equation that includes student motivation,parental involve- and more bureaucracy. ment and quality teachers.Measure 95 has nothing to do with any of these things. Measure 95 unnecessarily changes Oregon's Constitution and makes it much harder for our Community Colleges to Oregon is fortunate . have some of the best students and provide quality,affordable educational opportunities to every teachers in the nation.Let's not make it any harder for them than citizen. Community Colleges work for Oregon. Don't upset the it already is. Show your support for our public schools and balance we enjoy between educational quality and affordability. vote"No"on Measure 95. Protect Oregon's Community Colleges and the people who Signed, depend on them. Elders in Action Vote"No"on Measure 95 Gray Panthers Robert Ackerman,Board Chair United Seniors of Oregon Lane Community College (This information furnished by Charles Kurtz,Vice-Chair,Elders in Action.) (This information furnished by Robert Ackerman, Board Chair, Lane Community College.) r (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 153 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 95 Arguments ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION Measure 95:It's Unfair,Unnecessary and Undefined Measure 95 hurts our public schools,hurts our teachers and hurts our kids. Join these Organizations and Individuals in Opposing Ballot Measure 95 • American Association of University Women-Oregon Chapter • American Federation of Teachers-Oregon • Association of Oregon Faculties • Brain Injury Support Group of Portland • Confederation of Oregon School Administrators • Ecumenical Ministries of Oregon • Elders in Action • Governor John Kitzhaber • Gray Panthers • Human Services Coalition of Oregon • Jobs with Justice • Laborers Local 483 • Multnomah County Commission Chair,Bev Stein • Northwest Oregon Labor Council • Oregon AFSCME • Oregon AFL-CIO • Oregon Alliance of Children's Programs • Oregon Consumer League • Oregon Education Association • Oregon Head Start Association • Oregon Marketing Educators Association • Oregon Music Educators Association • Oregon Nurses Association • Oregon Public Employees Union • Oregon PTA • Oregon School Boards Association • Oregon School Employees Association • Oregon Science Teachers Association • Oregon State Building and Construction Trades • Oregon State Council of Senior Citizens • Oregon State Firefighters Council • Rural Organizing Project • Salem-Keizer School Board • SEIU Local 503 • SEIU,Oregon State Council • State Treasurer Jim Hill • Superintendent of Public Instruction Stan Bunn • United Seniors of Oregon • Women's Rights Coalition Vote NO on Measure 95 (This information furnished by Morgan Allen, Oregonians Against Unfair Schemes for Our Schools.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 154 Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 96 Proposed by initiative petition to be voted on at the General EXPLANATORY STATEMENT Election, November 7,2000. Ballot Measure 96 would prohibit the Oregon Legislative Assembly from referring any constitutional amendment to the BALLOTTITLE voters that increases the number of signatures required to place a measure on the ballot, requires a geographical distribution of signatures, or constrains the use of the initiative process to amend the Oregon Constitution on any subject. Ballot Measure k7,l, I ?S GONSTItW7YE t+I PRgliiBttS liiIAICING 96 would also prohibit the Oregon Legislative Assembly from II+I1iIATiVI PR-CI�SS HARI�IaR,EXIwEPT referring any constitutional amendment or statute, or adopting THI l3iUGH IAIfF'IAT`IUE;'AiPF►U�5 kiiiWAMIYELY any law,that makes it materially more difficult or more expensive for the people to use the initiative and referendum process. RUTt1 "YEa"YOi :'Yesvate prtslti#Its malt€rsg ttt1 ttatttr8,' The Oregon Constitution currently allows the Oregon re'Wrendttm process more expensive, difficult exempt through Legislative Assembly to adopt laws affecting the initiative and Initiab}re appltes retroaetavety. referendum process, so long as they are consistent with the (Fii LT CI=`�HG?"�fQTE,"No"10,18 retains;iet�lslattare's aut�drity, Oregon Constitution, and to refer constitutional amendments to to pass lags;,"( at re#errals_..a in lnitiative, referendum the people that modify the initiative and referendum process.As }�roceSSha'rder. described above, Ballot Measure 96 would limit this legislative power. SWIUtIIiI I€IY lends of rreUtutdon.<Legislature now I?as'autt ph ty to pass laws,refer to zloR ste�tutes,c4nstr a Jonal amendments' The Measure would repeal any law or constitutional amend altering!tnttiative referer tut u process. Measure prohffiits.law. s ment that would violate the measure's provisions and that was Ur referrals fkt3ji ieglsl€tire lrcreaslrig expense Or tlji#juity of enacted within two years before the measure's effective date of initiative;rptf: riId: press`%y:irtcreasil g required fturrtber cf December 6, 2000. No constitutional amendment has been signatures; fgttiring sographid distribution pf,signaLre&;' enacted since December 6, 1998 that would be affected by this constraining spde from emending constittltlort c+n any subjttar measure. othenNise I3ieais anal such jam, constitutional errtendtnents ertrtotetliwtthin t years beftsr$Imeas uMIS effective date.Irffedt is Committee Members: Appointed by: t o Ill ncr$asing expense,diftculty of iitlttat'tars rir referendum Becky Miller Chief Petitioners process'exo ptt tve Bill Sizemore Chief Petitioners ES1IM/1Tlw+ FrNANCIAkL fMPAGT:There is no f€na�lclai ffeut Les Swanson Secretary of State on state:or loo il'governr lent axpertddltures Of revenues Jim Westwood Secretary of State Maury Holland Members of the Committee (This committee was appointed to provide an impartial explanation of the ballot measure pursuant to ORS 251.215.) TEXT OF MEASURE BE IT ENACTED BY THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF OREGON: The Constitution of the State of Oregon is amended by adding the following section: Section 1. (a) Whereas the initiative and referendum process belongs to the People of Oregon,and was created by the people to curb the power of elected officials; and whereas the initiative and referendum process is a perpetual threat to the power of elected officials;in order to protect and preserve the people's right to self-government;the state legislative assembly shall not adopt a law, or refer to the voters an amendment, which increases the number of signatures necessary to place a measure on the bal- lot; requires a geographical distribution of signatures, constrains the people from amending this Constitution regarding any subject whatever, or otherwise makes it materially more difficult or more expensive for the People to exercise their right to use the initiative and referendum process. (b) If, in the two years previous to the effective date of this 2000 Amendment,the state legislative assembly has adopted a law or referred to the voters an amendment that violates this section,the law or amendment is hereby repealed. 155 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet-statewide Measures Measure No. 96 Arguments ARGUMENT IN FAVOR ARGUMENT IN FAVOR Who is Afraid of Democratic Initiative? ONLY YOU CAN ANSWER THIS QUESTION Oregon voters have a more direct democracy through almost a How long do you think the Legislature will continue to try hundred years of initiatives and referendums.Evolution of the ini- and restrict the initiative process instead of addressing the tiative and referendum process compensates for the absence of real issues of concern to the people of Oregon? a parliamentary system. The initiative process allows political Vote Yes on 96 factions,who might otherwise be represented in a Parliament,to have a crack at proposing legislation. Since 1995, the Legislature has sponsored hundreds of bills to Who is afraid of the initiative process?All the big powers such make it more difficult to exercise our constitutional right to the as the (1) Governor (each year he has to show himself and initiative and referendum process. In 1996, they brought us caution voters on some ballot measure), (2) State legislators Measure 24, proposing to amend the Constitution, requiring an (they have to contend with the voter's power of referendum), (3) equal amount of the signatures be gathered from each of corporations (each year the TOXIC RIGHT TO KNOW becomes Oregon's congressional districts before an initiative could be closer to becoming a human right), and (4) Public Employees placed on the ballot.In 2000,they brought us Measure 79,seek- Union (involuntary contributions). ing to dramatically increase the number of signatures required to put constitutional amendments on the ballot. Both of these An assault on the initiative process is different than a reform. measures were defeated by an overwhelming vote of the people.. Reforms for the initiative process might include: It's clear that the Legislature is not getting the message! (1)Disallowing foreign corporations from making contributions The initiative and referendum process is a vital check and balance (2)Giving legislative counsel and review for initiative proposals (3) Disallowing reruns on the following general election to a Legislature controlled by vested interests. These same (4)Qualifying initiatives as ballot measures earlier for voter review vested interests are behind the Legislature's repeated efforts to (5) Voiding results if under thirty percent of active voters parti- restrict the initiative process. Measure 96 puts a stop to this by cipate preventing the Legislature from: (6)Shortening time for appeal of initiative title to three months • Increasing the number of signatures to place a measure on the (7)Offering a$25 state income tax deduction for active voters ballot; (8) FUNDING LAW SCHOOL CHANNELS ON CABLE TELEVI- . Requiring q g geographical distribution of signatures; SION WITH SUPPORTING INTERNET DOCUMENTATION TO • Constraining amendments to the Constitution on any subject EDUCATE VOTERS AS LAWMAKERS! whatever;or I will vote against Bill Sizemore's other measures. They act ' Making the initiative or referendum more difficult or expensive against the greater good of Oregon and benefit those who earn to use. the most.However,Measure#96 merits consideration.The initia- Our government is based on the separations of power in order tive process is an evolution in democracy and can be perfected by to prevent it from being concentrated in the hands of the few.The legislators who refer proactive reform measures to voters, initiative and referendum process will always be in jeopardy as The initiative and referendum process along with the legisla- long as the Legislature can restrict it. Measure 96 places any ture. and the its is rt of a constitutional equation for proposed restrictions on the initiative process in the hands of the balancing power between legislators juries judges and voters in People,where it belongs.In the end you decide! Oregon.Governors, legislatures, corporations, unions, oligarchic Vote yes on 96 elitists,and Washington D.C.,all tremble before the voter's power of initiative and referendum in Oregon. Coalition for Initiative Rights www.telel2ort.com/-dweezil/cir.htm (This information furnished by Toby Grant.) Lloyd Marbet Candidate for Secretary of State (503)637-3549 www.marbet.org (This information furnished by Lloyd Marbet,Coalition For Initiative Rights.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 156 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 96 Arguments ARGUMENT IN FAVOR ARGUMENT IN FAVOR A yes vote on Measure 96 will stop the politicians from making the INITIATIVE PROCESS IS UNDER ATTACK initiative process more difficult. In the last two state legislative sessions, legislators have intro- In the last legislative session over fifty bills were considered to duced more than 100 bills designed to make the initiative process do just that!Why? Because the politicians don't think we voters more difficult or more expensive. Seems the state legislature are smart enough to make the decisions that affect our lives and doesn't like the voters having so much say on public policy. those of our children. Legislators have dreamed up scheme after scheme to slow down These are the same politicians who pass about nine hundred Oregon's self-government system.They have crafted numerous new bills every legislative session!And they want to make it more new rules to sabotage the process. Many legislators are openly difficult for"we the people"to put a few measures on the ballot hostile to the initiative process. every two years? Consider this:Even though voters turned down a proposal by the The initiative process in itself does not create new laws. If the legislature to increase the signature requirement for placing mea- drive to get enough signatures is successful (the great majority sures on the ballot,the Secretary of State succeeded in doing so are not) it merely places measures on the ballot for "we the anyway by creating a huge penalty for every duplicate signature voters"to decide. they find when he checks the validity of signatures submitted to Opponents claim that making numerous State Constitutional his office.For every duplicate signature,they eliminate 400 other changes through the initiative is inappropriate. We should not signatures. confuse the sanctity of our"Federal Constitution,"from which all Many experts agree that this penalty is wildly inaccurate, but of our rights are granted,with that of our state document, which Secretary of State Bill Bradbury continues to enthusiastically merely spells out the laws by which Oregonians wish to live. enforce it anyway.Bradbury finds one duplication and he wines Some voters have been heard to complain that the ballot out the signatures of 400 other voters who invested their time and effort to consider the issue and sign the petition. becomes too complicated when too many "choices" appear. Freedom is not free! Democracy requires some effort on the part Even the courts have openly criticized Secretary of State of its citizens.Thousands of men and women have sacrificed and Bradbury's policy of not counting the signatures of registered died to protect our right to govern ourselves through the elective voters that he has designated"inactive"This year, thousands of process.The least we can do is education ourselves and vote on registered voters had their signatures nullified by Secretary the issues presented before us. Bradbury even though they had never been notified that the Government is expanding and becoming more obtrusive in our Secretary of State would not count their signatures. lives.Do not allow power seeking politicians to weaken the voice Measure 96 simply tells the legislature to leave the initiative of the people by making it more difficult to be heard! In many process alone.It tells them to stop trying to make it more difficult other countries citizens unhappy with their government resort to for voters to have their say.Stop trying to increase the signature revolution.In Oregon we can use our right of the initiative. requirement.Stop devising technical ways to discount the signa- tur s of valid registered voters and keep popular initiatives off the Vote yes on Measure 96! (This information furnished by Frank Eisenzimmer, Chief Petitioner, Oregon's initiative reminds the state legislature that their power is Committee to Preserve Self-Government.) derived from the people. Right now they need to have that reminder reinforced.Measure 96 does that. (This information furnished by Bill Sizemore,Oregon Taxpayers United.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 157 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet-Statewide Measures Measure No. 96 Arguments ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION The nonpartisan Oregon Initiative Committee opposes Ballot The ACLU of Oregon says Measure 96,and we want to tell you why. VOTE NO ON MEASURE 96! For 90 years the voters of Oregon have been able to amend Another constitutional amendment the constitution either by adopting an amendment referred by the Measure 96 is one of seventeen constitutional amendments legislature, or by adopting an amendment presented by initiative petition, on the ballot this election.This amendment is unnecessary tinker- ing with our constitution. Ballot Measure 96 curtails our right t propose constitutional Proponents of initiatives should play by the same rules amendments to the legislature for referral l to the voters by cleverly as everyone else in the political process. by attacking the referendum and lawmaking power of our elected representatives. Measure 96 would prohibit the legislature from passing any Ballot Measure 96 would prohibit the legislature from referring laws or referring any constitutional amendments to voters that to the voters any proposed constitutional amendment "which would make the initiative or referendum process more account- increases the number of signatures required to place a measure able to voters. on the ballot; requires a geographical distribution of signatures, This will put a cloud over any law the Legislature might pass to constrains the people from amending this constitution regarding make the initiative process more accessible or informative for any subject whatever,or otherwise makes it materially more diffi- voters because sponsors of initiatives might claim the change cult or more expensive for the People to exercise their right to use makes the initiative process more difficult. the initiative and referendum process" For example: Initiative sponsors have a constitutional right to Stripping the legislature of its power to refer such constitutional pay petition circulators for signatures.But doesn't the voter have amendments also strips Oregon voters of the right to consider the right to know who is paying for those signatures? them. Ballot Measure 96 would compel voters to pursue such measures exclusively through expensive initiative petition Measure 96 is designed to make it impossible for the legisla- campaigns. ture to pass laws that require greater disclosure of information Ballot Measure 96 also bars the legislature from adopting any regarding the special interests funding an initiative proposal. law on any subject which "otherwise makes it materially more Measure 96 will allow special interest groups, who have a difficult or more expensive" to exercise the initiative and refer- financial stake in getting their proposals on the ballot,to keep vot- endum process. Again voters would be compelled to pursue ers in the dark. such changes solely by undertaking expensive initiative petition Measure 96 helps the initiative industry,not voters campaigns. Most Oregonians support the initiative process, but think it Ballot Measure 96 is intended to keep such constitutional needs some fine-tuning every now and then.This measure would amendments from reaching the voters by referendum.It is for you, freeze today's initiative system into place and prevent useful the voters,to decide whether the public interest justifies increased changes, just because they could make the process more difficulty or expense to the initiative industry and to those persons challenging for today's initiative"industry." and interests so busily using it to their advantage. Measure 96 is bad for voters. Vote No on Ballot Measure 96. Measure 96 is bad for our political process, (This information furnished byJohn C.Beatty,Jr.,William W.Wyse;Oregon Measure 96 is bad for Oregon. Initiative Committee.) VOTE NO ON MEASURE 96. For more information write to the Oregon ACLU at PO Box 40585, Portland,OR 97240 or go to www.aclu-or.org (This information furnished by David Fidanque, American Civil Liberties Union of Oregon.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 In accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 158 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet-Statewide Measures Measure No. 96 Arguments ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION Oregon League of Women Voters Opposes Measure 96. GOVERNOR JOHN KITZHABER URGES A "NO"VOTE ON MEASURE 96 The League of Women Voters of Oregon is a grass-roots, IT PROHIBITS EVEN MODEST,RESPONSIBLE REFORMS non-partisan organization which encourages informed and active participation of citizens in government. Since 1920, the League Dear Fellow Oregonians: has worked to inform voters, improve our political process and Measure 96 would amend the Constitution to impose a broad strengthen our democracy prohibition on reforms to the initiative process. It even prevents The League of Women Voters of Oregon opposes Measure 96 the Legislature from asking you, the voters, to approve changes because: to that process. It is so broadly written that it could even prevent It is wrong to prohibit reforms to the initiative process.This new campaign finance disclosure requirements–or prevent stiffer measure could prohibit the Legislature from even enacting small, penalties for fraud or abuse by paid signature gathering but useful reforms to the process, such as increasing campaign operations. finance disclosure requirements for initiative campaigns.There is I am certainly a friend of the initiative process; I am sponsoring no guarantee that needed reforms would be brought by the an initiative of my own in this election.And as Governor, I have initiative process. certainly had my share of problems with the Legislature.But the It is absurd to prevent the Legislature from asking the voters idea that modest reforms to the process should be prohibited,and that the Legislature shouldn't even have the right to ask yQq to to consider reforms to the initiative process. This measure approve reforms, is simply absurd. doesn't just take away the Legislature's power to pass reforms on its own;it prevents the Legislature from even asking the voters to In my view, we should always be careful about amending the approve reforms.That's absurd. Constitution.We should not pass any amendment that does not The measure is unnecessary;voters already have the right to have a strong justification.This proposed amendment is unjusti- approve or disapprove any significant changes to the initia- fied and ill-advised. tive process. The Legislature only has the power to make Please join me in voting"No"on Measure 96. modest reforms to the process.We don't need to take that power (This information furnished by John A.Kitzhaber,M.D.) away. The Constitution should be amended only for good reason. PLEASE JOIN US IN VOTING"NO"ON MEASURE 96. (This information furnished by Paula Krane, President,League of Women Voters of Oregon.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 159 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 96 Arguments ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION Former Governor Barbara Roberts Asks You to Vote"No"On Former Secretary of State Phil Keisling Opposes Measure 96 Measure 96 Fellow Oregonians: I value the initiative process. Before I was ever a public official, I As a former Secretary of State, I am opposed to Measure 96 participated in initiative drives.The initiative is a valuable part of our public life in Oregon. because it would amend the Constitution to prohibit reasonable reforms to the initiative process. It would even prohibit the But during my years as Secretary of State and as Governor– Legislature from asking the voters themselves,through referrals, and, in the past six years, as a private citizen again -- the to reform the process. conduct of the initiative process has changed dramatically. The initiative process is an important part of our system of In past years, most initiative efforts were door-to-door citizen government in Oregon. The initiative should be preserved. But efforts by volunteers to place measures on the ballot which had that does not mean that there should never be any reforms. broad popular support. Now, money plays an enormous role.So Campaign finance disclosure laws should be toughened.Abuses do new technology and computers.Sophisticated initiative spon- by paid signature-gatherers should be curbed. This measure sors can use computerized data to seek out and identify those could prevent even those simple, common-sense reforms to the who share their very narrow special interests. Too often, the process. ballot is used as a battleground for warring interest groups to fight Under the current Constitution, only the voters can approve sig- each other over obscure issues. Oregon's initiative process was nificant changes to the initiative process.But the Legislature can never meant to be used that way. make minor changes, such as requiring more frequent and As the initiative approaches its 100th birthday, I believe that there detailed disclosure of campaign contributions. This measure is need for occasional reforms to our initiative process.We should could take that power away from the Legislature – and that's have fuller disclosure of where the money comes from.We should wrong. The Legislature is, after all, elected by the people, make a stronger effort to keep the process honest and citizen- accountable to the people, and paid to do some work for us.It is directed. not in anybody's best interest to take away its power to curb strongly oppose a measure which imposes a sweeping abuses of the initiative, and to leave initiative reform up to those prohibition against reforms to the initiative process –even who can afford to pay signature-gatherers to put something on prohibiting the Legislature from asking you, the voters, to the ballot. approve reforms yourselves. And it is short-sighted and senseless to prohibit the Measure 96 is not necessary to preserve voter control over the Legislature from even asking the voters themselves,through initiative process. Under Oregon's Constitution, the Legislature the referral process,to pass initiative reforms. cannot make major changes without consulting the voters; and PLEASE VOTE"NO"ON MEASURE 96. even if the Legislature made a minor change which we did not Phil Keisling like, we could challenge it through the referral process. All this measure would do is act as a permanent roadblock to reasonable (This information furnished by Phil Keisling.) reforms. I hope you will join me in voting"NO"on Measure 96. (This information furnished by Barbara Roberts.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 160 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 96 Arguments ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION The Working Men and Women of Organized Labor Oppose Bill Sizemore's Measure 96 Organized labor recognizes the value of Oregon's initiative pro- cess.Four years ago,we went to the ballot to gain an increase in the minimum wage–which Oregonians resoundingly supported. At the same time,we recognize that there is room for'occasional reform in almost any process.The initiative process,for instance, would benefit from improved campaign finance disclosure laws so that all Oregonians know who is really supporting initiatives they are being asked to sign.We need to ensure that the process is open,fair,and available to all Oregonians. Measure 96 is an ill-advised effort to block even modest, responsible reforms to the initiative process. It would even prevent the Legislature from asking you the people to approve reforms yourselves.And it amends the Constitution –for no good reason. Bill Sizemore, whose business profits from the current initiative process,sponsors this measure to block even reasonable reforms to the system. But Oregonians need the ability to adjust the process to guard against abuses and unforeseen circumstances that might conspire to make it a system serving only the few, rather than the many. Please join the working men and women of organized labor in opposing Measure 96. This voters pamphlet statement brought to you by Oregon AFL-CIO American Federation of Teachers-Oregon Service Employees International Union,Oregon State Council Oregon Public Employees Union,SEIU Local 503 (This information furnished by Richard H. Schwarz, Executive Director, AFT-Oregon; Arthur Towers, Service Employees International Union, Oregon State Council; Rich Peppers, Oregon Public Employees Union, SEIU Local 503;Tricia Bosak,Oregon Education Association.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon,nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 161 Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 97 Proposed by initiative petition to be voted on at the General in this subsection shall check the trap at least every 24 hours. Election,November 7,2000. (a)The Director,in consultation with the Oregon Department of Human Services or the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, may grant a permit to use traps listed in subsection 4 BALLOT TITLE. for the purpose of protecting people from threats to their health or safety. (b)The Director may grant a special permit to use traps listed SANS E 00y,•,F4IPPING ANflt ALT RAPS,SOME in subsection 4 to a person who applies for such permit in writing FUR G4MMERCE and establishes that there exists on a property an animal problem which has not been and cannot be reasonably abated by the use of non-lethal control tools, including but not limited to guard 8s"Wft b nwt br dY J�p".9154A ! animals, electric fencing, or box and cage traps, or if such tools t tst7t t itt Ftdt tsu .trapping= art tn•aniimaf powns cannot be reasonably applied. Upon making a finding in writing # SUL�' T1�*`t+j(3 }Jo"±tote rejects hart on.body-t�Tpping that the animal problem has not been and cannot be reasonably traps,iefated r,�mtmer ;in fur,Certain an ntal poiso ns. abated by non-lethal control tools or if the tools cannot be reasonably applied, the Director may authorize the use, setting, tiCl Itr F :PrgftittttS tie tti steps a red[egtlCtltf traps on +, or placing or maintenance of such traps for a period not exceeding IaodY-grrPOPO: ga tnarnrrtaks. Prpitibtts ease, pur, 30 days. chese,barter,pttt�e ctt reav fur from rtiamrttal tapped fn such traps its Oteg . Aiit�eSe trf s 1ahed.".es of traps br.protec- (c)The Director may also grant a special permit to its employ- tiort ref helfft artd safetyttrttai,control,research,and pro.tection' ees or agents to use traps listed in subsection 4 where the use of oC ett...... ecl'spectes if petrttit.4ibt8ined'from Oregbri Fish and such traps is the only practical means of protecting threatened or Et il'l k pepar t nt:Pr+s�llbtts;uae of sodium ii 'bait tow: also endangered species, as listed under the Oregon Endangered tCt1� as Odrr peptttl 80, ?r•sadiurrt',cyanidex to 'poport or species Act. atte P "0 t tit pctt rt arty afitrrrta#:Pertaitt far toiattnrts, (d)The Director may grant a special permit to use traps listed $ fM 7 G!F MAFICAL IMRAG7: State a ertcfitttr @s tor', in subsection 4, not including Conibear traps, for the conduct of aftptngts #m art o.. an mai nkroi ,Writ! be-$455x000 pert year.', legitimate wildlife research. Irrtpferrterttatttrt of arrnit system wtii cast the state & 5,#tOQ:. (5)The United States Fish and Wildlife Service,its employees, par year, with'art a riifionai start tip cast of $ O,000. Dim t or agents may use a trap listed in subsection 4 where the Service rtetttte t+ t# t axe'Ede Ceded by$36, 00 per year tjue to determines,in consultation with the Director of the Department of eltrrttrtatcxt of tttr trappiri itcSrt863;fees, Fish and Wildlife, that the use of such traps is necessary to TFt rreasure i7,tS fie'ftrta�tCa,t effaot rJri locat goi+eYtrYtertt protect species listed as threatened or endangered under the aytpendurgsyj U.S.Endangered Species Act. (6)Violations of this section,or any rule promulgated pursuant thereto,is a Class A misdemeanor when the offense is committed knowingly as defined in ORS 161.085(8).If the defendant is sen- tenced to pay a fine,failure to pay the fine or any portion thereof • TEXT OF MEASURE shall be treated as provided in ORS 161.685, SECTION 2.(1) No person shall poison or attempt to poison any Be It Enacted by the People of the State of Oregon: animal by using sodium fluoroacetate, also known as Compound SECTION 1.In order to protect people and domestic pets and to 1080,or sodium cyanide. protect and conserve wildlife from the dangers of cruel and (2)Violations of this section,or any rule promulgated pursuant indiscriminate steel-jawed leghold traps and .poisons and to thereto,is a Class A misdemeanor when the offense is committed encourage the use of humane methods of trapping when trapping knowingly as defined in ORS 161.085(8).If the defendant is sen- is necessary to assure public health and safety,protect livestock, tenced to pay a fine,failure to pay the fine or any portion thereof safeguard endangered species, or conduct field research on shall be treated as provided in ORS 161.685. wildlife, notwithstanding any other provisions of Oregon law, the SECTION 3.(1) *Animal*means any non-human vertebrate. following provisions shall be inserted in Oregon Revised Statutes, Chapter 497. (2) *Body-gripping trap* means a trap that grips an animal*s (1) No person shall use a steel-jawed leghold trap or other body or body part.*Body-gripping trap*includes but is not limited body-gripping trap to capture any mammal for recreation or to steel-jawed leghold traps, padded-jaw leghold traps, Conibear commerce in fur. traps, neck snares, non-strangling foot snares. Cage and box traps, suitcase-type live beaver traps, and common rat and (2) No person shall knowingly buy, sell, barter or otherwise mouse traps shall not be considered body-gripping traps. exchange,or offer to buy,sell,barter,or otherwise exchange,the (3)*Person*means a human being and,where appropriate,a raw fur of a mammal that has been trapped in this state with a public or private corporation, an unincorporated association, a steel-jawed leghold trap or any other body gripping trap,whether or not pursuant to permit. partnership,a government or a governmental instrumentality. (3)No person shall use or authorize the use of any steel-jawed (4) *Raw fur* means a pelt that has not been processed for leghold trap or an other body-gripping tra to ca ture an animal purposes of retail sale. 9 P Y P P Y except as provided in subsection 4 or 5 of this section. (5)*Animal problem*means any animal that threatens or dam- 4 A person may use a Conibear trap ages timber or private property or threatens or injures livestock or O p y pin water, padded-jaw leghold trap,or non-strangling type foot snare with a special per any other domestic animal. mit granted by the Director of the Oregon Department of Fish and SECTION 4.If any part,section,or subsection of this legislation, Wildlife (Director) pursuant to parts (a) - (d) of this subsection. or the application thereof,shall be held invalid,unconstitutional or Issuance of such special permits shall be governed by rules inoperative, as to any particular person, persons or conditions, adopted by the Oregon Fish and Wildlife Commission pursuant to the remainder thereof,or the application of any such part,section ORS 496.138 and in accordance with the requirements of this or subdivision to other persons and conditions, shall not*be section.Every person granted a special permit to use a trap listed affected thereby. 162 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet=Statewide Measures Measure No. 97 EXPLANATORY STATEMENT Measure 97 prohibits the use of body-gripping traps with certain exceptions discussed below. The measure defines a body- gripping trap as a trap that grips an animal's body or body part, and specifically includes but is not limited to steel-jawed leghold traps,padded-jaw Ieghold traps,Conibear traps,neck snares and non-strangling foot snares.Cage and box traps,suitcase-type live beaver traps, and common rat and mouse traps are specifically excluded from the definition. Measure 97 prohibits trapping with body-gripping traps and also prohibits the buying and selling of unprocessed fur from animals caught in.body-gripping traps. Certain body-gripping traps may be used after a special permit has been requested and obtained from the Director of the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife.These traps are Conibear traps in water, padded-jaw Ieghold traps, and non-strangling foot snares,which may be used for the purpose of health and safety, animal control, legitimate wildlife research and protection of endangered species. No other types of body-gripping traps may be used under the permit process. To obtain a special permit, a person must show that there exists an animal problem which has not and cannot be reasonably addressed by the use of non-lethal control tools,including but not limited to guard animals,electric fencing,or a box and cage trap. In the alternative, they must show that non-lethal control tools cannot be reasonably applied. Upon making a finding in writing that the animal problem has not and cannot be reasonably addressed by non-lethal control tools, or if the non-lethal control tools cannot be reasonably applied,the Director may authorize these permitted traps for a period not exceeding 30 days. Persons using traps by special permit must check their traps every 24 hours.Under current law,trappers are required to check their traps every 48 hours for non-predatory ani- mals.They are not required to check any traps set for predatory animals. • Measure 97 prohibits the poisoning of any vertebrate animal through the use of sodium cyanide or sodium fluoroacetate, also known as Compound 1080. Both poisons are regulated by the Oregon Department of Agriculture.Sodium fluoroacetate cannot currently be used in Oregon.Sodium cyanide can only be used by the federal government in limited circumstances and cannot legally be used by anyone else. A violation of Measure 97 would be a Class A misdemeanor punishable by a fine not to exceed $5,000 and/or a maximum term of imprisonment of one year. Under this measure and current Oregon law, animals may be trapped to prevent the damage they cause to private property or threats to public health.Other mammals may be trapped just for their fur,even if they do not threaten property or public health.The Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife and the Oregon State Police Fish and Wildlife Division will continue to be responsible for enforcing and regulating the trapping of animals in Oregon. Committee Members: Appointed by: Scott Beckstead, Esq. Chief Petitioners Daniel Stotter Chief Petitioners Senator David Nelson Secretary of State Paul Phillips Secretary of State Greg McMurdo Members of the Committee (This committee was appointed to provide an impartial explanation of the ballot measure pursuant to ORS 251.215.) 163 CONTINUED 0 Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet-Statewide Measures Measure No. 97 Arguments ARGUMENT IN FAVOR ARGUMENT IN FAVOR Protect Pets and Wildlife Urges Yes on Measure 97 Vote Yes on 97 Restrict the use of cruel and dangerous traps and poisons Protect people,pets and wildlife Each year in Oregon,more than 40,000 animals are killed in traps I live in rural Oregon.Two years ago a conibear trap slammed for sport and for the purpose of selling their fur.Measure 97 will shut on my wrist. I have never experienced such unrelenting restrict the use of cruel and dangerous traps and will prohibit the agonizing pain.I lost the use of my hand for nearly nine months. use of two toxic chemical poisons.Nothing more. I found a trap in a pond near my home where many local residents Traps and poisons are cruel and inhumane walk their dogs and recreate.There were no warning signs.I lifted the trap from the water and it snapped shut on my wrist.The pain Steel-jawed leghold traps, snares, and Conibear traps cause was incredibly intense. I could not get the trap off. I struggled severe injury and suffering to wildlife and pets.Trapped animals against panic, knowing I had to keep control and get help. suffer in pain for days,sometimes even chewing off their own legs Within an hour the trap was removed, but the pain did not stop. to escape. The steel-jawed leghold trap has been declared My hand was paralyzed and had no sensation except pain.I had "inhumane"by the American Veterinary Medical Association,and sustained nerve damage that took almost a year to heal,and no the American Animal Hospital Association. medication alleviates the pain of nerve damage.Sometimes it felt M-44s are baited spring-activated devices that propel sodium like needles being shoved into it,or that my fingernails were being cyanide poison into an animal's mouth. Compound 1080, or pulled out by the roots.Some days all I could do was wrap myself sodium fluoroacetate, is a highly lethal, slow acting poison that in,a blanket and crippling me physically and emotionally. I lost causes immense suffering to its victims.There is no antidote. all use of my hand and could not work, or take care of myself Traps and poisons are non-selective without help. , I will never forget the pain,shock,fear and desperation I felt when Like landmines, they are hidden and waiting to explode, posing that trap slammed shut.However, I had the ability to get help and serious danger to children,family pets,and endangered species. knew that somehow I would get it off.I now know how an animal Measure 97 is a moderate measure feels when caught in a trap; terrified, in excruciating pain, and desperate enough to chew off its own limb to get free.The agony This measure balances public safety and humane treatment with inflicted on living beings by traps is almost beyond description. I the interests of property and livestock owners. It bans the most know, I have experienced it. Let my voice speak for those who inhumane body-gripping traps, while allowing the selective use cannot speak for themselves. of certain traps by permit to protect public health and safety, livestock, threatened and endangered species, and to conduct Jennifer Kirkpatrick wildlife field research.Homeowners can continue to use common Scappoose rodent and gopher and mole traps. (This information furnished by Jennifer Kirkpatrick.) Measure 97 has broad support Protect Pets and Wildlife-Oregon is endorsed by elected officials and more than 60 humane, conservation and veterinary groups. An all-volunteer signature gathering drive collected over 104,000 signatures to qualify Measure 97 for the ballot. Oregonians support humane treatment of animals,vote yes on Measure 97 Former Congresswoman Elizabeth Furse Co-Chief Petitioner, Protect Pets and Wildlife-Oregon For more information,visit our website:www.bancrueltraps.org (This information furnished by Former Congresswoman Elizabeth Furse, Co–Chief Petitioner,Protect Pets&Wildlife-Oregon.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 164 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 97 Arguments ARGUMENT IN FAVOR ARGUMENT IN FAVOR Veterinarians Urge YES on Measure 97 The Humane Society of the United States Urges a"YES"vote Veterinarians throughout Oregon oppose the use of steel-jawed on Measure 97 leghold traps and poisons to capture and kill wildlife. The Don't Be Tricked by the Opponents'Scare Tactics and False American Veterinary Medical Association, American Animal Information hospital Association, and the Oregon Veterinary Medical Measure 97 targets steel-jawed leghold traps and other inhumane Association have declared the use of these traps to be inhumane. and indiscriminate devices used for fur trapping and two deadly Marion-Polk Veterinary Medical Association endorses ballot poisons–nothing more, nothing less.Measure 97 was carefully Measure 97. crafted to target the use of particularly barbaric traps used to kill These organizations, charged with over-seeing humane animal animals for their fur and two poisons used for predator killing. treatment around the world, recommend alternatives, such as When it's necessary to remove or kill an animal, people can use guard animals and improved husbandry techniques be used more humane and equally effective traps or other techniques. whenever possible to protect livestock.Trapping animals for fur is Measure 97's opponents can't defend fur trapping, so they indefensible and has no place in a civilized society. Four states mislead voters with outrageous and false information. and 89 countries have banned steel-jawed traps. It's time for Opponents of Measure 97 engage in bald-faced fear-mongering. Oregon to join them. The measure imposes restrictions on the use of body-gripping Animals caught in these barbaric devices suffer agonizing physi- traps-not box or cage traps or other humane traps.Measure 97 cal pain and severe psychological trauma. Lax, or no trap-check is so moderate that it includes exceptions for the use of leghold requirements, as when trapping coyotes, allow animals to Ian- traps and other body-gripping traps to protect health and safety, guish for days awaiting death from dehydration, exposure or property, livestock, and endangered species. We talked to and exhaustion as they struggle to escape. Suffocation at the hands listened to ranchers and others before drafting Measure 97 and of the trapper,wishing to avoid damage to the pelt, is the reward included these exceptions to accommodate them. Measure 97 for those that live.The lucky ones manage to chew off a leg or does not ban trapping of moles, gophers, mice, or rats-animals paw,escaping with an injury that will greatly diminish their chance not trapped for fur.Ever see a mole or gopher coat?Neither have of survival in the wild and likely result in a slow and premature we. death.This is animal cruelty in its simplest form and it must be Fur trapping is not wildlife management. stopped. Fur trapping amounts to random and indiscriminate killing of As veterinarians we take an oath to relieve animal suffering and wildlife.Trappers set out more traps when pelt values increase. protect animal health.Each year we care for family pets, birds of For example, if pelt prices for otters or bobcats double from one prey, fox, rabbits and other unintended victims ensnared by year to the next, we may see a tripling in the number of bobcats traps.These injuries are needless and the suffering endured is killed in the state.That's not science;that's commercially driven unacceptable.It can be prevented. killing of our wildlife with inhumane traps. We can stop this senseless slaughter by voting"YES"on measure Vote YES on Measure 97 to protect wildlife and family pets 97 from the use of steel-jawed leghold traps and other body- Steve Amsberry, DVM gripping traps set out to kill animals for their fur. Michael Booth,DVM Dr.John Grandy,Senior Vice-President Dale Bush, DVM Wayne Pacelle, Senior Vice-President Sally Conklin, DVM Robert Franklin, DVM (This information furnished by Dr. John Grandy, Senior Vice President, Laird Goodman, DVM Wildlife and Habitat Programs, Wayne Pacelle,Senior Vice-President;The Humane Society of the United States.) Stephanie Hazen, DVM, Richard Hillmer, DVM Byron Maas, DVM Larry Peetz, DVM Melissa Turnbull, DVM (This information furnished by Melissa Turnbull, DVM, President, Marion- Polk Veterinary Association; Larry Peetz, DVM, Salem, Veterinarians Against Inhumane Traps;Dr. Byron Maas, Bend; Richard Hillmer, DVM, Salem;Robert Franklin,DVM,Portland;Sally Conklin,DVM,Corvallis;Dale Bush, DVM, Talent; Michael W. Booth, DVM, Salem; Stephanie Hazen, DVM, Salem; Laird Goodman, DVM, Beaverton;Steve Amsberry, DVM. Salem.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 165 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures -Measure No. 97 Arguments ARGUMENT IN FAVOR ARGUMENT IN FAVOR Oregon victims of trapping and poisoning tell their stories: The Oregon Humane Society strongly supports Measure 97 "We found Buddy's body, our German Shepherd, not more than Oregon's largest private animal shelter, serving the state with 100 yards from our back door.Bloody foam was around his mouth legislation and animal advocacy for over 130 years with over and nose.We also found pink film can objects on the pathway 34,000 supporters believes that now is the time to make Oregon where we found him.These were M44s,poison capsules contain- a safer place for humans, companion animals and wildlife. We ing deadly sodium cyanide gas." -- Dixie and George Tippett proudly participated in the all-volunteer effort to collect over (Estacada) 104,000 signatures to place Measure 97 on the ballot. "Lucky was a puppy,just barely alive, strangling in a neck snare Dogs and cats are often the unwitting,victims of the body-gripping and severely dehydrated. The snare had tightened further and traps and poisons targeted in this measure.The wording of this further as she struggled against the wire biting into her neck.Part. measure was carefully crafted to provide protection to dogs,cats, of it was still embedded in her neck and had to be surgically and children. Instead, of randomly setting out indiscriminate, removed"--Toni Walter(Tigard) deadly traps,Measure 97 provides a balanced approach.It would "Natasha, my German Shepherd pup,was near death.Somehow require the use of less deadly methods and targeting the actual she managed to crawl home,her front paw crushed in the jaws of wild animals causing the problem or safety concerns. a steel leghold trap, dragging a log attached to the trap behind The Oregon Humane Society values Oregon's wildlife population. her. Her mangled paw had developed gangrene.There were no If management is needed, animals should be treated with leash laws or domestic stock in the area." -- Barbara Kelley compassion and respect.Animals caught in steel-jawed leghold (Eugene) traps and neck snares suffer terribly.Oregon's lax trap check laws "We located our beloved family dog, Siddha, in a steel-jawed allow trappers to only visit their traps every 48 hours.Traps set for leghold trap, chained to a rod that had been driven into the coyotes do not require checking at all!There is no reason for any ground.He was barely breathing,laying in a six-foot circle of snow animal, domestic or wild to die a slow, terrible death in the year and frozen blood.The steel jaws had cut completely through the 2000.Better methods exist and it is time to use them. skin on both sides of his paw, exposing bones and tendons. His There is good reason why the Oregon Humane Society has been efforts to pull himself free of the trap had caused tearing and a lead proponent of Measure 97.It is our mission to make Oregon further damage to his joint."--James Ince, rancher(Azalea) a better place for all animals by creating a community of compas- "Our son was able to crawl under the children's playhouse and sion for all living things.Eliminating careless and inhumane killing, free the kitty rom where he had often stuck after dragging eliminating the indiscriminate use of deadly poison in the environ- Y g gging a trap ment and promoting more humane methods of managing the home on his right forefoot. Thumpy, as he was to be named, animals that live in our state,is well within our mission. suffered from severe frostbite,dehydration,shock, infection,mal- nutrition and was very near to death.Due to the severe frostbite, Please join The Oregon Humane Society and vote"YES"on his ears were lost,as was his foot"--Roberta Vandehey(Fossil) Measure 97! Vote Yes on 97! Sharon Harmon, Executive Director Protect our pets and wildlife (This information furnished by Susan Mentley,Oregon Humane Society.) (This information furnished by Kelly Peterson, Protect Pets& Wildlife– Oregon.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 166 CONTINUE-DO Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 97 Arguments ARGUMENT IN FAVOR ARGUMENT IN FAVOR Ranchers and farmers protect their livelihood, pets and Oregon Wildlife Federation Urges"YES"on 97 wildlife without traps and poisons. The Oregon Wildlife Federation believes in wildlife populations The key to protecting livestock and crops from predators, and to that do not interfere with human populations. We also believe decreasing losses in general, is good husbandry. Traps and people have the right to protect their property.Measure 97 does poisons are not necessary to ranching or crop operations.They not threaten wildlife management or private property rights.Traps present a danger to you and your neighbor's stock and pets, in and poisons are not selective;they injure and kill whatever animal addition to wildlife. Improved husbandry, and other non-lethal (including domestic animals,endangered species and people) control methods really work to keep herds and crops healthy and comes into contact with them.In addition,they have been shown protected-- it also makes you a good neighbor to wildlife and to to be ineffective in controlling or limiting predators, which is a families living close by. primary reason for their use.We do not believe the questionable benefits of traps and poisons outweigh the risks they pose to the Livestock and wildlife, including predators, aren't mutually exclu- sive. It's possible and desirable to protect livestock and crops public and the environment. without harming other animals.The focus of farming and ranching One teaspoon of the poison Compound 1080(sodium fluoroace- is production, NOT removing predators and other wildlife.There tate)can kill several adult humans.There is no antidote.Sodium are many types of non-lethal controls available and it's time to cyanide (used in gas chambers) is the chemical inside small shift public funds and educational efforts away from killing wildlife canisters known as M44s.They are baited,stuck into the ground. to environmentally sensitive methods of livestock and crop A blast of poison shoots into the face of whatever animal disturbs production. them. Measure 97 bans sodium cyanide and Compound 1080 Sally Conklin has raised sheep in the Willamette Valley for over 20 from Oregon. years and has never lost sheep or Iambs to predators."Bringing Trapping does not achieve a quick,clean kill, or selectively man- ewes into my barn during lambing and keeping Iambs inside for a age populations. Animals suffer in traps for days. Only bobcats week afterward has been the most important and cost-effective have a bag limit.Pelt price,not biology,dictates the management thing I've done to protect my herd;'Sally states.She rounds up of furbearers. and confines up to 100 sheep by herself, without any additional Biologists found that indiscriminate killing of predators with traps expense. and poisons, which seeks to reduce the population, actually has Guard animals are widely and successfully used for livestock the opposite effect-it causes populations to grow.In response to protection.Certain breeds of dogs, llamas and donkeys are very reduced numbers and disruption of pack social systems that effective in reducing predation and in deterring unwanted effectively control breeding, more females produce larger litters, animals, domestic and wildlife, from pastures and pens. "The and survival is greater. The pressure of more mouths to feed beauty of guard dogs is they're on duty 24 hours a day,their daily forces predators to increase hunting and predation on livestock. activity patterns match those of most predators", states Jay Traps and poisons cause more problems than they cure,it's Lorenz, Ph.D, leading researcher on livestock guard dogs. time to control them. Responsible Ranchers and Farmers Urge YES on 97! Vote YES on Measure 97 Beth Ashley, Rancher, Maupin Paul Loney, President,Oregon Wildlife Federation Sally Conklin, Rancher,Corvallis Marty Ginsburg, Rancher,Azalea (This information furnished by Paul Loney, President, Oregon Wildlife Jim Ince, Rancher,Azalea Federation.) Jay Lorenz, Ph.D,Corvallis John Platt,Helvetia Winery, Hillsboro (This information furnished by Jim Ince.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 167 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 97 Arguments ARGUMENT IN FAVOR ARGUMENT IN FAVOR Oregon Animal Welfare Alliance Urges Yes on Measure 97, Oregon Audubon Chapters Urges"Yes"on Measure 97 The Oregon Animal Welfare Alliance (OAWA) urges Oregonians Steel-jawed leghold traps are inhumane and indiscriminate.They to join them in passing Measure 97.OAWA represents Humane break bones, dislocate joints, and cause excruciating pain for Societies,Animal Control Agencies,wildlife advocacy and animal wildlife and family pets. welfare groups throughout Oregon. All offer protection and Victims that attempt to free themselves cause additional pain and support to companion pets and wildlife.All OAWA member orga- suffering. If they do not die from thirst, starvation, and exposure, thatplaced this important issue before Oregon voters.participated in a successful all volunteer signature drive the trapper will kill them, usually by bludgeoning or stomping. that Traps and poisons present a very real and serious danger to Animals caught in traps don't just linger for minutes,or hours,but family pets,endangered species,other wildlife and even children* for days. Oregon has one of the most lax trap-check laws, with Trapped animals suffer terribly.Some chew their legs or paws off, trappers required to visit the traps only every 48 hours,except for break and splinter their teeth and claws trying to escape during coyotes for whom there is no trap check requirement. the long(sometimes days or even weeks)wait before the trapper Body-gripping traps catch any animal that triggers them including arrives to stomp or beat them to death. Sodium cyanide and threatened and endangered species, young and juvenile wildlife, Compound 1080, deadly poisons that are equally nonselective, birds as well as family pets.These devices are like landmines for kill any animal or human who contacts them. It's time Oregon wildlife.Studies demonstrate that for every target animal caught in eliminated these dangerous, primitive, unnecessary practices. a trap,one to ten non-target animals fall victim to these devices. There are many other control options available;Measure 97 only restricts these cruel and indiscriminate methods for recreation Measure 97 would prohibit the use of steel jawed leghold traps and commerce in fur. and other body-gripping traps to capture any animal for recre- The sole intent of Measure 97 is to restrict the inhumane methods ational or commercial purposes. of fur trapping,while allowing certain traps to be used to protect It would allow,with a permit issued by the Oregon Department of private property and livestock. Measure 97 has no hidden Fish and Wildlife, trapping for animal damage control with agenda. It will not prevent homeowners from rodent control, or non-strangling foot snares, padded jaw leghold traps and prevent animal workers from using common restraint equipment. conibear traps in water.Farmers must first try non-lethal methods It's time Oregon joined the 89 countries and four states that have of controlling nuisance animals before obtaining a permit. banned inhumane steel-jawed leghold traps.Trapping animals for Permits may also be issued for trapping to protect public health fur is animal cruelty, and our family pets and wildlife deserve and safety, to safeguard endangered species, and to conduct better than this. legitimate wildlife research. Vote Yes on Measure 97. Measure 97 also prohibits the use of Compound 1080 (sodium fluoroacetate)and sodium cyanide.These poisons are used to kill (This information furnished by Susan Mentley, Treasurer, Oregon Animal coyotes; however, unintended wildlife can trigger these devices, Welfare Alliance.) resulting in even more unnecessary killing. Endorsed by: Columbia Gorge Audubon Society Kalmiopsis Audubon Society Rogue Valley Audubon Society Salem Audubon Society Siskiyou Audubon Society (This information furnished by Jim Britell, President, Kalmiopsis Audubon Society;John Taylor, Vice-President, Siskiyou Audubon Society;Dennis White, Conservation Chair, Columbia Gorge Audubon Society; James Conley, President, Salem Audubon Society;Thomas T. Smith, President, Rogue Valley Audubon Society.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 In accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 168 CONTINUED O Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 97 Arguments ARGUMENT IN FAVOR ARGUMENT IN FAVOR Sportsmen For Measure 97 Urge"YES"on Measure 97 Oregon Chapter Sierra Club Urges YES on 97 Ethical hunters support Measure 97. It provides Oregonians Oregon's public lands are littered with dangerous and indiscrimi- balanced and fair use of traps when they are necessary,such as nate steel-jawed leghold traps.These devices and substances not for the control of nuisance animals.The core beliefs of ethical only threaten wildlife and family pets, but also hikers and other hunters are incompatible with the concept and deed of trapping outdoor enthusiasts. animals for the purpose of personal profit or for sport. Measure 97 will restrict cruel and indiscriminate traps and Two of sport hunting's most important tenants are'fair chase'and two deadly poisons. making a quick and clean kill.Trapping violates both concepts. poisons are indiscriminate killers: There is no level playing field when taking animals with a trap line. Trapping is a passive pursuit --the trap is set, the trapper goes Measure 97 bars the use of Compound 1080 and sodium cyanide home. Any animal happening to stumble into the waiting trap -- deadly poisons set out to kill wildlife. Compound 1080 is a becomes entrapped. There is no active stalking of a specific highly lethal poison with no known antidote.Compound 1080 not animal or pitting the hunter's capabilities against those of the prey only kills its targeted victims, but also animals that feed on poi- species as there is in sport hunting.This violates the concept of soned carcasses, such as raptors.Originally banned throughout fair chase. In addition, trapping does not provide a quick, clean the West in 1972 because of secondary poisoning of wildlife, it is kill. Animals caught in snares and traps suffer for prolonged now creeping back into use in western states. Measure 97 will periods, they do not die quickly.After days of struggling in traps establish state law prohibiting its use in Oregon once and for all. or snares, they are killed at point blank range by suffocation (stomping on their chests), or are bludgeoned to death to avoid Sodium cyanide loaded into spring activated ejector devices marring the pelt. This is not a quick or clean kill. In addition, known as M 44s - is used of Oregon U.S. Department of numerous animals besides the one for which the trap is intended Agriculture kill predators, often on public ic lands, at taxpayer are caught,suffer and die needlessly. expense. Sodium cyanide is a highly toxic and indiscriminate poison that causes a violent death for both target and non-target Trapping violates the important hunting concept of eating what animals, including threatened and endangered species. It can you kill,not selling or wasting it.Before game laws were enacted, take several minutes of suffering before the animal succumbs to animals were killed for the primary purpose of selling their parts. the poison and dies. Today's game laws prohibit hunters from selling or otherwise profiting from harvested wildlife or parts. Commercial Trapping Wildlife Exploitation: By obeying game laws and a strict code of ethics, hunters Trapping is the only state-sanctioned form of commercial wildlife manage wildlife and control game populations.Trapping is not a killing, where individuals kill,animals and sell their parts, the fur, form of ethical hunting. for profit.It is a vestige of the long-discredited era of market killing of wildlife.Trappers don't kill the animals for food,but simply to sell Loren Hughes, President,Sportsmen for Measure 97 the parts to the international fur trade. Past Regional Director, Izaak Walton League Protect our public lands and wildlife: (This information furnished by Loren Hughes, President, Sportsmen for Commercial and recreational trapping and deadly wildlife poisons Measure 97.) disrupt natural ecosystems, create dangerous situations for hikers and other outdoor enthusiasts,and cause untold suffering for tens of thousands of animals. Please join the Oregon Chapter Sierra Club in voting YES on 97. (This information furnished by Mari Margil, Conservation Coordinator, Sierra Club,Oregon Chapter.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 169 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet Statewide Measures Measure No. 97 Arguments ARGUMENT IN FAVOR ARGUMENT IN FAVOR THE FUND FOR ANIMALS URGES"YES"ON 97 Oregon victims of trapping and poisoning tell their stories: The Fund for Animals, on behalf of more than 1,000 Oregon "Suddenly our West Highland Terrier, who was a little behind us, members and supporters,urges a"Yes"vote on Measure 97.This cried out.We turned to see her writhing on the ground, her leg sensible measure will prohibit the use of cruel and outdated traps caught in a steel-jawed leghold trap. In the desperate, bloody for recreation and commerce in fur, and prohibit the use of two minutes that followed,Kerstin was severely bitten twice before we deadly poisons. could find a way to release the traumatized dog."-- Robert and At The Fund for Animals' animal care facilities, we have seen Kerstin Adams(Astoria) first-hand the effects that indiscriminate traps can have on both "A neighbor found Dante,our year-old Aussie/Chow mix pup,in a "target" and "non-target"victims. An orange tabby kitten named weakened condition, but still alive. Mangled flesh, and precious Peg once came crawling toward the main house at our Black little of it,was all that was left of his right foreleg.My wife and our Beauty Ranch,step by painful step,all the time dragging a steel- two toddlers took him to the veterinarian who had to remove jawed leghold trap behind her.A veterinarian had to remove her Dante's entire leg at the shoulder."--Luke Gregg (North Plains) front leg all the way up to the shoulder. And at our Wildlife Rehabilitation Center, we have provided medical treatment to "One Sunday, as we walked along in a nearby national forest, several protected species injured in traps, including a great Nellie became a target of a leghold trap that had been set along horned owl and a juvenile red-tailed hawk who both had their legs the left edge of the path. Her yelps were pitiful as my husband snapped off in the jaws of leghold traps. wrenched open the trap and freed Nellie's injured front leg" --Diane Gange Landers(Corvallis) The small number of animals who receive our help pales in com- parison to the tens of thousands who suffer for days with broken oken bones, lacerations, joint dislocations, and other injuries. As the some snare traps. Sure enough, several days later some kids animals struggle to free themselves,they may break their teeth or came up to our house and told us a cat was trapped in one of the injure their gums by chewing on the metal traps.They may pull the snares.The cat was obviously terrified and in pain. Somehow I stakes out of the ground and drag the traps with them for several managed to free it without getting seriously clawed or bitten. It days, or they may even chew off their own legs in desperate hobbled off before I could determine if the leg was broken.Any attempts to escape.Their misery only ends when they finally die child or pet could have gotten caught and injured in his snares" of infection, parasites, blood loss, or at the hands of the trapper. --Bill Wood,M.D.(Clackamas) Measure 97 will prohibit the use of these inhumane traps for Vote Yes on 97! recreation and commerce,but will still allow the use of some traps Protect our pets and wildlife to ensure public health and safety,to protect livestock or property, To view a short video about the Oregon trapping campaign,go to: to safeguard threatened and endangered species, or to conduct http://www.stream.realimpact.net/?file=realimpact/hsus/video_ field research on wildlife. features/hsus_feature_leghold.rm Please vote"Yes"on Measure 97. (This information furnished by Kelly Peterson, Protect Pets & (This information furnished by Michael Markarian,The Fund For Animals.) Wildlife-Oregon.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth Of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 170 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 97 Arguments ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION The Oregon Society of American Foresters has approximately OREGON'S WATER,SANITARY,PARK,IRRIGATION AND 1200 members, including foresters,scientists,administrators and VECTOR CONTROL DISTRICTS educators who contribute to the management of public and pri- URGE A NO VOTE ON 97 vate forest lands throughout Oregon.We work for many different Measure 97 bans the use of one of our most effective ways employers and hold a variety of professional viewpoints, but we of controlling rats, mice and other destructive animals. strongly oppose Measure 97. It would greatly restrict animal control practices in Oregon, affecting not only foresters trying to Measure 97 will make the control of rats in sewer systems control rodents or other animals that damage or destroy more difficult, making it easier for rodents to enter homes. seedlings and young forests, but also homeowners dealing with problems from.gophers, moles and other pests. Measure will prohibit the use gripping traps to catch moles that t create holes in soccer fields creating a safety Oregon Society of American Foresters opposes Measure 97 hazard for children. because: Measure 97 will make it more difficult to control gophers that • Animal damage to Oregon's young forests continues to be a tunnel into irrigation ditches creating flooding hazards. significant management problem in sustaining Oregon's forests. MEASURE 97 IS A WELL INTENTIONED MEASURE • Measure 97 uses broad, restrictive language that would elimi- BUT IT JUST GOES TOO FAR nate effective tools needed by foresters to reduce animal damage to young forests. In many locations animal damage control is Measure 97 applies to "...any non-human vertebrate."The' needed to promptly establish new forests and to ensure sustain- measure is too broad. able forest management. Measure 97 defines "Body-gripping trap" to include most • Carefully planned trapping by professional foresters is biologi- common lethal and non-lethal traps but adds that phrase cally sound and environmentally safe. Current trapping methods "..but is not limited to..."which makes the definition open- have been developed and tested over time and have proven ended and subject to interpretation by lawsuit. highly effective and environmentally sound. In many situations, Measure 97 applies to governments as well as individuals, alternatives to such methods that are as safe and effective do not making public control of destructive animals by gripping exist. traps a crime. • Measure 97 does not allow exceptions for any body gripping VOTE NO ON MEASURE 97 traps except when set in water. This prevents using traps to control gophers, moles, and rodents that are damaging forest (This information furnished by Greg Baker, Executive Director, Special regeneration. Districts Association of Oregon.) • The complex and cumbersome process included in the mea- sure to allow exemptions is not practical.By the time a permit is obtained serious damage can occur. The Oregon Society of American Foresters supports profes- sional,conscientious management of Oregon's forest resources. Oregon is a leader in reforestation and sustainable forestry. Measure 97 would threaten this status by eliminating important tools and practices prudently used by professionals to achieve sustainability. (This information furnished by Carrie Sammons, Society of American Foresters.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 171 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphfet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 97 Arguments ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION Mothers Ask Oregonians to "Measure 97 is poorly written" Vote"No"on Measure 97 Major Roy Hyder, retired Measure 97 is so poorly written that its intent seems to be to Oregon State Police Fish&Wildlife Division hurt Oregon's family farms and ranches. As a retired Oregon State Police Officer,I'm proud to have worked Our families raise livestock and crops for a living, so like other 29 years protecting Oregon's wildlife. I have some very serious concerns with Measure 97 that.l ask Oregonians to consider farm and ranch families we live close to nature.Our children and before voting. grandchildren have learned a strong work ethic and responsibility by raising calves and Iambs.They have learned the heartbreak of Oregonians should read the measure to understand that Measure having their livestock and pets hurt or killed by coyotes and other 97 threatens the very wildlife it claims to protect. predators. Definition of a "body-gripping" trap in Measure 97: We have come to expect a certain amount of wildlife damage "Body-gripping trap means a trap that grips an animal's because it occurs every year on farms and ranches but some- body or body part:' times we find it necessary to control over-populations of pests like This extremely broad definition opens the door to lawsuits against moles,gophers and predators like coyotes. farmers and ranchers using animal management tools like The definition of a body-gripping trap in Measure 97 is so squeeze chutes that grip a calf or a lamb's body.This definition broad as to appear foolish. also includes humane instant-kill mole and gopher traps used by The language used in Measure 97 includes squeeze chutes and private property owners to protect their lawns and gardens. head gates.These things are used every day on the ranch for - Section 1 (3)in Measure 97:No person shall use or autho- life-saving treatment of cattle, sheep and horses. Even lariats, rize the use of any steel-jawed leghold trap or any other snares and catchpoles meet the definition of "body gripping" body-gripping trap to capture any animal except as traps.At the very least,this measure is an invitation to lawsuits by provided in subsection 4 or 5 of this section. animal rights extremists. The inclusion of"any other body-gripping trap" is a blanket ban No one supports the needless suffering of animals. on the use of any traps in Oregon.While the proponents claim Nor do we support allowing dangerous animals to threaten our to want to stop certain types of trapping, Measure 97 bans all family's safety.In order to protect a healthy and safe environment trapping except under certain circumstances where a special for all Oregonians, we must keep tools available and our options permit must be issued. I've reviewed the permit process and 1 believe it is unworkable. open.The use of traps in Oregon is strictly regulated by Oregon Department of Fish&Wildlife and enforced by the Oregon State Measure 97 ignores strict trapping laws already in place.It could Police Fish & Wildlife Division. Changes to these regulations result in law enforcement officers citing citizens for trapping nui- should go before the Oregon Fish & Wildlife Commission... we sance animals instead of enforcing important existing wildlife should not manage wildlife with the ballot box. laws. PLEASE VOTE NO ON MEASURE 97. Measure 97 is a poorly written measure that goes too far. IT'S AN ALL AROUND BAD DEAL The measure includes a"notwithstanding any other provisions of Oregon law"that overrules existing laws.It also bans two poisons Margaret Magruder Sharon Livingston that already cannot be used in Oregon today! Clatskanie,Oregon Long Creek, Oregon I ask that you join me in voting"No"on 97. Marjorie Nichols Sharon Beck Thank you. Canby,Oregon Cove,Oregon (This information furnished by Sharon Livingston, Margaret Magruder, Roy Hyder Marjorie Nichols,Sharon Beck.) (This information furnished by Roy Hyder,Retired,Oregon State Police.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 172 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 97 Arguments .ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION Oregon State Police Enforce State Trapping Laws Former Chairs of the Oregon Fish&Wildlife Commission Dear Oregonians, Urge Oregonians to vote NO on Measure 97 Oregon State Police officer with the Fish &Wildlife The ban is extreme and goes too far because As a retired Ore 9 it is poorly written Division, I'm very familiar with the existing laws that govern the use of traps in Oregon. Measure 97–bans common mole and gopher trans Any person trapping in Oregon must be licensed. A requirement Moles and gophers can destroy home gardens,city parks,school of the licensing process is that each person successfully finishes playgrounds,cemeteries, nurseries and golf courses.They are a a training program sanctioned by the State of Oregon. The nuisance because of their mounds and burrowing systems that required training program teaches ethics, humane trapping, create several hundred feet of holes and mounds.They also chew resource management and trapping laws.The training program on underground cables and pipes, causing damage that may be helps ensure the law is followed and humane treatment of wildlife difficult to find and expensive to repair. is practiced. Measure 97–imposes extreme permit process and fines Oregon State Police officers routinely check traps and trappers to Violations for trapping a mole or a gopher could result in a Class ensure laws and regulations are followed. In the field, officers A misdemeanor with fines of up to$5,000 and up to a year in jail check traps for a required brand,a number that identifies the trap- per animal. per who owns it,so they know who is out there and where.They also ensure seasons and bag limits are abided by to protect the You will only be able to protect your property with a "special health of our wildlife populations. permit"from the Director of the Department of Fish and Wildlife. Lawbreakers that trap in an unsafe or inhumane manner violating This process will be a slow, cumbersome bureaucratic red-tape existing laws are arrested and prosecuted. Placing a trap on mess from an already overworked and understaffed department private property without permission from the owner or within city Only after you have applied in writing and proven that a problem limits or parks is illegal. exists,will you be allowed to trap.What good is mole and gopher Enforcing a ban on mole and gopher traps and other trapoing of control after crops have been destroyed or after a child has been nuisance animals will prove difficult. It is also a waste of valuable injured after tripping in a gopher hole. time. Oregon State Police have many important wildlife laws to Measure 97 does more harm then good enforce and responding to complaints of illegal mole and gopher We've reviewed thousands s. regulations and laws as Oregon trapping in lawns,gardens and golf courses is not one of them. Fish&Wildlife Commissioners.Measure 97 is not good for Oregon Measure 97 is unnecessary and goes too far. or Oregon's wildlife. Please Vote"No"on 97 Don't get trapped by the ban! Sincerely, VOTE NO on Measure 97 Lieutenant Dudley Nelson,retired Pete Barnhisel,Corvallis Bob Jacobson,Newport Oregon State Police Fish&Wildlife Division Jim Habberstad,The Dalles Jim Van Loan,Steamboat (This information furnished by Dudley Nelson, Retired, Oregon State (This information furnished by Jim Habberstad, Jim Van Loan, Bob Police.) Jacobson,Pete Barnhisel,former commissioners, Oregon Dept.of Fish& Wildlife.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 173 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No 97 Arguments ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION Rudy Rosen,Ph.D. Oregon Farm Bureau Opposes Measure 97 Former Oregon Department of Fish&Wildlife Director Measure 97 defines a trap"that grips an animal's body or body As a biologist and former director of the Oregon Department of part."This broad definition opens the door to farmers and ranch- Fish&Wildlife, I've reviewed thousands of regulations and laws. ers being sued over the use of head gates and squeeze chutes. While Measure 97 appears as an attempt to protect wildlife... it threatens to do more harm than good. If Measure 97 passes,Oregon farms will be struck with an explo- sion of animal damage. Even with sensible animal control, Measure 97 threatens the public health and safety of rodents alone cost Oregon farms over $16 million annually Oregonians by limiting the tools used to manage wildlife (Oregon Agricultural Statistics Service 1998).Many other animal populations. populations need to be managed to minimize losses to Oregon's Examples from other states that passed similar bans: farmers. • Tragedy struck a young family when their baby boy in California Here's how some of the damage is done... was left brain-damaged after ingesting droppings from rac- Moles --Their mounds of loose soil are only an indication of coons, a population described as an "infestation" by wildlife the extensive tunneling activity underground. Moles eat and professionals. damage:tulips, lilies, iris,carrots, potatoes,peas,beans,corn, • An over-population of coyotes around the Colorado Springs oats and wheat. Airport has resulted in numerous planes hitting coyotes on the Gophers--The burrow system of a single gopher may range runway.One strike caused over$500,000 in damage to the air- over several hundred feet. Gophers feed on roots, stems and plane's landing gear. leaves.Gophers even damage trees by stem girdling and root Consider this Bend Bulletin editorial(August 14,2000) pruning. "If you want to know how Measure 97 would work, consider Nutria--A non-native animal to Oregon that burrows into river what's happened in Massachusetts since voters approved a banks and irrigation canals and ditches.This burrowing activity similar initiative - one that included the trap loophole - in 1996. can destabilize banks and cause serious erosion. Prior to the ban,there were fewer than 24,000 beaver in the state, Coyotes--While impossible to get rid of, coyote populations says state wildlife biologist Susan Langlois.As of this fall,the pop- can be managed. Yet even with current management tools, serious n will top s. Roads With the explosion, naturally, have come coyotes kill thousands of baby lambs and calves each year in serious problems. Roads have been washed out by collapsing beaver dams, Langlois says, and just last year beaver activity Oregon. forced four towns to pass ordinances requiring residents to boil Measure 97 restricts common sense methods for controlling their drinking water." nuisance animals. The consequences of a Measure 97 just weren't thought out. It Measure 97 leaves poisons as a poor option to the use of traps. binds the hands of professional biologists who work to manage the balance between man and nature.Our wildlife biologists need Join Oregon's Farmers in Saying"No"to Measure 97 tools to guard against diseases and parasites such as gardia, (This information furnished by Andrew Anderson,Oregon Farm Bureau.) round worm and Lyme disease. Oversimplified ballot measures to solve complex biological issues just don't work. That's why I hope you'll vote"No"on 97 Rudy Rosen Former Director, Oregon Department of Fish & Wildlife (1994- 1997) (This information furnished by Rudy Rosen,Ph.D.,former director,Oregon Dept.of Fish&Wildlife.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argume nt. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 174 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 97 Arguments ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION Measure 97 permit process is flawed and unworkable ATTENTION SPORTSMEN.WILL YOU BE NEXT? VOTE NO ON MEASURE 97 Measure 97 reads: "SECTION 1.(4)(b)The Director may grant a special permit to In 1994, using emotional rhetoric and graphic videos of illegal use traps listed in subsection 4 to a person who applies for hunts and hunts in other states, animal rights extremists misled such permit in writing and establishes that there exists on a Oregon voters into supporting a ban on certain cougar and bear property an animal problem which has not been and cannot be hunting techniques.At the time they stated that their only purpose reasonably abated by the use of non-lethal control tools, was to ban these few"unfair"practices.Now they are back attack- including but not limited to guard animals, electric fencing, or ing scientific wildlife management with an attempt to stop already box and cage traps, or if such tools cannot be reasonably well regulated trapping.What will be next, Bow Hunting, Muzzle applied:' Loaders, All "Sport" hunting? Lets look at the havoc created by We ask: How is this process supposed to work? the ban on cougar and bear hunting brought about by the • How long must we attempt the non-lethal control tools? passage of Measure 18. • Establish a problem how?A bureaucratic form?Video tape? WILDLIFE MANAGEMENT HAS SUFFERED."We think Measure • How many sheep have to be killed on our private land before 18 is one of the most unfortunate incidents that has happened to it is considered a problem? wildlife management in this state, this century."Jim Haberstadt, Vice Chairman, Oregon Fish and Wildlife Commission 12/14/94. Measure 97 reads: "Upon making a finding in writing that the animal problem has Eugene Weekly. not been and cannot be reasonably abated by non-lethal HUNTING OPPORTUNITY IS REDUCED.The May 3,2000 issue control tools or if the tools cannot be reasonably applied, the of The Observer had this to say about the recommendation to Director may authorize the use, setting, placing or mainte- reduce elk tags in Wallowa County."Over the past four years, elk nance of such traps for a period not exceeding 30 days:' populations have plummeted because of predation, wildlife We ask: How is this process supposed to work? officials say. Consequently tags have been reduced by 6,000.' • When will the Director review our requests? ODFW District Biologist Vic Coggins.believe the reduction in is considered reasonable? numbers is a predation problem, "probably mostly cougars". • What "Cougars are believed to be preying primarily on elk calves;' • After is 30 days – we guarantee you – predator animals will Goggins said. The Observer, La Grande, OR, May 3, 2000. return and the flawed, unworkable process will begin again. Measure 97 is a continued attack on Sportsmen. The moving Measure 97 supporters stated in written testimony: torte behind Measure 18 was the Humane Society of the United "...there is nothing to preclude the ODFW[Oregon Department States. of Fish &Wildlife]from charging a minimal fee for processing money Once again they have pledged enormous amounts mon to support Measure 97.Their leader,Wayne Pacelle has permits..." repeatedly attacked "sport>hunting", saving his most vicious We ask: How will this fee be administered? attack for muzzle loaders and bow hunters. Washington State • What is the proposed fee? University Speech 4-19-93.Will your sport be next? • How many times a year should we pay a fee to protect our SPORTSMEN UNITE sheep? PROTECT YOUR OUTDOOR HERITAGE Measure 97 is flawed VOTE NO ON MEASURE 97 Measure 97 is unworkable (This information furnished by Rod Harder, Oregon Sportsman's Political Vote No on Measure 97 Victory Fund.) Cleve and Ellie Dumdi Sheep Ranchers in Lane County Carey Moffett Sheep Ranchers in Lane County (This information furnished by Cleve and Ellie Dumdi,Carey Moffett.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 175 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 97 Arguments ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION Pest Control Businesses know 97 will Manager of Pioneer Cemetery Ban Mole and Gopher Traps Urges Oregonians to Vote"No"on 97 The definitions and language of Measure 97 goes way beyond the Cemeteries need to be safe places to visit. claims of the proponents.We've read the measure and we know Maintaining the safety of visitors and the appearance of a that it bans common mole and gopher traps... its there in black and white. cemetery grounds as a place of respect and honor for the dead is a costly endeavor. Measure 97 threatens our ability to get the job done. For many pioneer cemeteries the expense and responsibility It also threatens the property of our customers. falls directly on volunteer board members and local community We work to keep lawns, gardens, parks, school playgrounds, support. cemeteries, nurseries and golf courses safe and beautiful.Moles However well intentioned, the proponents of Measure 97 cause extensive damage to lawns, home gardens and farms have gone too far! because of their mounds.The burrowing of gophers is not only a The language and definitions they want us to put into law bans nuisance, but also causes erosion and lost water. A variety of the use of safe,humane traps used by cemeteries across Oregon tools are used to effectively manage these critters, many are to maintain the safety of their grounds. banned by Measure 97. If our grounds aren't safe, this will drive up liability insurance If Measure 97 becomes law, it is reasonable to think that addi- costs.Many small cemeteries throughout Oregon can't afford any tional poisons will be released into the environment and highly additional costs. Measure 97 may threaten their financial well- populated areas.More poisons are not a responsible approach to being nuisance animal control and can be very expensive. Government permit process is Confusing and Unworkable! Consider this:violations for trapping a mole or gopher could result The government bureaucracy made by Measure 97 doesn't even in a Class A misdemeanor with fines of up to $5,000 and up to allow cemeteries to obtain a permit from the Department of Fish a year in jail per animal. This is extreme for controlling these &Wildlife for mole and gopher traps. Besides, the hundreds of animals. cemeteries around the state and the people trying to maintain The proponents of Measure 97 dreamed up a permit process that them shouldn't have to get a permit to trap moles and gophers! is so unworkable, it wouldn't even allow the issuance of a permit Please vote"No"on Measure 97! for mole and gopher traps! Charlotte Benz, The proponents say Measure 97 does one thing,yet the measure Pioneer cemetery manager,Washington County does another. Measure 97 is so poorly written and thought out. It will create (This information furnished by Charlotte Benz.) unacceptable damage to the environment and to homeowners. The safest and most efficient method to retaining the natural balance of nature is with the responsible and regulated use of traps by educated and trained professionals. Thank you for.voting NO on 97 Guaranteed Pest Control Services Beaverton Eastside Mole Works Gresham American Extermination Plus, Inc. Portland (This information furnished by Wes Lydell, Guaranteed Pest Control Service Co.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 176 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet-Statewide Measures Measure No. 97 Arguments ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION State Labor Commissioner Jack Roberts OREGONIANS IN ACTION PAC Measure 97 will not do what the sponsors say it will do. Representing rural property owners As the current Labor Commissioner and a former Lane County And Commissioner, I have read thousands of pieces of legislation. OREGON FAMILY FARM PAC Laws need to make sense.Laws need to do in practice what the Representing small family farms in Oregon writers intend them to do. Urge a NO Vote on Measure 97 Read all of Measure 97.When you do,you see will it doesn't make sense! Measure 97 will hurt Oregon's family farms. Vote NO on Measure 97 Raising crops and livestock is hard work. Measure 97 makes it harder.It takes away a tool that helps us manage wildlife popula- MEASURE 97–TOO MANY UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES tions that can cause immense damage. Rodents cost farms and This measure far goes beyond the simple rhetoric of the sponsors ranches over$16 million dollars in 1998 alone while coyotes killed nearly a$1,000,000 in lambs and calves. • By not using the most effective tool, defenseless Iambs, Measure 97 restricts property owners from common sense cattle, and other livestock will be hunted and killed by practices. predator animals. There will be no efficient way to deter these predators from entering family farms and killing Moles,gophers and other nuisance animals can cause extensive domestic pets and livestock. damage to private lands. Yet Measure 97 forces private land- Why pass a law that could have such dramatic effects? owners to obtain permits to control some animals...and flat out bans common mole and gopher traps. • Since this measure is so poorly written it could ban lariats "Body-gripping"trap definition will result in lawsuits. (a rope to round-up livestock);head gates (used to restrain cattle, sheep and horses to receiving medicines and treat- The over-broad language in Measure 97 is an open invitation to ment); and catch poles and snares (to capture runaway lawsuits by animal rights extremists and trial lawyers.The language animals) used in Measure 97 includes squeeze chutes and head gates. MEASURE 97–BANS HUMANE MOLE&GOPHER TRAPS These things are used every day on the ranch for life-saving treat- ment of cattle,sheep and horses.Yet anyone operating one.under This measure bans all traps for all reasons Measure 97 could be sued. • Measure 97 bans the humane instant kill traps that protect PLEASE VOTE NO ON MEASURE 97 home gardens and crops from moles and gophers. (This information furnished by Larry George, Oregon Family Farm PAC, Measure 97 is too extreme.It goes far beyond what the Oregonians in Action.) sponsors say it will do (This information furnished by Jack Roberts, Commissioner, Oregon Bureau of Labor&Industries.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 177 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 97 Arguments ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION Measure 97 threatens sustainable forests "Outsiders can take credit for placing an Field foresters, forest economists and wildlife biologists of the animal trapping ban on Oregon's November ballot" Oregon Forest Industries Council evaluated the potential impacts Associated Press-August 22,2000 of Measure 97.This study of Measure 97 revealed serious flaws Oregonians will take credit for defeating Measure 97 in the measure's language and potential impacts that hurt refor Oregon Farm Bureau estation efforts. • Current animal damage control programs would be Oregon Cattlemen's Association banned Oregon Sheep Growers Association The breadth of the measure's language would stop current trap- ping methods for mountain beaver, also known as "boomers.' Oregon Association of Nurserymen These rodents, unrelated to river beaver, destroy seedling trees Oregon Women for Agriculture by eating their roots. • Permit process would cause delays in responding to Oregonians for Food&Shelter animal damage Oregon Cranberry Farmers'Alliance The amount of damage being incurred during a permit process by Oregon Dairy Farmers the government is expected to be extreme. Damage must be proven before a permit is issued and re-applications for new Oregon Seed Growers permits every 30 days will prove burdensome. Agricultural Cooperative Council of Oregon • Alternative methods are expected to increase costs by AG-PAC 720% These methods include tubing to protect seedlings,feeding pro- Association of Oregon Counties grams to deter animals from feeding on or damaging trees,and a Oregon Golf Course Owners Association more labor intensive hunting programs.The effectiveness of these programs is uncertain. Oregon Forest Industries Council • A dramatic increase in animal population Oregon Forest Protection Association Estimating animal population growth is difficult, but it is reason- able to expect a significant increase without current programs. Oregon State Grange This increase coupled with the loss of control methods would Oregon Hunters Association have devastating effect on our ability to maintain viable and future healthy forests. Oregon Guides&Packers Association • Non-compliance with Oregon Forest Practices Act Oregon Fur Takers The Oregon Forest Practices Act requires maintenance of roads Oregon Safari Club and forestlands for healthy rivers and streams.While a landowner is proving damage to receive a permit, as required by this Oregon Sportsman's Defense Fund measure, that landowner could fall out of compliance with other And many more... regulatory requirements such as the Forest Practices Act. A classic catch-22: fulfilling the requirements of one law violates Please Join another. OREGONIANS FOR RESPONSIBLE WILDLIFE Measure 97 threatens our ability to successfully replant MANAGEMENT Oregon's forests and should be defeated. And Vote NO on 97! (This information furnished by Mike Dykzeul, Oregon Forest Industries Council.) (This information furnished by Paul Phillips, Oregonians for Responsible Wildlife Management.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 178 Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet-Statewide Measures Measure No. 98 Proposed by initiative petition to be voted on at the General (5)No public entity shall collect or assist in the collection of funds Election, November 7,2000. for any purpose for a person or organization,if,after the effective date of this Amendment,the person or organization has:(i) used for political purposes any of the funds collected for it by a public entity after the effective date of this Amendment, or (ii) BALLOT TITLE commingled non-political funds collected by a public entity after the effective date of this Amendment with political funds. (fi) The state legislative assembly shall establish a financial �k # �NS"CT" � Pttlk3ikalf` penalty for persons and organizations which use for a political UBLf F5t3j3FiCE&FQF3 Pl.�1GAi: purpose money collected for them by a public entity.The penalty Pt1� 55;iMIT$1�dY#flki� _ shall be not less than double the amount of money contributed to or spent for a political purpose. 3EMli.7 " ) � � k 'es" ypte ,} hkbite �ln 3 pt�bki , (7) If any phrase, clause, or part of this section is found to be tssourc t{a t 11 c�i tt [ oct>kect a tti fi f5t unconstitutional by a court of competent jurisdiction,,the remain- 'N w.VOTA uN � ��� rt hft>ltkt3k ctri ing phrases, clauses, and parts shall remain in full force and pup resduroe's to 10011W 6r h0v 61611 effect. IU1Vk1 't�. rtcls Coiast�tttffon�Prt�hfblts t�rt�" ubt�;iUttfr"! t �9u Exld►r? ,erle tkr ; erfpt�ertt�,srap� +� kik�s si�tsr panfrtrht+�t st�teertt ��."Pcaitti�:ak ftds"' deftneck fo ii�de rtdktursa taiby► 9,:supRfrtrtgr tippos- si3s,� aanr�idat�, 1?#�1�t 11���&Uri fi}I" knitl�ttv�r p�tYtiUrf �T��tkbit�i!. ,�arfitkty kmtwrsad fir ur k €urn. �itf�st t��tftttt�I�ikrCtYf}�1py�p��r;;akt d8dtlotkr�t f�ri�rti�rr ;may. ptrk)tfGaf�; nc�rf��t �s k��lti�'�S triQr�tar�r p�f�{tjl #tsr vt�trn.: `�ilkiYstk'�F�������t�i1F�� 1"hks. rteasi�r�t fs�s#ieted :#a r u � � t far t rrs'• ttt�tet sTt atk b' �,�f�;t' 4 Ire s�ir�d rrlx.Shit r�+ar'trr �tx�tt`#if°rr'!g f�as8 tirre#,trA dp f3y �4,( in ?etr,rtUmterd!, ;years. 'Local gA�erntrrcatt exp�rldrttir�s•tsrr uot�rs",pamphret ksuk;lkication' are estimated to;ctaor �s $4 ,000 ln'euet rturrced years. e mdu WOW resukt tr srrt ektr a rt titlg-G tdldafe i's f errts and.arguM Ots lin� •a d;IttCaf voters' trtpttleta.; TEXT OF MEASURE BE IT ENACTED BY THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF OREGON: The Constitution of the State of Oregon is amended by adding the following section to Article XV, which section shall be appropri- ately numbered and shall read: Section 10(1) No public funds shall be spent to collect or assist in the collection of political funds. (2) For purposes of this section, money shall be deemed to be "political funds"if any portion of the money, including in-kind and pass-through contributions, is contributed to a candidate or polit- ical committee or party,or spent lobbying an elected official,or is spent, including independent expenditures, supporting or oppos- ing a candidate for public office or a ballot measure, including efforts to collect signatures to place a measure on the ballot,and any efforts,including but not limited to direct mail and media cam- paigns,to solicit signatures for initiative petitions or to discourage electors from signing initiative petitions. (3) For purposes of this section, public funds shall include public employee time on the job, public buildings,and public equipment and supplies; but shall not include the fee charged by the Secretary of State or a county elections division for placing a paid statement in an official Voters Pamphlet. (4) Public entities are prohibited from providing a service prohib- ited by this section even if reimbursed for the cost of doing so. 179 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet-Statewide Measures Measure No. 98 EXPLANATORY STATEMENT Ballot Measure 98 adds a new section to the Oregon Constitution that prohibits anyone from using public resources to collect or help collect political funds.Public resources that cannot be used to collect political funds include public moneys, public employee time, public buildings and public equipment and supplies. The political funds that a person cannot collect by using public resources include money contributed to candidates,political com- mittees or political parties, money spent lobbying an elected offi- cial and money spent supporting or opposing a candidate, ballot measure or initiative petition.This prohibition applies if any portion of the money collected with the assistance of public funds is passed through to another organization that, in turn, uses any portion of the money for a political purpose.Political funds do not include the fee charged by the Secretary of State or a county for placing a paid statement in an official voters'pamphlet, however, public resources are used to produce the voters'pamphlet. A public entity is prohibited from using its resources to collect political funds even if the public entity is reimbursed for those resources. Any person or organization violating this measure by using funds (collected with the assistance of public resources) for a political purpose, or by co-mingling those nonpolitical funds with political funds, shall lose the right to have money collected for it for any purpose by any Oregon public entity. This measure directs the Oregon Legislative Assembly to establish a financial penalty for persons and organizations that violate this measure.The penalty must be not less than double the amount illegally contributed or spent fora political purpose. This measure prohibits several activities currently allowed under Oregon law. For example, under this measure it would be illegal: (1) For public entities to collect political funds for public employee unions by means of payroll deduction. (2)To implement a public employee's request to deduct part of •• the employee's wages and transfer that deducted money to an • organization that uses all or part of that money to lobby elected officials or to support or oppose candidates, political parties, ini- tiatives or ballot measures. (3) For any organization that receives money from public employees through payroll deductions or electronic transfers to use any portion of the money to lobby an elected official or to sup- port or oppose candidates or ballot measures.Organizations that use payroll deduction include charities,insurance companies and financial institutions. (4) For individuals and organizations that are involved in politi- cal activities, such as lobbying or supporting or opposing ballot measures or candidates, to use public buildings for meetings or other activities,if the individual or organization will seek or accept political contributions on the public property. Committee Members: Appointed by: Becky Miller Chief Petitioners Bill Sizemore Chief Petitioners Roger Gray Secretary of State Margaret Olney Secretary of State Cecil Tibbetts Members of the Committee (This committee was appointed to provide an impartial explanation of the ballot measure pursuant to ORS 251.215.) 180 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 98 Arguments ARGUMENT IN FAVOR ARGUMENT IN FAVOR MEASURE 98 IS FAIR TO EVERYONE Stop using tax dollars to collect political funds MEASURE 98 GETS GOVERNMENT OUT OF THE Who do you suppose are the top contributors to the election BUSINESS OF COLLECTING POLITICAL FUNDS campaigns of those politicians who want to increase taxes and Under current law,publicly owned buildings,computers,and sup- expand the size of government? plies are being used to help collect millions of dollars in political When a measure to increase taxes appears on the ballot, who campaign funds for certain political groups. spends the most money trying to pass it. Currently, some public employees are even required, as part of When a ballot measure would reduce taxes,who spends the most their official,taxpayer funded jobs,to collect campaign money for money trying to defeat the measure? groups that run huge, multi-million dollar political campaigns. These employee are actually spending time on the clock, at tax- The answer to all three questions is the same: Public payer expense,collecting political campaign funds. employee unions. This is an outrageous abuse of taxpayer dollars.It is an affront to Public employee unions spend millions of dollars every election every hardworking taxpayer,who's tax dollars should be used to cycle trying to elect politicians who will expand government and pay only for legitimate functions of government.Collecting politi- increase taxes because that's good for them.The more money the cal funds is clearly not a legitimate function of government. rest of us pay in taxes,the more money government has available Measure 98 prohibits the use of our tax dollars or any other for hiring public employees.More public employees means more public resource to collect political funds. It does so in a fair and union dues for their unions.That's why increasing taxes is a top even-handed way. priority of public employee unions. Measure 98 treats Republicans, Democrats, Independents and But the victims of this cycle are the taxpayers.Their tax dollars are other political parties all the same. It applies equally to liberals, being used to collect political campaign funds for those whose moderates,and conservatives.It treats corporations the same as primary goal is to increase taxes. unions. Under Measure 98, no matter what your political stripe, Why do the public employee unions have what seems like an taxpayer dollars and other public resources could not be used to endless supply of political campaign funds? Because they have collect your political campaign funds. an advantage no one else has. Government collects their The status quo, on the other hand, is not fair.Currently, the only campaign funds for them by taking political contributions groups for which government collects large amounts of political out of public employee' paychecks before the employees money are those groups that campaign for higher taxes. even see a dime of their own money.(And they don't even have to have the employee's permission.) It is a conflict of interest for government to use taxpayer resources Of course, public employees have as much right to contribute to help the campaigns of those groups that support higher taxes. to political campaigns as anyone else. And under Measure 98, Measure 98 would make this practice illegal. public employees will still be free to contribute to any cause they Under Measure 98, all political organizations would have to col- personally believe in by simply writing out a check;just like every- lect their own political funds,which of course is as it should be. one else does. Let's pass Measure 98 and get government out of the business of Measure 98 applies equally to everyone. It doesn't favor collecting political campaign funds.Let's insure that elections are Democrats,Republicans,Independents,liberals or conservatives. fair and government is always a neutral party by passing Measure Under Measure 98, government simply will not collect 98. political campaign funds for anyone.Period. (This information furnished by Bill Sizemore,Oregon Taxpayers United.) That's the way it should be. (This information furnished by Bill Sizemore,Oregon Taxpayers United.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 181 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. ,98 Arguments ARGUMENT IN FAVOR ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION IT IS ALL ABOUT FREE POLITICAL SPEECH LEAGUE OF WOMEN VOTERS OF OREGON SAYS: The unions say Measure 98 will take away public employees' OREGONIANS DEFEATED THIS MEASURE rights to contribute to their unions'political activities and thus limit TWO YEARS AGO. their political speech. LET'S DEFEAT IT AGAIN. But that's just not true. In 1998, voters in Oregon said "no" to Measure 59. which is Measure 98 says public employee unions will no longer be able virtually identical to this year's Measure 98. We recommend a collect political funds by deducting them from workers'paychecks. "no"vote forthe same reasons we did last time: But it doesn't stop workers from voluntarily contributing-As- much as they want to their union's political activities by Measure 98 is unfair. It curtails individual rights by denying writing out a check or signing up for automatic checking account some union members the right to choose a payroll deduction to withdrawals. have a political voice like any other citizen.It also takes way a worker's right to choose to participate or not in political educa- The public employee unions know this.But they are pointing their tion funding. finger at Measure 98 because they don't want you to know that Measure 98 threatens the Voters' Pamphlet. Today in they are the ones who are actually taking away the free speech of Oregon, the Voters' Pamphlet is the most important election public sector workers. education tool we have to ensure that every voter has access They know that everywhere else this type of measure has to all of the information and arguments needed to make an been enacted,union members have exercised their freedom informed choice. If Measure 98 passes, according to legal by not contributing to the union's political activities. The interpretation, the pamphlet you are reading right now would workers are in the union to collectively bargain with their contain no election information, no arguments for and against employer,not to be a political action committee(PAC). issues,and no explanation of what a measure's consequences The union bosses know that,given the choice,the workers won't might be.The use of public funds for printing this publication give them their money for politics. would be prohibited by 98. Here's just one example.In 1998, 72% of Washington voters Oregon voters defeated this unnecessary and unfair approved a measure to do pretty much the same thing as measure in 1998. The League of Women Voters of Oregon Measure.98. Within months, the number of teachers willing to strongly recommends voting"no"on Measure 98. finance their union's political agenda dropped from 45,000(when It's still unnecessary,and it's still unfair. forced to contribute)to 8,000.State worker support for the union's Please vote"no"on 98. political activities dropped from over 40,000 forced contributors to a mere 82. LEAGUE OF WOMEN VOTERS OF OREGON That's right.82. (This information furnished by Paula D. Krane, President, League of Women Voters of Oregon.) Similar results have occurred elsewhere. The point is,Measure 98 won't take away public workers'rights.It will give them back. Measure 98 will make sure that every political contribution a public sector worker makes to his or her union will be freely given. Please vote YES on Measure 98. (This information furnished by Becky Miller,Oregon Taxpayers United.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 182 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 98 Arguments ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION Measure 98 is about shutting people out of democracy. OREGON PTA SAYS: Oregon Action urges you to vote NO on 98. MEASURE 98 IS A DIRECT ATTACK Bill Sizemore wants Oregonians to think this is about campaign ON YOUR NEIGHBORHOOD PTA! finance reform.OA has worked on campaign finance reform long If this amendment passes, PTAs would no longer be able to edu- enough to know that Measure 98 is phony reform. Cate our members on potential legislation or measures that may Real campaign finance reform encourages citizen participa- negatively or positively affect their children.We would no longer tion.Measure 98 discourages participation.It's undemocratic.It's be able to write.a letter to our state or federal representatives or unfair.It's wrong.It's phony. senators telling them about an urgent need that Oregon's children Measure 98 will gut the Voters'Pamphlet. Oregon Action can- miaht have. not afford TV or radio time to talk about the issues that matter to Why would these amendments affect us?Because PTAs(Parent our members,but we can afford the$500 for this space.If not,we Teacher Associations) all use "public resources for political could gather 1000 signatures. If you wanted to say something purposes"when we use our school buildings.We all collect dues about the election,you could do the same thing.But Measure 98 or raise funds in these public facilities, and a part of these funds wants to shut you and us out,leaving the political debate to those goes toward our child advocacy efforts. This activity is strictly who can buy time on TV and the radio. forbidden by amendment 98. Measure 98 shuts out small donors,but doesn't do anything The Oregon PTA works hard every legislative session to ensure about big money. In 1999, OA released the Undermining that the budget gives adequate funds to schools, to child health Democracy report that looked at campaign contributions in care, and to services for children with special needs. Over the Oregon.In the report, we compared some of the top 10 PACs in past 104 years,the PTA has been instrumental in: the state.In 1998,the Oregon Victory PAC got one hundred per- . Promoting parent involvement in schools cent of their contributions from 39 individuals or corporations who . Securing child labor laws gave$1000 or more.More than two-thirds came from those who Promoting school safety gave $10,000 or more. In contrast, one hundred percent of the ' Supporting compulsory public education contributors to the public employees'PAC gave between $1 and $100. Measure 98 denies participation in our democracy to the Promoting education for children with special needs public employees'PAC that represent small contributors and does - Establishing a juvenile justice system nothing about the big money PAC. • Implementing a nation-wide school lunch program Measure 98 endangers the chance for real reform. Measure If this amendment passes Oregon's children will lose one of the 98 is so broad and so poorly written no one knows for sure strongest voices they have:The voice of PTAs across this state, whether it will allow real campaign finance reform such as representing more than 27,000 concerned parents,grandparents, Measure 6 to be enacted. Legal opinions differ. Don't give politi- community members,teachers,and all children. cians an excuse to derail real reform.Vote NO on Measure 98. VOTE TO SUPPORT THE WORK THAT PTA Oregon Action is online at www.oregonaction.org. DOES FOR THE CHILDREN OF OREGON (This information furnished by RuthAlice Anderson,Oregon Action.) VOTE NO ON AMENDMENT 98! Kathryn Firestone, President Lisa Laursen Thirkill,Vice President for Legislation The Oregon PTA (This information furnished by Kathryn Firestone,President,Lisa Laursen Thirkill, VP for Legislation;The Oregon PTA(Oregon Congress of Parents and Teachers).) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 183 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet-Statewide Measures Measure No. 98 Arguments ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION Don't let 98 and 92 interfere with Measure 98 hurts programs that help seniors the Firefighter-MDA partnership Measure 98 hurts programs that help seniors,and it deserves no Fires aren't the only thing firefighters take on every day.We place in Oregon's Constitution. also partner with the Muscular Dystrophy Association to combat Measure 98 will hurt charities that help seniors and other neuromuscular diseases that affect millions of Americans. people. Every pay period, thousands of working Oregonians We work hard for our money.And it feels good to know that voluntarily donate money to hospice programs, Red Cross, and our voluntary contributions help families dealing with other charities that help seniors.Amendment 98 takes this right muscular dystrophy. But amendments 98 and 92 could end away from one group:Public employees.These are our firefighters, our partnership with MDA. teachers and nurses.This measure would unnecessarily single Through our paychecks every month,we make contributions that them out and put millions of dollars at risk at the same time. pay for things like research, physical therapy, support groups for If this measure passes, charities like senior meal programs that families and even summer camp for kids. This partnership has receive donations through payroll deductions would have to make been going strong since 1954. a choice:Either stop advocating for us when good or bad legisla- Amendment 98 would bar us from making our monthly tion comes up, or stop accepting any donations from teachers, contributions to MDA.Why?Because like many charities, MDA nurses and other public employees who have been contributing through payroll deduction for years. works to pass legislation that would help its members.For exam- ple, MDA has succeeded in getting better long-term health care These non-profit groups would be severely punished if they and better access in public facilities for people who use wheel- mistakenly spent any of their payroll-deducted funds on chairs.But amendment 98 strictly forbids us from contributing to political work. any group's political activities — even MDA's efforts to improve Wheie will people go if they can't go to a charity for hero the lives of the disabled. pub- lic assistance.Our state budget has enough problems alread . Please vote"no"on amendments 98 and 92. Stand up for seniors and other groups who benefit from charita- They take choices away from firefighters. ble contributions.Please join us in opposing Measure 98. They take money away from people who need it. Signed, They don't belong in Oregon's Constitution. Oregon State Council of Senior Citizens ' Signed, United Seniors of Oregon Gray Panthers of Oregon Bob Livingston Advocacy Coalition for Seniors and People with Disabilities Oregon State Fire Fighters Council (This information furnished by'Jim Davis, Oregon State Council of Senior Steven Kenney Citizens, United Seniors of Oregon, Gray Panthers of Oregon,Advocacy Muscular Dystrophy Association Coalition for Seniors&People with Disabilities.) (This information furnished by Steve Kenney, Regional Director Muscular Dystrophy Association;Bob Livingston,Oregon State Firefighters Council.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 184 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 98 Arguments ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION STATE TREASURER JIM HILL URGES A Oregon Secretary of State says, "NO"VOTE ON 98 "Vote`no'on 98 to save the Voters'Pamphlet" Oregon has a rich history of diverse and progressive politics.We As the Secretary of State, I respectfully ask you to vote"no"on take pride in the high level of participation in which our citizens Measure 98, and preserve the very Voters' Pamphlet you are involve themselves in our state and local governments.Measure reading right now. 98 is a mean-spirited attempt to silence the voices of one How would 98 affect the Voters'Pamphlet? group of Oregonians. Measure 98 would forbid the use of public funds to pay for print- Our public servants, the men and women targeted by Measure ing and distributing the state's voter pamphlet. If Measure 98 98,are under unfair attack.These are our children's teachers,our passes,this could be the last Voters'Pamphlet as we know it. neighborhood police and firefighters, and our nurses and health Here's how:Everyone who submits a statement pays a fee to the care providers. Measure 98 aims to keep these valuable state.These fees, along with public funds, pay for s copy to be Oregonians out of the political process by making it difficult for them to participate. delivered free to every registered voter in Oregon. Oregon's Voters'Pamphlet is a unique and valuable tool for voters Oregonians then get to read where candidates stand on the to read about the candidates and the issues they will decide. I issues they care about.They also read arguments for and against urge you to read the fiscal impact statement for Measure 98, ballot measures, so they can understand the consequences which clearly reflects the loss of this important information.A por- before they vote. tion of it is funded by the various candidates and political Doesn't Measure 98 exclude the Voters'Pamphlet? committees who pay to submit information that is mailed to every Even though the amendment has language that says voters' registered voter in the state.Another portion is paid by a fund that pamphlet fees would be allowed under the law, the experts who would be restricted by this measure. As responsible voters, we drafted the fiscal impact statement concluded that candidates' should be wary of any attempt to keep information from helping statements and arguments wouid be eliminated.That is because us make well-informed decisions. Measure 98 is an attack on part of the printing and mailing cost would be covered by"public Oregonians'ability to educate themselves about their gov- funds"—an act that would be forbidden by amendment 98. ernment and their vote.It will gut our Voters'Pamphlet. How do I know Measure 98 will really gut the Voters' This dangerous measure would also make it tougher for public Pamphlet? employees to use payroll deduction to contribute to the charity of See the Financial Impact Statement for yourself at the beginning their choice.Oregon has a vital network of private charities that of this section.The unbiased team of experts who analyzed the serve our state's most vulnerable citizens. Measure 98 would measure and wrote the statement concluded the state would save take money away from Oregon's valuable private charities. little by not printing the information we rely on in the Voters' The individuals who crafted Measure 98 are trying to pull the Pamphlet-but really we will all lose a lot. wool over the eyes of Oregon voters.Don't be fooled.Please Please vote no on Measure 98--the voters'pamphlet is too join me in voting NO on Measure 98! important to lose. Jim Hill Bill Bradbury Oregon State Treasurer Secretary of State (This information furnished by Jim Hill,Oregon State Treasurer.) (This information furnished by Bill Bradbury, Secretary of State, Oregon Secretary of State's Office.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor dces the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 185 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 98 Arguments ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION UNITED WAY URGES A"NO"VOTE ON 98: GOVERNOR KITZHABER URGES YOU IT WILL HURT OREGONIANS IN NEED TO VOTE"NO"ON AMENDMENT 98 Measure 98 is unfair to Oregonians who support charities, As an Oregonian, I know the importance our citizens place on and unfair to Oregonians who need the services provided by making the right choices for Oregon's future. In any election, we these charities. It will end charitable contributions to many may not all agree on the issues,but we want the right to make an groups that help Oregonians. informed, fair decision.That's why I'm asking you to join me in The United Way is Oregon's largest human services fundraising voting"no"on Amendment 98. organization. Our agencies help seniors, children, disabled citi- Amendment 98 is unfair. It denies some of our friends and zens, and many other Oregonians with special needs. Because neighbors who are union members the right to choose a voluntary many of the non-profit agencies that receive funding from us dues deduction to have a political voice like any other citizen. inform the legislature on matters that affect the people we serve These are the men and women of Oregon who are firefighters, our work and theirs is considered "political" and would be police officers,nurses and teachers.They save lives and educate seriously impacted by amendment 98 our children. Amendment 98 would prohibit public employees from mak- Amendment 98 is unnecessary. Right now in Oregon, no ing voluntary payroll donations to the United Way in the worker can be forced to contribute to their union's or anyone same way they have for years.Since payroll deduction pro- else's political fund. Legal protections already allow workers to grams are the mainstay for United Way, fundraising, this "opt out" of union political contributions, and many Oregonians could result in millions of dollars in losses to programs like already choose to"opt out"Amendment 98 doesn't protect these hospice care,The Salvation Army,The American Red Cross, workers.It takes away their right to choose for themselves. and The YMCANWCA. Amendment 98 is underhanded. Its sponsors call it"paycheck Due to the elimination of the payroll deduction option and the high protection,"but it is actually an attack on public employees. Bill cost of complying with amendment 98, United Way will have less Sizemore's plan to single out public employees is wrong for funding to support necessary programs for seniors, low-income Oregon.It doesn't belong in the Constitution. and disabled Oregonians. These deserving people will have Amendment 98 threatens the Voters' Pamphlet. Even though nowhere to turn to but public support That could mean a greater Sizemore tried to reduce amendment 98's impact on the Voters' need for tax-supported programs. Pamphlet, legal experts say he failed. See the Financial Impact Please vote "no" on 98 and keep the path open for charitable Statement and the Explanatory Statement in the front of this workplace giving. section.Both clearly show that the Voters'Pamphlet as we know Signed, it could cease to exist— it could include no arguments for and Members of the Board of Directors,and Staff against candidates and causes, and no explanation of what a The United Way of the Mid-Willamette Valley measure's unintended consequences might be.We need to pro- tect the Voters'Pamphlet, one of the best sources of information Russell Beck, Executive Director for Oregon's citizens. Robert Ruck,Chair of the Board PROTECT OREGON'S WORKERS Gregory Astley AND THE VOTERS'PAMPHLET Randall Franke George Gent VOTE"NO"ON AMENDMENT 98 Tom Golden Carolyn Gorsuch Governor John A.Kitzhaber,M.D. Judy Grant (This information furnished by John A. Kitzhaber, M.D., Governor of Delilah Ginther Oregon.) Stacy Hartline George Jennings Paul Krissel Jennifer Larsen Morrow Keeta Lauderdale Kay Marikos Ed Martin Raquel Moore-Green Don Myers Lee Pelton Bruce Rogers Ted Stang Betty J.Youngblood (This information furnished by Paul Krissel,Member of the Board.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 186 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 98 Arguments ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION "I can make 50 phone calls and NURSES URGE"NO"VOTES ON raise quite a lot of money very quickly." CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENTS 98 AND 92 --Bill Sizemore, Sponsor of Measures 98 and 92 As Registered Nurses,we care about what happens to our Quoted in The Oregonian, May 17, 1997 patients and the care they receive.When legislation comes up that affects our patients'care and rights, we use the small politi- Our constitution should embody the highest principles of good cal contributions voluntarily deducted from our paychecks government.These principals should be fair and apply equally to a resource all citizens. Measures 98 and 92 are not fair, and do not apply ensure that patient care wins out over-the interests of equally to all citizens.They are meant to eliminate the voices of pharmaceutical tical companies, HMO's and tobacco companies. working people from participating in the political process. Silencing nurses'voices for quality care. Consider this. Constitutional amendments 98 & 92 would restrict our ability to have voluntary political contributions deducted from our pay- • Some sponsors of measures can raise money to further their checks. That would make it very difficult for our professional political agenda with a few phone calls to big contributors. association–the Oregon Nurses Association–to have a voice in Working people of more modest means must pool their the policies that shape health care for all Oregonians. resources in small amounts in order to be heard above the These measures do not address the real problem. clamor of corporate and moneyed interests. Pharmaceutical companies, HMO's, and tobacco companies will • 'Working people use payroll deductions for personal banking, not be affected by these measures.They will still have the right to making charitable contributions and to support their unions and spend millions of dollars to influence our legislators. In fact, by professional associations.The Sizemore measures 98 and 92 silencing nurses,the business of health care will have more influ- are meant to eliminate these options. ence on the quality of care you receive. • Measures 98 and 92, by attacking the use of payroll deduc- 98 and 92 are unfair and unnecessary. tions, attempt to still the voices of employees, while they do Nurses have been voluntarily making contributions through our nothing about the free flow of checks,cash and gifts that come paychecks for years.This money is used to protect nurses'rights, from wealthy contributors and corporations. patients' rights, and to support charitable organizations like the Mid-Valley Women's Crisis Service. Any member of the Nurses' These attempts to restrict participation of working Oregonians in Association can choose not to participate. Please vote no on 98 the political process of their state is a betrayal of the initiative sys- &92 to safeguard our freedom to participate. tem which was established to broaden participation in govern- ment. This repeated attempt to restrict the collective voice of Please vote no on 98&92 working people,while leaving unaffected the major sources of big Galen Thompson,RN,Pendleton money contributors,should be rejected by voters. Demetra Apperson,RN,The Dalles Don't Let Our Constitution Be Used for Unfair Politics Maye Thompson,RN,PhD,Portland Patricia DeShazer,RN,Lakeview Vote"No"on Measures 98 and 92. Debra Cassell,RN,Albany Lawrence Perry,President Chris O'Neill,RN,Eugene Oregon Common Cause Susan Aronson,RN,Corvallis Gayle Lewis,NP,Jacksonville (This information furnished by Larry Perry,Chair,Oregon Common Cause.) Terri Hansen,RN,Medford Jean DeJarnatt,NP,Salem Barbara Geiszler,RN,Phoenix-Talent Gail Pray,RN,Coos Bay (This information furnished by Martin Taylor,Nurses Unite.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 187 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 98 Arguments ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION We,the undersigned charities,advocates and Measure 98 is Unnecessary: businesses,urge a"NO"vote on proposed I've already"opted out:' Constitutional amendment 98. 1 have exercised my right to"opt out"of contributing to my union's Charities and businesses often come,together to help Oregonians political fund,without any hassle whatsoever.Measure 98 would who need assistance.Measure 98 would take away a choice from not protect my right to"opt out:'but it would take away my right working Oregonians and hurt the thousands of Oregonians who and the right of my co-workers to"opt in"and participate in poli receive assistance and support from work-place giving programs. tics like anyone else.That's not fair to me or to any other Oregon CHARITIES/ADVOCATES: worker who would be excluded by this measure. Advocacy Coalition for Seniors and People with Disabilities Choice is one of the fundamental rights of all Oregonians and the American Association of University Women of Oregon backers of Measure 98 want to take that away from me.Currently, American Civil Liberties Union I have the choice of whether I want to participate in the process. Canyon Crisis Center Don't let the backers of Measure 98 take that choice away from Children First for Oregon me. Ecumenical Ministries of Oregon No employee can be forced to contribute to a union's political House of Zion Ministries, Inc. campaign.It's a•right upheld by the U.S.Supreme Court.It's even Human Services Coalition of Oregon listed in the Official Ballot Title Summary and in the Explanatory League of Women Voters of Oregon Statement that Bill Sizemore signed off on.The law says my lob Mid-Valley Women's Crisis Service Muscular Dystrophy Association, Inc. is secure regardless of whether I contribute.I have seen firsthand that it's true. National Committee for Responsive Philanthropy Oregon Alliance of Children's Programs Please vote"no"on 98. Oregon State Council of Senior Citizens Oregonians for Public Safety It doesn't give me rights.It takes my rights away. Portland Gray Panthers Sincerely, Salem Childbirth Education Association Danielle Fischer United Seniors of Oregon United Way of the Mid-Willamette Valley (This information furnished by Danielle Fischer.) United Way of Columbia County Willamette Valley Child Care Federation BUSINESSES: Associated Business Systems B'For Publishing Services B.D.Consulting, Inc. Bennett, Hartman&Reynolds Attorneys at Law Brices Catering C& E Systems, LLC Celilo Group Charles R.Williamson,Attorney, Kell Alterman& Runstein, LLP Clackamas County Veterinary Clinic Discover Mortgage-North Greeley Branch FamilyCare, Inc. Labor's Community Service Agency, Inc. LGD Insight, Ltd. Mark E.Horstmann, CPA Microtech Systems Pac/West Communications Portland Teachers Credit Union Smith, Gamson, Diamond&Olney Attorneys at Law The Bentley Gilbert Firm Three Rivers Farm Unions-America.com Wiser&Associates BUSINESS ASSOCIATIONS: National Electrical Contractors Association (NECA), Oregon- Columbia Chapter Oregon Association of Hospitals and Health Systems Oregon Credit Union League Osteopathic Physicians and Surgeons of Oregon (This information furnished by Mike Fahey President, Discover NW Union Mortgage;Gina Mattioda,Co-Chair,Human Services Coalition of Oregon.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 188 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—statewide Measures Measure No. 98 Arguments ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION A Message from Working Oregonians Democrats say"no"to 98 and 92. Bill Sizemore,the sponsor of Measures 98 and 92,is singling out Proposed Constitutional Amendments 98& 92 are unnecessary payroll deduction because he knows we have to put our smaller and unfair. Measure 98, in particular, singles out one group and contributions together in order to be heard in the political arena. puts the Voters'Pamphlet at risk.The Constitution is no place for Sizemore's supporters can write$50,000 checks to his cam- this kind of law. paigns,while most of us can only contribute a little at a time. These two measures are so poorly written,vague and far reach- Payroll deduction helps up pool our funds.Take that away, ing that common ground is shared by a wide political spectrum. and you take away our right to be heard. See for yourself the list of endorsers calling for a "no" vote: It includes Democrats, Republicans,environmental groups,seniors Sizemore says these measures will protect us,but we are already protected from having to make political contributions.Many of us groups,businesses and unions.Here's why: already exercise that right. In fact, Sizemore knows we are • Measures 98 and 92 would dramatically alter the landscape of already protected.He signed an official Explanatory Statement in Oregon's political debate by excluding one side: working this very Voters'Pamphlet that says,"Under current law...Neither Oregonians like teachers, firefighters and nurses. Everyone unions nor any other organization can require political contribu- has the right to have his or her voice heard. tions"(Measure 92 Explanatory Statement,second paragraph). . 98 and 92 would undermine the work charities do for, The real aim of this measure is to take away the rights of working Oregonians.We all understand the importance of charities and Oregonians. their advocacy in combating hunger and providing hospice Please join us in rejecting these unfair and unnecessary care. Creating extensive and unnecessary paperwork means less time to fulfill their mission. constitutional amendments. Vote No on Measures 98 and 92. • 98 puts the Voters' Pamphlet at risk. The Financial Impact Statement reflects the major reduction of this pamphlet,one of Sally Tulley, Registered Nurse,Oregon Federation of Nurses, Oregon's best election resources. AFT 5017,Oregon City Please vote"no"and keep these unfair and far-reaching amend- John Cornelius. Flight Attendant, Flight Attendants 39, Portland ments out of our Constitution. Lee Lasse.Tire and Wheel Specialist,Transit Union 757, Springfield Earl Blumenauer,U.S.House of Representatives Charles Calkins, Environmental Specialist,State,County and Bill Bradbury,Secretary of State Municipal Employees 3336, Bend Kate Brown,Senate Democratic Leader Maggie Robb, Lead Sanitation Technician,Bakers and Grain Tony Corcoran,State Senator Millers 114,Tualatin Peter Courtney,State Senator Jim Stith,County Eaui mp ent Operator,Oregon Public Peter DeFazio,U.S.House of Representatives Employees,SEIU 503, Medford Randall Edwards,State Representative James Neal, Road Maintenance Worker,Communications Dan Gardner,State Representative Workers 7955, Seal Rock Avel Gordly,Oregon State Senator Cindy Van Ortwick.School Custodian,Service Employees 140, Gary Hansen,State Representative Portland Darlene Hooley, U.S.House of Representatives James Sullivan.Gas Corrosion Technician,Office Professional Elaine Hopson,State Representative Employees 11,Gates Randy Leonard,State Representative Sheirll Edwards,Grocery Checker, Food and Commercial Kathy Lowe,State Representative Workers 555, Roseburg Jeff Merkley,State Representative Kevin Jackson,Correction's Sergeant, State,County and Hardy Myers,Attorney General Municipal Employees 3940,Ontario Barbara Roberts, Former Oregon Governor Tom Weaver, School Maintenance Worker,Classified Diana Rosenbaum,State Representative Employees,AFT 3662, Scappoose Kurt Schrader,State Representative Terri Wilson,Cold Mill Operator,Steelworkers 6163,Albany Frank Shields,State Senator Peter Sorenson, Lane County Commissioner (This information furnished by Tim Nesbitt,Oregon AFL-CIO Committee on Beverly Stein,Chair,Multnomah County Board of Commissioners Political Education.) Cliff Trow,State Senator Vicki Walker,State Representative David Wu,U.S.House of Representatives Ron Wyden,U.S.Senate (This information furnished by Barbara Roberts, Former Governor of Oregon.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon„nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth,of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 189 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet-Statewide Measures Measure No. 98 Arguments ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION Republicans Oppose Unnecessary and Unfair Measure 98 Unfairly Targets Public Employees Constitutional Amendments Measure 98 takes an already unfair proposal and applies it "No"on 92 and 98 unfairly to one group of citizens –to us, the workers who Some people will be surprised at the strong Republican opposi- provide Oregon's public services. tion to these measures.The truth is,the wide variety of opposition Like Measure 92, Measure 98 is designed to limit our ability to to 92 and 98 reflects the far-reaching consequences these participate in the political process on matters that affect our lives proposed Constitutional amendments will have on Oregon. as workers and citizens. Both measures apply only to payroll 92 and 98 are unnecessary and unfair. These measures are deduction, the best way for working people to make our voices unnecessary because all workers already have the option to not heard y the political process.There are no similar restrictions on fund their union's political activities.They're unfair because they wealthy citizens or corporations to make their voices heard. single out one group and take away their ability to participate in Measure 98 would prohibit organizations that receive our payroll- the political process. deducted funds — whether unions, charities or professional They hurt charitable organizations. Because many charities associations—from representing our interests and fulfilling the speak up on behalf of their members in order to be effective,their purposes for which we support them. Even writing a letter to a work is considered"political"by these measures would be subject legislator would be banned if supported in any way by payroll- to the stringent rules set forth by both amendments. For groups deducted funds. like the United Way and the Muscular Dystrophy Association,that Worse yet, Measure 98 applies only to us as public employees– means fewer funds from the generous Oregonians who have further evidence that this constitutional amendment is designed to been contributing from their own paychecks for years. be unfair. If Oregonians with special needs can count less on charities for We believe it is unfair to single out public employees,to limit support,chances are they will need more public services to make our rights as workers or to restrict our voices as citizens.But up the difference.With our state budget constrained as it is, one that is exactly what Measure 98 does. wonders where the money would come from to provide these services. We should have the same rights as other workers to use payroll deductions and to direct our contributions and dues No matter the politics of working Oregonians,it is not right to the organizations of our choice. to unfairly single them out and take away their rights. Finally, Measure 98 is unnecessary. All workers– in the public It's not right to make funds harder to raise for charities like sector,just like the private sector—already have the right to opt the United Way,Muscular Dystrophy Association,and groups out of paying for political expenditures with which we disagree. that help senior citizens.These groups provide a valuable And thousands in Oregon already do. public service and need our"no"vote on these measures. Please join us in rejecting these unfair and unnecessary con- Join us in voting NO on 98&92. stitutional amendments.Vote"No"on Measures 92 and 98. Jack Roberts,Oregon Labor Commissioner Zita Ingham Mark Simmons, Majority Leader, Oregon House of Represent- Professor atives(Elgin) American Federation of Teachers,OR 3190 Max Williams,State Representative(Tigard) Bandon Lane Shetterly,State Representative(Dallas) Paul Zebell Vic Backlund,State Representative(Keizer) Tom Butler,State Representative(Ontario) City Electrician Jim Hill,State Representative(Hillsboro) International Electrical Workers 48 Bill Witt,State Representative(Portland) Portland Randy Franke,Marion County Commissioner Michael Brown Police Officer (This information furnished by Jack Roberts,Labor Commissioner.) State,County and Municipal Employees 1847 Portland Jo Ann Kuhnhausen Ranger Aide Oregon Public Employees,SEIU 503 The Dalles (This information furnished by Tim Nesbitt,Oregon AFL-CIO Committee on Political Education.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 190 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 98 Arguments ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION If you want big money out of politics Public Service Workers Say NO to Measure 98 Vote"Yes"on 6 We are workers who provide public services throughout our state. And We are proud of the work we do for you and we are proud union members. "NO"on 98 Bill Sizemore's Measures 98 and 92 will hurt rank and file union Organizations including seniors, environmental, labor and members.They attack our rights to make small political contribu- consumer groups are working together to take the influence of tions through payroll deductions. Some people may be able to large, money contributions out of Oregon politics. The Oregon, write checks to candidates or for ballot measures of $1000, or Accountability Act– Measure 6 is a large step in that direction. more. We can not. Only by setting aside a small amount each Measure 98 is notl month are we able to get our story told. Measure 6 is an attempt to clean up politics. Measure 98 is UNFAIR and UNBALANCED. Under Measure 6 a candidate may voluntarily choose to run as a It unfairly targets middle-class public service workers while "clean money"candidate by demonstrating enough public support leaving corporations and special interests unchecked. and agreeing to limit spending and reject private contributions. Measure 98 is UNNECESSARY. Measure 98 could threaten good reform. In our union, members make the rules. We don't need Bill Bill Sizemore, the sponsor of Measure 98, said in an Oregonian Sizemore to tell us how to operate our union. Many union- article, this "proposed constitutional amendment (Measure 98) represented workers decide not to make political contributions would trump Measure 6"Measure 98 would forbid the use of pub- through our union.That's their choice and federal law.The way lic funds to collect money for political purposes.Since taxpayers' this measure is written, it would deprive thousands of hard- money would be used to support a candidate under Measure 6, working Oregonians a public voice. the implementation of Measure 6 may be threatened. Please VOTE NO on 98. Let's not risk the opportunity for fair politics in Oregon. Ellen Jackson, Office Worker, Klamath Falls Vote "no" on 98 and "yes" on 6 for real campaign finance Glenda Short,Trainer, Eugene reform. Charles Spray, Physician, Salem Nancy Magill,Case Manager, Portland Signed, Deborah Dombrowski, Library Worker,Corvallis Maureen Kirk Melody Williamson,Office Worker, Independence Oregon State Public Interest Research Group Bart Lewis,Accounting Technician, Eugene Barbara Hopkins,Office Worker, Salem (This information furnished by Maureen Kirk,Oregon State Public Interest Mark Gronso, Electrician, Pendleton Research Group(OSPIRG).) Monty Walters, Mental Health Specialist,Ashland Gwelda Shepardson,Case Manager, Roseburg Karen Cummins,Child Protective Services,Coos Bay Rosalie Pedroza,Oregon Health Plan,Salem Sue Martinez,Cook, Eugene Randy Davis, Maintenance Worker,Clatskanie Alice Grimes, Retired Library Worker, Medford Larry Williams,Apprenticeship Representative,Springfield Rosanne Richard, Project Coordinator,Salem Kym Lamb,Case Manager, Portland John Ekberg, Natural Resource Specialist,Corbett Geraldine Ruatta,Case Manager, Grants Pass Vickie O'Reilly, Employment Specialist, Beaverton Jesse Backman, Forestry Worker, Bay City Elizabeth Duell,Office Worker,Salem All members of Oregon Public Employees Union,SEIU Local 503 (This information furnished by Terrence Cavanagh, Oregon Public Employees Union,SEIU Local 503.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 191 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 98 Arguments ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION Oregon Public School Teachers Ask You To MEASURE 98 IS EXPENSIVE&UNNECESSARY Vote"No"on Measure 98 Measure 98 would interfere with the contract we have negotiated Oregon does not need Measure 98.All public school teachers with our employees: currently have the ability to"opt out"of a political contribution if we —Our employees already pay the expense of payroll deduc- don't wish to participate.Most teachers value our right to"opt in" lions for their representation costs, as agreed to in our con because so many of the decisions that are made about Oregon's tract, or no public funds are expended for that purpose. public schools come through the Oregon legislature.Measure 98 There is no problem to be solved by this measure. would take away our right to pool our resources for a political voice. —It would increase, not decrease, the public expense of our Measure 98 is unfair to teachers.All teachers and other public payroll systems,by making us"watchdogs"of every Oregon employees should have the freedom to choose how our dues are bank, credit union, or charity an employee designates for spent. This measure targets one group of Oregonians – and payroll deduction,to insure those organizations are in com- denies us the same rights as individuals who are employees of pliance with this constitutional amendment. private businesses and big corporations. —This measure makes activities in other states a cause for Measure 98 doesn't belong in Oregon's Constitution. investigation and punishment of public employers in Oregon. Constitutional language that denies some Oregonians the free- For example,if an organization receiving a payroll deduction dom to choose how their money is spent should never happen. from one of our employees also lobbied state government in And it is probably unconstitutional. some other state, we have violated this law.That's the way this measure works. Measure 98 says one'thing,but does another. It changes how —Please join us in voting"NO"on this poorly drafted, unnec- teachers and other public school employees can participate in the political process – the process that determines how public essary measure. schools are funded,how many students can be placed in a class- David Frohnmayer Paul Risser Daniel Bernstine room, even what may or may not be taught.This measure will President, U of O* President,OSU* President, PSU ultimately hurt education in Oregon. Betty Youngblood Joseph W.Cox Please Vote No on Measure 98. President,WOU* Chancellor Paul Duchin Oregon University System* Middle School Teacher *Titles used for identification purposes only,and do not constitute Eugene a position on this measure by any institution of the Oregon Sharon Shannon University System or the Oregon State Board of Higher High School Teacher Education. La Grande (This information furnished by Grattan Kerans; Chancellor of Oregon (This information furnished by Sharon Shannon,Paul Duchin.) Universities.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 192 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 98 Arguments ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION Measure 98 would hurt Oregon's students MEASURE 98 IS UNNECESSARY AND UNFAIR: As student advocates here in Oregon, we feel threatened by PLEASE VOTE"NO"ON 981 amendment 98 and its impacts on us and our fellow students. Signed,the working men and women of: We care deeply about issues that affect us all, and we enjoy the AFSCME,Council 75 freedom to express ourselves politically.These are skills that help American Federation of Teachers-Oregon students become effective leaders. Association of Engineering Employees of Oregon Amendment 98 would shut us out of the political process by Association of Western Pulp&Paper Workers OR/ID Council restricting our use of our student fees and even our own cam- Bricklayers&Allied Craftworkers Local 1 puses.The following activities—typical of any university—would Cement Masons Local 555 likely be declared ILLEGAL under this measure: Columbia Pacific Building&Construction Trades Council • A student sends an alert from a university-owned computer Communications Workers of America Local 7901 urging members of his human rights'organization to call their Elevator Constructors Local 23 senators on an upcoming vote.(Illegal under 98) Heat and Frost Insulators&Asbestos Workers Local 36 • The student body president writes a letter on student body IBEW Locals 48, 112,280,659,932,970 letterhead asking the legislature to improve her university's International Alliance of Theatrical&Stage Employees Local 488 library.(Illegal under 98) International Longshore and Warehouse Union-Columbia River • A paid member of an environmental group organizes volun- District Council teers on campus to make phone calls on a ballot measure. International Union of Painters and Allied Trades Dist.Council 5 (Illegal under 98) Ironworkers Locals 29 and 516 • The Republican student group passes around a hat at an Laborers Locals 121,320,483 on-campus gathering and later contributes part of it to any Lane,Coos,Curry, Douglas County Building Trades Council campaign.(Illegal under 98) National Association of Letter Carriers Branch 82 Let us learn to participate in the political process now,and Northwest Oregon Labor Council,AFL-CIO we will become effective leaders for tomorrow. Operating Engineers Local 701 LIBERAL–CONSERVATIVE–INDEPENDENT Oregon AFL-CIO IT DOESN'T MATTER. Oregon Education Association WE ALL LOSE WITH 98. Oregon Machinists Council, District Lodge 24 Oregon Nurses Association VOTE NO ON 98! Oregon Public Employees Union,SEW Local 503 Signed, Jay Breslow,President Oregon School Employees Association Associated Students of the University of Oregon* Oregon State Building and Construction Trades Council Oregon State Fire Fighters Council Scott Young,President Pacific Northwest Regional Council of Carpenters Associated Students of Southern Oregon University* Painters and Tapers Locals 724, 1236,1277 Andy High,President Pendleton Building Trades Council Associated Students Western Oregon University* Pineros y Campesinos Unidos del Noroeste(PCUN) Justin Roach,President Plasterers Local 82 Associated Students of Oregon State University* Portland Community College Federation of Classified Employees Susan Whitmore,President Local 3922 Associated Students of Lane Community College* Portland Fire Fighters Association *For identification purposes only.The endorsement is of the indi- Roofers Locals 49, 156 vidual,and not of the university. Salem Building Trades Council SEIU,Oregon State Council, Local 49 (This information furnished by Scott Young, Associated Students of Sheet Metal Workers Local 16 Southern Oregon University;Jay Breslow,President,Associated Students of University of Oregon.) Southern Oregon Area Local,American Postal Workers Union Teamsters Joint Council#37 United Association of Plumbers and Steamfitters Locals 290,-598 United Food and Commercial Workers Local 555 United Steelworkers of America WA/OR/ID State Conference of Bricklayers and Allied Craftworkers (This information furnished by Grant Zadow,IBEW Local 48.) (This space purchased for$500 In accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 193 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 98 Arguments ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION OREGON CONSERVATION AND Measure 98 is vague and far reaching ENVIRONMENTAL GROUPS Measure 98's vague language and consequences are misleading SAY"NO"ON 98 to the voters of Oregon.As a former law professor at Willamette This is what you'll get by voting"no"on 98: and a former Oregon State Legislator,I contend Oregon will likely • You will protect the right of all Oregonians to have a polit- face the following consequences if Measure 98 passes: ical voice.Everyone has the right to be heard.That's how we • It will change the Voters'Pamphlet.It is effective now because get the most innovative solutions to the problems we face. voters can read statements and arguments made by candi- Remember the Bottle Bill? That started in Oregon and has dates.Because the measure won't allow for some costs of the since gone nationwide. voter's pamphlet to be paid from state funds,Oregon voters will • You will help advocates for clean air and water. The see a new,less helpful pamphlet. Environmental Federation of Oregon, the Sierra Club It will effectively prevent our Parent Teacher Association's and Foundation, Pacific Rivers Council, and hundreds of other many charities from advocating on behalf of Oregon's children. groups receive voluntary contributions through payroll deduc- Monies, or support, that reached these organizations through tions from generous public employees who choose to support the deduction method will not be available for these advocacy our efforts. This measure would mean the loss of countless purposes. dollars for organizations that work to keep Oregon's air and It will cause costly legal battles as concerned parties try to water clean. discover exactly what it does and if it is constitutional. Our • You will protect the Voters'Pamphlet.Even though the spon- sister states of Ohio and Nevada have already overturned sors of this amendment say that it will not harm the Voters' similar laws. Pamphlet, legal experts believe otherwise. In fact, the Fiscal It will make it more difficult for public employees,including fire Impact Statement in this very pamphlet show that the Voters' fighters and teachers, to make and collect voluntary political Pamphlet as we know it would no longer be printed. deductions.The voice of these workers will be harder to hear in • You will keep our Constitution free from a poorly written, the public discussion. vague and far-reaching amendment that could end up in court Measure 98 is vague. It doesn't cure a real problem and its and costing all of us a lot of money. Amendments are for consequences are worse than the problem it imagines.It doesn't serious issues that are fair to all Oregonians—not for vague belong in our Constitution. amendments with far-reaching consequences. Vote"no"on 98! Please Vote No on Measure 98. Signed, Bryan Johnston, Dean Atkinson Graduate School of Management Environmental Federation of Oregon Willamette University Forest Service Employees for Environmental Ethics Friends of the Columbia Gorge (This information furnished by Bryan Johnston, Dean,Atkinson Graduate Oregon Environmental Council School of Management at Willamette University.) Oregon League of Conservation Voters Oregon Natural Resources Council Oregon State Public Interest Research Group Pacific Rivers Council Recycling Advocates Sierra Club (This information furnished by Jonathan Poisner, Oregon League of Conservation Voters.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 194 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet=Statewide Measures Measure No. 98 Arguments ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION We,the undersigned Community Advocates, Caregivers for the Elderly and Disabled Say:No on 92 and 98 Environmentalists and Educators, We provide care for the elderly and disabled. urge you to vote"no"on 98. We prepare and feed meals.We help our clients with medical We have offered our endorsement here because our organiza tions and the community we support all stand to lose under treatment and taking prescriptions. Measure 98.Measure 98 has far-reaching effects that will harm clients. a do the tasks that allow our r bathe and dress our c lients to maintain their c charities, and it will shut some Oregonians out of the political dignity and live independently. Our state's elderly and process.It's unnecessary and unfair. disabled remain in their homes and are not shipped off to nursing homes because of the work we do. Please Vote No on 981 For us to provide adequate care,we need to have a voice ENVIRONMENTAL: on the job. Our jobs are publicly funded by the legislature. Environmental Federation of Oregon Politicians won't understand what it takes to properly care for the Forest Service Employees for Environmental Ethics elderly unless we can tell those legislators.We need to educate Oregon Environmental Council them about working conditions because politicians set the work Oregon League of Conservation Voters rules.We need to tell them about patient needs because they set Oregon Natural Resources Council the funding levels for patient care. Oregon Public Interest Research Group Measures 92 and 98 effectively silence our voices because Pacific Rivers.Council we fund our political activity—like educating legislators on care for Recycling Advocates the elderly--through payroll deductions.We can't write$50,000 Sierra Club checks to politicians—most of us make about $8/hour.We just COMMUNITY ADVOCATES want to have our voice heard so we can improve the quality of Basic Rights Oregon care our clients receive and so we can improve our training, Community Alliance of Tenants benefits and working conditions. Eugene-Springfield Solidarity Network We oppose Measures 92 and 98.Measures 92 and 98 are Mid-Willamette Valley Jobs With Justice unfair and unnecessary.Working people need a voice. Oregon Action Oregon Common Cause Caregivers for the elderly and disabled: Oregon Consumer League Esther Doramus, Eugene Portland Jobs with Justice Risa Northway,Oregon City Portland New Party Rita Sparks, Eugene Rural Organizing Project Diane Chandler,Coos Bay Victim Offender Reconciliation Program /Community Mediation Kimberly Powell, Eugene Services of Polk County Caroline Mitchell, Bandon Western States Center Tena Vasquez,Oregon City EDUCATORS (This information furnished by Risa Northway.) Association of Oregon Faculties Confederation of Oregon School Administrators Oregon Education Association Oregon School Boards Association Portland Community College Faculty Federation Portland State Advocates Salem Keizer School Board The Oregon PTA Mark Abrams,Vice-Chair, Portland School Board Gordon Matzke,Faculty Member,Oregon State University Henry Sayre, Faculty Member,Oregon State University William Smaldone, Willamette University Professor and Salem City Council Member (This information furnished by Roger Gray,Coalition Against Unnecessary and Unfair Constitutional Amendments.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 195 CONTINUED It Official 2000 General election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 98 Arguments ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION ACLU RECOMMENDS A"NO"VOTE ON MEASURE 98 Not again! IT'S UNNECESSARY In 1998,Oregonians defeated Ballot Measure 59,a Bill Sizemore- Oregon law already prohibits public employees from doing authored measure that targeted the right of public.employees in anything while they're on the job to support or oppose political Oregon to deduct union dues using payroll deduction.There were candidates or ballot measures. (ORS 260.432) All workers many reasons why that was a bad measure, but one of the already have the right and ability to opt out of paying the portion biggest was its language would have disallowed the Secretary of of union dues that supports their union's political activities, and State to print the Oregon Voters'Pamphlet. many do. Now we are faced with Measure 98.Measure 98 is supposed to IT'S FAR-REACHING be the "son of Measure 59, but without the Voters' Pamphlet language.So guess what? Legal experts are now saying that Among its likely consequences are: Measure 98 may still put the Oregon Voters'Pamphlet at risk. • Forbidding public employees like teachers and nurses from And it's not just the Voters'Pamphlet that's at risk.Measure 98's contributing to their favorite charities in the same way they have vague language could also hurt the ability of charities to collect for years.This could mean big losses for groups including the donations via payroll deductions. United Way and the American Cancer Society. Charities are What's most frustrating is that this measure is so unnecessary. affected because many occasionally take positions on ballot This measure has nothing to do with most Oregonians.Measure measures and legislation such as the tobacco tax approved by gg is a deliberate attempt by supporters to deny public employees voters four years ago. the right to make voluntary political contributions through payroll • Blocking groups like the PTA from political expression by under- deduction. mining their on-campus fundraising activities. The key word is"voluntary."No one is forcing public employees to IT'S NOT ABOUT SAVING TAX MONEY donate this money.Public employees should have the same right as anyone else to express their opinions.Measure 98 is a blatant Measure 98 appears to aim for tax savings by limiting voluntary attempt by Mr.Sizemore and others to target a specific group of payroll deductions.Yet Section 4 of the measure specifically says people ... those who work for the government ... and gag their that even if the state or local government is reimbursed for the right to speak. cost of setting up a payroll deduction, it is still forbidden.This measure is built for one purpose:to exclude the participation of Unfortunately, the spillover from Measure 98 again forces unin- public employees.The savings will be the small amount from the tended consequences on all Oregonians: threats to the Voters' loss of the Voters' Pamphlet as we know it. (See Measure 98's Pamphlet,threats to charitable deductions and so on. Fiscal Impact Statement at the front of this section.) Are you tired of voting on these same issues over and over?Are IT DOESN'T BELONG IN OUR CONSTITUTION you tired of voting on issues that have no grassroots support, Similar laws have been overturned in other states because they but instead are brought about only by zealous paid signature gatherers? unfairly limit workers'rights to pool their resources to have a polit- ical voice. Oregonians should not have to pay for an expensive Join us and Vote NOI on Ballot Measure 98. legal defense for laws that aim to take away rights. Chuck Geyer,Portland VOTE"NO"ON MEASURE 98 AND KEEP THE AFSCME Local 3338(DEQ) CONSTITUTION FAIR FOR EVERYBODY Ronald Lopez,Ontario David Fidanque,President AFSCME Local 3783(Treasure Valley Community College) American Civil Liberties Union of Oregon This information furnished b ( y Don Loving,Oregon AFSCME Council 75.) (This information furnished by David Fidanque, American Civil Liberties Union of Oregon.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 In accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 196 Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 99 Proposed by initiative petition to be voted on at the General (B)The duties and functions of the Home Care Commission Election,November 7,2000. include,but are not limited to: (1) Ensuring that high quality, comprehensive home care p services are provided to the elderly and people with disabil- ities who receive personal care services in their homes by home care workers hired directly by the client and financed by payments from the State or by payments from a county or a, other public agency which receives money for that purpose from the State; � :. (2) Providing routine, emergency and respite referrals of qualified home care providers to the elderly and people with disabilities who receive personal care services by home care �e workers hired directly by the client and financed in whole or in part by the State, or by payment from a county or other $ public agency which receives money for that purpose from the State; c (3) Provide training opportunities for home care workers, s seniors and people with disabilities as consumers of per- sonal care services; g (4)Establish qualifications for home care workers; (5) Establish and maintain a registry of qualified home care "'- workers; (6) Cooperate with area agencies on aging and disability services and other local agencies to provide the services described and set forth in this section; Section 2.Home Care Commission Operation/Selection (A)The Home Care Commission shall be comprised of nine members.Five members of the Commission shall be current or former consumers of home care services for the elderly or people with disabilities.One member shall be a representative k. of the Oregon Disabilities Commission, (or a successor entity, f. - for as long as a comparable entity exists).One member shall be a representative of the Governor's Commission on Senior Services, (or a successor entity, for as long as a comparable fFV....:'... � entity exists). One member shall be a representative of the Oregon Association of Area Agencies on Aging and Disabilities,(or a successor entity,for as long as a comparable entity exists). One member shall be a representative of the Senior and Disabled Services Division, (or a successor entity, for as long as a comparable entity exists). TEXT OF MEASURE (B)The term of office of each member is three years, subject to confirmation by the Senate. If there is a vacancy for any cause, the Governor shall make an appointment to become WHEREAS,thousands of Oregon seniors and persons with dis- immediately effective for the unexpired term. A member is abilities live independently in their own homes,which they prefer eligible for reappointment and may serve no more than three and is less costly than institutional care (i.e. nursing homes), consecutive terms. In making appointments to the because over 10,000 home care workers, (also known as client Commission, the Governor may take into consideration any employed providers), paid by the State of Oregon provide in- nominations or recommendations made by the representative home support services; groups or agencies. WHEREAS,home care workers provide services that range from Section 3.Other Provisions–Legal Duties and Responsibilities of housekeeping,shopping, meal preparation, money management the Commission and personal care to medical care and treatment, but receive little, if any, training in those areas resulting in a detrimental (A)The Home Care Commission shall, in its own name,for impact on quality of care; the purpose of carrying into effect and promoting its func- tions, have authority to contract, lease, acquire, hold, own, WHEREAS, the quality of care provided to seniors and people encumber,insure,sell,replace,deal in and with and dispose with disabilities is diminished when there is a lack of stability in of real and personal property. the workforce which is the result of home care workers receiving (B) When conducting any activities in this Section or in low wages,minimal training and benefits; Section 1 above, and in making decisions relating to those WHEREAS, both home care workers and clients receiving home activities, the Home Care Commission shall first consider care services would benefit from creating an entity which has the the effect of its activities and its decisions on improving the authority to provide, and is held accountable for the quality of quality of service delivery and ensuring adequate hours of services provided in Oregon's in-home system of long-term care. service are provided to clients who are served by home care workers. Be It Resolved that the people of the State of Oregon adopt a (C)Clients of home care services retain their right to select Home Care Quality and Accountability Act of 2000 as a new the providers of their choice, including family members. provision of the Constitution of the State of Oregon. (D)Employees of the Commission are not employees of the Section 1.Ensuring High Quality Home Care Services:Creation State of Oregon for any purpose. and Duties of the Quality Home Care Commission: (E) Notwithstanding the provisions in subsection (D) of this (A)The Home Care Commission is created as an independent section, the State of Oregon shall be held responsible for public commission consisting of nine members appointed by unemployment insurance payments for home care workers the Governor. (F) For purposes of collective bargaining, the Commission 197 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet-Statewide Measures Measure No. 99 shall be the employer of record of home care workers hired EXPLANATORY STATEMENT directly by the client and paid by the State,or by a county or A I E M C I V other public agency which receives money for that purpose from the State. Home care workers have the right to form, Ballot Measure 99 amends the Oregon Constitution to create join and participate in the activities of labor organizations the Home Care Commission.The commission, an independent of their own choosing for the purpose of representation and public commission,would be responsible for ensuring high qual- collective bargaining with the Commission on matters ity home care services for elderly and disabled persons who concerning employment relations. These rights shall be receive publicly funded personal care in their homes. exercised in accordance with the rights granted to public The State of Oregon funds in-home support services for eligi- employees with mediation and interest arbitration as the ble elderly and disabled persons. Home care workers provide method of concluding the collective bargaining process. in-home services, including but not limited to housecleaning, Home care workers shall not have the right to strike. shopping,meal preparation,money management,transportation, (G) The Commission may adopt rules to carry out its personal care and medication management.Home care workers functions. are hired directly by the client.Clients would retain the right to hire home care workers of their choice,including family members. The Home Care Commission would consist of nine members appointed by the Governor for three-year terms,subject to confir- mation by the Senate.Five members would be current or former clients who have received home care services. The Oregon Disabilities Commission,The Governors'Commission on Senior Services, The Oregon Association of Area Agencies on Aging and Disabilities,Senior and Disabled Services or their successor entities,would have one representative each on the Home Care Commission.In making appointments,the Governor may consider any nominations or recommendations made by the representative groups or agencies. Ballot Measure 99 directs the commission, in its performance of its duties,to first consider the effect of its activities and decisions on improving the quality of service and ensuring that adequate hours of service are provided to clients.The duties of the com- mission would include but not be limited to providing routine, emergency and respite referrals of qualified home care workers; providing training opportunities for home care workers and their clients;establishing qualifications for home care workers;estab- lishing and maintaining a registry of home care workers; and cooperating with area agencies on aging and disability services and other local agencies to provide these services. The commission would have authority to contract, lease, acquire, hold, own, encumber, sell, insure, replace, deal in and with and dispose of real and personal property. Employees of the commission would not be employees of the State of Oregon for any purpose.The state, however, would be • responsible for paying the unemployment insurance payments.for • home care workers. The commission would be the employer of record of home care workers for collective bargaining purposes. Home care workers would have the right to form,join and participate in the activities of labor organizations of their own choosing for the purpose of representation and collective bargaining with the commission on matters concerning employment relations. Home care workers would have public employees' collective bargaining rights, with mediation and interest arbitration as the method of concluding the collective bargaining process. Home care workers would be prohibited from striking. The commission would have the authority to adopt rules to implement its duties and responsibilities. Committee Members: Appointed by: Kase Kasemeyer Chief Petitioners Karla Spence Chief Petitioners Earlene Berry Secretary of State Connie Lough Secretary of State Rick Stucky Members of the Committee (This committee was appointed to provide an impartial explanation of the ballot measure pursuant to ORS 251.215.) 198 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 99 Arguments ARGUMENT IN FAVOR ARGUMENT IN FAVOR OREGON STATE COUNCIL OF SENIOR CITIZENS For Our Families.For Our Health. GRAY PANTHERS Vote Yes on 99. UNITED SENIORS OF OREGON Allow our Elderly to Remain in their Homes ALL SUPPORT MEASURE 99 Every year, thousands of elderly or disabled Oregonians are O forced to move into a nursing home because they need help with Oregon is the nation's model for community based care system. the routine tasks of daily living.For many people,staying in their But, senior and disabled Oregonians lose out when they are unable to find the quality of care they need because the best own home with the assistance of a homecare worker is a better choice. workers can make more money at the local pizza parlor than they can as a client-employed caregiver. Improve Quality of Care for Disabled and Elderly PROVE CARE Because we care about elderly and disabled Oregonians, BALLOT MEASURE 99 WILL IM Act, will improve the Measure 99 will reduce turnover and improve the quality of care Ballot Measure 99, the Quality IMPROVE C standard of care for senior and disabled Oregonians.That's why s providing training to caregivers and establishing professional t the Oregon Council of Senior Citizens, the Gray Panthers and standards. United Seniors of Oregon urge a YES vote on Measure 99. Give Fair Treatment to Our Home Health Care Workers IN-HOME CARE IS LESS COSTLY THAN INSTITUTIONAL CARE Because we care about caregivers, Measure 99 will-for the first Care in your own community, in your own home, is the highest time-provide them with basic job protections like minimum wage, quality of care for elderly and disabled Oregonians.In this state, workers compensation and the right to collective bargaining. we provide various levels of care, including in-home care, Save Taxpayer Dollars assisted living,with nursing homes being the last option,so that Because we care about taxpayers, Measure 99 will strengthen senior and disabled Oregonians receive the appropriate, most and improve a system that has already saved millions of dollars cost-effective, level of care. Because community-based care by avoiding expensive and unnecessary nursing home placements. costs one-half to one-third as much as care in institutions(like Please VOTE YES on MEASURE 99, nursing homes),this is the best use of these public dollars. CAREGIVERS:THE CORNERSTONE OF IN-HOME CARE Betty Johnson,Benton County The cornerstone of Oregon's model of care for elderly and Janet Miltenberger,Clatsop County disabled citizens are quality homecare workers.It takes a special type of person to provide care to the elderly.The people who have Barbara Leff,Lincoln County it in their hearts to provide care for the elderly deserve to get the Margaret Hallock,Lane County training they need to provide proper care for their clients.Ballot Measure 99 will improve our model of care and increase the over- Because We Care About Oregon PAC sight, selection and training of homecare workers.And that will Beverly Stein,Chair improve the safety and care of elderly and disabled Oregonians. (This information furnished by Beverly Stein, Because We Care About JAMES A.DAVIS,on behalf of Oregon PAC.) Oregon State Council of Senior Citizens United Seniors of Oregon Portland Gray Panthers (This information furnished by Jim Davis,Oregon State Council of Senior Citizens,United Seniors of Oregon,Portland Gray Panthers.) (This space purchased for$500 In accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 199 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 99 Arguments ARGUMENT IN FAVOR ARGUMENT IN FAVOR Disabled Oregonians:"YES on Measure 99" ALZHEIMER'S ASSOCIATION:YES on 99 We are two disabled Oregonians who receive in-home care Oregonians who suffer from Alzheimer's benefit from familiar through Oregon's homecare program. Measure 99 will help to surroundings with family and friends nearby.Some need the help greatly improve this program. of a qualified caregiver in order to live at home. Homecare is crucial to thousands of disabled Oregonians Alzheimer's patients and their families recognize the need for sup- who live at home. It allows us to lead productive, independent port for in-home caregivers,whether they are family members or and dignified lives. But the program also has serious flaws that paid caregivers,who care for our most vulnerable citizens. make it difficult for us to find and retain trained, qualified home— care providers. Measure fixes those flaws. It ensures that disabled citizens in their own homes.That includes housekee quality homecare will be available for those of us who choose p- independence over institutions like nursing homes. ing,shopping,meal preparation,feeding,bathing,personal care, transportation, and administering medications.These caregivers Homecare workers provide us with the care we need.Imagine provide health care services to low-income elderly and disabled what it would be like if you couldn't bathe yourself or use the toi- consumers, yet have no health care as an employment benefit. let.What if you needed help to get out of bed?What if you were They are not covered by workplace health and safety regulations. unable to button your clothing?What if you couldn't hold a fork or Many times there is no respite or emergency care backup. cook for yourself?Homecare workers help us with all these things Caregivers do not have sick leave or vacations. Training is and much more. inconsistent and in some cases non-existent. Everyone will eventually grow old and some of us will QUALIFIED CAREGIVERS HARD TO FIND become disabled long before then.One of us, Beth,broke her Not surprisingly, there are issues regarding quality of care and neck in a swimming pool accident at 15, and the other, Susan, difficulty in recruiting and retaining qualified caregivers. The has been disabled since 1989.Susan was a tax preparer before turnover rate in some areas is over 100% which has a serious she got too ill to work. Beth will .graduate from college in June impact on the stability and quality of life of Alzheimer's patients 2001 to work with young people. If we were forced into nursing and other consumers of homecare.Some are forced into institu- homes,the quality of our lives would be severely diminished.With tional settings while waiting for an appropriate caregiver. quality in-home care we can lead full lives. MEASURE 99 WILL IMPROVE CARE Every year up to seven of ten elderly or disabled Oregonians Measure 99 will allow consumers,public agencies and homecare in the homecare program face the prospect of finding workers to join forces to address issues of quality care for the someone to care for them. We need qualified, professional, elderly and disabled. This measure will create a nine-member dependable care.We need a stable,qualified,professional work- consumer-directed commission to ensure high quality homecare, force to care for us and the thousands of others who seek care for establish qualifications and a statewide registry,and provide train- themselves or a family member. ing. In addition, caregivers may begin to receive wages and Please vote YES on Measure 99. benefits that reflect the value of their services and stabilize this important workforce. Beth Marcum Susan Marie House The Alzheimer's Association,Oregon Trail Chapter welcomes and Silverton Medford supports Ballot Measure 99. YES on 99 will help Oregon to (This information furnished by Beth Marcum,Susan House.) address the important issues confronting our elderly and people with disabilities. Liz McKinney, Executive Director Alzheimer's Association,Oregon Trail Chapter (This information furnished by Liz McKinney, Executive Director, Alzheimer's Association.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$5001n accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the he by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 200 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet--Statewide Measures Measure No. 99 Arguments ARGUMENT IN FAVOR ARGUMENT IN FAVOR Nurses Support YES on 99–The Quality Homecare Act Senior Citizen Center Sucnorts Ballot Measure 99 When someone comes into your home to care of you, whether We ask you to vote YES on 99 to ensure that Oregon you're elderly or disabled(or suffering from a treatable disease), seniors receive quality homecare personal safety and the quality of care are your highest consider- ations.The Oregon Federation of Nurses&Health Professionals, Senior citizen centers serve elderly Oregonians every day.We AFT Local 5017, urges a"YES"vote on Measure 99 because it see the dignity and independence that seniors possess when will improve the safety and care of some of our state's most they live in their own homes, in their own communities.Oregon's vulnerable citizens. homecare system allows over 10,000 elderly and disabled SAFETY FOR CLIENT AND CAREGIVER Oregonians to remain in their homes by providing them with in- Oregon's elderly and disabled citizens have been well-served by home caregivers. This system has saved the state over most of the in home, client-employed caregivers working in $400,000,000 because in-home care is less expensive than nurs- Oregon today.Still, it is a job that almost anyone can"walk in off ho homes.s a need ballot measure 99 to ensure that quality ly. the street"and get. Often, good homecare workers are hard to home care is an option for seniors who wish to live independently. find or leave for better-paying jobs elsewhere.This means that Ballot measure 99 ensures the quality of homecare by: some of our most vulnerable citizens go without the care that will • Creating a commission to ensure the quality of care. enable them to remain safe and healthy in their own homes. • Providing training so homecare workers can better meet Ballot Measure 99 will protect seniors and people with disabilities their clients needs. by making sure that homecare workers are properly trained and Creating a registry homecare workers,so seniors can have the skills for the job. find a qualified caregiver. • Providing routine emergency respite referrals so that a PROMOTES GOOD HEALTH;SAVES MONEY workers emergency doesn't leave a senior without care. Through the homecare program,low-income elderly and disabled • Creating a commission to develop baseline standards of Oregonians receive help with such critical daily living tasks as medical expertise for homecare workers. medical care,personal care,dressing,cooking, money manage- At senior centers we understand how important it is to Oregon ment and housework. seniors to have quality homecare available for them and their By living independently in their own homes,elderly and disabled loved ones.We understand how important it is to be able to stay Oregonians are happier and healthier until nursing home care at home with our families and our familiar surroundings when con- becomes medically necessary. Providing the most appropriate fronting illness or disability.We understand how important it is to care in this way has saved all of us more than$400,000,000. have trained and qualified caregivers.For these reasons we ask The Oregon Federation of Nurses&Health Professionals repre- you to join us in supporting Ballot Measure 99. sents 900 nurses and health care professionals in hospitals, Help Oregon seniors stay in their homes–vote YES 99 clinics,nursing homes and in private practice throughout Oregon. Lola Burge,on behalf of We support Measure 99—the Quality Homecare Act—because Molalla Adult Community Center it will improve the safety and training for in home caregivers.And Molalla Area Seniors,Inc. that will improve the health of all Oregonians. Vote YES on Ballot Measure 99. (This information furnished by Lola Burge,Molalla Adult Comm.Center and Molalla Area Seniors,Inc.) Kathy Schmidt,RN, President Oregon Federation of Nurses&Health Professionals (This information furnished by Katherine Schmidt, Oregon Federation of Nurses&Health Professionals.) (This space purchased for$500 In accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 In accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 201 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet=Statewkie Measures Measure No. 99 Arguments ARGUMENT IN FAVOR ARGUMENT IN FAVOR CAREGIVERS SUPPORT 99 HOMECARE PROGRAM HAS ALREADY SAVED TAXPAYERS More than 13,000 Oregon workers provide in-home care for the MORE THAN$400 MILLION BY KEEPING ELDERLY AND elderly and disabled.The care we provide enables our clients to DISABLED OUT OF EXPENSIVE NURSING HOMES live in their own homes.We do for them what they can no longer (Source: The Oregonian,June 22,2000) do for themselves. Measure 99 will expand the availability of in-home care for We prepare and feed meals. Oregon's elderly and disabled. According to the Fiscal Impact We help our clients with medical treatment and taking prescriptions. Committee(which is comprised of the Secretary of State, State We bathe and dress our clients. Treasurer,Director of the Department of Administrative Services, We do the tasks that allow our clients to maintain their dig- and the Director of the Department of Revenue),the direct cost of nity and live Independently. Measure 99 will be less than a million dollars. We provide care to Oregon's grandparents, parents,family, The homecare program has already saved taxpayers nearly friends, and our neighbors -- people who need assistance half a billion dollars by helping people stay out of nursing homes. due to injury,illness,age or disability. By making homecare more accessible, Measure 99 will save the We're the backbone of Oregon's community-based care sys- state additional money. tem.We need adequate training to provide the best possible care. VOTE YES ON MEASURE 99. The health of our clients is too important to settle for less.The Jim Duncan qualifications for this job should be more than just-a criminal back- Advocate for the Elders ground check and being over 18. y We may need to lift someone from the bathtub to their wheelchair (This information furnished by Jim Duncan,Advocate for Elderly.) and from their chair to their bed,but we are not entitled to workers' compensation protection (that other Oregon workers receive) should we throw out our backs. We take care of the elderly,quadriplegics,and people suffer- ing with Alzheimer's yet receive no training about those conditions. What we learn, we learn on our own or from our clients. Your YES vote on Measure 99 will help us and our clients by: Ensuring that the elderly and disabled have trained caregivers. Creating a registry of qualified caregivers to help our clients find caregivers whose skills match their needs. Providing for routine and emergency respite care.This ensures that if a caregiver is sick the client does not go without care. Giving caregivers the ability to make homecare a profession we can be proud of,not just another low-paying,dead end job. Vote YES on Measure 99.Make quality homecare a reality. Caregivers: Diane Chandler,Coos Bay Elyse Scott-Burnett,Woodburn Kimberly Powell,Eugene Caroline Mitchell,Bandon (This information furnished by Diane B. Chandler, Home Care Provider, , Elyse Scott-Burnett,Kimberly Powell,Caroline Mitchell.) (This space purchased for$500 In accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for 55001n accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the.argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 202 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet-Statewide Measures Measure No. 99 Arguments ARGUMENT IN FAVOR ARGUMENT IN FAVOR Advocates for Seniors,the Disabled,Human Rights,and Independence is a powerful word.For people with disabilities it is Working Families Say even more powerful. It is the benchmark by which we view our Vote YES on 99 quality of life.But it doesn't mean going it alone.We have allies in The following organizations are among those our quest for independence.The people who help us do the tasks supporting Measure 99–for Quality Homecare for we cannot do by ourselves, everything from housekeeping and Oregon's elderly and disabled. cooking, to bathing and toileting. A good working relationship Oregon State Council of Senior Citizens between an attendant and consumer means the difference Alzheimer's Association,Oregon Trail Chapter between living free,or living in an institution.But in Oregon, and ited Seniors Oregon across the nation our access to community based attendant ser- Un Unialla Adult Community Center vices is threatened by the working conditions that our attendants Molalla Area Seniors, Inc. are forced to work under by the State of Oregon.The state refers Disabilities to them as Client Employed Providers.But as employers we are Advocacy Coalition for Seniors and People With Di American Disabled for Attendant Programs Today(ADAPT) not allowed any control over the wages and other conditions they Portland Gray Panthers work under. They do not even get workers compensation. Older Women's League, Portland Chapter Measure 99 provides a framework for consumers and attendants to work together for their common good. Measure 99 reforms Oregon Federation of Nurses&Health Professionals attendant services by: Oregon Human Rights Coalition Human Services Coalition of Oregon • Providing an employer of record for fiscal purposes.Providers Oregon AFL-CIO would no longer be treated as independent contractors. Northwest Oregon Labor Council Service Employees International Union A majority of Commission members would have to be con- Oregon Public Employees Union,Union Local 503 sumers of attendant services.Consumers could still have the Oregon 75 right to decide who provides services to them. AFSCME Oregon School Employees Association • Creates a statewide registry of qualified providers. Association of Western Pulp and Paper Workers Oregon Education Association • Creates training standards for providers and consumers. Portland New Party You may not be disabled,but as we grow older the chances of our Pacific Green Party of Oregon needing these services increase. Portland Jobs With Justice Mid-Willamette Valley Jobs With Justice VOTE YES ON MEASURE 99!THE INDEPENDENCE YOU ARE Oregon Catholic Conference PROTECTING MAY BE YOUR OWN! (This information furnished by Arthur Towers, Oregonians for Quality (This information furnished by Ric Burger,Oregon ADAPT.) Homecare.) (This space purchased for$500 In accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 In accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 203 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 99 Arguments ARGUMENT IN FAVOR ARGUMENT IN FAVOR MEASURE 99 BACKED BY OLDER WOMEN'S LEAGUE DISABILITIES LEADER SUPPORTS Our population is growing older. As we grow older, we'll need QUALITY HOMECARE MEASURE 99 quality care available i our homes to maintain our health and Oregon has a nationally recognized system of care for seniors independence.Statistics show that more women rely on Medicaid and people with disabilities.But, it also includes low pay and c- for health care coverage in their older years. For those reasons, benefits for the in-home caregivers who are essential to the the passage of Ballot Measure 99—the Quality Homecare Act— cess of Oregon's system of long-term care. Ballot Measure 99, is important to Oregon's women. the Quality Homecare Act,will rectify that. SCREENED AND TRAINED CAREGIVERS CAREGIVERS IMPORTANT TO OUR CARE Oregon values the ability of elderly and disabled people to live in From my job working with disabled Oregonians and my own expe- rience with multiple sclerosis,I know the important role homecare that AH Oregonians,whether elderly or disabled, have access to workers play in our lives. Right now, my family and I are able to caregivers who are adequately screened and trained before they cope with my condition.As my condition deteriorates,we may not come to work in our homes.Ballot Measure 99 will make these be able to cope without the help of an home caregiver.Because improvements to our care and safety. I know how vital these workers are to Oregon's system of care for disabled and elderly persons, I decided to sponsor Measure 99. MAJORITY OF CAREGIVERS ARE WOMEN OUR SYSTEM BUILT ON CAREGIVERS It's important that voters realize that the majority of in-home care- Oregon's homecare system is built on the backs of in-home care- givers are women.This ballot measure will give these dedicated givers. They have a critical role in assisting their clients. They workers the opportunity to improve their working conditions. For enable us to live in our own homes where we are healthiest and many of these caregivers, this job may be their only source of happiest and the care is most affordable.They bathe us, help us income.They struggle to support themselves and their families, dress in the mornings,prepare meals,administer our medication, and are often forced to leave this field in order to bring their fam and help maintain our homes.In-home caregivers help us live ily above the poverty line. to our full potential.This profession is a calling.It takes a spe- INDEPENDENT LIVING cial person to properly care for the elderly and disabled.They Older women prefer to live in our own homes with our family, should be rewarded and recognized, not punished with working friends and cherished possessions around us. And, all of us, conditions that force them into a life of poverty. young or old, want to retain our independence.We shouldn't be MEASURE ASSURES SCREENED,QUALIFIED WORKERS forced into nursing homes because of the lack of in-home Measure 99 will call for training and respite leave that caregivers caregivers. need.Measure 99 assures Oregon's disabled and elderly citizens SAFETY AND COMPETENCY that they will_have screened and qualified people in their homes Older and disabled Oregonians need to be assured of the com- helping them. Measure 99 will make it much easier to match a petency and qualifications of the people who are coming into their caregiver with the proper skills to a client with special needs. homes to provide care.Ballot Measure 99 will give us the protec- Vote YES on Measure 99,the Quality Homecare Act. tion of screened and trained caregivers who are able to do the job. The Older Women's League urges your YES vote for Measure 99. EUGENE ORGAN Chief Sponsor, Eugene RUTH CURRIE Executive Director,Portland Chapter,Older Women's League (This information furnished by Eugene Organ.) (This information furnished by Ruth Currie, President, Older Women's League,Portland Chapter.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 204 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet--Statewide Measures Measure No. 99 Arguments ARGUMENT IN FAVOR ARGUMENT IN FAVOR Working Families Support Quality Homecare ECUMENICAL MINISTRIES OF OREGON Vote YES on 99 ENDORSES BM 99 Working families in Oregon understand the challenges of provid- Ecumenical Ministries of Oregon strongly supports creation of a homecare commission ing for a family. Sometimes that includes providing care for an . ensure the quality of publicly funded elderly parent, grandparent or a disabled family member. Some he care services. This measure allows consumers of homecare are fortunate enough to be in a position to provide that care. homecare services, local agencies and communities to begin However, some of our elderly and disabled citizens do not have addressing well-documented issues in one of Oregon's most families to provide the care they need.Homecare workers fill an important long-term care system; training, respite care, recruit- ment and retention. important,humanitarian role in helping us care for our loved ones. Each stakeholder in this program stands to benefit from the pas- These workers are defined as"domestic servants;'yet the work sage of they do is similar to paraprofessional health care workers.There this measure.Oregon voters will be approving a measure with vision are no safety nets under this group of workers who are the safety sion and capacity to strengthen and prepare for a growing net for our most vulnerable citizens. population of seniors as well as people with disabilities.In-home care has proven to be the most humane and respectful method of They are denied basic benefits typically extended to American caring for our most vulnerable citizens. It's also the most cost- workers.There are no minimum wage laws for these workers,no effective.By investing in this system of care we are creating the on-the-job safety standards, no workers' compensation for foundation necessary to meet Oregon's future needs. work-related injuries,no vacations,sick leave,pensions or health Ecumenical Ministries of Oregon worked to pass legislation simi- insurance.They do not have the right to form and join a union to lar to BM 99 during the 1999 legislative session. Unfortunately, negotiate for better working conditions.They have been a silent, the legislature failed to act on this important policy package.It is invisible workforce. now before Oregon voters to act in the best interest of our elderly The value of the work is indisputable. It's physically and and people with disabilities...as well as the dedicated workers emotionally challenging.Yet the compensation keeps many who care for them. of these workers in poverty. Many are forced into other fields In short,we believe Measure 99 to be fundamentally a matter because they cannot support themselves or their families. of human rights,civil rights and labor rights. Measure 99 is a step towards improving the lives of our elderly "A wise...Government...shall not take from the mouths of labor the and disabled loved ones. Measure 99 is also a step towards bread it has earned"Thomas Jefferson, First Inaugural Address, giving homecare workers that which they deserve, our respect 1801. and compensation that reflects the value of their work. Join us in supporting Ballot Measure 99. Join us in supporting BM 99. Oregon AFL-CIO 'The Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Portland and the Greek Orthodox Church abstained from EMO's deliberations regarding Northwest Oregon Labor Council Service Employees International Union the November ballot measures. Oregon Public Employees Union,SEIU Local 503 (This information furnished by David Leslie, Ecumenical Ministries of AFSCME Council 75 Oregon.) Oregon School Employees Association Association of Western Pulp and Paper Workers (This information furnished by Nancy Padilla, Oregon Public Employees Union,SEW.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 205 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet-Statewide Measures Measure No. 99 Arguments ARGUMENT IN FAVOR QUALITY HOME CARE FOR SENIORS THREATENED BY MEASURES 88,91,92,93,98,AND 8 The positive impact of Measure 99–improved home care for elderly and disabled Oregonians at a cost savings to taxpayers– will be severely limited if any of six other measures are approved by voters. Measures 88,91,93,and 8 reduce the availability of funds for vital public services like homecare for the elderly and disabled. Measure 99 improves the homecare system in Oregon.But with- out adequate funding, seniors and the disabled will not get the care they deserve. Measure 91 hits homecare workers doubly hard by increasing taxes on working Oregonians who make what we make–about$8/hour. Measures 92 and 98 restrict the involvement of homecare workers in the political process. If we as homecare workers had not stood up for improved care for their clients and for improved working conditions for themselves,Measure 99 would have never made it on to the ballot. Homecare workers deserve the same opportunity to participate in the political process that nursing home owners have. We deserve to be able to pool our efforts and pool our resources to fight for quality care for our clients. Measures 92 and 98 would severely limit our ability to work together to fight for improved working conditions or quality care. Measures 92 and 98 would effectively silence our voices as we work to educate voters and politicians about the dire state of homecare in Oregon. Support quality home care for the elderly and disabled: Vote YES on Measure 99 and NO on Measures 88,91,92,93, 98,and S. Caregivers for the elderly and disabled: Esther Doramus,Eugene Risa Northway,Oregon City Rita Sparks,Eugene Tena Vazquez,Oregon City Karen Thompson,Scio (This information furnished by Esther Doramus, Rise Northway, Rita Sparks,Tena Vazquez,Karen Thompson) (This space purchased for$500 In accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 206 Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 1 Proposed by initiative petition to be voted on at the General EXPLANATORY STATEMENT Election, November 7,2000. Ballot Measure 1 amends the Oregon Constitution by adding BALLOT TITLE a provision relating to public education funding to Article VIII. Public education includes education provided by school districts, community colleges, public universities and other public educa- tion providers. Currently statutes establish quality goals for public education. F The Oregon Constitution does not require the legislature to fund public education to meet these goals. This measure requires the legislature to fund a sufficient amount of money to meet public education quality goals as estab- lished by the legislature.The measure also requires the legisla- ture to publish a report that demonstrates to the public that the , fss � funding for public education is sufficient to meet the quality goals or must state the reasons for any insufficiency,the extent of the insufficiency and the impact that will have on the ability of public education providers to meet the quality goals. P q tY 9 Currently the Oregon Constitution and existing statutes allow a school district to levy local option taxes in excess of the amount of property taxes that may be approved under the school district's a property tax rate limit. This would happen provided the tax is approved by a majority of the electors of the district in a general election or an election in which 50 percent of the eligible voters participate. This measure requires the legislature to establish grants to property poor districts that levy the local option tax.The measure �$• directs the legislature to determine the amount of the grants and to establish the criteria for the grants. f . Committee Members: Appointed by: Joanne Waller Chief Petitioners Duncan Wyse Chief Petitioners Senator Gene Derfler Secretary of State TEXT OF MEASURE Senator Marylin Shannon Secretary of State Ron Saxton Members of the Committee Be It Enacted by the People of the State of Oregon: (This committee was appointed to provide an impartial explanation of the PARAGRAPH 1.The following Section is added to and made ballot measure pursuant to ORS 251.215.) a part of Article VIII of the Constitution of the State of Oregon: Adequate and Equitable, Funding. (1) The Legislative Assembly shall appropriate in each biennium a sum of money sufficient to ensure that the state's system of public education meets quality goals established by law,and publish a report that either demonstrates the appropriation is sufficient, or identifies the reasons for the insufficiency, its extent,and its impact on the ability of the state's system of public education to meet those goals. (2) Consistent with such legal obligation as it may have to maintain substantial equity in state funding, the Legislative Assembly shall establish a system of Equalization Grants to eligible districts for each year in which the voters of such districts approve local option taxes as described in Article XI, section 11(4)(a)(B)of this Constitution.The amount of such Grants and eligibility criteria shall be determined by the Legislative Assembly. 207 CONTINUED P Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 1 Arguments ARGUMENT IN FAVOR ARGUMENT IN FAVOR OREGON'S PUBLIC SCHOOL LEADERS Dear Oregonians, SAY VOTE YES ON MEASURE 1 Ballot Measure 1, the Accountability and Equity in School Measure 1, introduced by Governor Kitzhaber and State Funding Act, will fundamentally change how we fund schools in Schools Superintendent Bunn, is a common-sense way to hold Oregon.It will also help poorer school districts afford to exercise the legislature accountable for school funding. We support the local option,to help pay for their schools.I urge your yes vote Measure 1 because it allows voters to understand where their on Measure 1. education dollars are going. The measure was crafted to change the debate about school Measure 1 is a simple,fair and long-overdue remedy to funding from"how much to spend?"to"what education services inadequate school funding. are we buying?" It does so by requiring the legislature to fund The Oregon Legislature is obligated to provide a public school schools so students can reach the high standards set in law. If system. It has also set in law ambitious student achievement the legislature fails to do so, its members must detail the effects standards.Unfortunately, its appropriations have not matched its of their funding decision on the ability of our students to meet ambitions. Measure 1 will correct that problem by directing the standards. legislature to underwrite its educational goals or explain why not. Currently,the school funding debate in the legislature focuses on Measure 1 recognizes that Oregon's local option law large numbers rather than on what those dollars actually buy in needs fixing. terms of education. By requiring the legislature to develop the school budget in terms,of student achievement-that is,to deter- The 1999 Legislature passed a law allowing school districts to mine the relationship between dollars and student performance- raise up to$500 per student through"local option"property tax the legislature can be held accountable for the consequences of levies. Measure 1 establishes grants allowing less wealthy dis- its funding decisions. The governor will similarly be held tricts to supplement local option money with state funds to the accountable for the relationship between the recommended K-12 level of richer districts. This assures that equalization is not budget and anticipated student performance. eroded. Equally importantly, Measure 1 will require the legislature to pro- Measure 1 preserves local control. vide matching funds for poorer districts that wish to exercise the The state provides 70 percent of school funding. It requires local option to help pay for their schools. school districts to pursue certain educational goals and stan- Many property poor districts simply cannot afford a local property dards.Local school boards, however, determine school budgets, tax. Measure 1 will require the legislature to help equalize the guided by available resources, state law and local priorities. difference between wealthy and poor districts that choose the Measure 1 doesn't change this. Measure 1 simply holds state local option by grants,depending on the level of property value in decision-makers responsible for their funding decisions. a school district.This will help make a local option property tax Take the politics out of school funding decisions. more affordable for districts that pass one. VOTE YES ON MEASURE 1. Measure 1 will deliver exactly what it promises: more account- ability in school funding decisions, and greater funding equity for Confederation of Oregon School Administrators students across Oregon.I urge your yes vote on Measure 1. Oregon School Boards Association John Kitzhaber (This information furnished by John Marshall, Oregon School Boards (This information furnished by John A.Kitzhaber,M.D.) Association;Ozzie Rose,Confederation of Oregon School Administrators.) (This space purchased for$500 In accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 In accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 208 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 1 Arguments ARGUMENT IN FAVOR ARGUMENT IN FAVOR THE OREGON PTA SUPPORTS MEASURE 1 OREGON EDUCATORS SAY "VOTE YES" ON BALLOT The Oregon Legislature has mandated that our students meet MEASURE 1.HERE'S WHY: certain goals and requirements before graduation.However,they • Voters know that funding public schools adequately and equi- have consistently refused to fund this mandate, leaving school tably is vitally important. districts and teachers with little or no training,few additional mate- . Voters deserve to know that their elected representatives have rials, more responsibilities, and longer hours with no additional gotten that job done when they pass the education budget. compensation. This is not only unfair for our school districts and our teachers, ' In the absence of BM 1,voters don't always get the full story. but ultimately it is the students who suffer most.While the notion Students deserve the best education we can provide so that of a level of requirement, and the pledge to help all of Oregon's every child has an equal opportunity to achieve in the 21st students achieve that level is noble,and one that we fully support, centunf world., the Oregon PTA feels it is unfair to set the level of expectation While Oregon law has mandated that students meet higher goals, without giving it the monetary support that it requires. those laws have been essentially unfunded mandates.Educators It's time for the Oregon Legislature to put the financial commit- have been willing to embrace quality education goals and to take ment into their legal commitment.How can we expect our teach- on new and greater responsibilities, but they need more training ers to do more with less? opportunities and supporting curriculum materials to make the It's like giving a builder the blue prints to build your house,then new programs work. giving them no money but demanding that the house be built any- By requiring the Legislature to provide adequate funding to meet way. Oregon's quality education goals, Measure 1 will hold the state Only this isn't houses.These are our children. accountable,just as schools are held accountable for using tax dollars wisely and well. Additionally, the measure requires the Given the last two legislative sessions, it's obvious that the Legislature to report how their budget meets or fails to meet these commitment to education was not a priority for the legislature. goals—so that citizens do get the full story. This measure would help take some qt the politics out of the Measure 1 also provides a way to maintain the district-by-district process of funding K-12 education.It would help to cut down on funding equity that's taken a decade to achieve. By establishing the biennial grab for money for the state budget that always equalization grants to assist poorer districts in obtaining local seems to place our children at the end of the line. option funding,this measure provides a fair funding system for all Because this measure would help to stabilize school funding; students—no matter where they live. because it would finally put financial support into the mandated EDUCATORS SUPPORT EDUCATIONAL QUALITY AND school quality goals;and because this would help to keep equity EQUALITY: THEY ASK YOU TO VOTE "YES" ON BALLOT between school districts,The Oregon PTA supports this measure. MEASURE 1. PLEASE JOIN US-SUPPORT THE FUTURE FOR OREGON'S CHILDREN. (This information furnished by James Sager, Oregon Education Association.) VOTE YES ON MEASURE 1 The Oregon PTA Kathryn Firestone,President Lisa Laursen Thirkill,Vice President for Legislation (This information furnished by Kathryn Firestone,President,Lisa Laursen Thirkill,VP for Legislation;The Oregon PTA(Oregon Congress of Parents and Teachers).) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 209 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 1 Arguments ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION All Oregonians desire good education. But to reach that goal, should we increase funding for public schools?We think funding should be decreased and therefore we oppose Measure 1. Why? First, public schools leave God out of education.They are, at their heart,self-consciously secular.They say knowledge is ethi- cally neutral, which it isn't (Prov. 15:26, 24:9; 2 Cor. 10:5; Rom. 1:18-21).They teach that the world can be truly known and under- stood without reference to its Creator.This is a lie.The truth is that "the fear of the Lord is the beginning of knowledge,"and it is folly to ignore this. Second, Its just not government's job to educate children. The Bible says civil government's job is to restrain certain sins by punishing evildoers (Rom. 13:4) and to praise the righteous (2 Pet.2:14).No matter how"good"government-run schools are, they cannot accomplish either of these God-given purposes. Parents are responsible,unless impoverished,to pay directly for the feeding,clothing,and education of their own children. By assuming the responsibility to educate all children,the State has excluded God as the foundation for learning and has levied very high taxes.This makes it very diff icult for most parents to ful- fill their God given obligations to fund their children's education. Don't feel guilty for saying"No"to more money for public schools. Like the leech's two daughters in Proverbs 30:15,public school advocates ALWAYS cry,"Give,give:'Like the fire of Proverbs 30:16, they're never satisfied, they never say,"It is enough."Nor do they provide fruits worthy of such"giving." The answer is not stabilized funding for public schools, but a gradual replacement of these schools through privatization and restoration to parents of their ability to discharge the duties gra- ciously given to them by God. We therefore oppose Measure 1. Prepared by the Parents Education Association, a family-based biblical alternative to the National Education Association. (This information furnished by Dennis R. Tuuri, Parents Education Association.) (This space purchased for$5001n accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 210 Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 2 Proposed by initiative petition to be voted on at the General (c)A bill introduced under this section must receive at least one Election, November 7,2000. hearing in the Senate and must be submitted for a vote in the Senate before adjournment sine die of the legislative session in which the bill is introduced. BALLOT TITLE under(a) Disapproval of an administrative rule or part of a rule der subsection (3) of this section does not prevent a state agency from thereafter adopting another rule pertaining to the issue or issues addressed b y the disapproved rule. If a state �« � r .. . agency adopts an administrative rule or rules addressing the same issue that was the subject of a rule that was disapproved under subsection (3)of this section,the President of the Senate ¢ � shall cause to be prepared and introduced in the Senate a bill approving the rule or rules.The bill shall be introduced at the next e,;, '• following regular session of the Legislative Assembly after the effective date of the administrative rule.If the administrative rule becomes effective during a regular session of the Legislative a Assembly,the bill required by this subsection must be introduced & at the regular session of the Legislative Assembly next following $ the session during which the rule becomes effective. (b) The Legislative Assembly may amend a bill introduced under this subsection in the same manner as provided for bills introduced under subsection(3)of this section.Any administrative rule or part of a rule not approved by the passage of the bill has no further force or effect after adjournment sine die of the legisla- tive session in which the bill is introduced.If an administrative rule or part of a rule is disapproved under the provisions of this �s R subsection, any rule adopted by a state agency that addresses the same issue that was the subject of the disapproved rule is of no force and effect until such time as the Legislative Assembly by gV law approves the rule. (c)A bill introduced under this section must receive at least one hearing in the Senate and must be submitted for a vote in the Senate before adjournment sine die of the legislative session in which the bill is introduced. TEXTTEXTO F MEASURE[A['I I D (d) Any person may seek judicial review of a determination MEASUfl made by the President of the Senate as to whether an adminis- trative rule addresses the same issue that was the subject of a Be it enacted by the people of the State of Oregon: rule that was previously disapproved under subsection(3)of this PARAGRAPH 1. The Constitution of the State of Oregon is section. Any person may seek a judicial determination as to amended by creating a new section 34 to be added to and made whether an administrative rule adopted by a state agency after a part of Article IV,such section to read: disapproval of a rule under this subsection addresses the same issue that was the subject of the disapproved rule. In any SECTION 34. (1) The people reserve upon themselves the proceeding for judicial review under this subsection, the court power to require that the Legislative Assembly review and shall liberally construe the language of a rule in favor of a finding approve any administrative rule in the manner provided by this that the rule addresses the same issue that was the subject of a section. previously disapproved administrative rule. The Legislative (2)The Legislative Assembly shall be required to review and Assembly shall by law provide a process for seeking judicial approve an administrative rule or rules upon the filing of a petition review under this subsection. with the Secretary of State that has been signed by at least (5)Any bill introduced under this section is subject to veto by 10,000 qualified voters.A petition filed under the provisions of this the Governor in the manner provided by section 15b,Article V of subsection shall identify the specific administrative rule or rules this Constitution. If the Governor vetoes a bill introduced under that the Legislative Assembly is required to review. All adminis- this section, the administrative rule or part of a rule specified in trative rules identified in the petition must relate to one subject the bill shall be considered disapproved for the purposes of this only and matters properly connected therewith. section unless the Legislative Assembly overrides the veto in the (3)(a)Upon receiving a petition that meets the requirements of manner provided by section 15b(2),Article V of this Constitution. subsection (2)of this section,the Secretary of State shall cause (6)Nothing in this section affects any right of a person to seek written notice to be given to the President of the Senate.The judicial review of any administrative rule as otherwise provided for President of the Senate shall thereafter cause to be prepared and by law. introduced in the Senate at the next following regular session of (7)As used in this section: the Legislative Assembly a bill approving the administrative rule (a) 'Administrative rule' means any state agency directive, or rules.If the petition is filed with the Secretary of State during a standard, regulation or statement of general applicability that regular session of the Legislative Assembly, the bill required by implements, interprets or prescribes law or policy, or that this subsection must be introduced at the regular session of the describes the procedures or practices of a state agency,but does Legislative Assembly next following the session during which the not include: petition is filed. (A)Executive orders;or (b)The Legislative Assembly may approve the administrative (B) State agency internal management directives, regulations rule or rules specified in the bill introduced under this subsection or statements if those directives,regulations or statements do not by passing the bill.The Legislative Assembly by amendment of substantially affect the interests of members of the public. the bill may approve only some of the specified administrative (b)'State agency'means any elected or appointed state officer, rules or may approve only part of a specified rule.Any adminis board, commission, department, agency or institution, except those in the legislative and judicial branches. trative rule or part of a rule not approved by the passage of the bill has no further force or effect after adjournment sine die of the legislative session in which the bill is introduced. 211 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 2 EXPLANATORY STATEMENT Ballot Measure 2 would amend the Oregon Constitution to cre- ate a new process to review administrative rules by the Legislative Assembly upon the petition of at least 10,000 qualified voters. Administrative rules are state agency directives,standards,regu- lations, or statements that implement, interpret, or prescribe law or policy, or describe state agency procedures. Administrative rules do not include executive orders or internal management directives. A petition under the measure must be filed with the Secretary of State.The petition may challenge more than one rule, but all rules challenged by the petition must relate to one subject only and to matters properly connected with that subject. The Secretary of State must give notice to the President of the Senate of the filing of a petition meeting the requirements of the measure.The President of the Senate must then introduce a bill for approval of the rule or rules at the next following regular ses- sion of the Legislative Assembly. If the petition is filed during a legislative session,the bill must be introduced at the next follow- ing regular legislative session. The Legislative Assembly may approve an administrative rule by passing the bill introduced by the President of the Senate.The Legislative Assembly,by amendment of the bill,may approve only some of the rules specified in the bill, or approve only part of a rule specified in the bill.Any administrative rule or part of a rule that is not approved by the passage of the bill has no further force or effect after the final adjournment of the legislative session in which the bill is introduced. The disapproval of an administrative rule does not prevent a state agency from thereafter adopting another rule pertaining to the same issue addressed by a disapproved rule.However, if an agency adopts another rule pertaining to the same issue, the President of the Senate must introduce a bill to approve the new rule.The bill is subject to the same conditions and has the same effect as a bill submitted pursuant to a petition filed under the measure. The measure allows any person to seek judicial review to determine whether an administrative rule adopted by a state agency addresses the same issue that was the subject of a pre- viously disapproved rule. If the new rule or any part of the new rule once again fails to gain approval,the agency loses its authority to adopt rules on that subject without prior Legislative approval. All bills introduced under the measure must receive at least one hearing in the Senate and must be submitted for a vote in the Senate before the final adjournment of the legislative session. All bills introduced under the measure are subject to veto by the Governor. If the Governor vetoes a bill introduced under the measure,the administrative rule or rules specified in the bill are disapproved unless the veto is overridden by the Legislative Assembly in the manner provided by the Oregon Constitution. Committee Members: Appointed by: Larry George Chief Petitioners David Hunnicutt Chief Petitioners Gail Achterman Secretary of State Robert Liberty Secretary of State Phillip Grillo Members of the Committee ' (This committee was appointed to provide an impartial explanation of the ballot measure pursuant to ORS 251.215.) 212 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 2 Arguments ARGUMENT IN FAVOR ARGUMENT IN FAVOR In ancient Athens, rulers had to post all laws, so people could VOTE YES ON MEASURE 2 know what actions could lead to their arrest. One clever tyrant Whether you belong to the Democrat, Republican, Reform, wrote them in very small print, and posted them on a very tall Libertarian, Independent,or Green Party, Measure#2 is right for pole! Since people no longer knew the laws, he could arrest his opponents at will. you.. ou matter who controls the state legislature, citizens are locked We have a like system today.Go to the Oregon Revised Statutes t of the process as long as the state bureaucrats hold the power (Section 657.072)and you'll find the law says nonprofit organiza- out tions don't have to pay unemployment taxes. But go to the of administrative rules. Administrative Rules of this section, and you'll find that these Administrative rules are just like laws passed by the elected offi- groups DO have to pay unemployment taxes! Observe the law cials,except they are proposed and adopted by non-elected state and you're in violation of the rules,which have the force of agencies.They are insulated and immune from the scrutiny of the law! voter. There's an explanation, but here's the point. Unelected, unac- Voters can change the Constitution countable bureaucrats write and adopt thousands of rules, all Voters can change the state statutes passed by legislators carrying the force of law. Legislators like this because it gets Voter cannot change administrative rules them off the hot seat on controversial issues such as nonprofits having to pay unemployment taxes.But we elect Legislators to That's wrong. make laws,to make the tough decisions,not the bureaucrats! Measure 2 creates an open,fair process that allows the citizens Measure 2 provides a mechanism to force the Legislature to to require the legislature to review and vote on administrative approve or disapprove controversial Administrative Rules. We rules. support it for a couple of Biblical reasons. Measure 2 is fair, open, and citizen driven.The special interests First, the Scriptures exhort us to truthfulness (Pr. 23:231 Cor. will hate it,but Oregonians should demand it. 13:6)and diligence(Pr.12:27)in our callings.Romans 12:8 cites Citizens For Accountability in Administrative Rules urges you to diligence as a basic requirement for leaders. It's something less vote: than truthful or diligent for someone elected to pass laws to give the dirty work to bureaucrats. Yes on Ballot Measure 2. Second, our system of electing representatives to make laws is (This information furnished by Larry George,Citizens for Accountability in rooted in the Bible.Administrators are good in their place.But this Administrative Rules.) Measure restores accountability to those who were elected by the people. It's a small but positive step in restoring the kind of representative government envisioned by our Founding Fathers and taught in the Bible. Prepared by the Parents Education Association, a family-based Biblical alternative to the National Education Association. (This information furnished by Dennis R. Tuuri, Parents Education Association.) (This space purchased for$5001n accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 In accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse-I The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 213 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet-Statewide Measures Measure No. 2 Arguments ARGUMENT IN FAVOR ARGUMENT IN FAVOR Administrative Rules: The Oregon Education Coalition urges you to vote yes on Laws created with no vote/Laws with no accountability Measure 2. Administrative Rules are laws created by non-elected bureau- As a grass roots education reform organization, we talk with crats in Salem. hundreds of parents and community members each month about Administrative rules are laws that have the same force and effect their hopes for Oregon's public school system,and their ideas for as laws passed by elected officials-except that there is: how it can be improved. No Vote by Your Elected Officials What most people don't know is that a major obstacle to improv- No Vote of the People ing our schools is the Byzantine maze of administrative rules No Accountability to the Citizens written by un-elected bureaucrats. These rules have tied the hands of Oregon's school administrators and Oregon's thousands Ballot Measure#2 sets up a simple review and approval process of talented and competent classroom teachers. for administrative rules; These rules have the force of law,yet were never voted upon by If 10,000 citizens say they want to have their elected officials the legislature. review a rule,then the legislature is required to review the admin- istrative The process by which these rules are written and established is rules. dominated by special interest groups,which know that by control- Measure#2 creates citizen driven accountability. ling the rule writing process, they can essentially make law A "Yes"vote creates a process to allow Oregonians to require circumventing the legislative process. accountability in administrative rules. Worse,the ability for school administrators,parents and teachers If you have an to change rules that they find harmful (but that special interest y y questions about the process created by Measure groups find useful) is limited so severely as to make it next to #2,please read the"explanatory statement"written and agreed to impossible. by both proponents and opponents of Measure #2.You will see that Measure #2 creates a simple and fair process open to all But Measure 2 solves this problem.It establishes a responsible, Oregonians. fair process by which citizens can get the legislature to review (This information furnished by Larry George,Citizens for Accountability in administrative rules that are not productive. Administrative Rules.) Measure 2 will increase citizen involvement in our government, and help citizens regain authority that has been consolidated in state agency bureaucracies. Special interest groups will urge you to vote no on Measure 2, because their wishes are quite well served by the current system, which they find easy to dominate. The Oregon Education Coalition urges you to vote YES on Measure 2 (This information furnished by Rob Kremer,Oregon Education Coalition.) (This space purchased for$500 In accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 In accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 214 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet--Statewide Measures Measure No. 2 Arguments ARGUMENT IN FAVOR ARGUMENT IN FAVOR PROTECT OUR NEIGHBORHOODS—VOTE YES ON Administrative Rules Are The MEASURE#2 The Laws of Narrow Special Interests The Neighborhood Preservation Committee is working to bring Break the Special Interest Stranglehold on State Government— more notification, more information and more citizen control to Vote Yes on Measure#2. Oregon's land use planning process. Administrative Rules are laws passed by non-elected bureaucrats Special interest groups are controlling the destiny of neighbor- in Salem.These rules are passed without a vote of the people, hoods all over the Portland/Metro area,and all over Oregon. without a vote of your elected officials, and without adequate Administrative rules, passed by a non-elected commission in opportunities for you to participate in the process. Salem,are requiring higher and higher housing densities in exist- As a result sR2ciai Interests control the "administrative ing neighborhoods. rules"process behind the scenes. These high-density housing "administrative rules" are forcing Many times the Legislature will pass intentionally vague laws so over-crowding of schools, more traffic congestion, loss of open that special interests can work with the state agencies and draft space, and other problems, all with little public notice, and with special provisions for the special interest groups to get their way. little public input. These special provisions would never pass under the scrutiny of Measure#2 would allow neighborhoods to challenge administra- the public process with elected officials who are accountable to the citizens. five rules to protect and maintain their communities. Measure #2 would require the special interests groups to work Special interests get their way, the politicians can duck out of the tough issues — and Oregon citizens are left with neighborhood groups,and would require accountability in the process. process. If you care about your neighborhood, if you care about Measure#2 creates a simple process so that Oregon citizens can accountability, you care about citizen Involvement in the require the legislature to vote on the laws created by the bureau- land use planning system,please vote yes on Measure#2. state more avoiding the tough vote by passing the buck to the state te agencies. (This information furnished by Kathryn Schiele, Neighborhood Measure #2 holds the special Interests and the politicians Preservation Committee.) accountable—Oregonians are entitled to that. (This information furnished by Larry George,Citizens for Accountability in Administrative Rules.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$5001n accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse [The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 215 CONTINUED Official 200 denial Election Voters'Warftphlef=5tatbVdde Measures Measure No. 2 Arguments ARGUMENT IN FAVOR ARGUMENT IN FAVOR Protect the Oregon Family Farm Did you know that non-elected bureaucrats can: Vote Yes on Measure#2 Raise fees that cost you money It is wrong for small family farmers and ranchers to be locked out Allow polluters to foul our air and water of the process because we do not have powerful, high-paid Stop you from voting on local issue lobbyists lurking the halls of state agencies. The sad truth is that new rules are made every day. Powerful special interest groups have a great deal of influence and power over administrative rules (laws created by state And our elected officials are powerless to do anything about it. agencies). They're called administrative rules. Powerful special interests lobby for and testify in favor of state Currently, numerous boards, commissions, and state agencies agency budgets, then those state agencies write administrative create administrative rules. The average voter doesn't know rules(laws)which benefit special interests. where they come from,who made them up,or even why we don't Some administrative rules threaten the very existence of the have some control over the agencies we created. small Oregon farmer. One administrative rule says that a small That's why we need to pass Measure 2. farmer isn't a farmer unless he/she makes$100,000 per year— state agencies believe that 80% of Oregon's family farmers are Measure 2 is About Citizen Involvement not farmers at all,just because they aren't corporate farms that Measure 2 simply allows citizens to gather signatures on a peti- make a lot of money.The $100,000 rule doesn't make sense in tion.If enough signatures are gathered,the legislature is required agriculture,and it is bad public policy. to review administrative rules we think are unfair, unwise, too Measure#2 create a process which opens up administrative rules weak,too heavy handed,or too costly. to a public process—a process to assure elected legislators have Like the rule that allow companies to dump toxic sludge in our the final say on. lawmaking, as intended in the Oregon rivers. Constitution. Or the one that says a barber can't let his dog lie in the corner of In the legislative process there are checks and balances, and his shop. there is accountability. Measure 2 allows the family farmer the opportunity to require agency laws to 'go through the same Measure 2 Doesn't Change One Single Rule that Already Exists Constitutional process as every other law. Where the elected But It does give citizens a voice... lawmakers make the laws. Protect Oregon's family farmers qy voting for accountability in A chance to tell the Legislature that our beliefs and feelings are state government,vote YES on Measure#2. being ignored... A chance for average citizens to take control away from special (This information furnished by Dave Hunnicutt,Oregon Family Farm PAC.) interest groups. Vote Yes on Measure 2 Vote Yes for More Citizen Involvement (This information furnished by Rita Swyers.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 216 CONTINUED " Official 2000 General Election Voters"Pam hlet,--Statewide Measures Measure No. 2 Arguments ARGUMENT IN FAVOR ARGUMENT IN FAVOR Don't Let Special Interests Mislead You Help Protect The Family Farm How can a ballot measure that gives the people the power to peti Vote Yes on Measure 2 tion their state government be anything but good? Measure 2'will help small farmers have a voice in state govern- Special interests will try to tell you giving citizens the right to ment,a voice we do not currently have. challenge state agency "laws" as a bad thing — Don't let them Measure 2 creates a process that should already be the law,and mislead you!!! one that many other states already have. Measure 2 gives power back to the citizens Measure 2 will help In several important ways: Measure 2 can save the taxpayers money 1) Measure 2 would make state government more accountable to Measure 2 restores the checks and balances in state Oregonians government 2) Measure 2 would counteract special interests'and lobbyists' Measure 2 breaks the "special interest" control in state influence government 3) Measure 2 would open-up state government Thirty-three other states have now adopted laws requiring review Administrative rules are laws, just like those laws passed by a of state agency laws,because this is good public policy. majority of our state senators and state representatives, and Special interests know that Measure 2 would break their monop- eventually approved by the governor—but administrative rules do S P not go through the careful"checks and balances"of the legislative oly on state agency lawmaking. If you hear outrageous claims process. against Measure 2, remember, they are from special interests who have a great deal to lose when we allow and encourage Simply put: state agencies are writing laws. State agencies are citizen involvement in state government. lobbied and influenced by special interests and there are very few Vote Yes for Citizen Involvement ways that the average citizen can influence this process.Measure 2 fixes this problem. Vote Yes on Measure 2. Family farmers have found that state agencies react to special (This information furnished by Frank Nims,Oregonians In Action.) interest lobbying and protect moneyed interests, many times to our detriment. Rules have even been written to specifically limit small family farms.This must stop.It is not fair, and it not good public policy. Measure 2 will help fix this problem. The Oregon Family Farm PAC urges you to vote YES on Measure 2 (This information furnished by Dave Hunnicutt,Oregon Family Farm PAC.) (This space purchased for$500 In accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 217 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 2 Arguments ARGUMENT IN FAVOR ARGUMENT IN FAVOR The Oregon Association of REALTORS® supports Ballot Taxpayer Association of Oregon Measure 2. Laws should be enacted by those who answer to the voters. Administrative agencies adopt rules that have the same effect on This is becoming more of the exception rather than the rule. For Oregonians as taws passed by the Legislature.These rules are re whatever reason, successive legislatures have essentially given adopted without any oversight or accountability because the non-elected state agencies enormous powers to affect the lives of bureaucrats that adopt these rules were not elected and cannot Y 9 them to create our citizens and their businesses, b allowing be voted out of office. "administrative rules". State administrative rules are usually meant to carry out the laws enacted by the Legislature, not to create new laws. However They may call them rules, but they have the force of law.These administrative agencies use their rule-making powers to create, rules allow bureaucrats to impose arbitrarily large fees, severe new laws all the time. penalties and restrictions to which citizens have little recourse. Ballot Measure 2 would create oversight and accountability.Ballot There are countless stories of Oregonians who have been hit with Measure 2 requires that any rule challenged by a petition of rules that are often unnecessary... but also are often unreason- 10,000 voters would need to be passed by the Legislature and able,unfair,intrusive,counterproductive,or just plain wrong. signed by the Governor.Otherwise,the rule would have no further Over 124,000 Oregonians have put Measure#2 on the ballot to effect.To create a law, the Legislature must pass it and the provide relief from poorly thought out rules. Measure #2 simply Governor must sign it. Bureaucrats should be held accountable provides a way for citizens to require the state legislature to too! review and vote on the rules. If the bureaucrats enact a rule that takes away the property rights Measure 2 can force elected officials to exercise oversight and of Oregonians,the rule could be challenged under Ballot Measure ultimate responsibility for administrative rules,by giving citizens a 2.The bureaucrats could be forced to explain the reasons for the workable avenue of appeal when they are unfairly abused by the rule to the Legislature and to the public.Ballot Measure 2 could bureaucracy. help to prevent the enforcement of rules that take away your rights. Vote Yes on 2. Ballot Measure 2 is about fairness,democracy and accountability. For more information on the Taxpayer Association of Oregon,visit Unelected bureaucrats should not have more power over our website at www.oregonwatchdog.com Oregonians'lives than the people elected to the Legislature. (This information furnished by Jason D.Williams, Taxpayer Association of The Oregon Association of REALTORSO supports Ballot Oregon.) Measure 2 and urges you to VOTE YES on this important issue. (This information furnished by Jana B. Jarvis, Oregon Association of REALTORS.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 218 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet-Statewide Measures Measure No. 2 Arguments ARGUMENT IN FAVOR ARGUMENT IN FAVOR Oregon Grange Support People's Oversight on Government Regulations The Oregon State Grange Asks You To Vote Yes On Measure 2. Vote Yes on Measure#2 The Oregon State Grange is the largest grassroots, rural-based People elect officials to represent theml fraternal organization in the state with 246 local Granges. Elected officials are to represent the wishes of the people who elected them, and in most cases they pass laws that reflect the Grange members believe that an open and responsive state government is vital for good government,and that is why we are people's needs. Ballot Measures passed to the people, also urging you to vote es on Measure 2. become laws of the state.However, some state agencies ignore 9 g Y Y the people's voice and the legislative "intent"of law when they No matter what issues you care about,the environment,educa- produce"administrative rules" tion,or crime and punishment, Measure 2 gives Oregon citizens Non-elected bureaucrats create lawsl more power over their state government. Administrative rules created by state agencies allow special inter- Citizens Should Have The Right To Petition Their Government. . ests and personal agendas to be implemented.This rulemaking Oregon was the first state to give its citizens the right to circulate avoids the voters, and avoids the check and balances of the petitions to change state law.The Grange was the first organiza- legislature. Bureaucrats who work for state agencies are not tion to fight for this important right in Oregon.Direct democracy elected by the public and therefore are not held accountable to has been a proud Oregon tradition for over 90 years. the public.They create"law"by creating rules which govern the citizens of the state. Over the past 30 years we have seen a substantial growth in "administrative rules". Administrative rules are laws created by What is wrong with making agencies accountable? non-elected state bureaucrats who work in state agencies. Even elected officials cannot control the state agencies' rule Currently no process exists for citizens to petition their state making process. Measure #2 creates a straightforward, simple government to review administrative rules. Measure 2 corrects process which allows the citizens to challenge and require the this problem. legislature to review administrative rules.It is simple,it fair,and is Measure 2 will require the Legislature to review"administrative long over due.People and the Legislature deserve accountability rules"when citizens disagree with the actions of bureaucrats and from state agency rule makers. then take action. How much will It cost? Measure 2 is about giving you more say over what happens in Do not let opponents fool you by saying that Measure#2 would Salem. The Oregon State Grange urges your "Yes" vote on cause long legislative sessions at a huge cost to state govern- Measure 2, ment.That simply is NOT the truth.If Measure#2 passes, state (This information furnished by Catherine Johnston, The Oregon.State agencies will soon learn to create and administer rules with the Grange.) "full and clear intent"of law the first time around so challenges to their rules become unnecessary. Measure#2 allows for much needed accountability. The Oregon Cattlemen's Association strongly urges you to support Measure#2 (This information furnished by John V. Hays, Oregon Cattlemen's Association.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 219 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlbt--Statewide Measures Measure No. 2 Arguments ARGUMENT IN FAVOR ARGUMENT IN FAVOR I've been there;I have seen the special interests in action, and I Strengthen Citizen Involvement—Vote Yes on Measure 2 urge you to vote yes on Measure#2! Citizen Involvement and Legislative Review are Good Things, In the early 1990's,I was elected to serve in the Oregon House of Unless You're a Special Interest Group Representatives. I quickly realized that the special interest's In the next few pages,you will read arguments from special inter- secret that most Oregonians are unaware of is the administrative est groups talking about how the s will fall if Measure 2 asses. rules process. 9 P 9 sky P What a joke. Administrative rules are laws, but elected officials do not All Measure 2 does is give you,the average citizen the right create these laws. 9 Y 9 9 to force your legislature to review an administrative rule Administrative rules are created by,non-elected bureaucrats in passed by a non-elected board or commission. As citizens, state agencies who are not accountable to the Oregon voter. we have the right to demand that our elected representatives take Special Interests like administrative rules because they can get control over the laws they pass.Under our current laws,once the laws outside public scrutiny. legislature creates a law, the non-elected boards and commis- sions take over, and the legislature (and citizens) loses all Career Politicians like administrative rules because they can authority to make sure their law is carried out in the way it was pass the responsibility for these laws on to the state agencies, intended. and the politician can avoid public accountability. Administrative rules are adopted by political appointees In the 1993 legislative session, I tried to get a similar measure The commission and boards that create administrative rules are referred the people through the legislature: career politicians filled with political appointees who supported the political winners and speci al interests killed the proposal.Finally,the citizens have ve in the last election.These people are not elected,are not account- said enough and collected the signatures needed demand able to the voters,and usually have a political agenda just like a accountability in Oregon's administrative rule process.. legislator. Please Vote Yes for Accountability Unfortunately, although the boards and commissions are as Vote Yes for Measure#2 political as the legislature,they are not elected,and the public has Fred Girod no way to review their actions.This is wrong. Former State Representative Who will oppose Measure 2 District#30 Special Interests and extremist organizations. (This information furnished by Fred Girod.) The same people who oppose Measure 2 are those who opposed the citizen notification law, Ballot Measure 56.These extremists said notifying citizens of zoning changes to their property would "gut" Oregon's land use planning system. Oregonians rejected these outrageous claims and passed Measure 56 by over 80%. Measure 56 has strengthened citizen involvement—and so will Measure#2. How can a Measure which requires a citizen petition and a leg- islative review be bad? If you do not like the scrutiny of public opinion! Reject the outrageous claims of special interests, Vote Yes on Measure#2. (This information furnished by Larry George,Citizens for Accountability in Administrative Rules.) (This space purchased for$500 In accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 In accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 220 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet-Statewide Measures Measure No. 2 Arguments ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION THE LEAGUE OF WOMEN VOTERS THE ACLU OF OREGON URGES YOU TO VOTE NO ON MEASURE 2 URGES YOU VOTE NO ON MEASURE 2 The League of Women Voters of Oregon asks you to oppose Measure 2 is anti-democratic Measure 2. Currently, rule making in Oregon is an open process with Measure 2 would be an unnecessary and dangerous addition to public hearings and opportunities for citizens to work with public Oregon's Constitution. Administrative rules are written to imple- agencies to craft responsible rules.Measure 2 will allow rules that ment law made by the Legislature.Oregon's Constitution should have been created in an open process to be nullified behind not be cluttered with such legislative and administrative matters. closed doors. UNNECESSARY Measure 2 reduces political accountability Measure 2 will allow a small number of voters to send state Administrative rules are written to prevent agencies from arbitrar- agency rules into limbo without any political accountability.Under ily or capriciously interpreting statute. Current law provides our current system the presumption is that making or amending safeguards to the administrative rule-making process.It requires law requires action by the legislative and executive branches of state agencies to give notice of rule-making, to disseminate government. However, Measure 2 reverses that presumption by proposed rules to interested parties, to hold public hearings. allowing the non-action of the Legislature (i.e., not considering Current law provides both legislative and legal remedies to an administrative rule)to have a legislative effect—nullifying the citizens believing an agency has exceeded its authority. rule. Oregon voters and the Oregon Legislature have repeatedly Measure 2 undermines the balance of powers opposed creating a new process for legislative review of adminis- among our branches of government trative rules.All state agencies would be affected including those Our constitutional form of government requires checks and dealing with public health,safety,the environment. balances among the three branches of government: executive, DANGEROUS legislative and judicial.The ACLU of Oregon believes the separa- tion of powers doctrine is essential to protecting the Bill of Rights Unlike earlier ballot measures and bills introduced into the because it keeps any one branch of government from becoming Legislature, Measure 2 would allow as few as 10,000 voters to too powerful.Measure 2 inappropriately gives the Legislature the petition the Legislature for a review of an administrative rule or power to override executive branch decisions without requiring a rules.An individual or corporation with paid signature gatherers vote of both houses of the legislature. could file such a petition. Because Committee Chairs have the choice to hear or not to hear a bill, the bill/petition might never Measure 2 is not necessary have a hearing.The dangerous result would be that the bill/peti- Checks and balances on administrative rules already exist. tion in Measure 2 language"has no further force or effect after Under our current system,the Legislature already has the power adjournment".The petition would, in such a situation, render the to change an administrative rule–by changing the enabling law. administrative rule null and void--without any hearing at all. Additionally, there already is a process for citizens to challenge administrative rules in court. This provision of Measure 2 raises the potential for an agency rule being negated without any public response what so ever. Please VOTE NO on Measure 2 Measure 2 is not in the public's interest.It is bad public policy.It is For more information write to the Oregon ACLU both unnecessary and dangerous. at PO Box 40585, Portland,OR 97240 or go to www.aclu-or.org The League of Women Voters of Oregon urges you to vote NO on Measure 2. (This information furnished by David Fidanque, American Civil Liberties Union of Oregon.) (This information furnished by Paula Krane,President,League of Women Voters of Oregon.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 In accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 221 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statew!de'Measures Measure No. 2 Arguments ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION Oregon Recreation&Park Association Working Families Only Stand To Lose From Measure 2 Oregon Parks Association Vote NO on Measure 2 Oppose Measure 2 Many of Oregon's administrative rules directly affect the work- The Oregon Recreation&Park Association and the Oregon Parks place of Oregon's workers - and many more affect and protect Association, organizations representing over 500 professional workers in their homes and in their neighborhoods. Measure 2 members that provide park and recreation services throughout would give corporate or wealthy interests a tool with which to the state,urge you to vote"NO"on Measure 2. undermine these protections and safeguards. Measure 2 is aimed at radically altering the governing process in Under Measure 2,any rule that protects the safety and health of Oregon.It amends the Oregon.Constitution to allow special Oregon's employees while on the job;that ensures evenhanded Interests to overturn any administrative rule. It could enforcement of minimum wage or anti-discrimination laws; that Increase the cost of government while creating an unpre- provides for fair handling of employer/employee disputes - all dictable and unstable environment for business,government these rules could be in jeopardy. and ordinary citizens.Measure 2 is a devious end run,aimed at Off the job,workers become citizens, residents,and consumers. universally accepted functions of representative government. Measure 2 provides an open door for special interests that want Oregon currently has over 12,000 administrative rules that imple- to undermine consumer protections, pollution controls land use ment legislation including: provisions for parks, trails and open agreements,and other important safeguards of our quality of life space; land use goals, environmental protection; the Oregon in Oregon. Health Plan; local taxing authority; and more. Measure 2 could There is no need to jeopardize all of these important worker and allow special interests overturn any of these rules without a consumer protections when the legislature already has the power vote of the Legislature or r the people. to override the rule-making process with legislation.Measure 2 is The measure would require the Legislature to review any admin- unnecessary! istrative rule that someone challenges by collecting only 10,000 VOTE NO ON MEASURE 2 signatures.At the going rate for signatures this could cost very little. Measure 2 gives special interests a big advantage over This voters pamphlet statement brought to you by the ordinary citizens and throws a monkey wrench into the public process of administrative rules setting. Oregon AFL-CIO Measure 2 Is a reprise of Measure 65 which was defeated in OPEU,SEIU Local 503 1998 by a broad coalition of citizen groups and businesses. (This information furnished by Rich Peppers, Oregon Public Employees While it was designed as an open and blatant attack on Oregon's Union,SEIU 40ca/503.) land use planning system and sponsored by the anti-land use regulation group Oregonians in Action, it can result in a much broader impact. Ballot Measure 2 is unnecessary, unreasonable, undemocratic and Oregon's voters should reject it. Save Oregon's Administrative Rules Process. Vote"NO"on Measure 2. Oregon Recreation&Park Association Oregon Parks Association (This information furnished by Stephen A. Bosak, Oregon Recreation& Park Association,Oregon Parks Association.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 In accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 222 CONTINUED Official 9M General Election Voters'Pamphlet--Statewide Measures Measure No. 2 Arguments ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION STATEMENT BY FORMER OREGON GOVERNORS OREGON'S BUSINESS COMMUNITY URGES YOU TO MARK HATFIELD AND VIC ATIYEH VOTE NO ON MEASURE 2 In Opposition to Measure 2 As members of Oregon's business community, we are proud of We each have decades of experience in government, both as our role making Oregon work.Oregon succeeds-when business, lawmakers and as Oregon's chief executive. That experience government and citizens can work in a partnership, creating an leads us to oppose Measure 2 for several reasons: environment that makes our state a great place to live and do First,the measure is unnecessary. business. The Oregon Legislature already has a process for reviewing For business,a critical part of that environment is a stable,ratio- The inappropriate. State law nal system for making rules we must follow on a day-to-day basis. administrative rules they cons administrative rules to chat- That includes health and safety rules,tax accounting procedures, already allows anyone affected id air and water pollution control, food growing and packaging lenge them in court;if the court finds the rules exceed the author- ity granted the agency by the Legislature, it can invalidate those standards, and just about anything to do with employees'insur- rules.Finally,the Legislature may pass legislation at any time to ante coverage. repeal or amend administrative rules they find objectionable. Right now, these rules are made by Departments, Board and Second,it is undemocratic. Commissions that have expertise in their respective areas.And there is a process for us and everyone else to work with those Measure 2 creates a process by which a small number of petition officials as rules are drafted.We may not always agree with them. signers,combined with a minority of the Legislature,can block the But there is a process to appeal.Most important, the system is execution of laws passed by the full Legislature.This is not demo- stable and predictable. cratic. Without that stability, Oregon would be a much less attractive Third,It gives the Legislature new and inappropriate power state in which to do business.And it's precisely that stability which over the executive branch. Measure 2 would destroy.It is a threat to every Oregon business --from small family farmer to major corporation--and those who The Governor and the state agencies he-or she directs are are employed by them.Imagine playing a game where the rules charged with carrying out the laws passed by the Legislature. changed whenever someone with an axe to grind didn't like them. Measure 2 would allow a small number of petitioners and a single It would create an intolerable situation which would threaten powerful chair of a legislative committee to invalidate the rules Oregon's strong economy. state agencies adopted in order to carry out the laws.Measure 2 would give the Legislature the power not only to adopt the laws Measure 2 is poorly written and has no place in Oregon's but also to control their administration.This is too much power in Constitution.Whatever the proponents of this measure intended, one branch of government. it will do much that is unintended. We urge you to defeat measure 2. Fourth, this measure does not belong in our state Constitution. VOTE NO ON MEASURE 2 BAD FOR BUSINESS.BAD FOR OREGON. Our state Constitution, like our national Constitution, should be reserved for fundamental principles and the essential structures Oregon B siness Association of government.We should not amend our Constitution to add an Northwest Environmental Business Council unnecessary and troubling provision like Measure 2. Fred Miller, Portland General Electric Bill Williams,Bear Creek Corporation We urge you to join us in voting"no"on Measure 2. Brett Wilcox,Northwest Aluminum Mark Hatfield Jim Johnson,Intel Corporation Governor of Oregon, 1959-1967 (This information furnished by Nik Blosser,Oregon Business Association.) U.S.Senator 1967-1996 Vic Atiyeh Governor of Oregon, 1979-1987 (This information furnished by Mark Hatfield.) (This space purchased for$500 In accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 In accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 223 CONTINUED Official 2000'General Election Voters'Pamphlet-m-Statewide Measures Measure No. 2 Arguments ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION Oregon Police and Prosecutors Say GOVERNOR JOHN KITZHABER URGES YOU MEASURE 2 ENDANGERS PUBLIC SAFETY TO VOTE NO ON MEASURE 2 A dangerous initiative on the ballot this November could find a Dear Fellow Oregonians, hiding place in Oregon's Constitution and steal away many of the Measure 2 is another huge waste of taxpayer dollars that doesn't crucial protections that keep our communities safe. even solve a problem. Citizens already have plenty of ways to Measure 2 seems innocuous enough. After all, what could be challenge administrative rules in Oregon.And Measure 2 doesn't wrong with letting the Legislature review administrative rules? just waste money-it will let any special interest or individual with an axe to grind tie up our Legislature and our courts with frivolous Plenty, as it turns out. For one thing, it is totally unnecessary. and petty challenges to all kinds of rules. There are already many checks and balances on the administra- For instance, polluters could block rules protecting clean air and tive process,and many ways to challenge rules with which you do safe drinking water and requiring the cleanup of toxic waste, all not agree.For another, it could tie the Legislature and the courts without a vote of the people or the Legislature.And Measure 2 up with frivolous and petty challenges to all kinds of rules.There would lock all these costly and dangerous things in the Oregon is certainly no need to put this untested scheme in our Constitution. Constitution. Moreover,Measure 2 is not really about reviewing rules.It's about I urge you to vote"no"on measure 2 this November. repealing them—without giving the people an opportunity to have KEEP OREGON'S ECONOMY AND ENVIRONMENT HEALTHY their say. VOTE NO ON MEASURE 2 Under Measure 2, hundreds of rules that protect the public (This information furnished by John Kitzhaber,M.D.) from dangerous criminals and ensure justice for law-abiding citizens could be repealed without a vote of the people or the Legislature. That would be a crime. What are some of the rules that could be put at risk under Measure 2's undemocratic process? • Sentencing guidelines. • Sex offender registration and community notification requirements. • Rules governing crime victim compensation. • Minimum standards for employment as a law enforcement officer. • Regulations governing prison terms,parole,and post-prison supervision. Protect yourself.Don't be fooled by this measure. VOTE NO ON MEASURE 2. Sheriff Ris Bradshaw 'Sheriff Dan Noelle Clackamas County Multnomah County Sheriff John Pardon Sheriff Stan Robson Douglas County Benton County (This information furnished by Sheriff Dan Noelle.) (This space purchased for$500 In accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 In accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument.. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 224 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet--Statewide Measures Measure No. 2 Arguments ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION PROTECT THE COLUMBIA GORGE OREGON CHAPTERS OF THE AUDUBON SOCIETY VOTE NO ON 2 URGE YOU TO The Columbia Gorge is a national treasure that must be VOTE NO ON MEASURE 2 protected for our children and future generations. Why Give Special Interests Greater Power To Undermine Passage of Measure 2 could ruin this Oregon's Quality Of Life? scenic treasure within a lifetime. Why is Oregon special? We live here because of our love and Measure 2 could allow special interests to overturn any state respect for the natural world.Historically, Oregon's citizens have administrative rule that protects the Columbia Gorge from urban fought hard to protect wildlife and wild places. sprawl, rampant development, pollution, open-pit mining, or But Measure 2 takes power away from citizens who want to irresponsible clearcutting.For approximately$10,000 of paid peti- defend the health of our state's environment and puts it in the tioning,special interests could derail existing Gorge protections if hands of wealthy special interests who place their own interests the Legislature failed to pass them.Yes, even the Legislature's above the rules and laws protecting our quality of life. failure to vote on a rule would result in the rule being overturned. Measure 2 Devastates Citizens'Ability To Protect These are administrative rules that help keep the Gorge a Fish And Wildlife Habitat national treasure: Measure 2 will let any special interest or individual opposed to • State rules that Implement the Columbia River Gorge protecting fish and'wiidlife tie up our legislature and our courts National Scenic Area Act. with baseless challenges. Polluters could block rules protecting • Rules that help Gorge communities plan urban growth to clean air and safe drinking water and requiring the cleanup of ensure livability. toxic waste, and developers could eliminate safeguards for • Rules to protect river corridors and salmon habitat. wetlands and streambank protections—all without a vote of the Think about your favorite place in the Gorge and the times that people or the Legislature. you've spent with friends and family at this special place. Now And Measure 2 would lock all these costly and dangerous things imagine it forever ruined because special interests were able to in the Oregon Constitution. ` erase rules that protect the Gorge. Whether you live in the Gorge or experience it through sightsee- Measure 2 Has Unknown,Dangerous Consequences ing, hiking, picnicking or fishing–whether you go to the Gorge Measure 2 is vague,confusing, and poorly written.It could have often or just once in a while,it's important to protect this priceless devastating effects on the laws that protect our environment,our part of our natural heritage. communities,and the health and safety of all Oregonians. For big businesses,$10,000 of paid petitioning would be a small If Measure 2passes we lose our ability to keep our communities price to pay for unchecked development, mining and logging in good places to live for both wildlife and people. the Gorge. WE URGE YOU TO VOTE NO ON MEASURE 2 Protect the Gorge and vote"No"on Measure 2. Audubon Society of Corvallis ENDORSERS: Audubon Society of Portland Nancy Russell,founder, Friends of the Columbia Gorge Cape Arago Audubon Society Dr.John Reynolds,chair,Friends of the Columbia Gorge Central Oregon Audubon Society North Cheatham,orchardist,Hood River Columbia Gorge Audubon Society Dr.William Bell, Columbia Gorge Community College President, Kalmiopsis Audubon Society The.Dallas Lane County Audubon Society Barbara and Robert Bailey,orchardists,The Dalles Rogue Valley Audubon Society State Representative Chris Beck Salem Audubon Society Former State Senator Dick Springer Siskiyou Audubon Society (This information furnished by Michael Lang, Friends of the Columbia (This information furnished by Ron Carley,Audubon Society of Portland.) Gorge.) (This space purchased for$500 In accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 In accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 225 CONTINUED Official 2000 General election Voters'Pa Filet—StatAwide Measures , Measure No. 2 Arguments ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION OREGON FAMILY FARMERS OPPOSE MEASURE 2 OREGON NURSERY OWNERS AND OPERATORS As family farmers and ranchers from every corner of Oregon, OPPOSE MEASURE 2 we respectfully ask our fellow Oregonians to VOTE NO ON As owners and operators of nurseries, we respectfully ask MEASURE 2 to protect Oregon's farm, ranch, and forest our fellow Oregonians to VOTE NO ON MEASURE 2 to protect lands. the land base needed for our industry to continue to thrive We are Oregonians who make our living by growing crops, and provide jobs for Oregonians. livestock, and trees.Oregon's land use planning rules, including Nurseries in Oregon are mostly small,owner-operated firms,but farm and forest zoning, are what has protected our land from our industry is making a big contribution to our state's prosperity. uncontrolled urban sprawl and rural development. These rules Oregon's fast-growing nursery industry is now the largest contrib- have been essential to maintaining the basic livelihood of thou- utor to our state's $3.5 billion agricultural economy. In 1998, sands of Oregon families who earn their living in agriculture,and Oregon trailed only California and Florida in total horticultural have enabled Oregon's farms, nurseries, ranches,and forests to production, with a record $532 million in sales—an increase of contribute billions of dollars to our state's economy. 8%over 1997. MEASURE 2 WOULD HARM OREGON FARMERS Unlike many other agricultural commodities, most of Oregon's The sponsors of Measure 2 have made it very clear that they nursery products are grown in counties that also have large urban intend o use the measure to weaken or repeal the rules they populations.The top five nursery producing counties in the state to promote responsible development and protect farm, range, and are Marion, Clackamas, Washington, Yamhill, and Multnomah forest lands from being covered by subdivisions. This would Counties. threaten the viability of a major Oregon industry and undermine By 12rotecting our industry's land base from uncontrolled urban the quality of life for citizens of our state. sprawl. Oregon's land use and farmland protection rules have Please vote no on Measure 2. enabled nurseries to flourish,even in the face of rapid population gmwth.These rules have been essential to maintaining the basic Bob&Barbara Bailey Mark Tipperman livelihood of thousands of Oregonians who earn their living in Cherries Cattle,Timber nurseries and other agricultural operations. Wasco County Union County MEASURE 2 WOULD HARM Gary L.Harris Donald Logan OREGON'S NURSERY INDUSTRY Onion&Carrot Seeds Christmas Trees,Hay,Timber The sponsors of Measure 2 have made it very clear that they Jefferson County Washington County intend to use the measure to weaken or repeal the rules that Lois&Clif Kenagy David and Diana Lett promote responsible development and protect agricultural land Row Crops Wine Grapes from being covered by subdivisions. This would threaten the Benton County Yamhill County viability of Oregon's nursery industry and undermine the quality of Ambrose&Susan McAuliffe Jim Monroe life for citizens of our state. Cattle&Calves Sheep,Timber PLEASE VOTE NO ON MEASURE 2. Klamath County Linn County Alice Doyle and Greg Lee Bob Iwasaki Dave&Ellen Vanasche Jim Wood Log House Plants Nurseryman Grass and Legume Seed Cattle,Horses,Hay,Timber Cottage Grove Washington County Washington County Crook County Susan Anderson Rod Park J&T Farms Anderson Gardens Park's Nursery Vegetable Seed,Grass Seed,Hay,Grain, Hillsboro Gresham Commercial Horse Stables Drew Hunter Marcus Simantel Marion County Nursery Operator Retired Nurseryman Jud&Diana Parsons Salem Portland Timber,Christmas Trees,Grass Seed Jim Gilbert Jackson and Marion Counties Northwoods Nursery Michael&Susan McCarthy Molalla Pears,Apples,Hay,Timber,Cattle Hood River County (This information furnished by Greg Lee.) (This information furnished by Diana Parsons,Hill Crest Orchards.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 In accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute=endorse The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the aaccuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 226 CONTINUED Offficclaf 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 2 Arguments ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION Teachers,Educators and School Boards PROTECT OREGON'S COAST Urge You to VOTE NO on 2 VOTE NO ON 2 Professional educators establish rules for school districts to follow How much pride could we take in beaches we couldn't get to, with respect to school curriculum, instructional guidelines, views we couldn't see and rivers and estuaries we couldn't teacher licensing and school auditing and accountability.Measure protect?Oregonians have a long tradition of stewardship over our 2 threatens the quality of public education in Oregon by allowing coastal region. Measure 2 could have a devastating effect on any special interest group to overturn rules without even a vote of Oregon's coast, by drastically eroding the laws designed to the Legislature.We need professional educators,PTA's,teachers, protect it. superintendents and local school boards determining what our children learn,not narrow special interest groups. Measure 2 would allow any special interest with an estimated Administrative rules dealing with curriculum, teacher licensing $10,000 to spend to place any administrative rule in limbo.These rules are the mechanism that make our coastal protection laws and other education functions must go through a lengthy, public work.We can be certain that if this measure passes,we will see process before being adopted.Citizens can have extensive input challenges to rules that assure public access and protect coastal into this process,and rules can be overturned by the Legislature resources. if needed.Measure 2 would throw that careful process completely out of balance by allowing a special interest to put rules at risk. What might Measure 2 do to Oregon's Coast?We would likely That's not good government, and it's not good for our children's see attacks on any or all of the following rules that: education system. • Enforce Oregon's cherished Beach Law, which keeps our In addition, Measure 2 will likely waste taxpayer dollars, impact • beaches open to all ing the state's ability to fund public education. should be spending money directly in the classroom, not on n l Protect public access to the shoreline lawyers and • Protect endangered coastal salmon runs and aquatic habitat • Restrict inappropriate development on crumbling bluffs,dunes, litigation. flood-prone areas Don't let special interests jeopardize our public school system. • Conserve our estuaries Measure 2 has many unintended consequences and does not • Restrict landowners from drastically altering the shoreline for belong in Oregon's Constitution. their convenience PLEASE VOTE NO on 2 BEWARE UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES Oregon Education Association Measure 2 is so poorly written no one knows just what the con- Oregon School Boards Association sequences would be.But the likely result is that when protections Confederation of Oregon School Administrators are thrown out to benefit the few, property values, livability and American Federation of Teachers--Oregon recreational opportunities will be reduced for everyone else. (This information furnished by Tricia Bosak,Oregon Education Assoc.) Those who love Oregon's coast know that administrative rules protect everything from tidepools to scenic overlooks, from riparian areas to mudflats,from beach access to wildlife habitat. As citizens who value Oregon's tradition of coastal stewardship, we urge you to VOTE NO ON MEASURE 2. Oregon Shores Conservation Coalition Kalmiopsis Audubon Society Citizens for Orderly Development,Curry County Cape Arago Audubon Society Oregon Chapter,Surfrider Foundation Columbia Deepening Opposition Group Citizens For Florence Doug Thompson,Astoria City Councilor Cheryl Thorp,Curry County Commissioner Lori Hollingsworth,Lincoln City Councilor (This information furnished by Phillip Johnson, Oregon Shores Conservation Coalition.) (This space purchased for$5001n accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$5001n accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 227 CONTINUED stt6ral= ►. Met;attres Measure No. 2 Arguments ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION SALMON FOR ALL NW STEELHEADERS URGES A NO VOTE ON MEASURE 2 VOTE NO ON 2 Salmon for All knows what is good for the fish is good for the MEASURE 2 HURTS OREGON'S FISH AND FISHERMEN fishermen. Measure 2 would harm fisheries and the economies supported by coastal fisheries.Measure 2 would allow industrial Under Measure 2 any special interest or individual with an axe polluters, politicians and special interests to overturn rules that to grind can repeal any kind of rule including important rules protect salmon,essential fish habitat and water quality. protecting fish and fish habitat.All you have to do to put a rule at risk is hire someone to gather 10,000 signatures.This measure MEASURE 2 HURTS SALMON would allow special interests and polluters to overturn rules that MEASURE 2 HURTS OREGON'S FISHERMEN protect water quality,fish habitat,and fishing regulations. Here are five reasons SALMON FOR ALL members want you to Important Rules affecting fish that could be overturned: join us in voting NO on Measure 2. • Wildfish Management Policies which protect naturally spawn- 1.THREATENS RULES PROTECTING SALMON The Oregon ing wild fish. Salmon Plan,the Oregon Forest Practices Act,Select Area All Commercial and Recreational Angler Regulatory Limits Fisheries and other key programs that offer protection to IT'S UNNECESSARY salmon will be in jeopardy if Measure 2 passes. Measure 2 doesn't solve a single problem.There are plenty of 2.MEASURE 2 DOESN'T BELONG IN OREGONS CONSTI ways to challenge administrative rules.This just creates another TUTION. Measure 2 is so poorly written, that it lets any way for special interests to hurt Oregon. Measure 2 allows any special interest tie up our legislature and our courts with rule to be put at risk with only 10,000 signatures—it doesn't even frivolous and petty challenges to all kinds of important rules. require a vote of the legislature or the people — it's just too 3.MEASURE 2 IS UNNECFS ARY Measure 2 wastes the dangerous to put into Oregon's Constitution. taxpayer's money on a poorly written constitutional amend- IT'S TOO EXPENSIVE ment that creates more problems than it solves.We already have plenty of ways for citizens to challenge rules. Oregonians will be spending more money on frivolous and petty challenges to all sorts of rules instead of spending money on 4.MEASURE 2 WILL HARE' FISHERIES. Measure 2 could important things like education, restoring fish habitat,and public eliminate timing windows for industrial in-water work periods safety.Measure 2 is a waste of taxpayer money.It will be a boon and water quality protections,which will harm salmon. for special interests,polluters and signature gathering firms while 5.MEASURE 2 WILL HARM FISHERIES WHICH SUPPORT average taxpayers like you and me will lose out. COASTAL ECONOMIES. Measure 2 would eliminate rules NO ON 2 that protect valuable fisheries. SAVE SALMON IT HURTS FISH PROTECT OREGON'S FISHERMEN NW STEELHEADERS SAY VOTE NO ON 2 VOTE NO ON 2 Association of Northwest Steelheadets Salmon for All (This information furnished by Norman E. Ritchie, P.E., Association of (This information famished by Lovenia Warren,Salmon for All.) Northwest Steelheaders.) (This space purchased for$600 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$5001n accordance with ORS 251.255.) [The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 228 CONTINUED�, Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet--Statewide Measures Measure No. 2 Arguments ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION STATEMENT IN OPPOSITION BY RECREATIONAL AND COMMERCIAL FISHERMEN SAY, FORMER OREGON APPELLATE JUDGES VOTE NO ON MEASURES 2 AND 71 MEASURE 2 IN UNNECESSARY AND HARMFUL Everyone who cares about the future of fishing in Oregon should If you find this measure confusing and poorly drafted,you VOTE NO ON MEASURES 2 AND 7. are right. It is. It also threatens unexpected mischief for Why?it is harmful to Oregon's fish and fishermen. education,health care,and other public needs. Measure 2-It's Unnece ssary and Too Expensive RULES ARE ADOPTED THROUGH • 'Under Measure 2,any special interest or individual with an axe AN OPEN PUBLIC PROCESS to grind can put any rule in jeopardy,including important rules The Oregon Legislature often assigns to state agencies the task protecting Oregon's fish and fish habitat, water quality and of interpreting and carrying out laws,sometimes by administrative even fishing regulations. rules. Agencies can adopt permanent rules only after public • Some important rules which could be overturned include; notice and giving any citizen the opportunity to comment on the . Wildlife Management Policies which protect naturally spawn- proposed rule.An oral hearing must be held if requested by ten or ing wild fish. more people or an association having at least ten members. . All Commercial and Recreational Angler Regulatory Limits. • Measure 2 doesn't solve a single problem, because there are THE LEGISLATURE CAN ALREADY already plenty of ways to challenge Oregon's administrative REVIEW,REPEAL,OR AMEND AGENCY RULES rules. All new rules are already submitted to the Legislature for review, Measure 7-Bankrupts Oregon - Reduces Access - Means and lawmakers already"at any time,may review any proposed or Less Fish adopted rule of a state agency" (ORS 183.725). Moreover, Could require taxpayers to PAY commercial developers to NOT anyone can ask the Legislature to change any rule that departs destroy some of Oregon's most precious lakes and rivers.If the from the Legislature's policies, without collecting 10,000 state or local county could not "pay up", then critical public signatures. resources that protect and replenish our watersheds, and COURTS CAN ALREADY OVERTURN RULES THAT CONFLICT nourish salmon and steelhead streams could be destroyed. WITH LAWS PASSED BY THE'LEGISLATURE Would overturn local zoning laws,opening up stream corridors Anyone affected by a rule who believes that it is unauthorized or to unregulated development, limiting access to Oregon's best contrary to a law passed by the Legislature can have it reviewed salmon and steelhead rivers. in court. Already adopted and reasonable limits on logging development along streams could be overturned. This would harm fish We heard many challenges to rules when we were active judges. habitat and reduce fish runs. Oregon courts invalidate rules that are not authorized or are . Rules ensuring instream flows for fish could not be enforced. inconsistent with the law. No water?No fish! A FEW PEOPLE SHOULD NOT BE ALLOWED TO STOP VOTE NO ON MEASURES 2 AND 7 STATE AGENCIES FROM CARRYING OUT THE LAW IT HURTS OREGON'S FISH AND FISHERMEN. To permit a few people to stop agencies from administering exist- ing statutes would be a radical and harmful departure from Pacific Coast Federation of Fishermen's Associations(PCFFA) Oregon's constitutional separation of powers. Oregon Council of the Federation of Fly Fishers' Oregon Council,Trout Unlimited George M.Joseph Oregon Trout Chief Judge&Judge Frank Amato, Frank Amato Publications Oregon Court of Appeals 1977-1992 'Only opposed to Measure 2 Hans Linde (This information furnished by Caroline Fitchett, Oregon Community Justice Protection PAC.) Oregon Supreme Court 1979-1990 William L.Richardson Chief Judge&Judge Oregon Court of Appeals 1976-1997 Betty Roberts Justice Oregon Supreme Court 1982-1986 Jacob Tanzer Justice Oregon Supreme Court 1980-1983 (This information furnished by Betty Roberts.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 In accordance with ORS 251.255.) The,printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse men'f by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 229 CONTINUED el 2bWGiniralElection Voters'Pamphlet *4 Measures Measure No. 2 Arguments ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION WHAT COULD MEASURE 2 DO? MEASURE 2 COULD BE HAZARDOUS TO YOUR HEALTH RUIN THE OREGON WE LOVEI There is a lot the supporters of Measure 2 won't tell you.Perhaps Oregon has the nation's strongest program to manage its growth. they are just interested in avoiding some of the rules they don't like.But in doing so,they could destroy a system that is absolutely It protects farmland and forestland. It curbs wasteful, sprawling critical for safeguarding the health of Oregonians. development of endless strip malls that cause traffic congestion. Just about everything to do with protecting health and safety in It helps guarantee public beaches and makes more affordable Oregon comes through the administrative rules process.There is housing available. a good reason:these rules must be developed by professionals in How?Through administrative rules.The Legislature itself decided health care,public health and other specialties.But If Measure 2 to use rules instead of statutes to assure good planning. And passes,anyone can try to overturn important rules such as: three times, Oregon voters have rejected efforts to repeal this Communicable Disease Control in Day Care Facilities system—even during a recession. • Rabies Control Since they can't win in a fair process,anti-planning extremists are • Confidential Government Reporting of Diseases trying to deceive voters,and tilt the playing field by creating a new, • Restaurant or Food Pushcart Inspections dangerous process for repealing critical rules. • Tuberculosis Screening and Control Measure 2 is Undemocratic and Dangerous • Immunization Requirements. Swimming Pool Regulations Measure 2 would lock into Oregon's Constitution an unde- • Certification of Public Drinking Water Systems mocratic process which would make it easy for a small group • Privacy of Medical Records of extremists—or even an out-of-state corporation—to It is easy to imagine those who wish to increase their profits or REPEAL the laws that protect our communities and our qual- reduce their responsibility challenging these rules and hundreds ity of life. like them. It is also easy to imagine those with ideological MEASURE 2 ALLOWS ANYONE WITH $10,000 FOR PAID agendas using this measure to force their beliefs on others – PETITIONING TO OVERRULE THE MAJORITY OF VOTERS— including trying to limit or disrupt access to family planning or WITHOUT AN ELECTION OR A VOTE OF THE LEGISLATURE. other services that should be a matter between individuals, families and their doctors.A measure as extreme as this does No wonder The Daily Astorian called Measure 2's predecessor, not belong in Oregon's Constitution. 1998's Measure 65, "The Frankenstein of ballot measures" (10/1/98) This is not a scare tactic:Measure 2 poses a direct threat to the system that protects the public's health in Oregon. It doesn't LOVE OREGON?VOTE NO ON 2. matter what the authors intended–this is what it actually could Friends of Douglas County do. Jackson County Citizens League Please don't be reckless with the health and safety Friends of Linn County of you and your family. Friends of Bend Oregon Shores Conservation Coalition Vote NO on Measure 2 Friends of Eugene Oregon Nurses Association 1000 Friends of Oregon Planned Parenthood Affiliates of Oregon Hood River r Valley Friends of alle l County William Morton,MD, Portland y Residents Committee Friends of Polk County David Fitchett,MD,Albany Eric Dover, MD, Portland Columbia County Citizens for Orderly Growth Mary Ellen Coulter,MD, Bend Citizens for Orderly Development(Curry County) Thomas Ewald, er Ashland Friends of Benton County Citizens For Florence Craig Mather, MD,Ashland Friends of Marion County (This information furnished by Donald Skinner,Planned Parenthood of the Alliance for Responsible Land Use in Deschutes County Columbia/Willamette.) www.NoOn2and7.com (This information furnished by Robert Liberty, 1000 Friends of Oregon.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrar}t the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 230 CONTINUED� Official 2000(3erreVal Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 2 Arguments ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION SOUTHERN OREGONIANS VOTE NO ON MEASURE 2 URGE YOU TO VOTE NO ON MEASURE 2 TO PROTECT THE OREGON DEATH WITH DIGNITY ACT MEASURE 2 DOES NOT BELONG IN OREGON'S CON TITU Protect the Choice of Oregon Voters As Oregon voters already TION know,the Oregon Death With Dignity Act is a hugely popular and successful law. Our Death With Dignity law has survived two Measure 2 allows anyone with $10,000 for paid petitioners to elections,three years of federal court litigation,and attacks form overrule the majority of administrative rules — without an the United States Congress as well as the Oregon legislature.So .election or a vote of the legislature.It makes it easy for special far,we've been successful in protecting our law. interests—or even out-of-state interests-to repeal the rules that protect the Imp re Improvements in End-of-Cite Care In Oregon What protect our communities and neighborhoods. voters now need to know is that our opponents support Measure IT IS UNNECESSARY 2 because it will enable them to undermine the agencies that have passed rules to implement our law.These agencies,such as Oregon's current system provides safeguards to the rule- making process. State agencies are required to hold public the Oregon Health Division, have responsibly implemented the hearings,to disseminate proposed rules to interested parties and Oregon Death With Dignity law for almost three years. This responsible implementation has resulted in improved end-of-life must give notice of all rule making.Measure 2 would be a waste care for all Oregonians. of taxpayer money for abroblem that doesn't even exist, Oregon voters and the legislature have repeatedly opposed Protect the Oregon Death With Digni Law Under Measure 2, creating a new system for repealing administrative rules. opponents of the Death With Dignity law need only collect 10,000 signatures to challenge an agency rule. y collecting 10,000 Once again, Measure 2 is unnecessary and it doesn't belong in signatures, opponents of death with dignity reform can "pull a Oregon's Constitution. rule"from the agency and place it into the legislature for recon- IT HURTS SOUTHERN OREGONIANS sideration.We can't let this happen. It was only three years ago that the Oregon Legislature placed our new Death With Dignity Critical rules protecting children, seniors, education, health, our law back on the ballot for repeal.Anything that makes it easier for environment and public safety could.easily be repealed by any our opponents to challenge the Death With Dignity law in the individual or special interest—and without a vote of the legislature legislature must be rejected. or the voters. Here are just a few examples: Please send another strong message to opponents of With Dignity • Key Components of the Oregon Health Plan Death • Standards for Clean Air and Clean Drinking Water VOTE NO ON MEASURE 2 • Teacher Licensing and School Curriculum Standards Hannah Davidson • Rules protecting Farm and Forestland Executive Director • Rules protecting Regulatory Stability for Businesses Oregon Death With Dignity Legal Defense and Education Center DON'T LOCK THIS INTO OREGON'S CONSTITUTION Jeana Frazzini VOTE NO ON 2 Executive Director Bill Williams,President and CEO,Bear Creek Corp. Oregon Right Director Die William Thorndike,Jr. Susan Reid,Ashland City Council (This information furnished by Hannah Davidson, Executive Director, Larry Medinger,Medinger Construction Co.Inc. Oregon Death With Dignity Legal Defense and Education Center.) Peter W.Sage,Former Jackson County Commissioner Jean Gregg Milgram,League of Women Voters of the Rogue Valley (This information furnished by Caroline Fitcheft, Oregon Community Protection PAC.) (This space purchased for$500 In accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 In accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 232 CONTINUED Official 2000 Genet�ai'Elec tsn'Voters'Pamphlet—Statei Measures Measure No. 2 Arguments ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION MEASURE 2 ALLOWS SPECIAL INTERESTS TO REPEAL MEASURE 2 HURTS OREGON SENIORS CRITICAL CLEAN AIR AND CLEAN WATER RULES Measure 2 is an irresponsible ballot measure that would lock into This Measure's complicated process favors polluters who want to our Constitution a wasteful and unaccountable process for elimi- relax rules that protect Oregon's clean air and water. Because nating administrative rules—including critical rules that protect only 10,000 signatures are required to overturn a rule, any seniors and other Oregonians. polluter with some money can pay a professional signature UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES FOR SENIORS gathering company to challenge any rule. Measure 2 Threatens Drinking Water The sponsors of this measure may simply want to avoid having to obey rules they don't like.But they won't tell you that Measure 2 Measure 2 threatens Oregon's clean water rules, which limit the will destroy a system that is absolutely essential for safe- pollution allowed into our rivers,streams,and even our household guarding the interests of senior citizens—and the health of tap water.Under Measure 2,these rules could be repealed,along all Oregonians. with standards for cleaning up toxic pollution that contaminates EXAMPLES OF RULES PROTECTING SENIORS THAT COULD our rivers and groundwater. BE OVERTURNED IF MEASURE 2 PASSES: Measure 2 Threatens Healthy Air Licensing and standards for operation of nursing homes and Oregon's clean air rules have successfully reduced field burning, adult care foster care facilities. industrial emissions, and smog.Under Measure 2, polluters who -Residents'rights in nursing homes. fought these rules could challenge them,along with rules dealing Privacy of medical records. with dangerous toxics like mercury,dioxin,and lead. Consumer protections related to gas, water, electric, and Measure 2 Doesn't Solve any Problems telephone service,including rates and billing. Rules that prevent contamination of drinking water. Citizens already have ways to challenge or change rules.Interest Availability of and standards for emergency ambulance service groups already successfully challenge and overturn rules when in every county. the rule doesn't comply with the law.This measure is unneces- -Key provisions of the Oregon Health Plan. sary and shouldn't be part of Oregon's Constitution. Protections for renters and senior mobile park residents. Building safety codes. Measure 2 Lets the Fox Guard the Hen House -Other consumer rights and protections. Oregon's environmental rules result from years of research, HEALTH PROFESSIONALS SHOULD WRITE THE RULES- negotiation,and public meetings.Decisions on health aren't made NOT POLITICIANS AND SPECIAL INTERESTS by"bureaucrats;'as Measure 2 backers would have you believe, but rather by public health professionals. Many of the most important protections for the interests of Oregon seniors come through administrative rules. There's a Public health professionals should set regulations that protect good reason for that:professionals in health,gerontology,energy Oregon's clean air and water,not politicians who take money from policy,and other specialties must develop these rules.Measure 2 polluters.But under Measure 2,politicians and the polluters who allows special interests to weaken the rules that protect seniors. fund their campaigns could weaken key clean air and water This poorly drafted measure would insert into our Constitution a safeguards without any input from Oregon voters. process allowing all of these protections to be easily overturned. Measure 2 is a back-door attempt to let special interests re-write DON'T BE FOOLED. the rules that protect our families. VOTE NO ON MEASURE 2.1T HURTS SENIORS Don't be fooled.Vote NO on Measure 2. United Seniors of Oregon Oregon Environmental Council Columbia Riverkeeper Oregon Advocacy Coalition of Seniors and People with Oregon League of Conservation Voters Tualatin Riverkeepers Disabilities Oregon State Council of Senior Citizens Sierra Club Willamette Riverkeeper Portland Gray Panthers (This information furnished by Jeff Allen,Oregon Environmental Council.) (This information furnished by Jim Davis,Oregon State Council of Senior Citizens,United Seniors of Oregon.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$5W In accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 231 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet--Statewide Measures Measure No. 2 Arguments ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION VOTE NO ON MEASURES 2&7 Congressman Earl Blumenauer urges you to... Measures 2 and 7 Undermine Laws Protecting Children VOTE NO on Measure 2. D you think children should have safe sidewalks to walk to Oregon has been a national leader in land use, environmental Do y protection and health care.This innovation has required creative school on? Do you think our neighborhoods should be protected and even courageous legislation and leadership. An important from speeding traffic and the danger, air pollution and noise it part of our legacy has been the ability to craft administrative rules brings? Do you think people should be safe when they go for a to makes things like worker protections,nursing home regulations walk or ride a bicycle? and land use laws,a reality.Without rules to implement our state's Thousands of your fellow Oregonians worked for years to make landmark legislation and creative ideas, many or these protec- our communities safer and healthier places to live,work and play. tions would be meaningless. All that is threatened by these two costly and unnecessary Measure 2 is a stealth attack that would allow one committee,or measures. even one committee chair who was controlled by special If they pass we lose our ability to keep our communities good interests,to overturn the work of countless citizens and even the places to live. legislature.Measure 2 is a waste of taxpayer dollars,and doesn't even solve a problem! Citizens already have plenty of ways to Measures 2 and 7 Undermine Oregon Communities challenge administrative rules in Oregon.And Measure 2 doesn't Do you think that your community should be able to decide how it lust waste money-it will let any special interest or individual with grows? As citizen activists, we've fought hard for changes to an axe to grind,tie up our legislature and our courts with frivolous protect our communities and make them safer.These measures and petty challenges to all kinds of rules. Polluters could block take power away from neighborhoods and put the power in the rules protecting clean air and safe drinking water and those hands of wealthy special interests. requiring the clean up of toxic waste, all without a vote of the people or the legislature. And Measure 2 would lock all these Measures 2 and 7 Have costly and dangerous things into the Oregon Constitution. Unknown,Dangerous Consequences Oregonians have wisely defeated nearly identical measures, to Measures 2 and 7 are vague,confusing,and poorly written.They Measure 2,twice in the last six years.Let us do so again. could have devastating effects on the health and safety our communities, and laws that protect our children and all Vote NO on Measure 2.It's Anti-Oregon. Oregonians. Earl Blumenauer WE URGE YOU TO VOTE NO ON MEASURES 2&7. Member of Congress Bicycle Transportation Alliance (This information furnished by Earl Blumenauer.) Commute Options for Central Oregon Willamette Pedestrian Coalition Association of Oregon Rail and Transit Advocates(AORTA) Citizens for Sensible Transportation Transit Riders United Oregon Transportation Reform Advocates Network (This information furnished by Catherine Ciarlo, Bicycle Transportation Alliance.) (This space purchased for$500 In accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 In accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 233 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'PamphletL-Statewide Measures Measure No. 2Arguments ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION Trustees and Staff of The Nature Conservancy THE HUMAN SERVICES COALITION OF OREGON,THE Urge You to Vote NO on 2 OREGON HUMAN RIGHTS COALITION, ECUMENICAL MEASURE 2 THREATENS OREGON'S WILDLIFE MINISTRIES OF OREGON AND CHILDREN FIRST FOR OREGON...OPPOSE MEASURE 2 Oregon's quality of life includes a precious diversity of fish, MEASURE 2 wildlife, native plants and their habitats.As our population keeps HURTS CHILDREN growing,we must work to preserve Oregon's natural heritage for HURTS PUBLIC HEALTH our children and grandchildren. Measure 2 will make It harder to protect Oregon's wildlife and Many of Oregon's administrative rules are aimed at protecting our their habitats for future generations. most vulnerable citizens—children,the working poor,patients in health care facilities,and the mentally ill. By giving special interests new powers to strike down rules they Under Measure 2, any rule that protects abused children, don't like, Measure 2 jeopardizes Oregon's safety net for establishes child care standards or nursing facility protec- spaces. wetlands, streams, fish runs, wildlife habitats, parks and open tions,ensures patients'rights,or expands health care for the space poor could be in jeopardy. Today,415 of Oregon's 3,773 identified plant and animal species Measure 2 could also affect rules guarding our public health. —one in every nine—are at risk of extinction.To safeguard our polluters could block rules protecting clean air and safe drinking natural heritage, we need a variety of approaches, including ,Hater all without a vote of the people or the legislature. Rules purchase of critical lands, incentives for voluntary conservation, implementing our new pesticide-tracking law could also be and rules carefully crafted with review and input from overturned. stakeholders. All across Oregon,caring individuals,corporate leaders,farmers, MEASURE 2 ranchers,volunteers, non-profits, local governments and elected DISCOURAGES CITIZEN INVOLVEMENT leaders are working hard to create balanced solutions that will Oregon has a history of citizen involvement in its rule making protect our environment for future generations.We won't always process. Under Measure 2, special interests could interfere with agree,but people of good will working together are the best hope these open processes.It attempts to solve a problem that doesn't for Oregon's at-risk fish and wildlife. even exist Measure 2 will make it much harder for Oregon's citizens, A special interest group or corporation that dislikes an adminis- working together and using the democratic process,to fairly and trative rule could hire a signature gathering company to collect securely protect wetlands, streams, water quality and important signatures to challenge the rule. If the required numbers of wildlife habitats. signatures are gathered and the legislature fails to act, the rule Vote NO on Measure 2 implementing these protective laws would no longer be in effect. The fact that no one has to vote — not the legislature or the Trustees and Staff of The Nature Conservancy of Oregon: people — means that key rules protecting our public health for Ron Berger those most in need will be at risk.Inaction by the legislature could Paulette Bierzychudek also mean inaction by the state in protecting our public health and Brian Booth serving those most in need. Ellis Feinstein PROTECT OUR CHILDREN AND OUR PUBLIC HEALTH Skip Freedman Brian Gard PLEASE VOTE NO ON MEASURE 2 Robert G.Gootee Human Services Coalition of Oregon Daniel D.Heagerty Oregon Human Rights Coalition Tom Imeson Ecumenical Ministries of Oregon Stephen E.Kantor Children First For Oregon Peter G.McDonald James T.Post (This information furnished by Gina Mathoda,Co-Chair, Human Services Richard Reiten Coalition of Oregon.) Mary B.Ruble Patricia L.Wessinger Russell Hoeflich,Vice President and Oregon Director Catherine Macdonald, Director of Conservation Michael Powelson,Director of Agency Relations Carrie Walkiewicz;Director of Development (This information furnished by Russell Hoeflich,The Nature Conservancy of Oregon.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 234 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 2 Arguments ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION What part of"No!"didn't they understand? ADVOCACY COALITION FOR SENIORS In 1998,Oregon voters resoundingly defeated Ballot Measure AND PEOPLE WITH DISABILITIES URGES A NO VOTE ON MEASURE 2 65, which would have allowed special interest groups to essen- tially overturn an administrative rule without a vote of the public or The Advocacy Coalition for Seniors and People with Disabilities is the Oregon Legislature. a statewide organization promoting legislative and community Now, the backers of Measure 65 have brought us a "new' values that protects and supports the needs of Oregon's seniors and people with disabilities.We are opposed to Ballot Measure 2 measure—Ballot Measure 2.And what is Measure 2?Despite a few cosmetic changes, there is no debate: Measure 2 is just for the following reasons: Measure 65 all over. *Any administrative rule, from licensing nursing homes and Again,what part of"Not"didn't they.understand? adult foster care facilities to building access,safety and fire codes could be threatened by special interest groups. Measure 2,just like 1998s Measure 65,would be a huge waste *Challenges to administrative rules could be tied up for up to of taxpayer dollars. And it doesn't even solve a problem — no four years in the legislative process and create unnecessary matter what proponents may say, Oregon citizens already have logjams in the legislature. plenty of ways to challenge administrative rules. But Measure 2 allows anyone with a beef,real or imagined,to m e already have mechanisms to review and solicit public tie up the Legislature and the courts with petty challenges to all comment on rule changes or additions. kinds of rules. For about$10,000 paid to professional signature *The cost of delays,both financial and in meeting the needs of gatherers,any person or corporation could put any administrative Oregon citizens is unnecessary. rule in limbo until the next Legislature meets. *Added costs will force cuts in programs that serve the elderly What kinds of rules are affected? Rules that protect farmland and people with disabilities that are currently under-funded. and forests, prevent urban sprawl, preserve open spaces and This measure is unnecessary.It will threaten the interest of every- wildlife habitat and maintain access to Oregon's public beaches. day Oregonians on all fronts.It will damage a process that is set In other words, the very kinds of rules that make Oregon the up to protect our citizens. unique and special state it is. Let's make it VERY clear this time: we said NOI,and we Vote NO on Measure 2 meant NO! Ruth McEwen,Co-Chair,Advocacy Coalition Please join me and Vote NO!on Measure 2. (This information furnished by Ruth McEwen, Advocacy Coalition for Charles Calkins,Bend Seniors and People with Disabilities.) Oregon AFSCME Local 3336(DEQ) Leslie Kochan,Portland Oregon AFSCME Local 3336(DEQ) (This information furnished by Don Loving,Oregon AFSCME Council 75.) (This space purchased for$5W In accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 fn accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 235 Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet--Statewide Measures Measure No. 3 Proposed by initiative petition to be voted on at the General of the property forfeited under the provisions of this subsection Election,November 7,2000. shall not be excessive and shall be substantially proportional to the specific conduct for which the owner of the property has been convicted. For purposes of this section, "property" means any interest in anything of value,including the whole of any lot or tract BALLOT TITLE of land and tangible and intangible personal property, including currency, instruments or securities or any other kind of privilege, & GTa g kn ,w interest,claim or right whether due or to become due.Nothing in ` this section shall prohibit a person from voluntarily giving a $ judgment of forfeiture. (4) Protection of innocent property owners. In a civil forfeiture proceeding if a financial institution claiming an interest zs n a x ,• T' " in the property demonstrates that it holds an interest, its interest $ shall not be subject to forfeiture. xA In a civil forfeiture proceeding if a person claiming an interest 101 in the property, other than a financial institution or a defendant a who has been charged with or convicted of a crime involving that property, demonstrates that the person has an interest in the property, that person's interest shall not be subject to forfeiture unless: (a)The forfeiting agency proves by clear and convincing evi- dence that the person took the property or the interest with the intent to defeat the forfeiture;or (b)A conviction under subsection (3) is later obtained against the person. k (5) Exception for unclaimed property and contraband. Notwithstanding the provisions of subsection(3)of this section,if, x )_ following notice to all persons known to have an interest or who tt� may have an interest, no person claims an interest in the seized property or if the property is contraband,a judgment of forfeiture Ss'" a*.. x t�a3 '. f aF s z,* s M ,� s 4 tir*��s• may be allowed and entered without a criminal conviction. For purposes of this subsection, "contraband" means personal property, articles or things, including but not limited to controlled substances or drug paraphernalia,that a person is prohibited by Oregon statute or local ordinance from producing, obtaining or possessing. (6) Law enforcement seizures unaffected. Nothing in this section shall be construed to affect the temporary seizure of property for evidentiary, forfeiture, or protective purposes, or to alter the power of the Governor to remit fines or forfeitures under TEXT OF MEASURE Article V Section 14,of this Constitution. (7) Disposition of property and proceeds to drug treat- Article XV of the Constitution of the State of Oregon is ment. Any sale of forfeited property shall be conducted in a amended by a vote of the People to include the following new commercially reasonable manner.Property or proceeds forfeited section: under subsections(3),(5),or(8)of this section shall not be used Section 10.The Oregon Property Protection Act of 2000. for law enforcement purposes but shall be distributed or applied (1)This section may be known and shall be cited as the"Oregon in the following order: Property Protection Act of 2000.' (a)To the satisfaction of any foreclosed liens,security interests and contracts in the order of their priority; (2)Statement of principles.The People,in the exercise of the (b)To the State or any of its political subdivisions for actual and power reserved to them under the Constitution of the State of reasonable expenses related to the costs of the forfeiture pro- Oregon,declare that: ceeding,including attorney fees,storage,maintenance,manage- (a)A basic tenet of a democratic society is that a person is pre- ment,and disposition of the property incurred in connection with sumed innocent and should not be punished until proven guilty; the sale of any forfeited property in an amount not to exceed (b) The property of a person should not be forfeited in a twenty-five percent of the total proceeds in any single forfeiture; forfeiture proceeding by government unless and until that person (c)To the State or any of its political subdivisions to be used is convicted of a crime involving the property; exclusively for drug treatment, unless another disposition is spe- (c)The value of property forfeited should be proportional to the cially provided by law. specific conduct for which the owner of the property has been (8)State and federal sharing.The State of Oregon or any of convicted;and its political subdivisions shall take all necessary steps to obtain (d) Proceeds from forfeited property should be used for treat- shared property or proceeds from the,United States Department ment of drug abuse unless otherwise specified by law for another of Justice resulting from a forfeiture. Any property or proceeds purpose. received from the United States Department of Justice by the (3) Forfeitures prohibited without conviction. No judgment State of Oregon or any of its political subdivisions shall be applied of forfeiture of property in a civil forfeiture proceeding by the State as provided in subsection(7)of this section. or any of its political subdivisions shall be allowed or entered until (g) Restrictions on State transfers. Neither the State of and unless the owner of the property is convicted of a crime in Oregon, its political subdivisions, nor any forfeiting agency shall Oregon or another jurisdiction and the property is found by clear transfer forfeiture proceedings to the federal government unless a and convincing evidence to have been instrumental in committing or facilitating the crime or to be proceeds of that crime.The value state court has affirmatively found that:(a)The activity giving rise to the forfeiture is interstate in nature 236 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure -No. 3 and Sufficiently complex to justify the transfer; EXPLANATORY STATEMENT (b)The seized property may only be forfeited under federal law; or (c)Pursuing forfeiture under state law would unduly burden the Ballot Measure 3 will require Oregon law to be changed to pro- state forfeiting agencies. hibit"asset forfeitures" unless the owner of the property is first (10) Penalty for violations.Any person acting.under color of convicted of a crime involving the seized property. law, official title or position who takes any action intending to In a civil "asset forfeiture proceeding;' the government agency conceal,transfer,withhold,retain,divert or otherwise prevent any may seize and dispose of property that the government believes proceeds,conveyances, real property,or any things of value for- was used in a crime or is the proceeds of a crime.The property feited under the law of this State or the United States from being may be personal property,cash,homes or businesses. applied,deposited or used in accordance with subsections(7),(8) Under current Oregon law,there is no requirement that the owner or(9)of this section shall be subject to a civil penalty in an amount of the property must first be arrested or convicted of a crime treble the value of the forfeited property concealed, transferred, before his or her property is forfeited to the government. withheld, retained or diverted.Nothing in this subsection shall be construed to impair judicial immunity if otherwise applicable. Under current law,the government must establish probable cause 11 Reporting (more likely than not) that the property was used to facilitate a ( ) po g requirement. All forfeiting agencies shall crime, or was acquired from the proceeds of criminal activity. report the nature and disposition of all property and proceeds Forfeited property may not be disposed of without a court order seized for forfeiture or forfeited to a State asset forfeiture oversight which,before it can issue,requires an examination of the circum- committee that is independent of any forfeiting agency.The asset stances of the seizure. forfeiture oversight committee shall generate and make available to the public an annual report of the information collected.The If passed,Measure 3 will require the government to prove by the asset forfeiture oversight committee shall also make recommen- stricter standard of clear and convincing evidence that the dations to ensure that asset forfeiture proceedings are handled in property was used to commit,or was the proceeds of,the crime a manner that is fair to innocent property owners and interest for which the owner was convicted.If the person whose property holders. was seized is not charged or convicted of a crime, the property (12)Severability.If any part of this section or its application to must be returned unless the property has been abandoned or is contraband. any person or circumstance is held to be invalid for any reason, then the remaining parts or applications to any persons or cir- Current law requires government agencies to report forfeiture cumstances shall not be affected but shall remain in full force and actions in certain cases to an oversight committee. effect. Measure 3 expands current reporting requirements to include all civil forfeitures. The measure would also require the oversight committee to be independent of any forfeiting agency. Under current law, government agencies may recover from the proceeds the entire cost of pursuing the forfeiture. Measure 3 would limit recovery of costs to no more than 25% of the prop- erty's value. Under current law, forfeiture proceeds may be used by forfeiting agencies for enforcement of drug laws,as well as drug treatment and education programs. Measure 3 would require that the balance of the proceeds be directed only to drug treatment programs,unless otherwise provided by law. Measure 3 also would require that the value of the property forfeited shall not be excessive and shall be proportional to the conduct for which the owner of the property was convicted.Under current law, if the government is successful in a civil forfeiture proceeding,a claimant may ask the court for a mitigation hearing to determine proportionality. Measure 3 would limit state and local government agencies from transferring forfeiture proceedings to the federal government unless the transfer is approved by a state court judge. Measure 3 would not change current law allowing temporary seizure of property for evidentiary, forfeiture, or protective pur- poses by law enforcement. Measure 3 creates penalties for violations of its terms. Committee Members: Appointed by: David J.Fidanque Chief Petitioners Representative Floyd Prozanski Chief Petitioners Chief Jim Harper Secretary of State Chief Rick Lewis Secretary of State Senator Avel Gordly Members of the Committee (This committee was appointed to provide an impartial explanation of the ballot measure pursuant to ORS 251.215.) 237 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 3 Arguments ARGUMENT IN FAVOR ARGUMENT IN FAVOR I always believed In`Innocent Until Proven Guilty" "FORFEIT LIBERTY" until three years ago,when the government seized my life savings. Editorial excerpted from the Medford Mail-Tribune. March 31. 1999 My name is Harry Detwiler. I am 62 years old. I was a special "It reads like a scene from some Third-World police state:Federal education teacher at Ashland High School for 25 years. I was agents discover marijuana growing in a rental property.Assuming Oregon's Special Education Teacher of the Year in 1972,and was the landlord,who lives elsewhere,is involved,they break into his named Ashland's Man of the Year twice. house and rifle through his belongings.They find keys and open My problems began in 1997 shortly after my son and I sold a a safe, in'which they find$35,000 in cash.They seize the cash former rental property.The new owner was arrested for growing and refuse to return it.The landlord is not charged with a crime, marijuana.During the arrest, police found my name on some of but his money is gone. the man's paperwork. "The police state that this story originates from is the United So they drove to my house 25 miles away to see what I knew.I States... The landlord is Harry Detwiler, a retired Ashland High was not home, but they entered anyway.They found the keys to School teacher... my safe and took$35,000,my life savings. "Detwiler has not been charged with a crime. He has papers When I returned home I thought I had been robbed.Police soon that document how he came to have so much cash on hand... arrived and told me they had taken my money under civil forfeiture The cash is gone, along with whatever trust Detwiler had in the laws.They said 1 should have known the man who bought my government... home was growing marijuana. "Something is clearly wrong here. Foundations of American For three years, 1 have fought unsuccessfully to get my jurisprudence are turned upsidedown:the presumption of inno- money back. cence is gone;the burden of proof is shifted from the accuser to 1 was never charged with a crime. the accused;the independent review of appeals is not available... I was never convicted of a crime. "Trust will come only when a system exists in which justice The prosecutor was quoted in the newspaper admitting there was gets a fair hearing.That system doesn't exist now." no evidence against me. Medford Mail-Tribune.March 31. 1999 Still they refuse to give my money back. Even after I produced business receipts showing where the (This information furnished by David Smigelski, Oregonians For Property $35,000 came from. Protection.) In America,people are supposed to be innocent until proven guilty. But that's not how asset forfeiture laws work. That's why we need to pass Measure 3. Measure 3 requires a person be convicted of a crime before their assets can be sold off. Measure 3 would have forced the police to give me back my money,or prove me guilty. Measure 3 may be too late to help me, but it will protect other innocent landowners. Please join me In voting Yes on Measure 3. Harry Detwiler Ashland,Oregon (This information furnished by Harry Detwiler, Oregonians for Property Protection.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 In accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 238 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 3 Arguments ARGUMENT IN FAVOR ARGUMENT IN FAVOR A Message from a Chief Petitioner of Measure 3 Asset forfeiture without a criminal conviction is wrong. Civil forfeitures occur an average of three times a day in Oregon. My name is Floyd Prozanski.I served as the chair of the Oregon In 1999, police reported taking $2.1 million from 1,069 people. Asset Forfeiture Oversight Committee from 1997-1999. 1 have , In 72 percent of those cases, no one was arrested, charged, or had first-hand experience with Oregon's Asset Forfeiture Law. convicted of a crime. Measure 3 reestablishes the doctrine of innocent until No one should ever lose their property to the government proven guilty by requiring that people must be convicted of a unless they are first convicted of a crime involving the use of crime before their property can be forfeited permanently. their property. Under current law, property can be seized and sold off, even Most people are surprised to learn this isn't already the case,but when the owner of the seized property is not charged,arrested or police are allowed to seize and keep houses, cars, bank convicted of a crime.That's wrong. accounts,or other property without first convicting the owner of a crime. The government shouldn't get a dime,unless it can prove the crime. Worse yet, only half of the agencies that are required to report By passing Measure 3, Oregonians' rights will be protected. how they spent forfeiture proceeds to the state did so. In fact, in Citizens will no longer have to spend years and thousands the 11 years of asset forfeiture in Oregon, there has only been Citizens of one report issued,and that one is sadly incomplete. dollars in futile attempts to recover property seized by the government... even when no charges are filed or no conviction Who Gets The Money Seized Under Forfeiture? occurs. Government lawyers and the police who seize the property split Measure 3 Ensures People are Innocent Until Proven Guh,y: it.And by law, they can spend it only on things like cars, police overtime,cell phones,and weapons. Measure 3 will allow criminals to have their assets seized,but the government can't keep the property permanently unless it proves That sets up a conflict of interest, where government agencies the person has committed a crime.The constitutional protection have a financial incentive to seize as much as they can.And since of"innocent until proven guilty"will be applied to forfeiture cases they never have to prove a crime has been committed,the system for the first time. is rife with abuse. Measure 3 Will Force Government Agencies To Report Measure 3 Expands Reporting Requirements and Forfeitures: Directs Funds Seized into Treatment Programs: We have spent years trying to determine how much property the Measure 3 ends the conflict of interest by requiring that forfeiture government seizes and how that money is spent. But 11 years proceeds be directed into treatment and education programs to after reporting requirements were implemented, we still have no reduce drug abuse and crime.And local governments still retain idea how much is seized and how those funds are used.Measure the.right to use the funds for other legitimate purposes. 3 puts teeth in the law that will make government agencies report Our constitution should say people are innocent until proven what they seize and keep. guilty. Measure 3 Protects Innocent Landowners: Measure 3 will make sure no one loses property unless they're Property of innocent landowners is often seized because renters found guilty of a crime. commit crimes without the owner's knowledge. A yes vote on Please Vote Yes on Measure 3. Measure 3 ensures that property owners are protected. Ray Heslep Measure 3 Brings Fairness to Forfeiture laws in Oregon. Chief petitioner State Rep.Floyd Prozanski Oregon Property Protection Act of 2000 (This information furnished by State Rep.Floyd Pro-,-J,usi.) (This information furnished by Ray Heslep,Chief Petitioner,Oregonians for Property Protection.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 25L25.,,, I The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endor7 - ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the 1 ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant ti"e accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 239 -- ----- — CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 3 Arguments ARGUMENT IN FAVOR ARGUMENT IN FAVOR The Oregon Prop2EW Protection Act of 2000 includes the ACLU of Oregon and Oregon Gun Owners following provisions: Support Measure 3 Criminal Conviction Required: No civil forfeitures can be com- While Oregon Gun Owners and the American Civil Liberties pleted without a criminal conviction of the accused. Union of Oregon don't often agree on issues,there is one ballot Standard of Proof: No property can be seized under civil forfei- Measure we both support this year–Measure 3. ture laws without "clear and convincing evidence" that the Here's why: property is proceeds of a criminal act or "instrumental in... All of us support taking the profit out of crime. facilitating the crime:' Current law allows the seizure of property merely on "probable All of us also believe in-the constitutional protection of"innocent cause°' until proven guilty." Innocent Owner Defense:Property owners who rent property to We support Measure 3 because we want to make sure that someone later convicted of a crime would not lose their property the property taken by the government is really being taken under this initiative(as they could under current law) unless it is from criminals rather than from innocent property owners. shown, by "clear and convincing evidence:' that the person Over the past decade,cities and counties have seized millions of took the property with the intent to defeat the forfeiture, or the dollars worth of property in asset forfeiture proceedings, but no property owner is convicted of participating in criminal activities. statewide agency has any idea how many of those people were Proportionality: Requires property forfeitures to be "substan_ actually guilty,what percentage of those assets has been kept by tially proportional" to the underlying offense and the value of law enforcement, what percentage was sucked down the black the property. hole of legal costs,or how much has been made available to drug treatment programs. Forfeiture Proceeds Restrictions:Requires forfeiture proceeds When Oregon's forfeiture law was first passed, most legislators to be used for treatment, education and prevention programs. assumed that seizing millions from suspected criminals would Prohibits the current use of forfeiture proceeds for purchases of provide a financial windfall to state and local governments.It now cars,weapons and other items for law enforcement purposes. appears the biggest winners have been the police agencies and Restrictions on Seizure Transfers to the Federal government lawyers who make the decisions about what property Government:Prohibits transfers of seized property to the federal gets seized and kept by the government. government unless a court determines that the case is interstate The power that these police government bureaucrats wield is in nature and complex;the property only can be forfeited under enormous.They seize property first and ask questions later.They federal law;or pursuing civil forfeiture under state law would be presume that every suspect is guilty and force property owners to unduly burdensome. prove their innocence. And the very government officials who Penalties for Concealing or Diverting Forfeited Property: make these decisions benefit directly or indirectly from the out- Government officials or agencies attempting to conceal or divert come. property that is forfeited under state or federal law in violation of it is a procedure that turns our Constitution on its head.It is time the procedures established by this law are subject to a civil to restore basic due process protections for property owners in penalty that is treble the value of the forfeited property. Oregon.Measure 3 will accomplish that goal. Annual Audit of the Forfeiture Program: Establishes a state please Join Us in Voting Yes on Measure 3 "asset forfeiture oversight committee"to publish an annual report on the disposition of all seized and forfeited property. Dave Fidanque, Executive Director John Hellen,Administrator (This information furnished by Geoff Sugarman, Oregonians for Property ACLU of Oregon Oregon Gun Owners Protection.) (This information furnished by David Fidanque, Executive Director,ACLU of Oregon;John D.Hellen,Administrator,Oregon Gun Owners.) (This space purchased for$500 In accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 240 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No., 3 Arguments ARGUMENT IN FAVOR ARGUMENT IN FAVOR MEASURE 3 APPLIES JUDICIAL CORNERSTONE OF Protect Innocent Property Owners "INNOCENT UNTIL PROVEN GUILTY" Vote Yes on Measure 3 TO OREGON'S CIVIL FORFEITURE LAW All too often in Oregon and around the country, innocent land- As a long-time human service and social justice advocate, I urge owners fail victim to forfeiture laws when they are not involved in your support for Ballot Measure 3,The Oregon Property Protec- any kind of criminal activity. tion Act of 2000.This measure will restore balance to our civil for- Imagine renting a piece of property to someone who later is residing laws, by ensuring that all Oregonians, especially those merely suspected of committing a crime at that property. Under residi iding in our most vulnerable communities, will be viewed as current law, the innocent landowner can lose that property for- innocent until proven guilty in civil forfeiture cases. ever,with virtually no way of fighting the government agency that Most of us are surprised to learn that the cherished concept of seized the property. "innocent until proven guilty;"a cornerstone of our criminal justice That's wrong. system,doesn't apply in civil forfeiture cases.Under current law, the government can keep an innocent person's home, car, life- In America,people are innocent until proven guilty. savings, and personal belongings, without a criminal charge or But current law turns that notion upside down. conviction. Far too many innocent Oregonians have suffered tragic personal losses under this flawed and unjust law. To protect the rights of property owners and to end the injustice of current asset forfeiture laws,we urge the passage of Measure 3. ECONOMICALLY DISADVANTAGED AND MINORITY POPULATIONS SUFFER THE MOST UNDER • Measure 3 requires a conviction before rho e�rty can be THE CURRENT SYSTEM disposed of. Unless a person is convicted of a crime,they While civil forfeiture laws were designed to target drug kingpins, should not lose their property. far too many innocent persons have had their property taken • Measure 3 improves reporting requirements.Today,after under these laws. In an astounding 65% of completed forfeiture 11 years of forfeiture, we still have no idea how much is cases,there was no criminal charge or conviction.Many innocent taken each year because reporting is incomplete and, in property owners do not contest this injustice because they cannot many cases,not even required. afford to hire an attorney to challenge an unwarranted forfeiture. . Measure 3 ends the conflict of interest that occurs daily And,when your property is seized by the government, you must when government agencies get to keep and spend the "prove" the innocence of your property if you want to keep it. money they seize.This measure requires the funds be spent Under existing law,the burden of proof is on you,not the govern- on treatment programs to help prevent crime. ment.Measure 3 will correct this injustice, by placing the burden of proof on the government. Across our nation, innocent landowners are losing property to forfeiture laws. MEASURE 3 APPLIES FORFEITURE PROCEEDS TO It's time to end the injustice in Oregon. DRUG TREATMENT AND EDUCATION PROGRAMS As one of the leading property rights groups in the state, we By breaking the cycle of addiction, we will lower the number of strongly support Measure 3. crime victims and the related costs to all Oregonians. Please Vote Yes on Measure 3. Please join me by voting YES ON MEASURE 3. Dave Hunnicutt Legal Counsel Ellen C.Lowe Oregonians in Action (This information furnished by Ellen C.Lowe.) (This information furnished by David J. Hunnicutt, Legal Counsel, Oregonians in Action.) (This space purchased for$500 In accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 241 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 3 Arguments ARGUMENT IN FAVOR ARGUMENT IN FAVOR The Myth of Financial Disclosure Under Facts About Asset Forfeiture in Oregon.. Current Oregon Law Number of Oregonians who lost property Eleven years after the passage of a law requiring annual disclo- to Asset Forfeiture in 1999: 1,069 sure of all civil forfeiture cases in Oregon, reporting remains a Percent of those people above who were secret affair for government agencies involved in these cases. arrested,charged or convicted: 28 In 1989,the Oregon legislature established the Asset Forfeiture Number of people who got their property Oversight Committee to keep an eye on the way government back after charges were dropped: 0 agencies seize and dispose of property under civil forfeiture laws. At that time, police agencies throughout the nation were Percent of police agencies that are required aggressively pursuing innocent property owners with their to report how they spend Forfeiture proceeds: 100% overzealous use of civil forfeiture,seizing millions of dollars from .innocent people and using the money to buy expensive cars and Percent of police agencies that reported high-powered military weaponry, including armored vehicles and how they spent Forfeiture proceeds in 1999: 50% assault weapons.The Advisory Committee was supposed to keep Number of years the state has been required an eye peeled for such abuses in Oregon,and government agen- to annually report Asset Forfeiture proceeds: 11 cies were supposed to provide detailed information to citizens on all civil forfeitures in Oregon. Number of forfeiture reports actually filed: 1 The reporting requirements in that 1989 law have never been Amount police say they seized in Oregon met in 11 years.That's another good reason to vote YES on last year: $2.1 million Measure 3. Amount taken under Asset Forfeiture in In the past decade,the state has issued just one report on asset Oregon since 1989: $20-$100 million forfeiture, and that report is sadly incomplete because less than Percent of asset forfeiture proceeds paid 50%of the police agencies in Oregon reported how they spent to government lawyers: 50-75% the money they seized. Measure 3 will change that by putting teeth in the report ing Percent that will be paid government e requirements. Measure 3 will remind these government agen- lawyers under Measure 3:: 25/o cies that they work for us, and that when we say we want Amount state will lose under Measure 3 if information,we will get it. police must convict people they target for Shine the light of public oversight on the asset forfeiture forfeiture: $0 process in Oregon.Remind the government that the law applies (This information furnished by Amy Klare, Oregonians for Property to them,too. Protection.) Vote Yes on Measure 3. (This information furnished by David Smigelski, Oregonians For Property Protection.) (This space purchased for$500 In accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 242 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 3 Arguments ARGUMENT IN FAVOR ARGUMENT IN FAVOR We take it for granted that people are innocent until proven Voting for Measure 3(The Oregon Property Protection Act)is an guilty. opportunity for all Oregonians to right a terrible wrong that has This is one of the most cherished doctrines in America.However, been done to innocent properly owners. Oregon police have exploited a loophole in our Constitution. Allowing the government to seize property and dispose of it with- Through this loophole,the police are allowed to confiscate prop out conviction of a crime corrupts the very system of law we have established. erty, including cars, cash and land, from innocent Oregonians without arresting or charging them.This loophole, called Asset The current law which allows seizure and forfeiture without con- Forfeiture,has flipped justice on its head. viction bankrupts our trust in the due process that we have come Right now, police can take and keep your cash, property, busi- to believe in and which is the foundation of our legal system. ness and possessions on the suspicion that they may be linked to It is hard to believe that the police could show up at your door, a crime. They do not have to prove it, either! Under asset search your house for illegal substances,find none,but they seize forfeiture, the accusation is enough. In Oregon, more than 70 your cash and valuables.They don't arrest you and you are never percent of the people who lose their property to forfeiture are charged with a crime, but you still can't get your property back. never convicted of a crime. This violates one of our most cherished values of"innocent until Measure 3 closes this loophole by requiring a person to be proven proven"guilty. guilty before their property can be permanently confiscated and Measure 3 requires that the owner of the property must first be sold. convicted of a crime involving the seized property before the gov We fear this sort of treatment when we travel to totalitarian coun- ernment may take and dispose of it.It also establishes priorities tries,but we face it here in Oregon. for the distribution of those forfeiture proceeds when conviction occurs. Who profits from asset forfeiture? I support this measure and am proud to be one of its two chief Forfeiture proceeds are split between police and government petitioners,because I believe in the basic American values upon lawyers,who also happen to be the same people who determine which this country is founded.This is the United States of America which property to take.This is an inherent conflict of interest that and it is time that we return our legal system to the course upon has led to well documented, large-scale abuses of forfeiture all which its founders intended.Let's return to our original values. across the country. Under Measure 3, property can still be forfeited but only when Imagine if IRS auditors were paid a commission for every deduc- accompanied by a conviction, and there is no effect on state or tion they threw out? local government expenditures. Horror stories abound of innocent people who have lost their life Voting for Measure 3 will protect innocent property owners, pro- savings to asset forfeiture. tect our constitutional values, and restore our trust in the legal Don't wait for this arbitrary practice to harm you. process. Oregonians are innocent until proven guilty. Vote Yes on -Sandra Lee Adamson,A Chief Petitioner Measure 3. (This information furnished by Sandra Adamson, Chief Petitioner, Furnished by The Libertarian Party of Oregon Oregonians for Property Protection.) (The Libertarian Party of Oregon is the third largest political party in the state. Libertarians are fiscally conservative and socially tolerant, we believe that government should be limited to pro- tecting our freedoms while ensuring personal responsibility.) (This information furnished by Eric Winters,Libertarian Party of Oregon.) (This apace purchased for$500 In accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 In accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 243 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet-Statewide Measures Measure No. 3 Arguments ARGUMENT IN FAVOR ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION Asset Forfeiture in Oregon: A True–False Quiz I ask you to vote NO on Measure 3. The police can seize your property even In 1989 1 worked with the legislature to pass a forfeiture law if you have done nothing wrong: True that would protect innocent people, provide an easy avenue for The police can keep your property even anyone who wanted a public forum to voice concerns about the if they admit they have no evidence against application of the forfeiture law, and to allow police agencies to you: True use some of the forfeited funds for the investigation of our drug laws.The law envisioned that drug dealers would bear some of A person must be convicted of a crime the burden of major drug investigations. before the government can keep their assets: False Since 1989 the legislature has provided additional safeguards Measure 3 would require the police to convict to the law, including a requirement that innocent persons get people before punishing them: True attorney fees. Oregonians are Innocent Until Proven Law enforcement have used forfeiture funds to establish task Guilty under Asset Forfeiture: False forces throughout the state to investigate drug trafficking both inside the state and drugs coming into Oregon. They have Under Measure 3,Oregonians would be become a critical part of Oregon's efforts to pursue the biggest considered Innocent Until Proven Guilty: True drug dealers. Most Oregonians who lose their property Measure 3 prohibits the use of forfeited funds to be used in under Asset Forfeiture are arrested first: False anyway for law enforcement.That means the task forces will lose Police get to keep the money they take vital funding.The effect to them will be disastrous. through Asset Forfeiture: True The people who are behind Measure 3 want to abolish forfei- Police spend Asset Forfeiture proceeds ture. Measure 3 may accomplish this. In 1989 we were very on guns,cars and cell phones: True careful to make forfeiture civil in nature.That way the state could pursue both the criminal case.and the forfeiture. Measure 3 Under Measure 3,Asset Forfeiture makes forfeiture criminal in nature.Therefore the state may have proceeds will be used for drug education to choose between a criminal prosecution or forfeiture. In most and treatment: True cases the state will prosecute and then may have to give the Innocent people rarely lose their property money back to the criminal. wrongly in Oregon: False As a lawyer, a former governor and a citizen I am concerned Police can seize your house,car and bank that the backers of this measure wanted to put forfeiture into accounts on mere suspicion: True Oregon's Constitution. It does not belong there. I am concerned about a number of things within this measure that should have A grandmother can lose her house if her been debated within the legislature;they were not. grandson is arrested for selling marijuana: True I urge you to Vote NO on Measure 3. Police can take all of the money in your pocket for probable cause: True (This information furnished by Former Governor Neil Goldschmidt.) Police are required to report all the money they seize under Asset Forfeiture: True The police report all the money they seize under Asset Forfeiture in Oregon: False The police are required to report how they spend Asset Forfeiture proceeds: True Most police agencies report how they spend Asset Forfeiture proceeds: False The state has been required to publish annual reports on Asset Forfeiture for 11 years: True The state has published just one report on Asset Forfeiture in the last 11 years: True (This information furnished by Stephanie Van Zuiden, Oregonians for Property Protection.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 244 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 3 Arguments ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION MEASURE 3 WOULD HARM MEASURE 3 IS BAD FOR PETS OREGON'S ANIMALS The Oregon Humane Society is the largest and oldest animal Before an animal cruelty case finishes winding its way through advocacy organization in Oregon. We urge you to vote no on our legal system, humane societies and animal shelters are Measure 3.A cruelty case involving multiple animals can easily currently allowed to ask a court, through a forfeiture hearing,for cost an animal protection organization tens of thousands of full custody of rescued animals,so that they may be adopted into dollars that can be better spent. permanent,loving homes. When animals are removed from cruel or neglectful situations in Under today's laws, animals are still classified as property. Oregon, it often falls on private or municipal animal shelters to MEASURE 3 would prohibit forfeitures of spy property before a care for them.Handling large cruelty cases can seriously impede criminal conviction. Because it fails to distinguish animals from the day-to-day operations of a busy shelter.Often dozens of dogs other types of property, MEASURE 3 could keep humane soci- or cats can languish for months and even years until the case is eties and shelters from finding permanent,new,loving homes for resolved or .goes to court. However, this situation was much abused animals until each criminal case is over -- a process improved in 1995 when a forfeiture clause was added to Oregon which can take years. statutes. It insured that shelters would be either financially com- MEASURE 3 COULD: pensated by the owner or the animals would be released for adoption into new homes. Bankrupt Oregon's humane societies and shelters. The people behind Measure 3 failed to consider how it would Tragically, cruelty cases often involve hundreds of animals. impact the resolution of Oregon animal cruelty and neglect cases. Providing food, housing, and medical care for animal abuse vic- tims is very expensive. Without the ability to find permanent If passed, Measure 3 would leave humane societies and animal homes for these animals until after each lengthy case is over,the shelters helpless in situations where large amounts of animals costs of this necessary care could easily bankrupt shelters and are seized. humane societies. Animals should not have to spend months or years behind bars • Keep abused animals in the hands of their abusers. for a crime they did not commit, paying the price with their lives. Because cruelty cases can take years to conclude, under Cruelty cases happen in Oregon. Do not cripple the shelters MEASURE 3, authorities may be forced to reconsider rescuing charged with the care of the animals. Do not compromise the abused animals due to the large financial costs of providing existing forfeiture laws that serve the animals well. necessary care throughout a protracted criminal case. Please continue to support Oregon's humane societies and • Limit the costs of care recoverable for rescued animals. animal shelters. MEASURE 3 could drastically limit the amount agencies can FOR THE SAKE OF OREGON'S ANIMALS, recover for the costs of care of abused animals.Agencies could VOTE NO ON MEASURE 3 even be forced into auctioning off rescued animals instead of being able to place them in the best new homes. OREGON HUMANE SOCIETY FOR THE SAKE OF OREGON'S ANIMALS, oregonhumane.org PLEASE (This information furnished by Susan Mentley,Operations Director,Oregon VOTE NO ON MEASURE 3 Humane Society.) American Humane Association Central Coast Humane Society Klamath Humane Society Florence Area Humane Society Humane Society of the Willamette Valley The Humane Society of the United States Animal Legal Defense Fund(www.aldf.org) (This information furnished by Stephan K. Otto, Animal Legal Defense Fund.) (This space purchased for$5001n accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 1 accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 245 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 3 Arguments ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION Measure 3 Will Forfeit the Well-being of Animals Ballot Measure 3 is a wish list for all criminals.They seek to All an are considered property under the law. Our com- diminish the effects of forfeiture on their criminal activity. panion animals don't seem like property, but the law sees it dif- Currently the State-of Oregon's forfeiture laws allow for the ferently.We all know that our relationships to our dogs and cats seizure and forfeiture of: feel different than our relationship to our car but according to the vehicles of repeat DUII offenders. letter of the law,they are one in the same.Computer, rabbit,tele- property used in illegal activities such as manufacturing vision,horse--all are treated equally under the law.Under Ballot drugs Measure 3, all property confiscated in criminal cases must be money gained from illegal activities;and held until the trial is completed-- INCLUDING ANIMALS. vehicles used to solicit prostitution Because most people don't think of animals as property, the Animal shelters use forfeiture to gain permanent custody of authors of Measure 3 probably never even considered the effect rescued animals that have been abused or neglected. it would have on abused and neglected animals. In a recent Oregon animal abuse case, dozens of starving cats If you do not engage in any of the above activities Measure 3 and several dogs were confiscated from a home, where many will do nothing to protect your property rights.It increases the were found dead. Under current law, a court found probable rights of criminals who obtain property illegally.What does that cause to believe that the animals were mistreated and the"owner" mean for us as citizens? chose not to post bond covering the costs of care for them.The - Drug houses in our neighborhoods will continue to operate. court was able to award permanent custody of the animals to the Existing tools to shut them down will be taken away. local humane society,enabling it to find them loving homes. -Our children,friends and family will continue to be victims of If Ballot Measure 3 passes, impounded abused and neglected DUII. animals would not be adoptable until after a criminal conviction, which might take months or even years.Caring for rescued ani- -Animal shelters will not have the means to rescue abused and mals for long periods of time would drain the budgets of animal neglected animals. shelters and humane societies,and ultimately discourage rescue -Innocent property owners will bear the burden for cleaning up of abuse victims. dangerous waste from the manufacturing of illegal drugs. For most people, our companion animals are more like our Current forfeiture process includes safeguards such as,the Asset children than they are like our cars or vacuum cleaners, and we Forfeiture Oversight Committee,no forfeiture without judge or jury consider ourselves more as their guardians than as their owners. approval and continual review of forfeiture cases are just a few. However, in the eyes of the law,animals are merely property and Measure 3 would have dire consequences for some of therb.This Most of the$330,000 raised for this measure came from outside measure must be defeated. Oregon.We-live and work in Oregon.We are Oregon's Sheriffs and Chiefs of Police.We are your neighbors, our children attend Vote NO On Measure 3 the same schools and we live in this community. ANIMAL PROTECTION INSTITUTE,www.api4animals.org It is our responsibility as Oregonians to ensure that law enforce- IN DEFENSE OF ANIMALS,www.idausa.org ment has the appropriate tools to protect everyone in our (This information furnished by Nicole Paquette,Animal Protection Institute; community. Measure 3 protects the property rights of Sheri Speede,In Defense of Animals.) criminals. Help us continue to protect law-abiding citizens. VOTE NO on 3. The Sheriffs of Oregon Committee Oregon Police Chiefs for Safer Communities (This information furnished by Greg Brown,Sheriff,Deschutes County,The Sheriffs of Oregon Committee;Steven Winegar, Oregon Police Chiefs for Safer Communities.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing cf*his argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or ir!ith of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 246 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 3 Arguments ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION We are Oregonians who live in a Portland neighborhood where a' Mothers Against Drunk Driving urges you to vote NO on drug dealer operated out of his house for many years.We oppose Measure 3. Ballot Measure 3 because it limits law enforcement's ability to shut down drug houses. In Oregon vehicle forfeiture is a proven tool utilized by the criminal justice system.This tool helps communicate swiftly and Imagine buying a house in a neighborhood.You like the area, it's consistently the message that drunk driving is not an option in safe for your children and you feel safe there.A neighbor moves Oregon. Counties who currently have forfeiture laws are in.Something is wrong.There is traffic in your neighborhood at all successfully reducing injuries and fatalities attributable to hours.You become suspicious and you are in communication with intoxicated drivers. the police. You note license plate numbers and anything that Offenders forfeit their vehicles only after they are given many seems out of place.You are constantly vigilant. Being at home chances and warnings.How many DUII's constitutes too many?If becomes a second job. the first time someone drinks and drives and it results in the death The dealer on our street was dealing large quantities of cocaine of your family member or friend, then the first time is one too and had guns.The house was ordered forfeited due to work done many. by a,local drug task force investigating the dealer. Without Changing the standards of forfeiture would directly effect a forfeiture,the dealer,who owns numerous properties,might ce system uses forfeiture remove weapons r have returned to our neighborhood to continue his activities valuable tool necessary in the fight against drinking and driving. after his release from prison in two or-three years.Or the drug from the hands The criminal justice repeat DUII offenders. Forfeiture is a fair and house could have continued to be operated by his associates while he served his prison term.The best thing for our neigh- effective process as it is currently applied in the State of Oregon. borhood was that he lost the house. Contrary to popular belief the majority of our members are not Forfeiture as it exists today already has safeguards for volunteers.They were recruited in the cruelest possible way,the homeowners.That is why it took several months to forfeit the death of a loved one.A mother whose 13-year-old daughter was dealer's house after his arrest. killed by an intoxicated driver with three previous DUII convictions founded MADD in 1980.Our mission is to stop impaired driving, Measure 3 would reduce enforcement against high,level dealers support victims of this violent crime and prevent underage who use houses to sell drugs.It would prohibit funds to be used drinking. for law enforcement.The task force who helped us needs forfei- ture funds to continue its work.The proponents want to stop drug from DUII however the problem still exists: house forfeitures by eliminating funding for drug task forces.it is unlikely that already limited state and local budgets will In 1998, impaired drivers killed 15,935 people in the U.S.,223 replace these funds. in Oregon. Drug houses in neighborhoods affect livability, devalue property On the average an impaired driver injures one person every 30 and bring unknowns into neighborhoods.Forfeiture is used by law seconds. enforcement to protect innocent property owners like us.Protect our neighborhoods.VOTE NO on 3. At the current rate two of every five Americans will be involved in an alcohol related crash during their lives. (This information furnished by Brian J.Porter,Donna Faye Porter,Jeanne Forfeiture in the State of Oregon has helped prevent unnecessary M.Petrella.) 9 P P deaths and injuries caused by repeat DUII offenders.Please help us preserve this invaluable tool.VOTE NO on 3. (This information furnished by Sandra Nelson, State Chair, Mothers Against Drunk Driving Oregon; Jeanne Canfield, Vice Chair, Oregon MADD.) (This space purchased for$500 In accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 In accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 247 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 3 Arguments ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION Vote No on Ballot Measure 3 State Attorney General Hardy Myers and District Attorneys in 11 As a Portland City Commissioner,1 introduced the first ordinance Oregon counties ask you to VOTE NO on Measure 3. in the country to take away the cars of repeat drunk drivers.The Organized crime is in it for the money. Forfeiture laws help effect in Portland was dramatic. From 1994 to 1995 while drunk take the profit out of criminal enterprises that sell drugs or driving was on the increase nationally, we saw a 42 percent exploit prostitutes.Measure 3 will put profit back in crime. decrease in drunk driving in Portland. Forfeiture is used to take cars away from people who repeat- I strongly believe in the effectiveness of vehicle forfeiture as edly drive while drunk. DUII forfeiture was enacted in a simple, common sense tool for law enforcement to keep Portland in 1994 and strengthened in 1999.This year DUII drunk drivers off the road. Last year, according to the Highway deaths are at an all time low.Measure 3 will blunt this tool. Traffic Safety Administration,16,000 people were killed in alcohol- Oregon's forfeiture law allows your elected city and county related accidents. representatives to use assets seized from criminals to People are frustrated and dismayed that chronic offenders con- support local law enforcement. Measure 3 will cripple tinue to drive drunk.They should be.People who repeatedly drive many drug-figghting task forces and directly affect the drunk should lose their cars because, in their hands, a car is a livability of ydur community. weapon. Oregon's forfeiture law contains many built-in safe guards to We will never know the feelings of the people whose lives have protect innocent persons and avoid abuses.This includes been snuffed out by drunk drivers.But consider how their loved attorney fees for innocent property owners and a require- ones feel about drunks who destroy the lives in family after family ment that the property has to be a major component in the because no one will take cars away from them. facilitation of the crime.Measure 3 is unnecessary. Takeaway the cars of repeat drunk drivers and keep the forfeiture Animal shelters gain permanent custody of rescued animals laws in place! suffering from abuse or neglect by using forfeiture.Measure Please vote NO on Ballot Measure 3. 3 falls to distinguish animals from other types of property,thus it will invalidate Oregon's current animal Earl Blumenauer friendly law. Member of Congress Oregon's forfeiture law is the result of over a decade of debate (This information furnished by Earl Blumenauer,Member of Congress.) and continual adjustment. Its 38 pages include numerous safe- guards.Measure 3,in only three pages,will lock Oregon law Into a poorly conceived Constitutional Amendment with complex and far reaching consequences. Please join us in VOTING NO on 3. Attorney General Hardy Myers District Attorneys: Michael Schrunk,Multnomah County Dale Penn,Marion County Josh Marquis,Clatsop County Doug Harcelroad,Lane County Michael Dugan,,Deschutes County Clay Johnson,Josephine County David Allen,Morrow County Paul Burgett,Coos County Jason Carlile,Linn County John T.Sewell,Hood River Steve Atchison,Columbia County (This information furnished by Attorney General Hardy Myers;Michael D. Schrunk,Multnomah County District Attorney;Dale Penn,Marion County District Attorney;Josh Marquis, Clatsop County District Attorney;Doug Harcelroad, Lane County District Attorney; Michael Dugan, Deschutes County District Attorney; Clay Johnson, Josephine County District Attorney;David Allen,Morrow County District Attorney;Paul Burgett,Coos County District Attorney;Jason Carlile,Linn County District Attorney;John T.Sewell, Hood River District Attorney;Steve Atchison,Columbia County District Attorney.) (This space purchased for$500 In accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 248 Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 4 Proposed by initiative petition to be voted on at the General (d) Any gifts, grants, federal government revenues or other Election, November 7,2000. moneys as may be made available for deposit into the Oregon Health Plan Trust Fund. (4) Appropriations of the earnings in the fund shall, to the BALLOT TITLE extent possible,maximize funding for expanding children's health coverage under the Children's Health Insurance Program, Title XXI of the federal Social Security Act. ;�sib a'� ag:`t ��3� �'� 3 's��.�k s 4 .�� .s.�Yn .e,�Ew u•� - f s s< „:s � SECTION 2. (1) Notwithstanding section 1 (2)of this Act,the �s Legislative Assembly, upon approval by two-thirds of the mem- bers elected to each house of the Legislative Assembly, may appropriate moneys from the Oregon Health Plan Trust Fund principal when the following economic conditions present or predicted in this state indicate the presence or likelihood of an ` economic recession: (a) The seasonally adjusted rate of nonfarm payroll employ- ment declines for two or more consecutive quarters;and (b) A quarterly economic and revenue forecast projects a •. negative ending balance that is greater than one percent of General Fund appropriations for the biennium for which the forecast is being made. a (2) Notwithstanding section 1 (2) of this 1999 Act, the Legislative Assembly may also appropriate moneys from the Oregon Health Plan Trust Fund principal when any judicial order T or decree or any settlement agreement to which this state is a r party requires the State of Oregon to pay any portion of the fund principal to the federal government. (3) Appropriations made under subsection (1) or (2) of this T" section must be for the purpose of financing those health pro- grams established or defined by law as programs eligible for such financing. (4)The Legislative Assembly may by law prescribe the proce- dures to be used and identify the persons required to make the forecasts and projections described in subsection (1)(b) of this section. (5) The Legislative Assembly may not use moneys in the � a a Oregon Health Plan Trust Fund for purpose other than financing 9 P p 9 Oregon Health Plan programs or under conditions other than those described in subsection(1)of this section unless the elec- tors of this state approve a measure referred to the electors by TEXT the Legislative Assembly that authorizes the use of moneys in TEXTOF MEASURE the Oregon Health Plan Trust Fund without regard to economic conditions or for a purpose specified in the measure.When-the Be It Enacted by the People of the State of Oregon: electors of this state approve the use of moneys in the fund for a purpose other than financing Oregon Health Plan programs, SECTION 1. (1)As used in this section,'Oregon Health Plan' moneys may be appropriated from the Oregon Health Plan Trust means those programs identified in ORS 414.019 and 653.800 to Fund under this subsection only for the purpose approved by the 653.850, including Medicaid, Title XIX of the federal Social electors. Security Act, that provide or arrange medical, dental and other SECTION 3. In the event that any statutory measure other remedial care services for low-income children and low-income than this 2000 Act and Measure 89 (General Election 2000, the adults. The term also includes programs financed under the legislatively-referred Initiative No. 211 of 1999 House Bill 2007) Children's Health Insurance Program, Title XXI of the federal also involves the proposed use of moneys paid to this state by Social Security Act. United States tobacco products manufacturers under the Master (2) The Oregon Health Plan Trust Fund is established in the Settlement Agreement of 1998 and is considered for approval or State Treasury, separate and distinct from the General Fund.All rejection by voters at the November 2000 general election, the earnings on moneys in the fund shall be appropriated continu- measure that receives the greatest number of votes at such ously and expended only for the purpose of financing Oregon election shall prevail, and the other measures shall be null and Health Plan programs. void. (3) Except as otherwise provided by the Oregon Constitution, the Oregon Health Plan Trust Fund shall consist of: (a) All moneys paid to this state by United States tobacco products manufacturers under the Master Settlement Agreement of 1998; (b)All earnings from investments of moneys in the fund. (c) Any moneys appropriated to the fund by the Legislative Assembly; 249 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 4 EXPLANATORY STATEMENT Ballot Measure 4 creates the Oregon Health Plan Trust Fund and requires that all moneys paid to the state by tobacco products manufacturers under the Master Settlement Agreement of 1998 will be deposited into the fund.Currently the use of moneys under the agreement is unrestricted. All earnings on moneys in the fund will be appropriated contin- uously and spent only for the purpose of financing programs that provide or arrange medical,dental and other remedial care ser- vices for low-income children and low-income adults. Measure 4 includes programs financed under the Children's Health Insurance Program and the measure directs that appro- priations of fund earnings will,to the extent possible,be used to expand children's health coverage. The Legislative Assembly may appropriate moneys from the principal of the trust fund only when approved by two-thirds of the members elected to each house of the Legislative Assembly and when economic conditions in the state indicate an economic recession is present or likely in the state. If appropriations from principal of the trust fund are made because of an economic recession, all such appropriations must be for the purpose of financing the same health programs eligible for funding from earnings of the trust fund under Measure 4. The Legislative Assembly also may appropriate moneys from the principal of the trust fund when a judicial order or decree or any settlement agreement to which the state is a party requires the state to pay any portion of the fund principal to the federal government. In addition to moneys received by the state under the Master Settlement Agreement,all earnings from investments of moneys in the trust fund, any moneys appropriated by the Legislative Assembly and any gifts,grants,federal government revenues or moneys directed toward the trust fund will be deposited in the trust fund. Oregon election law provides that when two ballot measures conflict,as Measure 89 and Measure 4 do,the measure receiving the highest number of"yes"votes will prevail. Committee Members: Appointed by: Senator Lee Beyer Chief Petitioners Senator Gene Timms Chief Petitioners Representative Mark Simmons* Secretary of State Jerry Spegman* Secretary of State Kathleen Beaufait Members of the Committee *Member dissents(does not concur with explanatory statement) (This committee was appointed to provide an impartial explanation of the ballot measure pursuant to ORS 251.215.) 250 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet-Statewide Measures Measure No. 4 Arguments ARGUMENT IN FAVOR ARGUMENT IN FAVOR Oregon Nurses Association Asks You to Measure 4 will ensure continuation of the Children's Health Take a Close Look at Measure 4. Insurance Program,providing needed health coverage Nurses Believe Measure 4 Makes the Best Use of for uninsured Oregon children. State Tobacco Settlement Revenues. The Oregon Pediatric Society supports Measure 4. Oregon is expected to receive more than$2 billion over 25 years There's simply no good reason any child in Oregon should be as its share of the national tobacco settlement. Measure 4 without healthcare. Through the Oregon Health Plan, we've prudently invests Oregon's share of the tobacco settlement in the expanded healthcare coverage to thousands of poverty-level Oregon Health Plan Trust Fund to provide a long-term, stable children. Because the federal Children's Health Insurance funding base for Oregon Health Plan programs. Program (CHIP) matches state dollars on a nearly three-to-one The Oregon Nurses Association supports Measure 4 for three basis,children's healthcare is a cost-effective investment. reasons: The Oregon Health Plan has already reduced the rate of 1.Measure 4 prudently invests the money Oregon gets from 1999. children in Oregon from 21% in 1990 to just 8% in the tobacco settlement in a trust fund. Only earnings from 1999.That's progress,but more is needed. the fund may be spent and those earnings are dedicated Last year, limited state funds left more than 61,000 Oregon permanently to pay for Oregon Health Plan programs. children–18 and younger–without healthcare. Spending settlement money as it's received would create a future deficit when tobacco company payments drop.Measure Ballot Measure 4 will change that.Measure 4 puts the priority on 4 guarantees perpetual benefits that will grow as the trust healthcare for children by specifically directing that trust fund grows and provide a permanent base of funding for Oregon earnings be used to maximize Oregon CHIP. It will afford us Health Plan programs. access to almost $100 million in federal funds, money that Oregon CHIP has to"use or lose" 2.It puts the priority on health care coverage for children.t he federal The Oregon Pediatric Society believes Measure 4 wisely invests Measure 4 requires that trust fund earnings b used to the state's share of national tobacco settlement funds where it maximize coverage of uninsured children through t can do the most good for more children.Oregon's kids need to be Children's Health Insurance Program.That will extend health care coverage n ti p us g 61,000 low-income children who currently healthy and nurtured in order to succeed in school and other activities.Measure 4 will help give these kids a health future. have no health insurance. y 3.measure 4 maximizes the amount of money available for The Oregon Pediatric Society urges you to vote YES on low-income health care. Nearly every dollar provided by Measure 4. Measure 4 will be matched by two or more dollars from the (This information furnished by James K. Lace, M.D., F.A.A.P., Oregon federal government. Because Measure 4 allows the state to Pediatric Society.) leverage federal funds,more than$129 million will be available for Oregon Health Plan programs over the next two years. The Oregon Health Plan has expanded health care coverage to more Oregonians, while nationally an increasing number are uninsured. Measure 4 provides the essential stability needed to make sure the Oregon Health Plan itself stays healthy. The Oregon Nurses Association recommends you vote YES on 'Measure 4. (This information furnished by Martin Taylor,Nurses United affiliated with Oregon Nurses Association.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 251 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 4 Arguments ARGUMENT IN FAVOR ARGUMENT IN FAVOR GOVERNOR KITZHABER RECOMMENDS Northwest Organization of Nurse Executives AYES VOTE ON MEASURE 4. Recommends a YES Vote on Measure 4. Measure 4 creates the Oregon Health Plan Trust Fund and Our members are responsible for the administration and invests in a permanent trust all the money the state will get from management of patient care services in all settings where health tobacco companies as part of the national tobacco settlement. care is delivered.We recommend you vote YES on Measure 4. Earnings from the trust will be dedicated to Oregon Health Plan The Northwest Organization of Nurse Executives provides programs. leadership for healthier communities, which aligns well with the The tobacco settlement provides Oregon the chance to secure Oregon Health Plan's focus on prevention and wellness.As an stable, long-term funding for Oregon Health Plan programs. It example, and unlike many private health insurance plans, the resulted from the state's lawsuit seeking reimbursement of state Oregon Health Plan fully covers tobacco cessation programs. expenses paying for treatment of tobacco-related illnesses That's especially important because nearly 40 percent of those among low-income Oregonians.It's logical to use the settlement eligible for the Oregon Health Plan are smokers. to pay for low-income health care. The biggest challenge the Oregon Health Plan faces is the threat The Oregon Health Plan has helped the state extend health care every two years that budget competition will force cuts and fewer coverage to more and more of its citizens. Yet children and Oregonians – particularly vulnerable children – will lose the working low-income families constantly are at risk of losing their coverage they now enjoy. health care coverage because the state lacks funds needed Measure 4 puts a permanent foundation under Oregon Health to take full advantage of federal health care programs. And an plan funding by dedicating the money Oregon will receive from estimated 327,000 Oregonians still have no health insurance. the national tobacco settlement into the Oregon Health Plan Trust Ballot Measure 4 is an Important part of ensuring stable, Fund.It makes good economic sense to invest all that money and long-term funding for the Oregon Health Plan,particularly spend only the earnings from the trust. It guarantees continued for low-income children. funding of the Oregon Health Plan. Measure 4 will provide coverage for 48,000 low-income children Measure 4 Expands Coverage for Children who otherwise would have no health care. But it also will help Measure 4 puts first priority on expanding coverage for Oregon more than 18,000 low-income working families pay for health care children who have no health care.Ongoing care during childhood coverage they now are on.a waiting list to buy. is a critical key to adult wellness. Measure 4 makes good use of Oregon's tobacco settlement Most Oregon Health Plan programs quality for federal matching windfall.Nearly every dollar of funding for health care provided by funds, so nearly every dollar of funding for health care provided Measure 4 will matched by almost two dollars from the federal by Measure 4 will be matched by two or more dollars from the fed- government. By using trust fund earnings to leverage federal eral government.If Measure 4 passes,nearly$130 million will be funds, Measure 4 will add more than $100 million for Oregon available for Oregon Health Plan programs in the next legislative Health Plan programs over the next two years. session.That will continue to grow as the trust fund grows. I urge you to Join me in voting YES on Measure 4. Measure 4 helps make sure the Oregon Health Plan has the long- John Kitzhaber term base of support it needs. Governor Please Vote YES on Measure 4. (This information furnished by John A.Kitzhaber,M.D.) (This information furnished by Judy Tatman, Northwest Organization of Nurse Executives.) (This space purchased for$500 In accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 252 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 4 Arguments ARGUMENT IN FAVOR ARGUMENT IN FAVOR OREGON MEDICAL ASSOCIATION SAVE THE OREGON HEALTH PLAN SUPPORTS MEASURE 4 Vote YES on Measure 4 Oregon Medical Association,the professional association of over The Oregon Health Plan is a bold approach to expanding 6,000 Oregon physicians, supports passage of Measure 4. It is the most appropriate use of Oregon's share of the national health care access for low-income Oregonians.While nationally tobacco settlement. the number of uninsured has risen to 18 percent,the number of Oregonians without health insurance has been reduced to 10 Measure 4 dedicates every dollar of the estimated$2 billion the percent-thanks in large part to the Oregon Health Plan. Since state will receive from the tobacco settlement and creates the the Oregon Health Plan was implemented,the rate of uninsured OREGON HEALTH PLAN TRUST FUND. ONLY the earnings children in Oregon has been cut from 20 percent to just 6 percent. from the trust fund may be spent and ONLY for Oregon Health Plan programs. But the Oregon Health Plan is at risk.The current state budget left 61,000 children in Oregon without health care - despite the The tobacco settlement was based on costs Oregon incurred for fact that the federal government will pay 72 cents of every dollar treatment of low-income Oregonians suffering from tobacco it costs to cover uninsured children. Another 18,000 Oregon related illnesses–this is why Measure 4's dedication of tobacco working families were left waiting for state help in paying for their settlement funds to a trust fund is most appropriate. health insurance because the legislature couldn't fully fund the The federal government matches nearly every dollar of State Family Health Insurance Assistance Program. spending on health care for the Oregon Health Plan.This allows Without a solid foundation of funding,the Oregon Health Plan the State of Oregon to leverage the earnings from the trust fund will continue to be threatened by competition for limited state to the benefit of all Oregonians. funds and vulnerable if Oregon's economy sours. Establishing the OREGON HEALTH PLAN TRUST FUND helps Measure 4 offers the stability the Oregon Health Plan Oregon create an endowment that will grow and will provide needs to survive. resources to sustain the Oregon Health Plan for many years to come. Because Measure 4 allows the state to leverage federal funds, more than $80 million will be available for Oregon Health Plan Measure 4 makes good business sense and it is good medical programs over the next two years.Nearly every dollar of funding policy for all Oregonians. for health care provided by Measure 4 will be matched by two or Please vote YES on Measure 4. more dollars from the federal government. Submitted by That amount will grow over the next 23 years as the Oregon David J.Lindquist,M.D. Health Plan Trust Fund grows. More important, Oregon Health President Plan Trust Fund will provide permanent,guaranteed funding. The Oregon Health Plan has worked to expand coverage and (This information furnished by Robert L.Dernedde,CAE,Oregon Medical keep health care costs in Oregon among the lowest in the nation. Association.) The Oregon Association of Hospitals and Health Systems urges you to vote YES on Measure 4 to save the Oregon Health Plan. (This information furnished by Kenneth Rutledge, Oregon Association of Hospitals and Health Systems.) (This space purchased for$500 In accordance with OAS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 In accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 253 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 4 Arguments ARGUMENT IN FAVOR ARGUMENT IN FAVOR NICU Physicians and Nurses The Chief Sponsors Explain YES on Measure 4 Why They Support Measure 4 Imagine the stress for parents of newborns who require the care As Chief Petitioners of Measure 4 and with a combined 28 years to legislative service, we are proud to present this stable, of specially trained doctors and nurses in Oregon's neonatal intensive funding solution for the Oregon Health Plan.It invests care units.Then imagine wondering how you are going To t funds Oregon will receive from the national tobacco settlement, o pay for the lifesaving healthcare services when you have no insurance.The medical costs can easily be$2,000 per day. It is compensating the state for past, present and future costs for economically devastating. treatment of low-income Oregonians suffering tobacco-related illnesses. Measure 4 can ease some of the financial burden for poverty level Measure 4 creates the Oregon Health Plan Trust Fund and and low-income working families.That is why the doctors and dedicates all the earnings from the trust to funding Oregon Health nurses who devote themselves to saving the tiniest of Oregon's Plan programs – for children, low-income working families and babies support Measure 4.We want all babies to have access to others who can't afford health insurance.It also maximizes limited healthcare services. funds by triggering federal matching dollars that almost triples the Measure 4 invests the state's share of.the national tobacco value of every dollar the trust earns. settlement in a trust fund where the earnings from the fund are Too often the Legislature looks to short-term political solutions, specifically targeted for children's health insurance. Measure 4 avoiding the long-term consequences of their actions.Measure 4 earnings will provide the state funds needed to access federal corrects the poor decision legislators made in sending Measure matching dollars, which will ultimately give Oregon the ability to 89 to voters. Measure 89 dilutes earnings from Oregon's share receive over$129 million to pay for healthcare for children. of the tobacco settlement by spending earnings on a range According to the Department of Administrative Services, if of programs that don't qualify for federal matching funds. Measure 4 passes,Oregon will have more trust fund earnings And Measure 89 fails to direct any funding for Oregon Health Plan in the first biennium than it has been able to invest In programs. Children's Health Insurance Program since the program Since it's inception, Oregon Health Plan funding has been began in 19971 Measure 4 will have a positive impact on the lives threatened by budget constraints. It may be tempting to spend of so many of our smallest citizens. tobacco settlement payments as we get them, but that would Please help us make a difference–vote YES on Measure 4. provide only short-term help.The Oregon Health Plan Trust Fund puts settlement dollars to work forever, providing a guaranteed (This information furnished by Barbara Roberts, RN, Lee Harker, MD, base of future support for health care programs helping Oregon's Rogue Valley Medical Center Neonatal Intensive Care Unit,•Marjorie Gold, most vulnerable citizens. RN, St. Charles Medical Center Neonatal Intensive Care Unit,•John V. McDonald, MD, Providence St. Vincent Neonatal Intensive Care Unit, Measure 4 lets Oregonians send a strong message to future Melinda Rupp, RN, Patrick Lewallen, MD, Legacy Emanuel Children's Legislatures:"We want tobacco settlement revenue used to SAVE Hospital,A.Charles Hoffineister, MD, Ronald Gordon, Molly Bryant, RN, THE OREGON HEALTH PLAN so it can continue providing Fredericka Smithies,CNA,Ann Krenek, RN,Deborah Moss,RN,Annette healthcare to low-income children and families" Garner,RN,Sacred Heart Medical Center Neonatal Intensive Care Unit.) Please support this bipartisan request from a rural and urban legislator to do what is right for all of Oregon. VOTE YES ON MEASURE 4! Senator Eugene Timms(R-Burns) Senator Lee Beyer(D-Springfield) (This information furnished by State Senator Lee Beyer, State Senator Eugene Timms.) (This space purchased for$500 In accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 In accordance with OAS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 254 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 4 Arguments ARGUMENT IN FAVOR ARGUMENT IN FAVOR Oregon Rural Health Association supports Measure 4. SUPPORT MEASURE 4 It makes good use of national tobacco settlement revenues. Save the Oregon Health Plan The Oregon Health Plan is seriously threatened every year. Oregon's comprehensive plan to extend health care coverage to The following state legislators,from both political parties and from uninsured low-income Oregonians is constantly at risk in state around the state, request your YES vote on Measure 4: budget battles.Measure 4 would create a permanent foundation Senator Lee Beyer,D-Springfield for Oregon Health Plan funding by creating a trust fund with national tobacco settlement dollars and dedicating its earnings to Representative Gary Hansen, D-Portland fund Oregon Health Plan programs. Representative Bob Jenson, R-Pendleton Rural Oregon has a higher percentage of Oregonians living in Representative Jerry Krummel, R-Wilsonville poverty than urban areas.Oregon Health Plan coverage has been the gateway to health care for many rural Oregonians who Representative Jeff Kruse, R-Roseburg otherwise couldn't afford ongoing health care for themselves and Senator John Lim, R-Gresham their families. As health care consumers and providers in rural Oregon,stable funding of the Oregon Health Plan is a top priority Representative Bob Montgomery, R-Cascade Locks of the Oregon Rural Health Association. Senator David Nelson, R-Pendleton ` The national tobacco settlement resulted from the state's lawsuit Representative Barbara Ross, D Corvallis seeking compensation for past, present and future costs of covering the treatment of tobacco-related illnesses for low- Senator Marylin Shannon, R-Brooks income Oregonians.It's logical to use settlement dollars to pay for low-income health care. Senator Charles Starr, R Hillsboro Measure 4 will provide health care coverage to thousands of Senator Veral Tarno, R-Coquille low-income children who currently have no health care.The Representative Terry Thompson, D-Newport federal government pays 72 cents of every dollar spent on health care for children in low-income families through the Children's Senator Eugene Timms, R-Burns Health Insurance Program. Measure 4 will fund insurance for Representative Jackie Winters, R-Salem more than 50,000 children not currently covered. Measure 4 will provide health care poverage for low-income Representative Bill Witt, R-Portland working families.Measure 4 will help more than 18,000 families Please vote YES on Measure 4. on the waiting list for the Family Health Insurance Assistance Program to get the health insurance their families need. (This information furnished by Pat McCormick, Committee to Save the Oregon Health Plan.) The Oregon Rural Health Association is the only organization that speaks for health care providers, consumers and the economic interests of rural Oregon. Measure 4 is a good deal for rural Oregon.Please Vote YES. (This information furnished by Lynn C.Ironside, Secretary, Oregon Rural Health Association.) (This space purchased for$500 In accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the The or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 255 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet=Statewide Measures Measure No. 4 Arguments ARGUMENT IN FAVOR ARGUMENT IN FAVOR Child Advocates SUPPORT MEASURE 4 Urge You to Vote YES on Measure 4 Save the Oregon Health Plan To Provide Health Care Coverage for All Oregon's Children The following candidates for the state legislature, from both As long time children's advocates,we are dedicated to the well- political parties and from around the state,request your YES vote being of each and every child in Oregon. We strongly support on Measure 4: Measure 4 and urge you to vote yes. Alan Bates, D-Eagle Point,House District 52 The federal Children's Health Insurance Program (CHIP) allows Alan Brown, R-Newport,House District 4 states to provide healthcare coverage for otherwise uninsured Bill Duncan,D-Summerville,Senate District 29 children through age 18. Under CHIP, the federal government pays 72 cents of every dollar spent on healthcare for children in Iry Fletcher,D-Woodburn,House District 38 low-income families.In other words,it costs Oregon only 28 cents to provide low-income children a dollar's worth of healthcare.But Mitch Greenlick,D-Portland,House District 7 despite the substantial federal help, last year the state could only Linda Harrington, D-Prairie City,House District 59 afford to add coverage for about 17,000 young Oregonians. Cedric Hayden, R Eugene, House District 43 Today more than 61,000 Oregon children" remain without healthcare coverage. Lon Holston,D-Central Point, House District 51 Measure 4 will provide coverage for those children Jane Hunts, R-Eagle Point, House District 52 who otherwise would have no healthcare. Debra James,D-Klamath Falls,Senate District 30 Oregon owes its youth a healthy start in life.Measure 4 is a wise Scott Lutz, R-Portland,House District 15 investment of tobacco settlement moneys in the health and well- being of Oregon children who,through no fault of their own, lack Roger McCorkle,D-Florence,Senate District 24 healthcare coverage. John Scruggs, R-Aloha,House District 6 Please vote YES on Measure 4 Wayne Snoozy, D-Klamath Falls, House District 53 Muriel and Marvin Goldman Kelley Wirth,D-Corvallis,House District 35 Child advocates (This information furnished by Muriel Goldman,Marvin Goldman.) Paul Zastrow,D-Hood River, House District 56 Please vote YES on Measure 4. (This information furnished by Pat McCormick, Committee to Save the Oregon Health Plan.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$5001n accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 256 1 CQNTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 4 Arguments ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION The American Heart Association The AMERICAN LUNG ASSOCIATION of Oregon BALLOT MEASURE 4 Opposes Measure 4 FAILS TO PROVIDE PREVENTION Tobacco Settlement Dollars Should be Spent on Tobacco Prevention Programs The National Tobacco Agreement will bring hundreds of millions MEASURE 4 PROVIDES NO MONEY AT ALL of dollars to Oregon.It would be a big mistake not to spend any FOR TOBACCO USE REDUCTION FOR OUR KIDS oft a settlement on tobacco-prevention.This is an historic oppor- tunity that will not come to Oregon again anytime soon.Let's not And,there are a few things we think you should know before you make a mistake that we will be paying for,for the rest of our lives. vote.We're opposing this Measure 4 because it would stop even BALLOT MEASURE 4 one penny of the tobacco settlement money from being spent on FAILS TO REDUCE COSTS TO TAXPAYERS tobacco prevention programs in Oregon.The very programs we need to keep our kids safe and healthy...and that's just wrong. It's been estimated that diseases caused by tobacco use costs We're the American Lung Association of Oregon. We've spent Oregonians over$1 billion dollars a year in economic and health nearly a century in Oregon promoting and providing programs to costs.Just over$300 million a year n taxpayer dollars l spent in prevent devastating tobacco-related diseases like lung cancer Oregon on public health care.The only way we can really reduce and emphysema.You can trust us to put the health of Oregonians these costs over the long haul is to invest in tobacco prevention today. first and foremost,we always have. BALLOT MEASURE 4 We Believe the Settlement Money Should be Used as it was FAILS TO PROTECT OUR KIDS Intended,which Is to Reduce Tobacco Use. The overwhelming majority of smokers began smoking as chil- FACT: Implementing effective youth-targeted programs, dren or teens. Smoking has devastating health consequences. combined with community and media activities, can For instance, 21% of all heart disease deaths are caused by prevent or postpone the onset of smoking among 20% smoking.Tobacco prevention is critical to keeping our kids heathy to 40%of U.S.adolescents. now,and in the future. FACT. 90%of new smokers are children and teens.According That's Why... to the Centers for Disease Control(CDC),comprehen- sive tobacco prevention programs are the most THE AMERICAN HEART ASSOCIATION effective in reducing tobacco use. Is Opposed to Measure 4 FACT. Nationwide public health studies indicate more than Tobacco Settlement Money Must Be Used For one-third (36.4%) of high school students are current Tobacco Prevention! smokers.In Oregon, over 60,000 children already use tobacco. TO ENSURE THE FUTURE HEALTH OF OREGON We believe you should know who is behind Measure 4... VOTE NO on BALLOT MEASURE 4 The HMO INDUSTRY In Oregon. (This information furnished by John W. Chism Jr., American Heart FACT: The Association representing Oregon HMOs put Association,Northwest Affiliate.) Measure 4 on the ballot. FACT: Measure 4 was designed to put the HMO's interests first. FACT: Measure 4 is just another special interest ballot measure that says one thing,but does another. The AMERICAN LUNG ASSOCIATION of Oregon Urges You to Vote"No"on MEASURE 4 (This information furnished by David J. Delvallee, American Lung Association of Oregon.) (This space purchased for$5001n accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 In accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the ar ument. 257 CONTINUED official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 4 Arguments ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION The American Cancer Society Says WHO HAVE YOU ALWAYS TRUSTED TO GIVE YOU HONEST INFORMATION ABOUT ISSUES THAT AFFECT THE PLEASE VOTE NO ON MEASURE 4 HEALTH OF OREGONIANS? Because Tobacco Settlement Dollars Should Go to Measure 4 prohibits any Tobacco Settlement money at all Tobacco Prevention from being spent on Tobacco prevention,and that's why... 1. Measure 4:Doesn't Give One Penny to Prevention The Tobacco Industry is being forced to take responsibility for the The Following Groups ALL Oppose Measure 4 billions of dollars they have cost U.S. taxpayers...it's called the American Cancer Society National Tobacco Settlement.Now they must pay for their decep- tive advertising aimed at our kids and their decades of lies about American Heart Association nicotine addiction.And at least aportion of the money should be American Lung Association,Oregon iicPri to fund tobacco prevention efforts. Oregon Federation of Nurses and Health Care Professionals 2. Measure 4:Look Who's Behind It ' The HMO Industry is behind Measure 4.They're making a grab for American College of Cardiology,Oregon Chapter every bit of the Tobacco Settlement.if this measure passes,it will Oregon State Council of Senior Citizens be just another special interest measure promising one thing and g delivering another. Measure 4 is nothing more than a special Oregon Advocacy Coalition of Seniors&People with interest giveaway designed to line the pockets of HMO's. Disabilities 3. Measure 4:Won't Decrease Future Costs Associated with Oregon Alliance of Children's Programs Tobacco.Use The costs to Oregon taxpayers for health expenditures associated Oregon Health Care Association with tobacco-related diseases are mammoth...more than $300 Portland Gray Panthers million dollars a year. That kind of money could make a real difference, if we didn't have to spend it each year on health care Oregon Center for Assisted Living for preventable diseases.Tobacco-use is a real financial drain on Oregon Advocacy Center us all. The former director of the US Centers for Disease Control Oregon Consumer League and Prevention(CDC)says... American Association of University Women of Oregon "we could cut the rate of smoking in half among teens and adults Human Services Coalition of Oregon this decade, if the nation would take the step of f fully implement- United Seniors of Oregon jnq anti-smoking programs." But Measure 4 Puts Oregon on the Wrong Track... We can't just sit by while Measure 4 tries to keep any of the WHO'S BEHIND MEASURE 4? money at all from being spent on tobacco prevention.That's WHO'S THE ONLY CONTRIBUTOR TO PAY TO PUT IT ON why we ouoose Measure 4. THE BALLOT? "PLEASE MAKE A HEALTHY CHOICE FOR OREGON! Answer:The Association representing the JOIN WITH THE AMERICAN CANCER SOCIETY HMO industry in Oreaon- in,committing to tobacco settlement funding for tobacco The HMO industry has designed Measure 4 to put prevention programs lb.%t interests above all others! VOTE NO ON MEASURE 4 The People You Can Trust to Put Oregon's Health First (This information furnished by Nancy Bennett,American Cancer Society.) Urge You to:VOTE NO ON MEASURE 4 it's bad for Oregon's health to fail to fund prevention! (This information furnished by John Valley,American Cancer Society.) (This space purchased for$500 In accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. P58 CONTINUE Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 4 Arguments ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION We Are: OREGON NURSES&HEALTH CARE PROFESSIONALS The American Heart Association REJECT BALLOT MEASURE 4 The American Cancer Society Because it doesn't do anything for prevention! The American Lung Association VOTE NO ON MEASURE 4... Of Oregon because it fails to use even a portion of the Tobacco Settlement And money for tobacco-prevention. WE ARE OPPOSED TO MEASURE 4 VOTE NO ON MEASURE 4... BECAUSE because prevention programs to ensure the future health of It Takes the Entire Tobacco Settlement and Oregon's kids deserve to be a top priority. Prohibits Any of the Money at All VOTE NO ON MEASURE 4... from being Dedicated to Tobacco Prevention because the huge costs associated with treating tobacco-related THE US CENTERS FOR DISEASE CONTROL AND illnesses are breaking the"financial"backs of Oregon taxpayers. PREVENTION,the"CDC"says... VOTE NO ON MEASURE 4... The following are excerpts from the US Surgeon General and because it was sponsored by the Association that represents the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Report the HMO Industry in Oregon and was written "Healthy People 2010, Emphasis Added. to put their interests first. • "The most important advance in comprehensive programs has As nurses and health care providers, we can tell you first hand, been the emergence of statewide tobacco control efforts" diseases caused by tobacco take a real toll, both on people's • Evidence shows that these multi faceted,state based tobacco health and on scarce healthcare dollars.The Tobacco Settlement control programs are effective in reducing tobacco use" was, in great part, about decreasing the future cost associated with nicotine addiction and smoking.We're opposing Measure 4 We AGREE with the US CENTERS FOR DISEASE CONTROL because it stops even,a nickel of the Tobacco Settlement from AND PREVENTION,the"CDC" going to tobacco prevention programs in Oregon. Prevention Does Work!!! The Facts- And, because prevention works, 1. Everyday in America, nearly 3,000 children start to smoke; Oregon's Heart, Lung and Cancer Organizations 2. Nearly every adult smoker today, started smoking as a are ALL Opposed to Measure 4 kid(90%); 3.The greatest tobacco use increase in youth occurs between This measure prevents any of the Tobacco Settlement money 7th and 9th grade. from being spent on tobacco prevention The Costs- We Urge Your No Vote on Measure 4 Please Join us in Supporting a Healthy Future for Oregon! 1. It costs Oregon taxpayers more than $300 million dollars a Please Join Us in Supporting Prevention Today! year on average, for public health costs associated with tobacco use (This information furnished by Nancy Bennett,American Cancer Society) 2. It costs Oregon taxpayers, about $100 million dollars in indirect costs associated with 1 million lost work days associ- ated with tobacco use 3. It costs Oregon more than $400 million dollars a year on average,for private health costs associated with tobacco use Measure 4 Doesn't Spend a Dime on Prevention Measure 4 Won't Do One Thing to Reduce Future Health Care Costs Please Join the Oregon Federation of Nurses and Health Professionals in Voting NO on Measure 4! (This information furnished by Katherine R.Schmidt,Oregon Federation of Nurses&Health Professionals.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 259 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet Statewide Measures Measure No. 4 Arguments ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION Nurses in Oregon Invite You to Take Former Surgeon General C. Everett Koop Urges No Vote on a Closer Look at Measure 4 Measure 4 MEASURE 4 PROVIDES NO MONEY AT ALL FOR Dear Oregon Families, TOBACCO PREVENTION Measure 4 is a measure drafted by the association representing The Surgeon General has stated that smoking rates among the HMO Industry.It prevents the State's tobacco settlement from teens could be cut in half within the decade if the nation being used for what it was intended:to reduce the damage that would fully implement anti-smoking programs. tobacco use inflicts on Oregon.The measure doesn't uu t one When will we ever learn? penny into tobacco prevention! What greater investment can Prevention saves lives and money! we make in public health than prevention?What investment would As nurses, we see the devastation caused by tobacco related give greater returns than antismoking programs?The answer is none. That is health problems on a daily basis.And,we see the financial drain why Oregon's leading public health advocates on the health care system caused by these preventable diseases. oppose Measure 4. I urge voters to protect Oregonians'health, Yet, Measure 4 stands poised to put Oregon on the wrong track Ives and pocketbooks by voting NO on Measure 4. because it fails to address prevention. The tobacco settlement is an historic opportunity—not only to The Price-Tag for Tobacco Use in Oregon is Just Too High... send a message to tobacco companies that we recognize their products for what they are—agents of death—but to put in place It Costs Oregon Taxpayers Too Much Money: programs that will improve public health in the future by reducing tobacco use. Measure 4 ignores this opportunity. Using the Each year hundreds of millions of the public's money is spent on tobacco settlement money for what it was intended - to provide tobacco-related illness. It's estimated, that in Oregon, more than smoking prevention programs, especially for kids and to help $300 million dollars a year are spent on subsidized health smokers stop smoking, is the wisest use for these funds. services for those with diseases like lung cancer and emphy- sema.Another$100 million is lost from Oregon's economy each As former Surgeon General I know tobacco use is the nation's year due to lost days of work for those suffering from these number one preventable cause of premature death and disease. diseases. The devastating effects of smoking are clear—thousands of lives have been lost and billions paid to provide health services to It Costs Oregon Citizens Too Many Lives: persons with tobacco-related illness. Despite this, tobacco Tragically,tobacco kills more than 1 in 5 Oregonians.It is believed companies continue to addict thousands of new smokers.After a that approximately 6,000 lives are lost each year in Oregon, and drop in the number of youth smokers,smoking is again on the rise another 400,000 nationwide, directly attributable to tobacco use. among young people for most of the last decade.We need to Well over 80%of new smokers are children and teenagers. make investments in smoking prevention efforts—and to use the settlement for what it was intended:to reduce the damage that So it just makes sense... tobacco use inflicts on Oregon.Measure 4 fails'to do that. The Tobacco Master Settlement should be spent on tobacco prevention. I urge you to vote NO on Measure 4. Nurses in Oregon Oppose Measure 4 Sincerely, VOTE NO ON MEASURE 4 C.Everett Koop, M.D,Sc.D. The Tobacco Settlement Should be Spent on (This information furnished by Dr.C.Everett Koop.) Tobacco Prevention! Natalie Rasmussen,Registered Nurse Lisa K.Hansen,Registered Nurse Carolyn Carter,Registered Nurse Anne Rosenfeld,Registered Nurse Jean R.Moseley,Registered Nurse Sara Crivellone,Registered Nurse Maryanne Bletscheu,Registered Nurse,MSN (This information furnished by Maryanne Bletscheu,RN,MSN.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 260 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 4 Arguments ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION OREGON SENIORS WEIGH IN ON MEASURE 4 The American College of Cardiology,Oregon Chapter: Oregon State Council of Senior Citizens The Professional Organization for DOCTORS of Cardiology Oregon Advocacy Coalition of Seniors& OPPOSES People with Disabilities BALLOT.MEASURE 4 PROHIBITS ANY MONEY AT ALL FROM BEING SPENT ON United Seniors of Oregon TOBACCO PREVENTION Portland Gray Panthers It would be a big mistake not to spend any of the Tobacco We Hope You Will Vote"NO"to Ballot Measure 4 Settlement on tobacco-prevention The Settlement will bring millions...hundreds of millions of dollars to Oregon.This is a Prevention Has Just GOT to become a Priority for once in a life time chance for Oregon that will never happen again. Oregon's Share of the Tobacco Settlement Let's not turn our backs on it! If we do,we will be paying for,for it As organizations working on behalf of Oregon's elderly, including well into the future. those who may be frail or disabled,we see Oregonians every day OPPOSES who are near the end of their life.Oregonians in assisted living, BALLOT MEASURE 4 convalescent or long-term care facilities.Tragically,many of them COSTS TO TAXPAYERS TOO MUCH experience illnesses attributed to a lifetime of tobacco use. Smoking prevention programs for our kids now will help It's been estimated that, tobacco-related diseases cost reduce the number of Oregonians who face these sorts of Oregonians over $300 million dollars a years in public health diseases in the decades to come. care expenditures. Another $100 million is lost in productivity reductions attributed to lost workdays in Oregon.The only way we Measure 4 is Too Costly for Oregon Taxpayers! can really reduce these costs over the long haul is to invest in The costs: health care costs, human costs, economic costs, are tobacco prevention today. huge.And, Measure 4 does not provide any funding for tobacco OPPOSES prevention. The Tobacco Settlement's purpose was to provide BALLOT MEASURE 4 some money for tobacco-prevention programs.We can't afford to FAILS TO PROTECT OUR KIDS'FUTURE HEART HEALTH turn our backs on this chance to reduce smoking and all the future associated costs to Oregon. The overwhelming majority of smokers began smoking as children or teens.For example,smoking causes 21%of all heart Oregon Taxpayers Pay the Price disease deaths.And, smoking nearly doubles the risk of certain Oregon taxpayers pay millions and millions of dollars to under- types of stroke. Tobacco prevention can make the difference write the costs of illnesses caused by tobacco use.In 1996 alone, keeping our kids healthy now and for a lifetime. the price tag in Oregon was almost$400 million in public health That's Wh care expenditures.And,a total cost of$1.5 BILLION is estimated y"' to be lost on all the economic costs associated with smoking— THE AMERICAN COLLEGE OF CARDIOLOGY, loss of productivity, lost workdays and private and public health Oregon Chapter care costs.Smoking prevention would go along way to reducing is Working to Defeat Measure 4 these costs, now and in the future. OREGON SENIORS Tobacco Settlement Funds Should Be Used For Tobacco Prevention! Are Asking You To TO ENSURE GOOD HEART HEALTH FOR OREGON VOTE NO ON BALLOT MEASURE 4 Please Join DOCTORS of Cardiology Smoking Prevention Should be a Priority for in Tobacco Settlement Money VOTING NO on MEASURE 4 Let's Ensure the Future Health of Oregonians (This information furnished by Sondra Gleason, American College of (This information furnished by Jim Davis, Oregon State Council of Senior Cardiology,Oregon Chapter.) Citizens, United Seniors of Oregon, Portland Gray Panthers, Oregon Advocacy Coalition of Seniors and People With Disabilities.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 261 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 4 Arguments ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION OREGON DOCTORS KNOW FIRST-HAND Oregon Health Care Association Says"NO"to TOBACCO PREVENTION IS A WISE INVESTMENT Ballot Measure 4 Prevention Must be a Priority for Oregon's Share of the That's Why Oregon Doctors Oppose Measure 4 Tobacco Settlement Measure 4 Means No Money for Tobacco Prevention As an association of health care providers,we work with The Tobacco Settlement is supposed to be used to fight tobacco- Oregonians every day who are at the end of their life. related illnesses. But, Measure 4 provides no money at all for Oregonians in long term care,assisted living and nursing tobacco use reduction...that's a real missed opportunity for homes.Sadly,nearly 50%of all tobacco related health care Oregon and for our kids. If we spend some of the settlement costs in Oregon are spent caring for people in long-term care money on helping people avoid smoking in the first place and facilities.We see the worst of the devastation cause by a lifetime helping current smokers quit, we can save lives, health care of smoking.Smoking prevention,for our kids now will make resources and tax dollars. the single biggest difference in reducing tobacco-use diseases and health care costs in the future. That's why doctors,nurses,senior's groups,children's groups and organizations like the Cancer Society, Lung Association, the Oregonians Just Can't Afford Measure 4! Heart Association are all opposing Measure 4. The costs:health care costs, human costs,economic costs,are According to a 1996 Center for Disease Control(CDC) huge.And, Measure 4 does not provide any funding for tobacco Report prevention.The Tobacco Settlement's purpose was to rp ovide some money for tobacco-prevention programs.We can't afford The Tobacco Industry in Oregon made: to turn our backs on this chance to reduce smoking and • $400 million dollars in gross revenues all the future associated health care costs to Oregon. The Taxpayers of Oregon 12aid: The HMO Industry is Behind Measure 4! • $450 million dollars in direct private medical Measure 4 is being brought to Oregon voters by the HMO expenditures Industry...it was designed to put their interests first.It's just • $350 million dollars in direct public medical another special interest ballot measure that says one thing expenditures but does another. • $100 million dollars in indirect costs due to lost days Oregon Taxpayers Pay the Price of work In 1993 Oregon spent nearly$73 million to treat smoking- $1.5 billion dollars:the cost of tobacco use to Oregonians related illnesses.Half of that total was spent on nursing homes. In 1996,Oregon Taxpayers spent almost$400 million in And,if Measure 4 passes$0 dollars will be spent on tobacco-related health care expenditures.Vote No on Measure 4 tobacco-prevention! and help control future health care costs. The fact is, tobacco prevention programs can -save taxpayers The Oregon Health Care Association Urges Oregon to money and that's an investment that Oregonians just can't afford to walk away from. Meanwhile, smoking is the most preventable VOTE NO ON BALLOT MEASURE 4 cause of death in our society. Prevention:It's What the Settlement Was About Prevention:It's What Makes Sense for Oregon Some of the settlement money should be invested in Prevention:It's the Right Thing to Do tobacco-prevention programs.It just makes good sense.It'll reduce both current and future health care costs, and tax (This information furnished by Jonathan Eames, Oregon Health Care dollars spent...but most of all it will save lives. Assn.,Oregon Center for Assisted Living.) Please Vote"No"on Measure 4 Join with Oregon Doctors in Investing in Tobacco Prevention Andrea Kielich,MD David Kliewer,MD Bruce Thomson,MD Gary Goby,MD Donald Austin,MD Mark Rampton,MD Tom Becker,MD Jay Kravitz,MD Bernard Kliks,MD Bruce McLellan,MD David Gilmour,MD (This information furnished by Donald F.Austin,MD.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 262 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 4 Arguments ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION WE CARE ABOUT THE CHILDREN OF OREGON HUMAN SERVICES COALITION OF OREGON Join Us in Opposing Measure 4 Oppose Measure 4 Because it Equals:No Money for Tobacco Prevention Support the Oregon Health Plan by Supporting Tobacco Dear Oregon Voter: Prevention The Oregon Alliance of Children's Programs opposes Measure 4, The Human Services Coalition of Oregon(HSCO)is comprised of because it provides no money at all from the Tobacco Settlement organizations who are dedicated to providing low-income for tobacco prevention. We are an association of organizations Oregonians with health care through the Oregon Health Plan.YYt devoted to helping kids in Oregon. HSCO is opposed to Measure 4. And, that's why we can't just stand by as Measure 4 tries to Why is that? divert every last penny of the Tobacco Settlement away from Measure 4: tobacco prevention programs for Oregon's kids.We are com- Would prevent any funds at all,from the Tobacco Settlement, mitted to helping Oregon's kids have a healthy future. from going to tobacco prevention programs in Oregon. The overwhelming majority of smokers start when they are chil- Measure 4: dren or teens.Let's face it,our kids are growing up facing all sorts Violates the entire premise of the Oregon Health Plan— of challenges we never would have imagined in our own Prevention.The Oregon Health Plan is based on the fact that childhood. Our kids face really tough pressures today.They are prevention services are always less costly than treating a bombarded by destructive images in the media...peer preventable disease latter.Yet,this measure won't address pressure...school violence...it's unending. tobacco prevention at all. That's why we need to do everything we can to help them stand Measure 4: up to these pressures, to make good decisions now and for the Doesn't make good sense. If we would spend a responsible future.That's why tobacco-prevention programs are key. amount of the Tobacco Settlement on tobacco prevention now, The Tobacco Settlement is a chance to invest in Oregon's kids.by we would save Oregon tax dollars and Oregon lives.After all, investing in tobacco prevention.It's true,we need to address kid's decreasing future tobacco use was a key element of the health issues now,but at the same time we need to invest in our Tobacco Settlement. kids'future health,too. Please join HSCO,health care providers and nonprofit Measure 4 would prevent even a small portion of the multi- organizations dedicated to the prevention of heart, million dollar Tobacco Settlement from being spent on lung,cancer and other tobacco-induced illnesses, tobacco prevention.We have an obligation to do the right thing in opposing this measure for our kids.We have an obligation to support prevention We have VOTE NO ON MEASURE 4 an obligation to defeat Measure 4. Tobacco Settlement Dollars for Tobacco Prevention THE OREGON ALLIANCE OF CHILDREN'S PROGRAMS PLEASE JOIN US IN CASTING A (This information furnished by Gina Mattioda,Co-Chair of HSCO.) "NO"VOTE ON MEASURE 4 Tobacco Dollars for Tobacco Prevention for Oregon's Kids It's What's Right (This information furnished by Janet Arenz, Oregon Alliance of Children's Programs.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 263 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet-Statewide Measures Measure No. 4 Arguments ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION The Housing Lobby Coalition of Oregon Opposes Measure 4. Measure 4 sends the Tobacco Settlement money to the Wrong Place for the Wrong Purpose. Oregon Should Use the Tobacco Settlement for TOBACCO USE PREVENTION and HEALTH SUPPORT PROGRAMS such as those found in Measure 89. If Measure 4 passes, not one penny of the Tobacco Settlement money will go to tobacco use prevention programs in Oregon. And, that's wrong.The Tobacco Settlement was about Tobacco and the harm it has caused.We need to make TOBACCO USE PREVENTION and HEALTH SUPPORT a real priority in Oregon in order to address the long-term consequences of the diseases caused by tobacco. Tobacco-related illnesses cost Oregon Taxpayers millions of dollars a year.Measure 4 provides little or nothing to reduce these costs. Without a commitment to tobacco use prevention, Oregon Taxpayers will continue to pay the bills for long-term and chronic health conditions.Measure 4 is short-sighted, and it fails to help Oregon Taxpayers. Measure 4 Does Nothing to Reduce Tobacco Use Among Oregon Youth. If we want a healthy Oregon tomorrow, we need to address prevention and health care today. Measure 4 fails to do that, NO money at all would be spent on prevention or on health support programs. Measure 4 Fails to Take A Comprehensive View of Health. Older Oregonians and Disabled Oregonians,including those who are disabled by the ravages of tobacco, have an increasingly difficult time finding affordable housing. They need assistance with housing and transportation to medical facilities and Measure -4 does nothing for them. HOUSING IS FUNDAMENTAL TO HEALTH. The Housing Lobby Coalition of Oregon urges you to Vote No on Measure 4. (This information furnished by Jim Markee,Housing Lobby Coalition.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 264 Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 5 Proposed by initiative petition to be voted on at the General (d) National Instant Criminal Background Check System; Election; November 7,2000. and (e)Stolen guns system. (2)As used in sections 1,5,6,7 and 8 of this 2000 Act: BALLOT TITLE 16(a)"Gun dealer"has the meaning given that term in ORS 6.412. (b) "Gun show" means an event at which more than 25 firearms are on site and available for transfer. CIRCMS"CAf10ES�iEUtii1NG SECTION 4. Sections 5 to 8 of this 2000 Act are added to • E3i It� F1�Ft and made a part of ORS 166.410 to 166.470. SECTION 5.(1)Notwithstanding the fact that ORS 166.412 C1ir [1iiVl requires a gun dealer to request a criminal history record check only when transferring a handgun,a gun dealer shall RESUN�1" OF:"ilS".V.O7 . "des ucste expar[ds trecon back- comply with the requirements of ORS 166.412 before trans- grotrnd bhet�c b #cars ftrerrn tCcnS#et tit guCt show pr by+e81181; ferring any firearm to a purchaser.The provisions of ORS 166.412 apply to the transfer of firearms other than hand- RStLT �`NQ"Y4TE "too'".."V0,e rent is exandrng Current! guns to the same extent that they apply to the transfer of E7retr+b�kgrauncf cheek roquiment tcyond hartdran trahs-, handguns. fe#S ley hurt�tt8rs. (2) In addition to the determination required by ORS SU f q tlf;• t to taw urrent[y res)ulres b rtsurtd elteck 166.412(3)(a)(A),in conducting a criminal background check befbl a n dealer seti$handgun.Weaskifo odiim ,iak oohd or criminal history record check, the Department of State t[rt'deafertiansfersar Ilirearm,baokgra ncicteck, Police shall also determine whether the recipient is other- ar .trerta#er u Ft g rrr d€tater, befcsre nt rtc G tt€r. tTtey t nsf8r wise prohibited by state or federal law from possessing a ftteartll at" rtt mow"£8vetit Vtitlt giver it bte iirearr is(Jra� firearm. Sant),•lUtxtoottitC C{eateS .CilrtEirt6t libtllty RetrktCrs taCk4', (3)Notwithstanding ORS 166.412(5),the department is not rount�''irtf ytttta ftu yearsr bars dISGl4surs ruder. F'Etb1M required,to operate the telephone number established under Recordsds printes of providing €else in#orrrtaftril, ORS 166.412(5)on Thanksgiving Day or Christmas Day. improper tr�tfr, to ilrtGlude transfersf a#i firstms, •not)usfi (4)(a)The department may charge a fee,not to exceed the randgues tthter:C)rarles amount authorized under ORS 166.414, for criminal back- ground checks required under this section or section 6 of 1IA` } k�+tli iAt'a `St gberrirr� rrt expndt- this 2000 Act. turEtsas�lLt *f104pryertoosanduCttheSddrtrnai (b)The department shall establish a reduced fee for sub- sequent criminal background checks on the same recipient and t3rre-tiril4 S#1rttfftt#iS i61,gC1CP. that are performed during the same day between the hours of State reuenutrs +rlt�8a reueitzfes watt increase 0tk 00 t 8 a.m.and 10 p.m. $x£)0,00 SECTION 6.(1)The Department of State Police shall make the telephone number established under ORS 166.412 (5) There is no farlet e£feet Sart 1pcalia rrrrtee�t expenditures ter available for requests from persons other than gun dealers re�renu8s for criminal background checks under this section. (2)Prior to transferring a firearm,a transferor other than a gun dealer may request by telephone that the department conduct a criminal background check on the recipient and shall provide the following information to the department: TEXT OF MEASURE (a) The name, address and telephone number of the transferor; (b)The make,model,caliber and manufacturer's number of Be it enacted by the People of the State of Oregon: the firearm being transferred; SECTION 1.The people of this state find that: (c)The name, date of birth, race, sex and address of the (1)The laws of Oregon regulating the sale of firearms con- recipient; tain a loophole that allows people other than gun dealers to (d)The social security number of the recipient if the recip- sell firearms at gun shows without first conducting criminal ient voluntarily provides that number; background checks; (e)The address of the place where the transfer is occur- (2) It is necessary for the safety of the people of Oregon ring;and that any person who transfers a firearm at a gun show be (f)The type, issuer and identification number of a current required to request a criminal background check before com- piece of identification bearing a recent photograph of the pleting the transfer of the firearm;and recipient presented by the recipient.The identification pre- (3) It is in the best interests of the people of Oregon that sented by the recipient must meet the requirements of ORS any person who transfers a firearm at any location other than 166.412(4)(a). a gun show be allowed to voluntarily request a criminal back- (3)(a)Upon receipt of a request for a criminal background ground check before completing the transfer of the firearm. check under this section,the department shall immediately, SECTION 2. Sections 1 to 8 of this 2000 Act and the during the telephone call or by return call: amendments to ORS 166.416, 166.418 and 166.460 by sec- (A)Determine from criminal records and other information tions 9,10 and 11 of this 2000 Act shall be known as the Gun available to it whether the recipient is disqualified under ORS Violence Prevention Act. 166.470 from completing the transfer or is otherwise prohib- SECTION 3. (1) As used in ORS 166.412 and sections 1, ited by state or federal law from possessing a firearm;and 5, 6 and 7 of this 2000 Act, "criminal background check" (B) Notify the transferor when a recipient is disqualified or "criminal history record check" means determining the from completing the transfer or provide the transferor with a eligibility of a person to purchase or possess a firearm by unique approval number indicating that the recipient is qual- reviewing state and federal databases including, but not ified to complete the transfer.The unique approval number is limited to,the: a permit valid for 24 hours for the requested transfer. If the (a)Oregon computerized criminal history system; firearm is not transferred from the transferor to the recipient (b)Oregon mental health data system; within 24 hours after receipt of the unique approval number, (c)Law Enforcement Data System; a new request must be made by the transferor. 265 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 5 (b) If the department is unable to determine whether the SECTION 8. (1) The Department of State Police shall recipient is qualified for or disqualified from completing the develop a form to be completed by a person seeking to transfer within 30 minutes of receiving the request, the obtain a firearm at a gun show from a transferor other than a department shall notify the transferor and provide the trans- gun dealer.The department shall consider including in the feror with an estimate of the time when the department will form all of the requirements for disclosure of information provide the requested information. that are required by federal law for over-the-counter firearms (4)A public employee or public agency incurs no criminal transactions. or civil liability for performing the criminal background (2)The department shall make the form available to the checks required by this section, provided the employee or public at no cost. agency acts in good faith and without malice. ' SECTION 9.ORS 166.416 is amended to read: (5)(a)The department may retain a record of the informa- 166.416 (1) A person commits the crime of providing false tion obtained during a request for a criminal background information in connection with a transfer of a[handgun]firearm if check under this section for the period of time provided in the person knowingly provides a false name or false information ORS 166.412(7). or presents false identification in connection with a purchase or (b)The record of the information obtained during a request transfer of a[handgun under ORS 166.4121 firearm. for a criminal background check under this section is exempt (2) Providing false information in connection with a transfer of from disclosure under public records law. a[handgun]firearm is a Class A misdemeanor. (6)The recipient of the firearm must be present when the SECTION 10.ORS 166.418 is amended to read: transferor requests a criminal background check under this 166.418. (1) A person commits the crime of improperly trans- section. ferring a [handgun] firearm if the person is a gun dealer as (7)(a)Except as otherwise provided in paragraphs(b)and defined in ORS 166.412 and sells, leases or otherwise transfers (c)of this subsection,a transferor who receives notification a [handgun] firearm and intentionally violates ORS 166.412 or under this section that the recipient is qualified to complete section 5 of this 2000 Act. the transfer of a firearm is immune from civil liability for any (2) Improperly transferring a [handgun] firearm is a Class A use of the firearm from the time of the transfer unless the misdemeanor. transferor knows,or reasonably should know,that the recip- SECTION 11.ORS 166.460 is amended to read: ient is likely to commit an unlawful act involving the firearm. 166.460. (1) ORS 166.250, 166.260, 166.280, 166.291 to (b)If the transferor is required to request a criminal back- 166.295, 166.410, 166.412, 166.425 and 166.450 and sections ground check under section 7 of this 2000 Act,the immunity 5 and 7 of this 2000 Act do not apply to antique firearms. provided by paragraph(a)of this subsection applies only if, (2)Notwithstanding the provisions of subsection(1)of this sec- in addition to receiving the notification required by this tion, possession of an antique firearm by a person described in section, the transferor has the recipient fill out the form ORS 166.250(1)(c)(B), (C)or(D)constitutes a violation of ORS required by section 7(1)(a)of this 2000 Act and retains the 166.250. form as required by section 7(2)of this 2000 Act. (c)The immunity provided by paragraph (a) of this sub- NOTE: Boldfaced type indicates new language; [brackets and section does not apply: italic]type indicates deletions or comments. (A) If the transferor knows, or reasonably should know, that the recipient of the firearm intends to deliver the firearm to a third person who the transferor knows, or reasonably should know,may not lawfully possess the firearm;or. (B)In any product liability civil action under ORS 30.900 to 30.920. SECTION 7. (1)A transferor other than a gun dealer may not transfer a firearm at a gun show unless the transferor: (a)(A) Requests a criminal background check under sec- tion 6 of this 2000 Act prior to completing the transfer; (B)Receives a notification that the recipient is qualified to complete the transfer;and (C)Has the recipient complete the form described in sec- tion 8 of this 2000 Act;or (b)Completes the transfer through a gun dealer. (2)The transferor shall retain the completed form referred to in subsection(1)of this section for at least five years and shall make the completed form available to law enforcement agencies for the purpose of criminal investigations. (3) A person who organizes a gun show shall post in a prominent place at the gun show a notice explaining the requirements of subsections(1)and(2)of this section.The person shall provide the form required by subsection (1)of this section to any person transferring a firearm at the gun show. (4) Subsection (1) of this section does not apply if the transferee is licensed as a dealer under 18 U.S.C.923. (5)(a) Failure to comply with the requirements of subsec- tion(1),(2)or(3)of this section is a Class A misdemeanor. (b) Notwithstanding paragraph (a)of this subsection,fail- ure to comply with the requirements of subsection(1),(2)or (3)of this section is a Class C felony if the person has two or more previous convictions under this section. (6)It is an affirmative defense to a charge of violating sub- section(1)or(3)of this section that the person did not know, or reasonably could not know, that more than 25 firearms were at the site and available for transfer. 266 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 5 EXPLANATORY STATEMENT Ballot Measure 5 expands current state law by requiring that a person other than a gun dealer who transfers a firearm at a gun show request a criminal background check.Current law requires only gun dealers to request such background checks.The mea- sure defines a "gun show" as an event where more than 25 firearms are at the site and available for transfer.The measure specifies information that a person other than a gun dealer must provide to the State Police when requesting a criminal.back- ground check and establishes deadlines for the State Police to respond.The State Police may charge a fee, as provided under existing Oregon law,for the additional background checks autho- rized by this measure. Under current law the State of Oregon conducts criminal back- ground checks on purchases of handguns made through gun dealers, and the federal government conducts such checks on rifle and shotgun purchases made through gun dealers.This mea- sure transfers the authority from the federal government to the state to conduct criminal background checks on rifle and shotgun purchases.The measure requires that the Department of State Police, in addition to conducting a criminal background check, determine whether a person is prohibited by state or federal law from possessing a firearm.Such prohibited persons include per- sons convicted of felonies and certain violent misdemeanors,and mentally ill persons who under state law are prohibited from pur- chasing or possessing a firearm. The measure grants immunity from civil liability to a person who requests a background check and receives approval before transferring a firearm, unless the person knows or should know that the person to whom the firearm is being transferred is likely to commit an unlawful act involving the firearm. The immunity does not apply-if the person knows that the recipient of the firearm intends to deliver the firearm to a third person who is prohibited from possessing a firearm.The measure does not grant immunity in a product liability action. The measure creates the crimes of providing false information in connection with a transfer of a firearm and improperly transfer- ring a firearm. Under current law these two crimes apply only to handguns. Committee Members: Appointed by: Senator Ginny Burdick Chief Petitioners Dale Penn Chief Petitioners Rod Harder* Secretary of State John Nichols* Secretary of State Les Swanson Secretary of State *Member dissents(does not concur with explanatory statement) (This committee was appointed to provide an impartial explanation of the ballot measure pursuant to ORS 251.215.) 267 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters"Pamphlet--Statewide Measures Measure No. 5 Arguments ARGUMENT IN FAVOR ARGUMENT IN FAVOR THE MILLION MOM MARCH ASKS YOU TO PLEASE SUPPORT Close the Loophole...That's Killing Oregonians! MEASURE 5! We now have the opportunity to close a deadly loophole in our Felons and kids can easily buy guns in Oregon, no questions state's gun laws. Vote YES on Measure 5, the Gun Violence asked.That's because current law doesn't require a background Prevention Act,which will make unlicensed dealers at gun shows check unless the seller is a licensed gun dealer. play by the same rules that govern gun sales everywhere else in That just doesn't make sense,and Measure 5 will stop it. the state, Measure 5 is a simple, common-sense measure that will protect Licensed gun dealers already run background checks our children and our communities from gun trauma by requiring Undercurrent law, licensed gun dealers must run background checks on all of their buyers whether the purchase is made at a buyers at gun shows to pass the same background check they store or a gun show.But unlicensed sellers, who sell would have to pass in a gun store,whether the seller is a licensed thousands dealer or not. of guns annually at Oregon gun shows, can sell to anyone, including violent felons-no questions asked.Amazingly,at gun Does it make sense that felons can buy any gun they want at a shows no background check is required when the seller is gun show,safe in the knowledge that the illegal sale will never be unlicensed. discovered?No! Criminals Love Gun Shows Does it make sense that kids can walk into a gun show and walk And make no mistake, unlicensed gun merchants are not just out with a gun? No! selling antique, Civil War era pistols for display on living room walls. These unlicensed dealers sell the full range of potent, Does it make sense that unscrupulous gun owners can sell guns modern weapons ... capable of inflicting widespread death and to illegal purchasers without any accountability? No! destruction.And they are selling them to criminals.Police investi- Measure 5 is simple common sense. gations have consistently found that gun shows are a major source of weapons for convicted felons,gang members and Background checks will make it harder for felons, kids, or other others not allowed by law to purchase firearms. The tragic prohibited purchasers to buy guns illegally. shooting deaths at Columbine High School are but one high Background checks will make it easier to trace guns recovered in profile example of the devastation caused by guns purchased crimes. from unlicensed dealers at gun shows. Background checks will make it easier to identify and prosecute gun traffickers who peddle guns to criminals and children. Common Sense Can Save Lives Don't be misled by zealots who claim that this measure somehow A 1999 report by the federal Departments of Justice and the violates the Second Amendment.This law will have absolutely no Treasury found that over ONE THIRD of all investigations of drug effect on the ability of a law-abiding citizen to buy,possess or sell crimes and crimes of violence involved at least one weapon that firearms.It merely applies current rules to unlicensed dealers. could be traced to a gun show.Of these,the study found that ONE That's just common sense. THIRD involved the possession by a MINOR of a gun that could be traced to a gun show. We can fix this tragic flaw in our gun laws. Vote YES on Measure 5. It makes sense for our children, our CLOSE THE LOOPHOLE-VOTE YES ON MEASURE 5! communities and our state. Because We Care About Oregon PAC (This information furnished by Penny Okamoto, The Organizing Chapters Beverly Stein,Chair of the Oregon Million Mom March.) (This,information furnished by Beverly Stein, Because We Care About Oregon PAC.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 268 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 5 Arguments ARGUMENT IN FAVOR ARGUMENT IN FAVOR Measure 5 endangers Oregonians YES on Measure 5. No one wants to see guns in the hands of criminals. However, Measure 5 has one purpose: to require criminal back- imposing restrictions and bureaucratic duties on law-abiding ground checks at gun shows. citizens in their homes is not the answer. Measure 5 restores fairness. Measure 5, places heavier restrictions on private citizens Licensed dealers already are required to do criminal than gun dealers. background checks before selling a firearm. Measure 5 Private dealers sell.guns to customers when the state doesn't extends that requirement to private sellers at gun shows.That's not only fair, it's common sense. respond to background requests within two days, under Measure 5 private citizens are prohibited from selling a firearm until the Why have background checks for some sales and not others at state grants permission. gun shows? It's a dangerous loophole that needs to be closed. With the bizarre consequence of making gun dealerships more Measure 5 closes it. profitable,the primary effect of this measure is raising the cost of Measure 5 helps law enforcement. defending yourself. As it is now, criminals can buy guns at gun shows in Oregon Many people wait until they sense a threat to themselves or their with no background checks.There are approximately 160 gun family before purchasing a firearm. Measure 5 delays urgent shows a year in Oregon, giving criminals lots of opportunities purchases by flooding the background check system, requiring to get their hands on firearms,no questions asked.When these checks on hunting weapons seldom used by criminals. guns are used in crimes, law enforcement can't trace them. Measure 5 will help law enforcement trace guns used in crime. If Measure 5 passes,stalkers,muggers,burglars and rapists Measure 5 background checks are immediate. may all breathe a little easier, fewer people will be able to Measure 5 does not create a waiting period. Background protect themselves. checks on gun show sales will be done instantly--just as they If Measure 5 passes,someone with a modest firearm collec- are on gun store sales. tion cannot give an old hunting rifle to a son or daughter Measure 5 makes no change in existing recordkeeping without performing background checks. requirements. If Measure 5 passes,any gun hobbyist must become a mini- Records on gun sales are kept for this reason: to help law records bureau,keeping documents for years after transfer- enforcement officials trace guns used in crime. Measure 5 ring just one firearm. simply extends existing recordkeeping requirements to more Why would anyone put such a flawed measure on the ballot? gun sales.The requirements themselves do not change. • This is not poor drafting,the proponents know what they're doing. Measure 5 protects Oregon gun owners. Measure 5 provides civil immunity from lawsuits for gun By encompassing almost every firearm transfer, this measure owners who sell guns at gun shows and do background amounts to a registration scheme for firearm transfers. checks.Another protection for gun owners:Measure 5 will help Registration was a precursor to confiscation in every country trace stolen guns. where people lost the right to defend themselves. Oregon must not begin down that path. Measure 5 is not a Constitutional amendment. Defend your right to defend yourself! Measure 5 is a simple,common sense law that will help reduce Vote NO on 5. gun violence in our state. It is no threat to the rights of law- abiding Oregonians. Furnished by the Libertarian Party of Oregon Vote YES on Measure 5. The Libertarian Party is Oregon's third largest political party. State Senator Ginny Burdick Libertarians are fiscally conservative, socially tolerant, believing Sheriff Robert O.Kennedy Sheriff Dan Noelle that government should be limited to protecting freedom while ensuring personal responsibility. (This information furnished by State Senator Ginny Burdick, Sheriff For more information call 1 (800)829-1992 or visit our web site at Robert O.Kennedy,Sheriff Dan Noelle.) www.lporegon.org (This information furnished by Eric Winters,Libertarian Party of Oregon.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 269 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 5 Arguments ARGUMENT IN FAVOR ARGUMENT IN FAVOR LAW ENFORCEMENT SUPPORTS MEASURE 5:VOTE YES I BELONG TO THE NRA, I OWN GUNS -- AND I SUPPORT Law enforcement officers throughout Oregon support Measure 5 MEASURE 5. because it will help reduce gun-related crime. Measure 5 As an NRA member, gun owner and hunter, I support requires criminal background checks at gun shows. Measure 5. Under current law, licensed gun dealers must conduct criminal Growing up in Eastern Oregon, I learned that owning a gun is a background checks before selling a gun.But unlicensed sellers at right as well as a privilege. As a small boy, playing with cap gun shows are allowed to sell guns to anyone without a back- pistols and toy rifles was a way of life.Getting older and moving ground check--no questions asked.This is a dangerous loophole to my first B.B. gun was the beginning of my transition from in the law,allowing criminals,juveniles and the mentally disturbed boyhood to a responsible gun owner. to obtain guns easily.The result too often is gun violence in our There is no debate about who should own guns. No one who communities. poses a risk to society should possess a firearm of any kind! Oregon police,sheriffs and state troopers see the tragic effects of gun violence every day. Many of these tragedies could be Measure 5 would help keep guns out of the hands of criminals, juveniles and mentally disturbed people.Measure 5 is a reason- prevented if we did a better job of keeping guns out of the hands able measure that will not interfere in any way with my rights of criminals,children and the mentally disturbed. as a law-abiding gun owner. • Measure 5 would close the dangerous gun show loophole I believe strongly that the best way to protect our Second by requiring that all gun sellers at gun shows conduct a Amendment rights is to make sure that they are not abused.The criminal background check before selling a firearm. NRA does a fine job educating and training gun owners.I think the • Measure 5 does not threaten the rights of law-abiding gun NRA should take a close look at Measure 5 and support it for the owners. sake of all responsible gun owners. • Measure 5 is not a constitutional amendment. Measure 5 is a reasonable,moderate response that will help keep • Measure 5 is a simple,common sense law that will help guns out of the wrong hands without interfering with the rights of keep guns away from criminals,children and the mentally any responsible, law-abiding gun owner. disturbed without threatening the rights of law-abiding I urge all responsible Oregon gun owners to vote YES on gun owners. Measure 5. Please join Oregon sheriffs and police officers in voting YES John Brogoitti a on Measure 5 Pendleton Oregon Police Chiefs for Safer Communities (This information furnished by John Brogoitti.) Sheriffs of Oregon Oregon Council of Police Associations Oregon State Police Officers Association (This information furnished by Steve Winegar, Oregon Police Chiefs for Safer Communities; Brian DeLashmutt, Oregon Council of Police Associations.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 270 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 5 Arguments ARGUMENT IN FAVOR ARGUMENT IN FAVOR Oregon Medical Association Urges a Paramedics and emergency personnel say "Yes"Vote on Measure 5 "YES"to Measure 5. We have a serious gun safety problem in Oregon. • Paramedics see the tragedies of gun violence firsthand. Too many guns sold at gun shows are getting into the hands of In this country, 12 children are killed every day by guns in criminals, children and the mentally disturbed.Today, if you or I crimes, accidents, gang violence and domestic disputes. purchase a gun from a gun dealer, we go through a criminal Paramedics are often the first on the scene. records check. But anyone can purchase a firearm from an unlicensed seller at a gun show with no questions asked. And Measure 5 will require background checks for all guns sold at criminals are doing just that, gun shows --the same background check that is required for Guns can be purchased at gun shows illegally, guns sold at department stores or gun shops. because no questions are asked. Measure 5 will close a loophole in our law and help keep guns There are over 160 gun shows in Oregon every year. Law out of the hands of children,felons and the mentally disturbed. enforcement officials often find guns from gun shows used in We may not be able to prevent all gun tragedies, but we can crimes,and gun shows are an easy source of firearms for minors make it harder to sell guns to persons who cannot legally own caught up in gang activity. them. It's time to close a dangerous loophole in our gun laws. Shawn Baird,EMT-P Measure 5 closes the loophole that allows children,criminals and Paramedic the mentally disturbed to purchase firearms at gun shows. Woodburn This is a small,but common sense step Justin Hardwick,EMTP to keep guns out of the hands of criminals and children. Paramedic Portland As physicians, we see the harm that is done when guns get into Lara Washington,EMT-P the wrong hands. We all need to work together for violence Paramedic prevention,and one step is to shut down a major source of illegal Par Paramam firearms in Oregon. Join Oregon Doctors in Voting Help keep guns out of the hands of children,convicted felons and the mentally disturbed. "YES"on Measure 5 Vote"YES"on Measure 5. Linda Erwin,MD Richard Kincade,MD Pprtland Springfield (This information furnished by Shawn Baird.) Bryron Sagunsky,MD John Tongue,MD Medford Tualatin Thomas Wilson,MD, Andy Harris,MD Salem Salem John Hoggard,MD Keith White,MD Portland Monmouth Hans West,MD Donald Trunkey,MD Salem Portland Loring Winthrop,MD Thomas Wilson,MD Salem Salem Stanley Nudelman,MD Martin Jones,MD Corvallis Eugene John Walker,MD Medford (This information furnished by Robert L.Dernedde,CAE, Oregon Medical Association.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 271 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 5 Arguments ARGUMENT IN FAVOR ARGUMENT IN FAVOR The Oregon Coalition for Safe Streets, Schools and Homes Nurses Support Common Sense Product Safety Laws. urges a yes vote on Measure 5. As nurses we feel an obligation to speak-up when there is a Oregonians have witnessed the tragedy of gun violence first common sense product safety issue before the public.We have hand.Now we have a chance to close the gun show loophole to advocated for the use of seatbelts and motorcycle helmets.We prevent guns from falling into the hands of criminals and children. have promoted safe toys for children and for safety caps on Currently,identification and background checks are required only pharmaceuticals. We have supported reducing the amount of toxins in our air and water. when guns are purchased from licensed dealers.But at hundreds of weekly gun shows held around the state each year, firearms Measure 5 is just Common Sense. are sold without any age or background check on the purchaser. Nurses Do Not Support Banning Products. This measure closes that loophole.It does not in any way restrict the ability of law abiding gun owners to purchase or own firearms. As nurses we have never advocated banning pesticides because We are all too aware of the recent gun violence in our schools they contain toxins or cars because they are involved in auto here in Oregon, in Colorado and across the country. According accidents. We don't support taking toys from kids or making to'the National Center for Injury Prevention and Control, cigarettes illegal. 4,643 kids were killed by firearms in 1996.That is 13 young We do not support restricting the rights of law abiding gun people per day. owners. Last legislative session Oregonians Against Gun Violence Measure 5 isn't Gun Control. (OAGV) and a coalition comprised of dozens of organizations throughout the state organized to support efforts to close the gun Firearms Improperly Sold Risk Public Safety show loophole.Tragically,the gun lobby was able to kill that bill by Selling guns to convicted felons is a risk to public safety.It is just one vote. that simple. Thousands of Oregonians have already achieved a great victory Measure 5 simply requires the same criminal background check by placing Measure 5 on the November ballot. Now we have a at gun shows that current law requires at gun shops.This is a chance to take direct action to close the gun show loophole once public safety precaution that may save lives.To a law abiding gun and r all. owner it amounts to waiting 10 minutes at a gun show before Join with us and thousands of Oregonians to safeguard our owning a new firearm.To society it amounts a few less firearms in children and communities from gun violence. the hands of criminals. Please vote YES on Measure 5. Vote"YES"on Measure 5 GUN SAFETY Oregonians Against Gun Violence Oregon PTA Firearms Improperly Stored Cause Injury City of Portland Our"Campaign for Children's Health"is promoting the use of Community Action Forum, Eugene lock-boxes and trigger locks.These are products that reduce the Ecumenical Ministries of Oregon risk of accidental injury by firearms. Rabbi Emmanuel Rose Oregon Public Health Association 30%of families with children keep a loaded gun Oregon Pediatric Nurse Practitioners Association in the home. Vera Katz, Portland Mayor Please, if you own.a gun please store it safely Jim Francesconi, Portland City Commissioner with a trigger-lock or in a lock box. David Kelly, Eugene City Counselor Serena Cruz,Multnomah County Commissioner And parents:it is appropriate to ask if guns are safely stored Mark Abrams,Vice Chair, Portland School Bd.(ID only) at a home before your child visits. (This information furnished by Ginny Burdick, Oregonians Against Gun (This information furnished by Martin Taylor,Nurses United.) Violence.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment,by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 272 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 5 Arguments ARGUMENT*IN FAVOR ARGUMENT IN FAVOR Statement in Support of Measure 5 by the OREGON DISTRICT ATTORNEYS URGE Oregon Catholic Conference A YES VOTE ON MEASURE 5. • Present laws require background checks by gun dealers, but We urge Oregonians to vote Yes on Measure 5. convicted felons and people with negative mental history can It makes it much harder for criminals, juveniles and mentally still purchase guns at gun shows. disturbed people to get guns. • Measure 5 is important for the common good in helping to For years we have seen that many guns used in drive-by shoot- restrict access to firearms for the protection of innocent ings, gang killings and other related criminal activity came from persons. unlicensed sellers to gun shows. • Measure 5 is reasonable and prudent gun safety legislation When licensed dealers sell guns at gun shows,they are required which is consistent with present legislation. to conduct background checks on anyone buying a gun.These The Oregon Catholic Conference recommends you vote requirements will not change under Measure 5. Yes on Measure 5. Measure 5 will affect only those unlicensed gun sellers who don't Most Rev.John G.Vlazny do background checks and who usually don't cooperate in crimi- Archbishop of Portland nal investigations.These are they people the criminals go to if President,Oregon Catholic Conference they need a gun.These are the people who will be required to do Most Rev.Robert F.Vasa background checks--just like the dealers do now--if Measure 5 Bishop of Baker is passed into law. Vice President,Oregon Catholic Conference How are unlicensed people able to sell guns at gun shows with- out doing a background check? Because currently there is a (This information furnished by Robert J. Castagna, Oregon Catholic dangerous loophole in the law.Measure 5 closes that loophole. Conference.) It requires anyone selling a gun at a gun show to conduct a criminal background check. Measure 5 is a sensible approach to reduce gun-related crime.It will make our communities and neighborhoods safer to live in by keeping more guns out of the wrong hands. Please join us and vote Yes on Measure 5 for safer communities. Dale Penn Marion County District Attorney Michael D.Schrunk Multnomah County District Attorney (This information furnished by Michael D.Schrunk.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument, accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 273 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 5 Arguments ARGUMENT IN FAVOR I ARGUMENT IN FAVOR Support Livable Communities:Vote YES on Measure 5 RESPONSIBLE GUN OWNERS SUPPORT MEASURE 5 Measure 5 would close the gun show loophole that allows As a gun owner and hunter,I support Measure 5. criminals,juveniles and the mentally ill to buy guns without going through a criminal background check. I believe gun ownership is a right--but not for criminals. As a member of Congress, I am working hard to reduce the There should be no serious debate about whether convicted epidemic of gun violence that threatens the livability of our com- felons or others who pose a risk to society should possess guns. munities.Unfortunately, Congress has failed to adopt reasonable We have problems enough without helping to arm felons and the legislation to keep guns away from criminals, children and the mentally disturbed. Unfortunately, gun shows have become mentally ill. Now you have a chance to help me break the firearm garage sales for criminals,juveniles and the mentally logjam in Washington,D.C. disturbed. Ballot Measure 5 closes that loophole without doing any harm to the rights of law-abiding Oregonians to own, buy or We know that gun shows are a major source of illegal firearms for sell guns. convicted felons, gang members and others who are not legally As a kid I grew up around guns.I was taught that a gun is always entitled to buy guns.That is because unlicensed sellers are not loaded. I had my first shotgun and began hunting rabbits and required to conduct criminal background checks before selling a squirrels at age 11.Hunting and gun ownership is a heritage and gun.Licensed dealers perform background checks routinely--at a lifelong pleasure that my sons share.As citizens we have the their gun shops and at gun shows. right to protect our family,our property and ourselves.Gun own- Isn't it only fair to require unlicensed gun sellers to conduct ership is critical to that right.For that reason I belong to the N.R.A. criminal background checks at gun shows, the same as I also enjoy going to gun shows. I go often and usually buy licensed dealers now are required to do? Measure 5 would something. require all sellers at gun shows to conduct criminal back- For too long, the debate over guns has been dominated by ground checks. . extremists on both sides.It is time for responsible gun owners to Sadly, too many people in Congress and the state legislature be heard.As one of those gun owners, I believe that the best have been intimidated by the extremist gun lobby. Measure 5 way to protect the right of gun ownership is to see that it is gives Oregonians a chance to stand up to the special interests not abused.Abuse will provide the fuel for more regulation and, and support common sense steps to keep guns out of the wrong ultimately,the loss of our right. hands and make our communities safer. Ballot Measure 5 is a reasonable, moderate response to a As an Oregon voter,you have a chance to make your voice heard specific problem.It will help reduce gun-related crimes by around the nation.Your vote for this sensible measure will make keeping guns out of the wrong hands. It is also a way to my job easier in Congress.Please vote YES on Measure 5. preserve our heritage of gun ownership. Sincerely, I urge Oregon gun owners to vote yes on Measure 5. Earl Blumenauer Garry R.Bullard Member of Congress (This information furnished by Garry Bullard.) (This information furnished by Earl Blumenauer, Blumenauer for Congress.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 274 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 5 Arguments ARGUMENT IN FAVOR ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION Oregon Sheriffs Support Measure 5. Measure 5,Government Registration Of Gun Owners Vote YES to Fight Crime. If measure 5 passes, private exchanges of firearms will require Measure 5 will require criminal background checks at gun shows. background checks using the "National Instant Check System" " This system has been down for days at a time. Read what the Measure 5 will make it much harder for convicted criminals, State Police have to say about how that affects their system,the juveniles and people who are mentally disturbed to buy guns in Handgun Instant Check System: Oregon. "Without the required national background check information, As law enforcement officials, we know that gun shows have HICS cannot authorize the firearm sale" become a major source of firearms for criminals and gang Oregon State Police Press Release May 12 2000 members in Oregon.Sometimes,the victims of gun violence are The databases created by this measure serve no purpose the same law enforcement officers we depend on to protect our other than to identify gun owners. In New York and California, children and families. databases of this type are being used to confiscate privately • A loophole in our current law allows criminals and juveniles to owned firearms. buy guns at gun shows and skip a background check.With as The same people who have called for this attack on your privacy many as 160 gun shows a year in our state,we have a serious have shown no inclination to prosecute criminals who try to buy safety crisis on our hands. guns. • Measure 5 will close the gun show loophole and help us pro- "Arrests rare in gun checks... tect our neighborhoods and communities from gun violence. • Measure 5 is not a Constitutional amendment. It does not "The whole purpose of this system is not to arrest people' threaten the rights of responsible gun owners. said Tom Dixson who supervises the Oregon State Police instant check system... • Measure 5 is a simple,common sense law that will help reduce "Even when local authorities are notified that a felon is gun violence in Oregon without threatening the rights of law- attempting to buy a gun, it's usually not a high abiding gun owners. priority for them to react right away." Please join us in voting YES on Measure 5. Statesman Journal 5/30/99 For a safer Oregon. "Few felons arrested under gun check law" Sheriff Robert Kennedy Sheriff Dan Noelle Eugene Register Guard 5/31/99 Jackson County Multnomah County "I don't see anything in this act that is going to prevent Sheriff John A.Trumbo Sheriff Stan Robson gun violence' Umatilla County Benton County Lane County Sheriff Jan Clements Sheriff Jim Spinden Sheriff Ris Bradshaw Eugene Register Guard August 4th 2000 Washington County Clackamas County "Our analyses provide no evidence that implementation of the Brady Act was associated with a reduction in homicide rates:' Sheriff Raul Ramirez Sheriff John O'Brien Journal of American Medicine Marion County Lincoln County Vol.284 No 5 August 200 (This information furnished by Stan Robson,Sheriffs of Oregon.) Measure 5 is not about stopping crimes. It's not about stopping violence. It's about stopping you. It's about preventing you from protecting your family. It's about a vast registration scheme. It's about government record keeping of you and your family.Despite no mention in the explanatory statement,this measure mandates the police to keep records of gun owners. Think About It. (This information furnished by Kevin Starrett,Oregon Firearms Federation Political Action Committee.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 275 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphiet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 5 Arguments ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION A Police Chief Says to on 5 PHYSICIAN OPPOSED TO GUN REGISTRATION As a career police officer and current chief of police of North Oregonians are being asked to pass this measure which Plains,Oregon, I urge a"no"vote on Measure 5. purports to reduce gun violence. Nothing could be farther from The first.sworn duty of police officers is to uphold the U.S.and the truth.This measure would only punish law-abiding people and impair their safety because criminals wouldn't follow this law any state constitutions. I have studied those documents, but the sad fact is that many police officers and other public officials have more than they do existing gun laws. never done so. It troubles me that some of my brothers in law Physicians with a political agenda or those who are misin- enforcement would support an attack on your rights. formed or choose to ignore the truth,often support such laws as Measure 5 will do nothing to reduce crime or violence.What it this because of"safety concerns:' will do is create one more hurdle for law abiding Oregonians to As a physician who has worked in major trauma centers for exercise a right that I have a sworn duty to protect. over 20 years in three states,I can tell you,laws like this do noth- I did not accept my position to erode the rights of the peopple I ing to enhance public safety.The data show that armed citizens prevent many more crimes, injuries, deaths and violence each serve.If this measure passes,massive databases of private le year than those caused by criminals with illicit firearms.A recent mation will be kept by the state, the same type of databases study released by the .Journal of the American Medical that have been used to confiscate privately owned firearms from citizens of New York and California. Association (284:585, 2000) proves that registering gun purchases (which the unconstitutional Brady,bill does) did not The "National Instant Check System," used for these back- reduce overall gun homicide or suicide rates, nor will this ground checks, has been "down"for days at a time. Under this measure.I and many of my physician colleagues concur with this measure countless new transfers will be regulated by that failed (http://www.KeepAndBearArms.com/dsgl/about.asp). system.When the system is turned off,those transfers will not be This measure is nothing more than a Brady bill extension, i.e. approved. a gun registration law.As such, it will do nothing for public safety It would be a shame to waste limited resources tracking the and also represents a terrible invasion of the privacy of good legitimate activity of the law abiding when we should be using Oregonians. History has proven that gun registration eventually those resources to combat crime. leads to gun confiscation and ultimately genocide. Don't leave Protect your freedom,protect your privacy.Vote no on Measure your family and fellow Oregonians this legacy. 5. As a physician, I always guarded my patients' privacy and safety.For that reason I urge Oregonians to reject this measure. Chief Gary McKenzie Do not allow your safety and privacy to be violated like this. North Plains Measure 5 is neither necessary nor in the best interests of (This information furnished by Gary McKenzie.) Oregon or its people. Larry Priano M.D. (This information furnished by Larry Priano,M.D.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 276 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 5 Arguments ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION When attempting to sell the public a "bill of goods", what is not ARGUMENTS AGAINST MEASURE 5 said is frequently more significant than what is.Ballot measure 5 This proposition presents several troubling, unacceptable pro- is a perfect example. visions. The bill's author and co-sponsors clearly wish to shut What proponents of measure 5 are not saying: down gun shows as we know them in order to"close legal loop- ."holesThey claim this is needed despite the fact that most The vast majority of firearms sold at gun shows are done by collector organizations include and welcome sheriff and police licensed dealers not private individuals, and per existing law, all personnel in their membership. dealer transactions require background checks. It is obvious that this whole proposal is nothing more than a Information measure 5 would collect, in addition to the identity of thinly disguised attempt to establish gun registration in our state. the buyer, is: (a) the name, address and phone number of the Registration has been a necessary prerequisite for later ultimate seller;and(b)the make, model,caliber and identification number confiscation and there is abundant proof in other states and other of the firearm being transferred.None of this data is necessary to countries of this final consequence. conduct a background check of the buyer, and all data collected would be retained by the Oregon State Police for up to five years. The definition of a"Gun Show"in this proposal is poorly written, Over 90%of these records would be on individuals who passed deliberately loose and vague. As written, it could prohibit trade the background check.The result would be a government data or purchase among citizen collectors in a private home unless base on law-abiding citizens and their private property, and a registration of the sale or transfer occurs. covert form of firearm registration. Currently, Federal law that applies to dealer transfer of Measure 5 has been presented to the Oregon Legislature as firearms, (NICS) or National Instant Check Service, involves three different bills in the last two sessions and always been retention of records for 90 days.Yet Measure 5 requires that State defeated.The major objection to these bills has been the regis- Police retain records of a firearm transfer for a minimum of five tration element.Proponents of these bills have always refused to years.The State Police have requested this.Why the insistence drop that element, even though the removal would almost on five-year (or more) retention of records unless de-facto certainly have ensured passage. This strongly suggest that firearms registration is contemplated for the near future? firearm registration is their goal, not background checks. In addition, although the State benevolently would absolve a Most gun owners are responsible people and do not want to sell citizen from possible charges arising from a firearm transfer if it is a firearm to a criminal.They would welcome a number they could registered with State Police,they require that the citizen transferor call,give the name of a potential buyer and instantly verify his/her keep a record of the transaction for.t least five years! integrity, provided it ended there. DON'T COMPROMISE YOUR RIGHTS AS A GUN OWNER. Measure 5 is not about background checks or public safety, it's VOTE NO ON MEASURE 5. about government control. Vote your conscience, but know the facts. (This information furnished by Dr.Fred J.Schuster.) Richard Graff President-OSSA (This information furnished by Richard Graff, President, Oregon State Shooting Assoc.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 277 CONTINUED� Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet-Statewide Measures Measure No. 5 Arguments ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION Measure 5 requires private sellers of firearms at gun shows to THE GUN PROHIBITIONIST'S obtain from the Oregon State Police instant background checks of RECIPE FOR FIREARMS CONFISCATION purchasers. We do not object to instant background checks of firearms purchasers, but this measure goes far beyond that. First,information on both gun and gun buyer in gun shop sales is entered into the state data base; then for guns bought in gun The bill would require private sellers to charge a fee for back- shows (Measure 5); then for all private transactions including ground checks. The fee would be set by the State Police. even guns inherited from parents.Wait some years for all legally Federally licensed dealers get instant background checks from owned guns to be captured in the data base (but never mind the FBI with no fee charged and the FBI is only allowed to retain about criminals'guns).Confiscation is next. the purchase records for a short time. This bill allows our State Police to retain complete records of the make, model and serial number of the firearms and the names Is the above a logical fallacy known as"slippery slope"?By and addresses of the sellers and purchasers for five years.We the definition of that fallacy,it is indeed.It fits the definition if each object to the five-year retention of these records. It is a form of step cannot be proven with 100% certainty, and that's the case registration of all firearm purchases since it includes rifles and here.For example,while it's highly probable that gun prohibition- shotguns as well as handguns.Why give the State Police more ists will soon come back with another initiative to capture all legal authority than the FBI? Why do they want to retain records on private transactions in the state data base, we don't know that law-abiding gun owners when the criminal has already been elim- with certainty. inated from these purchases by the instant background checks? Perhaps if we say each of the above steps is likely to occur— If preventing criminals from obtaining firearms is the goal, the rather than that it must occur—that would take it out of the cate- instant check does this.Why then is this bill requiring the regis- gory of a logical fallacy. All of them do seem very likely, given tration of the firearm purchased by the legal, law-abiding citizen enough time. of this state? In country after country throughout history,registra- There is one thing we do know for sure:no government can tion of firearms and their owners has been followed by firearms confiscate its citizen's firearms, if it doesn't know where confiscation. This has most recently occurred in England, those firearms are. Australia,and South Africa.Canada is well along in this process. It has already happened in the United States in New York City and Passing Measure 5 would get them a step closer to having the state of California with so-called assault rifles. the one,crucial tool they need to make confiscation work.It then remains only to wait until a government is elected,with Someday U.S.politicians may want to confiscate all guns from the, the will to use that tool. U.S. citizens. The records mandated by this bill would make it easy to do so. Gun prohibitionists are pushing this back-door registration because they know laws passed in other states specifically to We urge you to note NO on measure 5 register guns have had extremely low compliance rates. They Vern Schmidt, President also know gun confiscation laws, such as New Jersey's, did not Willamette Valley Arms Collectors Assoc. work without registration. If you want guns confiscated,then this measure is for you. But if you value your right to defend (This information furnished by Vern Schmidt,Pres.,Willamette Valley Arms your family and want to preserve that right for your children, Collectors Assoc.) VOTE NO! (This information furnished by Paul J.Bonneau.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 278 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 5 Arguments ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION SO WHAT IF MEASURE 5 BOILS DOWN TO FIREARMS "The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace REGISTRATION?WHAT'S WRONG WITH THAT? alarmed--and thus clamorous to be led to safety--by menacing Here is what's wrong: lawmaking ought to be founded on it with an endless series of hobgoblins,all of them imaginary." principle. The principles are found in the state and federal --H.L.Mencken constitutions. Examples: citizens may say what they think; they MEASURE 5 IS NOT ABOUT FIGHTING CRIME may defend themselves and their families;and there is a limit to When the most dedicated gun prohibitionist in the legislature police power. creates a ballot measure billed as a background check,it's a safe To illustrate:some may argue that the passage of Measure 5 will assumption that something else is going on.Consider: make it easier for police to solve crimes.In other words, it will be 1) Supporters claim Measure 5 will deny criminals access to more convenient for police.But, in good law-and-order fashion, it guns.This is untrue. No law has ever denied such access, for a would also be convenient for police to be able to beat confessions good reason:criminals find guns very useful for what they do,and out of suspects.Yet we don't permit that. We don't pass laws will go to great lengths to get them. Not that they have to go to based merely on how much more convenient it will make the job great lengths—the black market supplies them! Smuggling guns of police work.We adhere to the principle that there is a limit to is easy and lucrative.That's why criminals in England are well the police power. armed,despite the total gun ban there. The principle that people have the right to defend their families is 2) Instead of sending information on every law-abiding buyer to deeply embedded in this nation's culture: Even those who don't be recorded in the state database, Measure 5 could have called exercise this right recognize they are benefited by those who do, for sending information on prohibited buyers to gun sellers;thus as criminals cannot distinguish between them.This right is exer- eliminating the danger of confiscation.Why was the latter method cised frequently.Citizens use guns over two million times a year not used? in defense,most times simply by showing they have one.They kill more than twice as many criminals in justifiable homicides, as 3)Measure 5 calls for information on the gun itself to be recorded. police do. If a background check on the buyer were the only concern, the Measure 5 violates the principle that citizens have the right particular gun would be irrelevant.Why record gun information, to self-defense.Here's why: unless it's needed for confiscation later on? It is foolish to hand government the one tool it needs to Crime rates have been falling for years,but there is a guaranteed confiscate guns and destroy that right,in the simple-minded method to reduce them even further without threatening citizens' faith no future government will ever use this tool. There is constitutional rights: end drug prohibition.Our ancestors experi- extensive history around the world, and recently in this country enced a huge drop in crime following the end of alcohol prohibi- (New York,California),of governments doing just that. tion;we would find the same effect. Legislators may find it hard to stick to principle when making Measure 5 is not about fighting crime. It cannot deliver on laws, but that's no excuse for the rest of us to abandon it. that promise. It can help deliver something much worse, Make the principled vote:NO. though:the end of your right to defend your family.Don't be deceived by this"Trojan Horse".VOTE NO. (This information furnished by Paul J.Bonneau.) (This information furnished by Paul J.Bonneau.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 279 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet---Statewide Measures Measure No. 5 Arguments ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION While Measure 5 masquerades as a "reasonable, common Charlton Heston, National Rifle Association of America, sense"measure, in truth it is neither.Measure 5 is a major refer- Fairfax,Virginia endum on"gun control"in Oregon. This November, as Oregon voters mark their ballots, the Compare Measure 5 to the work of Mothers Against Drunk rights of honest citizens will be under attack,while danger- Driving. No one would have taken MADD seriously had they ous criminals stand to be let off the hook for their vicious promoted a program which targeted law-abiding drivers rather acts of violence. than dangerous drunk drivers, yet the Measure 5 ringleaders expect us to believe that an improperly targeted law will somehow Oregon voters will consider Measure 5, a gun control initiative stop criminals! that greatly expands government regulation and control over the transfer of firearms between law-abiding individuals.At the same Measure 5 was written back east by Handgun Control Inc.The time, Oregon voters will decide on Measure 94, which repeals avowed goal of this organization is to eliminate the private own- current minimum sentencing requirements for convicted felons ership of guns in America.An identical measure is also moving in and eliminates the existing ban on early-release from prison for Colorado. these violent offenders. Their idea is to get a figurative foot in the door in two western Law-abiding citizens are sick and tired of being blamed for acts of states,where people traditionally have some rational ideas about criminal violence while the perpetrators get off scot-free. guns in society, and then slowly, incrementally, pursue their real Prosecutions for violations of federal firearms laws have agenda--the complete elimination of guns from the hands of all declined by 12%since 1992. It's simply wrong to ask honest private citizens.Of course, this program only affects the citizens Oregonians to support more controls on the law-abiding who obey the law! Criminals will not be affected since they don't when current laws are not being enforced against the law- obey the law. breakers. And this is not mere rhetoric! It is 25 years of experience which NRA strongly supports proven, effective crime-fighting measures the"gun control"extremists refuse to acknowledge! Washington such as "Project Exile:' This program relies on tough, xe istina DC has come very close to eliminating all privately owned federal and state gun laws already on the books which target handguns,yet criminal violence, by means of guns, continues armed, violent felons and drug traffickers for swift prosecution unabated. A 15-year-old recently opened fire on some kids he and certain punishment. "Project Exile"is Credited in part for didn't like at the National Zoo and residents--and police--complain bringing a 46 percent drop in homicides and 65 percent of nightly gun fire.What's it going to take to prove to citizens that drop in crimes involving guns in Richmond,Virginia, since "gun control"does not work?Do we want to make Oregon as safe inception of the program in 1997. as DC? No new laws were necessary to bring about this decline.No new We are told, by the supporters of Measure 5, that gun shows restrictions on law-abiding citizens. Our rights are not what's are a"major source of illegal firearms:'So...why not go arrest the wrong.Let's enforce existing laws first.Vote NO on Measure criminals?Why push for more"gun control?" 5. Is this common sense? Is this reasonable?You decide! (This information furnished by Charlton Heston, President, National Rifle Vote"NO!"on Measure 5, send Handgun Control Inc back to Association of America.) California! (This information furnished by Terry Carroll, Oregon State Coordinator, Second Amendment Sisters,Inc.) l (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 280 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 5 Arguments ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION Sheriff-Elect Jim Main Douglas County,OR Oregon Sportsmen Oppose Measure 5 A Law Enforcement Officer Explains Why He is Voting Against Rod Harder, Executive Director Oregon Sportsmens Defense Fund Inc. Measure 5. Measure 5 expands state record-keeping on law-abiding citizens Measure 5 mandates a check of government records and certain and the firearms they have a right to own under the Oregon State medical records before any firearm sale between any two individ- uals attending a gun show may take place—including people who sell, collect, trade or exchange even just one firearm at such an Constitution. Measure 5 promotes government intrusion into the event. Gun shows are so broadly defined in this proposal that private lives of honest citizens who are simply exercising their right to keep and bear arms. restrictions could apply even in your own home.They will apply to your local gun club, if more than 25 members with guns are I am also concerned that this measure will have little, if any, present and their firearms are available for transfer and to your impact on violent crime. According to a National Institute of sportsmen's organization fund-raiser, if more than 25 guns are Justice study released in December 1997,very few guns used in available for auction,raffle or transfer.Estate sales and yard sales crimes come from gun shows.The majority of guns used by crim- could also be affected. inals come from theft, dope deals, or the black market. These Measure 5 also extends Oregon's"instant check"system to cap- ture will not be affected by Measure 5. ture all hunting rifle and shotgun sales covered in the measure. Lastly, Measure 5 does not pay for itself. Departments such as This expansion of state regulation will subject a whole new group mine will be charged with enforcing this measure should it of firearms transactions to Oregon's "instant check" tax that is become law. It will impose more responsibility on local law currently$10.00 per transaction.Additionally, the name, date of enforcement and additional costs will be incurred.A panel of state birth, race, sex and address of each individual involved in these officials charged with assessing the fiscal impact of Measure 5 legal gun sales,as well as a description and the serial number of determined it would impose no costs on local government. each gun lawfully transferred, will be maintained in the Oregon Baloney! Enforcing laws DOES COST TAX DOLLARS. State Police's centralized firearms registration data base. This Measure 5 diverts taxpayer dollars and police manpower from personal information on law-abiding citizens) and their private, p p legal property will be kept for up to five years The measure pro- serious crime and is unlikely to impact violent crime.Let's spend vides no penalty if the State Police inappropriately use the our tax dollars where they do the most good, like putting child information. molesters away for a longer time. Measure 5 expands the tax on legal gun purchases,broadens the Join Me and Vote NO on Measure 5. State Police's gun registration scheme and brings us closer to (This information furnished by James Main.) intrusive government regulation of all private firearms transfers— including those between family members and close friends. The Oregon Sportsmens Defense Fund Inc. urges you to Vote NO on Measure 5! (This information furnished by Rod Harder, Executive Director, Oregon Sportsmen's Defense Fund Inc.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. i accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 281 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 5 Arguments ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION It was the early 70s. A military coup seized power in my Vote No on Measure 5 homeland, Greece. Quietly in the night they closed down the Despite what you've heard, Measure 5 is about gun registration, newspapers and cut off the telephones.They took over the radio not background checks.There is no loophole.The law was never and the television stations. intended to invade the,privacy of peaceful citizens who are not When the people arose the next morning they were ordered to dealers. bring their remaining guns to the nearest police station. By that If background checks were important,why keep records of private time the only guns the people were still allowed to own were registered hunting rifles. transactions for five years? Anyone who chose to disobey was secretly arrested the next If background checks were important, why is there almost no night. Many were never seen again.Those who survived were prosecution,at the Federal or state level,of felons who try to buy beaten horribly and forced into internal exile without their families guns. even knowing whether they were alive,or where they were.When If less than 2%of guns used in crime come from gun shows,what family members searched for their loved ones they were does this measure accomplish other than registering guns of harassed,threatened and also beaten. honest citizens and wasting your money? Neighbors were afraid to talk to neighbors. People knew that Your home becomes a"gun show"if you have more than a certain being seen with the family of someone who disappeared was number of guns and you invite a friend over to buy a gun.You dangerous. wouldn't be able to pass on firearms to your children without gov- Our Founding Fathers were aware that tyrants and their horrors ernment intruding into your family's private matters. were not political accidents. Dictators rise up when they realize Do you trust government to keep these records private?There's that they need not fear the people.For this reason the Declaration no penalty for revealing your personal information, which would of Independence states we have not only the right, but the duty, be as secure as FBI files at the White House. to throw off such evil.And for this reason the Constitution and the Bill of Rights guarantee us the means to defend our freedoms. There's no evidence this measure reduces crime.It isn't intended to. It is supposed to fail so they can justify even more laws that Alexander Hamilton, one of the authors of our Constitution, said invade your privacy and take away your rights. that great danger came from those who claimed to fight for"the people"while pursing their hidden agenda.Ask yourselves,what The real purpose is to develop a database of you and your hidden plans are being laid by those trying to force you to regis- guns with the intent of eventually taking them from you. ter your guns? Registration always leads to confiscation. am proud and thankful to be an American. Please join me in You don't believe this?Ask those who live in England, Australia, shouldering the responsibility of defending America against all Cuba, Panama, or China. Confiscation of guns already exists in enemies,foreign and domestic. America.Ask those who live in New York City and California. For our children's future,vote no on Measure 5. Vote NO on this thinly-disguised scheme to.invade your private affairs and steal your rights. Ourania Yue, MD Freedom and privacy are not loopholes. Gun control is not (This information furnished by Ourania Yue,MD.) about guns,it is about control of your private life. Solomon Yue National Committeeman Jeff Grossman Washington County Vice Chair Pat Turnidge Finance Committee Co-Chair (This information furnished by Solomon Yue,Jr.,Jeffrey A.Grossman,Pat Turnidge;Oregon Republican Party.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 282 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 5 Arguments ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION Measure 5:Ineffective and Invades Your Privacy Do you like the anti-human rights issues present On its face,Measure 5 seems to be straightforward.However,we in this measure? ask you to look beyond its seeming simplicity and realize that it It categorizes everyone you included,as a criminal_ will be ineffective and an invasion of your-privacy I without any demonstrable cause. What this measure will do is tie your hands behind your back, First, Measure 5 purports to stop gun violence by eliminating the ability of criminals to purchase firearms at gun shows from private then you have go beg(and pay)fora background check to get them untied... parties. The proponents of Measure 5 argue that background f you can get a background check.("National checks keep guns out of the hands of criminals.This is simply puler problem m if temporarily suspends Oregon firearms purchases", osp.state.or.us/news_releases/html/may_12a_2000.html) untrue. The background checks system has been a failure. It has failed This is not a step toward our pap state policy, because federal and state governments have refused to prose but"Let me see your papers:' cute criminals who illegally attempt to purchase firearms.Without y you don't have government approved ID under this measure, prosecution, criminals are free to purchase firearms on the you don't exist, or at the very least must r a criminal, no sale. streets.A system that identifies criminals but does not prosecute This is just another version of "It's for your own good". Another them for their crimes is a failure.A recent study of the background restriction. The boot is placed on your neck for the actions of others. check system has concluded that it has not been effective at stopping gun violence. Rather, enforcement of existing laws and Criminals should be denied access to guns. punishment is more effective. Substitute in the place of"criminals"your race religion Second, Measure 5 invades the privacy of Oregonians to an national origin socio-economic status or other descri ti{Lon_ and see alarming degree. This measure will allow Oregon law enforce This measure takes away y it sounds as appetizing.your control over what you can buy.You ment to keep a computerized database of gun owners. What can't control whether it is shut down for an"audit",rg an"equip happens when a computer hacker or a ring of thieves who use it ment update","lack of funds","power outage","emergency"... to steal firearms from the houses of gun owners obtains the data ency"... base? Moreover,what happens when this list becomes available So that's what the Department of Racial Determination says to insurance companies who will use this list to discriminate oy u are. against gun owners for health, auto, life, and other types of Well,what race are you?What if the seller doesn't think you look insurance? like that race, and wants you to put something else down? Do The growth of technology in our lives with its ability to rob us of you need a hassle over your ancestral background?Will firearm our privacy is a hot topic in our country. Each day, our privacy buyers need DNA testing for race? rights are disappearing at the hands of government. Measure 5 Tell me again why minorities and eeoople who have come to opens the privacy-invasion door further. this country to escape oppression, should go through a background check? Considering the above arguments, we urge you to vote NO on Measure 5. If you aren't free to go buy a gun,without a background check,to prevent injustices against you, you aren't free, you are in a very (This information furnished by John T.Nichols-Executive Director,John D. dangerous trap.You are at the mercy of criminals or government Hellen-Administrator;Oregon Gun Owners.) neglect. Do you really want a law with roots in discrimination, racism,bigotry,and oppression? (This information furnished by Robert Gordon.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 283 Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 6 Proposed by initiative petition to be voted on at the General 1998, of the record high $12.5 million contributed to legislative Election, November 7,2000. elections,only four percent came from these small contributors. (b) It diminishes the free-speech rights of nonwealthy voters and candidates whose voices are drowned out by those who can afford to monopolize the arena of paid political communications. BALLOT TITLE ti In the 1998 Oregon general election, candidates spending the most money won 82 percent of the time.Data on legislative elec- tions illustrate these trends over time. In contested legislative "PUBU FUNDING"Cb CAND!I)A, 5 elections, the higher spending candidate won 85 percent of the time in 1992,89 percent of the time in 1994 and 83 percent of the fAllfO•LI�IIR SPIdAI�1G PRIYAT GQNTRIlUT1L?NS time in 1996. (c) It fuels the public perception of corruption and undermines I#�ULT fit= "Y "Yt}TE: "YeS Vote jrovldes limited pubic 'public confidence in the democratic process and democratic insti tttnding to;tndktetes asGepting,lim€ts go—, and private tutions. Declining public confidence is illustrated by record low gntriltirtt�rls. voter turnout in 1998 Oregon elections. The general election ilL p "i�IC1°*1�E «I�lo"Grote ratairis syste of too public! turnout was 59 percent of registered voters,which is only 47 per ft ales. cent of citizens eligible to vote. (d) It diminishes elected officials' accountability to their con- stituents; by compelling elected officials to be disproportionately Itiat& GefTtpdtgnS _r t tterti a, SeGret try f• tats, Treasurer, accountable to the major contributors who finance their election ttaii�Ely A eral,state campaigns. agreeing to:W, pt Qrtly Certain permitCe t contrib ttlons (e) It creates a danger of actual corruption by encouraging and make expenditures;tsflly #rortt titbsa'srr�trces (2) reetving!, elected officials to take money from private interests that are speClfled nurllkt or Gf $ ccrr5tributitans fri rn Orei on residents. directly affected by governmental actions. reat8 fund;tt firrttnGequairfyirg cafldittes'Ganl�taignt*F•After! (f)It drives up the cost of election campaigns,making it difficult quaCCfyirtg Gaitdidet2s rriey •splld revenues prtiy frarrl;;';fiancf, for qualified candidates without access to large contributors or remaining pE:ttftissCbCe p ivate Gi ntA)W 0 s htlattt ates at Ua a personal.fortunes to mount competitive campaigns.As an exam- funding.#�ei tta[Cy repalS polrtliattax Gredit.•lnCreased disGlraaktrre ple,cost of legislative elections increased by 52 percent between rauiirnents.Panaltles ftr�rir}latCaris.Cft�retr GClanges 1992 and 1998. iriiaF FI41+tC11tL liUYf�At: Mate rerenues crulcf (g)It disadvantages challengers because large campaign con- inGreE by"anastrma#edr1',f7flt,gt a year by elimrne#tortf the tributors tend to give their money to incumbents, thus causing loCrtiGal Tax rddit for# t3talbu#CGis tti State partisan Canditates. elections to be less competitive. None of the 43 statewide and fh$ IeglSiature siii apprGjrriate that ttiunt tai the;PQiitical legislative incumbents running in the 1998 general election lost. AGurytabiCity Frn , pllia addltlts! rttC+rtayS to tiny funct°cendi= (h) It inhibits communication with the electorate by candidates rtethtx r}uaIlfy*LrnCtet thC& nttaSUrE pnGe tuC[y fUnctBd; lTte without access to large sums of campaign money. l�GlCticaE;Arseountabillty-Fund afrati not exceed �& rrll1ticsn iri any (i)It burdens public officeholders who are candidates with time- hienniutrt consuming fund raising and thus decreases the time available to talk with voters and carry out public responsibilities. Costs to the Sedrtttery cif Mate=tti adrnrnCster the pleasure vuould' (j) It undermines the First Amendment to the United States be°� ,000ayear. Constitution and state constitutional rights of voters and candi- dates to be heard in the political process, it undermines the First ttre to�3Cx ftntic�el efft>sn•icl governitm rrt expendrtues U1 Amendment and state constitutional rights of voters to hear all reviKnus candidates'speech,and it undermines the core First Amendment and state constitutional values of open and robust debate in the political process. (2)The people of the State of Oregon find and declare that pro- viding a voluntary political accountability campaign finance sys- TEXTOF MEASURE tem for certain primary and general elections will enhance democracy in Oregon in the following principal ways: (a) It will help eliminate the harmful influence of large contribu- SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE: POLITICAL ACCOUNTABILITY tions on the political process,remove access to wealth as a major ACT.An act to reduce the influence of private money in poli- determinant of a citizen's influence within the political process tics by providing limited public funding to candidates who: and restore meaning to the principle of"one person,one vote" A) demonstrate public support by gathering from a large (b) It will help restore the rights of all citizens to equal and number of individuals$5 qualifying contributions during the meaningful participation in the democratic process. qualifying period,B)agree to campaign spending limits,and (c) It will help restore the free-speech rights of nonwealthy C) reject private money contributions after the qualifying candidates and voters by providing candidates with sufficient period.Sections 2 to 26 of this 2000 Act shall be known and may resources to communicate meaningfully with the voters. be cited as Political Accountability Act. d It will diminish the ( ) public perception of corruption and SECTION 2. FINDINGS AND DECLARATIONS: STATEMENT strengthen public confidence in the democratic process and OF NEED.(1)The people of the State of Oregon find and declare democratic institutions. that the current system of privately financed campaigns for nom- (e) It will help increase the accountability of elected officials to ination and election to the offices of Governor,Secretary of State, be constituents who elect them. • State Treasurer and Attorney General and the offices of state (f) It will reduce the danger of actual corruption caused by the Senator and state Representative undermines democracy in private financing of the election campaigns of public officials,thus Oregon in the following principal ways: substantially helping to restore public confidence in the fairness of (a)It violates the democratic principle of"one person,one vote" the electoral and legislative processes. and diminishes the meaning of the right to vote by allowing large (g) It will help halt and reverse the escalating cost of individual private contributions to have a deleterious influence on the politi- election campaigns. cal process by denying the rights of all citizens to equal and (h) It will create a more level playing field for incumbents and meaningful participation in the democratic process.This effect is challengers, create genuine opportunities for qualified Oregon demonstrated by the low level of participation of persons making residents to run for statewide and legislative office and encourage small contributions less than $50 in Oregon political contests.in more competitive elections. 284 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet---Statewide Measures Measure No. 6 (i) It will facilitate communication with the electorate by candi- contributions and seed money contributions after filing a declara- dates,regardless of the access candidates have to large sums of tion of intent under section 8 of this 2000 Act and throughout the campaign money. applicable qualifying period. (j) It will free public officeholders who are candidates from the (2)A participating candidate shall not make a seed money con- incessant rigors of raising money, and allow them more time to tribution of more than $100 or a qualifying contribution of more carry out official duties. than $5 from the participating candidate's personal funds to the (k) It will help restore the First Amendment and state constitu- participating candidate or the participating candidate's principal tional rights of voters and candidates to be heard in the political campaign committee. process, it will help restore the First Amendment and state con- (3)A candidate who has filed for certification under section 10 stitutional rights of voters to hear all candidates'speech and it will of this 2000 Act may not receive seed money contributions or help restore the core First Amendment and state constitutional qualifying contributions. values of open and robust debate in the political process. SECTION 5. MANAGEMENT OF POLITICAL ACCOUNTABIL- (I)The partial repeal of the political tax credit, ORS 316.102, ITY FUND BY STATE TREASURER IN COOPERATION WITH provides additional money to the General Fund that is directed to SECRETARY OF STATE. (1)The Political Accountability Fund is the Political Accountability Fund.The Political Accountability Act is established in the State Treasury, separate from the General a more effective way to meet the stated public policy purpose of Fund.All moneys described in section 6 of this 2000 Act shall be the political tax credit,which is to increase public participation in the political process. paid into the State Treasury and credited to the Political Accountability Fund. Moneys in the fund may invested in the SECTION 3. DEFINITIONS. As used in sections 2 to 26 of this same manner as other state moneys, and any interest earned 2000 Act: shall be credited to the fund. (1) "Certified candidate"means a candidate for nomination or (2) The Secretary of State shall keep a record of all moneys election to statewide office or the office of state Senator or state deposited in the Political Accountability Fund that shall indicate Representative who chooses to participate in the Political the source from which the moneys are derived, the interest Accountability Act and who is certified as a Political Accountability earned and the activity or program against which any withdrawal Act candidate under section 10 of this 2000 Act. is charged. (2)"Fund"means the Political Accountability Fund established (3)If moneys credited to the fund are withdrawn,transferred or in section 5 of this 2000 Act. otherwise used for purposes other than the program or activity for (3) "Legislative district dominated by one party"means a dis- which the fund is established,interest shall accrue on the amount trict for the office of state Senator or state Representative in which withdrawn from the date of withdrawal and until the moneys are the number of electors who are members of the major political restored. party, as described in ORS 248.006, with the highest number of (4) Moneys in the fund shall provide, and are continuously members in the district exceeds the number of electors in the dis- appropriated for, the financing of election campaigns of certified trict who are members of any other major political party by 50 per- candidates for nomination or election to statewide office or the cent or more. office of state Senator or state Representative, and the payment (4) "Nonparticipating candidate" means a candidate for nomi- of administrative, enforcement and other expenses of the nation or election to statewide office or the office of state Senator Secretary of State in carrying out the secretary's functions and or state Representative who does not choose to participate in the duties under sections 2 to 26 of this 2000 Act. Political Accountability Act and who is not seeking to be certified SECTION 6. CONTENTS OF POLITICAL ACCOUNTABILITY as a Political Accountability Act candidate under section 10 of this 2000 Act. FUND. The following shall be deposited in the Political Accountability Fund: (5)"Participating candidate"means a candidate for nomination (1)An amount appropriated by the Legislative Assembly to the st election to statewide office the office of state Senator or Political Accountability Fund.The amount appropriated under this state Representative who chooss es to participate in the Political subsection shall be equal to the average of the total amount Accountability Act and is seeking to be certified as a Political claimed as a tax credit under ORS 316.102 (1997 Edition) for Accountability Act candidate under section 10 of this 2000 Act. (6)"Qualifying contribution"means a contribution: contributions made to candidates for nomination or election to (a) Of$5 in cash, or in the form of a check or a money order, statewide office as defined in section 3 of this 2000 Act and can- made or payable to the candidate or principal campaign commit- didates for nomination or election to the office of state Senator or tee of the candidate;and state Representative in each of the three successive biennia (b)Made during the designated qualifying period by an individ- beginning on or after July 1, 1993.The amount shall be deter- ual who is a resident of this state and 18 years of age or older. mined by the Department of Revenue in cooperation with the (7)"Qualifying period"means: Secretary of State.The amount described in this subsection shall (a) For participating candidates of a major political party, the be deposited by the State Treasurer in the Political Accountability period beginning on the 250th day immediately preceding the Fund not later than July 1 of each odd-numbered year. The biennial primary election and ending at 5 p.m. on the 40th day amount to be appropriated under this subsection is made avail- immediately preceding the biennial primary election. able by the repeal of the political tax credit contained in ORS (b) For participating candidates who are not candidates for 316.102 (1997 Edition) for contributions to candidates who may nomination of a major political party,the period beginning on the participate in the Political Accountability Act; 15th day after the date of the biennial primary election and end- (2) Fund revenues that were distributed to a certified candi- ing at 5 p.m.on the 40th day immediately preceding the general date,that remain unspent after a biennial primary election or gen- election. eral election and that are returned to the fund as provided in sec- (8)"Seed money contribution"means a contribution described tion 16 of this 2000 Act; in section 8 of this 2000 Act of no more than $100 made by a (3) Fund revenues delivered by any certified candidate who person or a political committee,to a candidate. withdraws as a certified candidate or who withdraws as a candi- • (9)"Statewide office"means the offices of Governor,Secretary date for nomination or election as provided in section 25 of this of State, State Treasurer and Attorney General. 2000 Act,or by a candidate whose certification has been revoked under.section 19 of this 2000 Act; SECTION 4. CONTRIBUTIONS TO POLITICAL ACCOUNT- (4).Fund revenues delivered by any certified candidate against ABILITY ACT CANDIDATES ARE MADE ONLY DURING THE whom a civil penalty has been imposed, as described in section QUALIFYING PERIOD AND ARE LIMITED TO SEED MONEY 26 of this 2000 Act; CONTRIBUTIONS OF $100 AND QUALIFYING CONTRIBU- (5)Voluntary contributions made directly to the fund; TIONS OF$5. (1)To be eligible to become a certified candidate, (6)Civil penalties and other moneys collected under section 26 a participating candidate may receive and spend only qualifying of this 2000 Act;and 285 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 6 (7) Any amounts allocated or transferred under section 17 of state Senator,a minimum of 500 electors must make a qualifying this 2000 Act. contribution to the candidate;or SECTION 7.NOTICE OF AMOUNT OF FUNDS AVAILABLE.(1) (e) For a candidate for nomination or election to the office of Except as provided in subsection(2)of this section,not later than state Representative, a minimum of 300 electors must make a qualifying contribution to the candidate. September 1 of each odd-numbered year,the Secretary of State shall publish a notice of the amount of revenues contained in the (2)All qualifying contributions shall be from individuals residing Political Accountability Fund as of August 1 of the odd-numbered t this state.In the case of a candidate for nomination or election to the office of state Senator or state Representative, not less year. than 75 percent of the qualifying contributions received by the (2) If a regular session of the Legislative Assembly has not candidate must be from individuals residing in the candidate's adjourned by August 1 of the odd-numbered year, the secretary electoral district. shall publish the notice as soon as practicable following September 1 of the odd-numbered year.The notice shall describe (3) A payment, gift or anything of value shall not be given or received in exchange for a qualifying contribution. the amount of revenues contained in the Political Accountability Fund as of the date the Legislative Assembly adjourns. SECTION 10. CERTIFICATION OF CANDIDATES BY SECRE- TARY OF STATE. (1)After receiving at least the minimum num- ber of qualifying contributions specified under section ti of this CAL ACCOUNTABILITY ACT CANDIDATE. (1) A participating candidate shall file a declaration of intent to seek certification as 2000 Act, a participating candidate shall file for certification with the Secretary of State.The secretary shall determine whether the a certified candidate and to comply with the requirements of sec- tions 2 to 26 of this 2000 Act. Except as provided by rule under candidate has: section 20 (1) of this 2000 Act,the declaration of intent shall be (a)Signed,filed and complied with the provisions of a declara tion of intent described in section 8 of this filed with the Secretary of State during the applicable qualifying f Act; o period pursuant to forms and procedures adopted by the (b) Received the minimum number of valid qualifying Secretary of State by rule.A participating candidate shall submit contributions; a declaration of intent prior to collecting qualifying contributions (c)Qualified a candidate by nominating petition,declaration o and seed money contributions. of candidacy or other means;and (2) The declaration of intent shall specify that the candidate (d) Not accepted contributions, except for qualifying contribu- tions, seed money contributions and contributions described in agrees to comply with the provisions of section 23 of this 2000 Act. section 8(5)of this 2000 Act, and has complied with all require- (3) After filing a declaration of intent and prior to becoming a ments applicable to qualifying and seed money contributions. certified candidate,a participating candidate may not: (2)The Secretary of State shall certify a candidate complying (a) Accept contributions, except for qualifying contributions, with the requirements of this section as a certified candidate not later than five business days after the candidate has filed with the seed money contributions and contributions described in subset- t (5)of this section;or secretary under this section. ion (b( Make expenditures from funds other than qualifying contri (3)A certified candidate shall comply with all requirements of sections 2 to 26 of this 2000 Act after certification and throughout butions and seed money contributions. (4) A participating candidate shall limit the total aggregate the biennial primary and general election certify as., amount of the candidate's seed money contributions to an (4)a the Secretary re State does not certify a candidate under amount that does not exceed 10 percent of the total amount that this section, the secretary shall advise the candidate c the may be distributed to a certified candidate for the same office at reasons and of the actions the candidate must.take to become certified. a contested general election, as specified in section 13 of this 2000 Act. SECTION 11. LIMITATIONS ON USE OF REVENUES FROM (5) In addition to seed money and qualifying contributions, a POLITICAL ACCOUNTABILITY FUND.MONEY CAN ONLY BE participating candidate may accept: USED FOR LEGITIMATE CAMPAIGN EXPENSES. (1) After (a)Contributions consisting of printed or electronic lists created becoming a certified candidate, a candidate shall limit the candi- or maintained by a political party or political committee.The value date's expenditures to the revenues distributed to the candidate of any contribution received under this paragraph shall not count from the Political Accountability Fund and to remaining qualifying against the applicable limit on seed money contributions and seed money contributions. A certified candidate may not described in subsection(4)of this section;and accept any other contributions,except for contributions described (b)Any other in-kind contributions.The value of any contribu- in subsection(5)of this section. tion received under this paragraph shall not count against the (2) Notwithstanding ORS 260.407, all revenues distributed to applicable limit on seed money contributions described in sub- certified candidates from the fund shall be used only for purposes section(4)of this section.The aggregate amount of contributions related to the candidate's campaign for nomination or election to received under this paragraph and section 11 (5)(b)of this 2000 public office. Act shall not exceed an amount equal to five percent of the applic- (3) Revenues distributed to a certified candidate from the able spending limit described in section 13 of this 2000 Act. Political Accountability Fund may not be: SECTION 9. QUALIFYING REQUIREMENTS FOR POLITICAL (a)Contributed to any other candidate or political committee; ACCOUNTABILITY ACT CANDIDATES BASED ON DEMON- (b) Used to make independent expenditures supporting or STRAYING PUBLIC SUPPORT BY GATHERING MANY $5 opposing any candidate,political committee or measure; QUALIFYING CONTRIBUTIONS.(1) In order to qualify for certi- (c)Used in connection with the nomination or election of i e or fication under section 10 of this 2000 Act,participating candidates elect candidate to any office a at any election except the office or shall obtain qualifying contributions during the qualifying period election for which the revenues were originally distributed;or as follows: (d)Used to repay any loans or debts. (of For a candidate for nomination or election to the office of (4)A person shall not make or accept a contribution in violation of sections 2 to 26 of this es 2000 di Act. Governor, a minimum of 8,000 electors must make a qualifying (5)In additi on to revenues distributed to the candidate from the contribution to the candidate; (b) Fora candidate for nomination or election to the office of Political Accountability Fund,a certified candidate may accept: Secretary of State, a minimum of 6,0 r electors must make a (a)Contributions consisting of printed or electronic lists created qualifying contribution m the candidate; or maintained by a political party or political committee.The value (c For a candidate for nomination or election to the office of of any contribution received under this paragraph shall not count State Treasurer or Attorney General,a minimum of 4,000 electors against the applicable spending limit described in section 13 of this 2000 Act;and must make a qualifying contribution to the candidate; (d) For a candidate for nomination or election to the office of (b)Any other in kind contributions.The value of any contribution 286 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 6 received under this paragraph shall not count against the applic- dates as described in section 12 of this 2000 Act shall be: able spending limit described in section 13 of this 2000 Act.The (a) For contested biennial primary elections: aggregate amount of contributions received under this paragraph (A)$600,000 for each candidate for nomination to the office of and section 8(5)(b)of this 2000 Act shall not exceed an amount Governor; equal to five percent of the applicable spending limit described in (B) $200,000 for each candidate for nomination to any section 13 of this 2000 Act. statewide office other than Governor; SECTION 12. TIMELY RECEIPT OF FUNDS BY POLITICAL (C) $40,000 for each candidate for nomination to the office of ACCOUNTABILITY ACT CANDIDATES. (1) The Secretary of state Senator;and State shall distribute revenues in the Political Accountability Fund (D)$25,000 for each candidate for nomination to the office of state Representative. to certified candidates who are candidates for nomination of a major political party, as described in ORS 248.006, or who are (b) For uncontested biennial primary elections, an amount equal to r percent of the amount available for a contested nominees of a major political party in amounts determined under biennial primary election as specified in paragraph (a) of this section 13 of this 2000 Act, in the following manner: subsection. (a)Within 10 business days after certification,an amount equal to 20 percent of the amount available to the candidate for the (c) For contested general elections: (A) $1,200,000 for each candidate for election to the office of biennial primary election under section 13 of this 2000 Act; (b)Within three business days after the 90th day immediately Governor; preceding the biennial primary election, an amount equal to 80 (B) $400,000 for each candidate for election to any statewide office other than Governor; percent of the amount available to the candidate for the biennial (C)$80,000 for each candidate for election to the office of state primary election under section 13 of this 2000 Act; (c)Within 10 business days after the biennial primary election, Senator;and an amount equal to 20 percent of the amount available to the can- (D)$50,000 for each candidate for election to the office of state didate for the general election under section 13 of this 2000 Act; Representative. and (d) For uncontested general elections, an amount equal to 10 (d)Within three business days after the 120th day immediately percent of the amount available for a contested general election d in paragraph(c)of this subsection. preceding the general election,an amount equal to 80 percent of as specifie the amount available to the candidate for the general election (2)Notwithstanding subsection(1)(a),(c)and(d) n this section: (a) In a contested biennial primary election for nomination to under section 13 of this 2000 Act. (2)The Secretary of State shall distribute revenues in the fund the office of state Senator or state Representative held in a leg- to certified candidates 248.008,or who are not affiliated with es who are candidates of a minor political islative district dominated by one party, a certified candidate for nomination to the office of state Senator or state Representative, party,as described any political party,in amounts determined under section 13 of this who is a member of the major political party that is the dominant the following manner: party in the district, may choose to reallocate a portion of rev- 2000 Act, in business days after certification,an amount equal enues that would be available to the candidate for the general (a)Within the election the biennial primary election. to 20 percent of the amount available to the candidate for the general election under section 13 of this 2000 Act;and (b)The a certified candidate shall notify the Secretary of State that the candidate chooses to reallocate revenues under this sub- (b)Within three business days after the 120th day immediately section not later than the 40th day immediately preceding the preceding the general election,an amount equal to 80 percent of the amount available to the candidate for the general election biennial primary election. (c)The certified candidate shall be entitled to receive additional under section 13 of this 2000 Act. (3) In the case of candidates described in subsections(1)and revenues from the Political Accountability Fund in any amount that does not exceed 50 percent (2) of this section who qualify as certified candidates on or after the applicable amount described in subsection the 90th day immediately preceding the biennial primary election revenues under this subsection for the biennial date receive additional of this sea who chooses section. or on-or after the 120th day immediately preceding the general (d) If a certified candidate election, the Secretary of State shall distribute revenues in the al.primary election becomes a certified candidate at the general election: Political Accountability Fund to the candidates in an amount equal to 100 percent of the amount available to the candidate for the (A) The amount revenues the candidate may receive from the Political Accountability election under section 13 of this 2000 Act.The revenues shall be Fund for a contested general election distributed within 10 business days after certification. under this section shall be reduced by an amount equal to the (4) Revenues may be distributed to certified candidates under additional amount the candidate received for the biennial primary election. this section by any mechanism that is expeditious, ensures a (B)The amount 0f revenues the candidate may receive from accountability and safeguards the integrity of the fund. the fund for an uncontested general election under this section (5)The Secretary of State may extend any deadline for distrib- shall not be reduced. uting revenues under this section in the case of a recount or other circumstance that makes distribution of revenues by a deadline The Secretary of State shall determine whether a district is specified in this section impracticable. a legislative district dominated by one party as defined in section 3 of this 2000 Act in the manner and according to a schedule (6) For each biennium beginning July 1 of the odd numbered adopted by the secretary by year, the total amount of revenues distributed from the Political rule. Accountability Fund shall not exceed an amount equal to$5 per For each biennial pri mary election,the amount revenues be to be each individual who is eligible to register to vote in this state times distributed t° a certified candidate under this section shall each year of the biennium. Not later than September 1 of each be reduced by amount equal to the aggregate amount odd-numbered year, the Secretary of State shall determine the (a)Seed money contributions received by the candidate during maximum amount of revenues that may be distributed from the the applicable qualifying period and that are unspent on the date of filing for certification;and fund in the biennium. (7) The Secretary of State shall not distribute revenues from (b) Qualifying contributions received by the candidate during the applicable qualifying period. the Political Accountability Fund to certified candidates in excess of the total amount of moneys deposited in the fund. SECTION 14. ALLOW FOR MORE DEBATE TO LEVEL THE r SECTION 13.CAMPAIGN SPENDING LIMITS FOR POLITICAL PLAYING FIELD BY MAKING AVAILABLE A LIMITED AMOUNT OF MATCHING FUNDS IF POLITICAL ACCOUNT- ACCOUNTABILITY ACT CANDIDATES. Subject to sections ABILITY ACT CANDIDATE IS OUTSPENT BY COMBINATION (6) and (7) and 16 (2) of this 2000 Act and subsection (3) of OF INDEPENDENT EXPENDITURES AND/OR CONTRIBU- thi his section,and except as provided in subsection(2)of this sec- TIONS TO NONPARTICIPATING OPPONENT(S). (1) If a tion, the amount of revenues to be distributed to certified candi state- ment filed under ORS 260.058(1)or 260.068(1)or a notice filed 287 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 6 under section 22 of this 2000 Act shows that a nonparticipating (3) of this section exceeds the total amount distributed to the Candidate for nomination or election to statewide office or the certified candidate under section 13(2)of this 2000 Act;and office of state Senator or state Representative has received con- (b) For a general election involving a certified candidate who tributions or made expenditures in an aggregate amount that has made the choice to receive additional revenues for the bien- exceeds the amount of revenues to be distributed to opposing nial primary election under section 13(2)of this 2000 Act,match- certified candidates for the same nomination or office as specified ing funds shall be available to the certified candidate under this in section 13 of this 2000 Act,any opposing certified candidate for section when the amount of contributions or expenditures the same nomination or office shall be eligible to receive an addi- described in subsection (1), (2)or(3)of this section exceeds the tional amount of matching funds as described in subsection(5)of original amount of revenues to be distributed to the certified can- this section. didate at the general election,without any reduction for the addi- (2) If any statement filed under ORS 260.044 or notice filed tional amount distributed for the biennial primary election. under section 21 of this 2000 Act during a period described in However, if the certified candidate is the only certified candidate subsection(4)of this section shows that the aggregate amount of for the office at the general election, matching funds shall be independent expenditures made in support of or in opposition to available to the certified candidate under this section only when a candidate for nomination or election to statewide office or the the amount of contributions or expenditures described in subsec- office of state Senator or state Representative exceeds the tion (1), (2)or(3)of this section exceeds an amount equal to the amount of revenues to be distributed to a certified candidate for original amount of revenues to be distributed to the certified can- nomination or election to the same office as specified in section didate at the general election, less the additional amount distrib- 13 of this 2000 Act,then: uted for the biennial primary election. (a)If the independent expenditures are made in support of one (8) The Secretary of State shall distribute matching funds or more candidates, any opposing certified candidate for the under this section not later than four business days after receiv- same nomination or office shall be eligible to receive an additional ing a written request from the certified candidate if the secretary amount of matching funds as described in subsection (5) of this concludes that the certified candidate qualifies for matching funds section;and under this section. (b) If the independent expenditures are made in opposition to SECTION 15. FULL DISCLOSURE OF CAMPAIGN EXPENDI one or more certified candidates,each certified candidate against TURES AND SEED MONEY AND QUALIFYING CONTRIBU- whom the expenditures are made shall be eligible to receive an additional amount of matching funds as described in subsection TIONS. (1) All seed money contributions and qualifying (5)of this section. contributions received by a participating candidate shall be (3) A certified candidate shall also be eligible to receive an reported as contributions on statements required by ORS additional amount of matching funds as described in subsection 260.058 and 260.068.the Secretary of State by rule may provide (5) of this section if the statements or notices referred to in sub- for reporting previously reported contributions by reference. sections(1)and (2)of this section show that any combination of (2)All revenues distributed to and received by a certified can- contributions received or expenditures made as described in sub- didate from the Political Accountability Fund shall be reported as section (1) of this section and independent expenditures contributions on statements required by ORS 260.058 and described in subsection (2) of this section exceeds in aggregate 260.068. the amount of revenues to be distributed to the certified candidate (3) If the contribution is a seed money contribution, the state- under section 13 of this 2000 Act. ment shall list the name,occupation and address of each individ- (4)The provisions of subsection(2)of this section apply during ual who made the contribution, regardless of the amount of the the periods: contribution. (a) Beginning on the 250th day before the date of the biennial (4)If the contribution is a qualifying contribution,the statement primary election and ending on the date of the biennial primary shall list the name and address of each individual who made the election;and contribution, but is not required to list the occupation of each (b) Beginning on the day after the date of the biennial primary individual. election and ending on the date of the general election. (5)ORS 260.205 applies to each notice and written proof deliv- (5)Matching funds under this section shall be distributed from ery filed under section 21 or 22 of this 2000 Act. the Political Accountability Fund: (6)The Secretary of State may issue subpoenas under ORS (a) In an amount equivalent to the amount of contributions or 260.218 necessary to determine the sufficiency of any notice or expenditures that exceeds the amount of revenues to be distrib- written proof of delivery required to be filed under section 21 or 22 uted to the certified candidate under section 13 of this 2000 Act; of this 2000 Act. and (7)ORS 260.225 applies to any candidate,treasurer or person (b)In the case of independent expenditures made in support of who fails to file a notice or written proof of delivery required under a single candidate or in opposition to a single certified candidate, section 21 or 22 of this 2000 Act or who files an insufficient notice in an amount equivalent to the amount of independent expendi- or written proof of delivery. tures that exceeds the amount of revenues to be distributed to the SECTION 16.UNSPENT POLITICAL ACCOUNTABILITY FUND certified candidate under section 13 of this 2000 Act.In the case REVENUES RETURNED TO FUND IN MOST EFFICIENT of independent expenditures made in support of more than one MANNER AFTER BIENNIAL PRIMARY AND GENERAL candidate or in opposition to more than one certified candidate,in ELECTIONS. (1) If the first post-election statement filed by a an amount equivalent to the amount of independent expenditures certified candidate under ORS 260.058 for the biennial primary that exceeds the amount of revenues to be distributed to the cer- election shows unspent revenues received from the Political tified candidate under section 13 of this 2000 Act, divided by the Accountability Fund,and the candidate was not nominated at the number of certified candidates eligible to receive matching funds biennial primary election,the candidate shall return an amount of because of the independent expenditures. , money equal to the amount of the unspent revenues to the (6)An amount of matching funds distributed under this section Secretary of State when the statement required under ORS shall not exceed 100 percent of the amount available to be dis- 260.058 is filed. tributed to the certified candidate under section 13 of this 2000 (2) If the first post-election statement filed by a certified candi- Act. date under ORS 260.058 for the biennial primary election shows (7) Notwithstanding any other provision of this section: unspent revenues received from the Political Accountability Fund, (a) For a biennial primary election at which a certified candi- and the candidate was nominated at the biennial primary election, date has made the choice to receive additional revenues under the amount of revenues to be distributed to the certified candidate section 13(2)of this 2000 Act, matching funds shall be available under section 13 of this 2000 Act at the general election shall be to the certified candidate under this section only when the amount reduced by an amount equal to the aggregate amount of unspent of contributions or expenditures described in subsection(1),(2)or revenues received from the Political Accountability Fund. 288 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 6 (3) If the first post-election statement filed by a certified candi- sections 2 to 26 of this 2000 Act at the biennial primary and gen- date under ORS 260.068 for the general election shows unspent eral elections. revenues received from the fund, the candidate shall return an (4) The amount of funds appropriated to the Political amount of money equal to the amount of the unspent revenues to Accountability Fund for biennial primary and general elections the Secretary of State not later than the date the statement held after 2002 shall not be less than the amount described in required under ORS 260.068 is filed. section 6 (1) of this 2000 Act or the amount of payments made SECTION 17. PROVISIONS TO PROVIDE ADEQUATE FUND- from the fund for the immediately preceding biennial primary and ING IN FUTURE ELECTION CYCLES. Notwithstanding any general elections, whichever amount is greater.In addition, each Legislative Assembly at a regular session occurring after 2001, provision of section 6 of this 2000 Act: (1)Not later than the 10th business day following the end of the based on a recommendation from the Secretary of State, shall appropriate an additional amount to the Political Accountability qualifying period before the biennial primary election, the Fund to account for reasonable growth. Each regular session of Secretary of State shall determine whether the amount deposited the Legislative Assembly shall give priority in the Political Accountability.Fund under section 6 of this 2000 the reduction Act will be sufficient to provide the amount the secretary esti- expenditures nt a method to provide more e revenues for r the tax mates will be necessary to make payments to candidates under Political Accountability Fund. sections 2 to 26 of this 2000 Act at the biennial primary and gen- SECTION 18. AUTOMATIC ADJUSTMENT FOR INFLATION. eral elections.The determination of the Secretary of State shall Beginning on July 1,2005,the dollar amounts specified in section be based on the amount of revenues intended to be available to 13 of this 2000 Act shall be adjusted annually by the Secretary of certified candidates under section 13 of this 2000 Act, the num- State based upon the change in the Portland Consumer Price ber of candidates who are certified candidates at the biennial pri- Index for All Urban Consumers for All Items as prepared by the mary election,the projected number of certified candidates at the Bureau of Labor Statistics of the United States Department of general election and any other factors specified by the Secretary Labor or its successor during the preceding 12-month period.The of State by rule. amounts determined under this section shall be rounded to the (2) If the Secretary of State determines under subsection (1) nearest dollar. of this section that the amount deposited in the Political SECTION 19.HEARING ON CERTIFICATION AND MATCHING Accountability Fund under section 6 of this 2000 Act will be insuf- FUND DISPUTES. (1) A candidate who has been refused certi- ficient to provide the amount the secretary estimates will be fication or an opponent of a candidate who has been granted necessary to make payments to candidates under sections 2 to certification under section 10 of this 2000 Act may challenge a 26 of this 2000 Act at the biennial primary and general elections, the secretary shall request the additional amount the secretary certification decision by the Secretary of State filing a written request for a hearing with the Secretary of State not later than estimates will be necessary from the Emergency Board. The Emergency Board, out of funds available for the purpose, shall three business days after the certification decision is made. allocate that amount to the Secretary of State for the purpose of (2) A candidate who has been granted or refused matching making payments to candidates under sections 2 to 26 of this funds under section 14 of this 2000 Act,or opponent of a can- 2000 Act at the biennial primary and general elections. The didate who has been granted matching funds s under section 14 of this Secretary Act, may challenge the matching funds decision by the amount allocated to the Secretary of State under this subsection shall be deposited in the Political Accountability. Fund. Any Secretary of State by filing a written request for a hearing with the moneys allocated to the Secretary of State under this subsection Secretary of State not later than three business days after the that have not been distributed to certified candidates as of the matching funds decision made. 20th day following the general election shall be transferred by (3)The parties involved in the request for a hearing need not the Secretary State from the Political Accountability Fund to appear in person at a hearing held under this section,but instead the General Fund to be available for general governmental may submit sworn affidavits and other evidence to the Secretary expenditures. of State for entry in the hearing record.Such documents must be (3)In addition to the provisions of subsection(2)of this section, received by the Secretary of State not later than one business day if the Secretary of State determines under subsection (1)of this before the day of the hearing. section that the amount deposited in the Political Accountability (4)All hearings under this section shall be held not later than Fund under section 6 of this 2000 Act will be insufficient to pro- five business days after the request for a hearing is filed under vide the amount the secretary estimates will be necessary to this section.The hearing shall be conducted as a contested case make payments to candidates under sections 2 to 26 of this 2000 hearing pursuant to the applicable provisions of ORS 183.413 to Act at the biennial primary and general elections, the secretary 183.470. may request the State Treasurer to transfer the additional amount (5)The Secretary of State shall issue an order not later than the secretary considers necessary from the General Fund or three business days after a hearing.The Secretary of State may other funds to the Political Accountability Fund in the manner grant or revoke certification under this section.The Secretary of specified in ORS 293.210.Notwithstanding any provision of ORS State may grant or revoke matching funds, or modify a matching 293.210, the State Treasurer shall transfer that amount from the funds decision, under this section. General Fund or other funds to the Political Accountability Fund (6)Judicial review of an order made under this section shall be not later than 10 business days after receiving the request from as provided in ORS 183.480 to 183.497 for judicial review of con- the Secretary of State.The next deposit or deposits made to the tested cases. Political Accountability Fund after the transfer described in this (7)If the certification of a candidate is revoked following a hear- subsection shall be considered collateral for the transfer made by ing under this section,the candidate shall return to the Secretary the State Treasurer under this subsection.Moneys in the Political of State an amount of money equal to the total amount of rev- Accountability Fund may be used to repay any transfer and enues distributed to the candidate from the Political Accountability accrued interest to the State Treasurer after all obligations to cer- Fund.If matching funds distributed under section 14 of this 2000 tified candidates are satisfied.The State Treasurer shall notify the Act are revoked, the candidate shall return to the Secretary of Legislative Assembly if the Political Accountability Fund will not State an amount of money equal to the amount of revoked match- be balanced before the end of the biennium. If the Political ing funds distributed to the candidate from the Political Accountability Fund will not be balanced before the end of the Accountability Fund.If the Secretary of State or a court finds that biennium, the Legislative Assembly shall appropriate sufficient a request for a hearing under this section was made frivolously or funds to repay any transfer made under this subsection and to cause delay or hardship, the Secretary of State or the court accrued interest before the end of the biennium during which the may require the person who filed the request for a hearing to pay transfer was made.The additional funds transferred by the State costs of the secretary, court and opposing parties, and attorney Treasurer into the Political Accountability Fund under this sub- fees of the opposing parties, if any. section shall be used for making payments to candidates under 289 CONTINUED Official'2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 6 SECTION 20. ADMINISTRATION OF POLITICAL ACCOUNT- section 13 of this 2000 Act;or ABILITY ACT BY SECRETARY OF STATE.(1)The Secretary of (b)Any combination of contributions received or expenditures State shall adopt rules to ensure effective administration of sec- made by the nonparticipating candidate during the total period tions 2 to 26 of this 2000 Act.The rules shall include but are not described in ORS 260.058 (1) or 260.068 (1) and independent limited to procedures for: expenditures described in section 14(2)of this 2000 Act exceeds (a) Qualification, certification and disbursement of Political in aggregate the amount of revenues to be distributed to oppos- Accountability Fund revenues and return of unspent fund rev- ing certified candidates for the same nomination or office under enues for contests involving special elections, recounts, vacan- section 13 of this 2000 Act. cies,withdrawals or replacement candidates; (2)The nonparticipating candidate described in subsection(1) (b)Obtaining qualifying contributions; of this section shall: (c)Certification as a Political Accountability Act candidate; (a) File written notice with the Secretary of State.The notice (d)Collection of revenues for the Political Accountability Fund; shall describe the amount of contributions received or expendi- (e)Distribution of fund revenues to certified candidates;and tures made; (f)Return of fund disbursements and other moneys to the fund. (b) Deliver a copy of the notice to each certified candidate at (2)The Secretary of State shall prescribe forms for notices and the same election for the nomination or office described in written proof of delivery required to be filed under sections 21 and subsection (1) of this section for whom a nominating petition, a 22 of this 2000 Act and furnish the forms to persons required to declaration of candidacy or a certificate of nomination has been file the notices and written proof of delivery. filed;and SECTION 21. INDEPENDENT EXPENDITURE DISCLOSURE (c) File written proof with the Secretary of State that a copy of REQUIREMENTS. (1) Notwithstanding ORS 260.044 (1), a per- the notice was delivered to each candidate described in para- son making an independent expenditure in an amount of$1,000 graph(b)of this subsection.The written proof of delivery shall be or more,or independent expenditures in an aggregate amount of filed together with the notice. $1,000 or more, supporting or opposing a candidate or candi- (3)(a) Except as provided in paragraph (b) of this subsection, dates for nomination or election to statewide office or the office of the notice and written proof of delivery shall be filed with the state Senator or state Representative shall file notice, deliver secretary and copies of the notice shall be delivered to certified copies of the notice and file written proof of delivery of copies of candidates no later than 5 p.m.of the second business day after: the notice as provided in this section. (A)The amount of contributions received or expenditures made (2)The person making an independent expenditure or expen- exceeds the amount described in subsection(1)of this section;or dit(2) described in subsection e of this section shale (B) A notice received under section 21 of this 2000 Act indi- (a) File written notice with the Secretary ti State.The notice cates that independent expenditures obligated,alone or together shall describe the amount and use c the independent a notice with contributions received or expenditures made by the nonpar- ture or expenditures and state the name of the candidate or can- ticipating candidate, exceed the amount described in subsection didates the independent expenditure or expenditures are (1)of this section. intended to support or oppose; (b)During the period beginning on the first day of the account- (b) Deliver a copy of the notice to each candidate at the same ing period for the second preelection statement of contributions election for the nomination or office described in subsection (1) received and expenditures made described in ORS 260.058 and of this section for whom a nominating petition, a.declaration of 260.068 and ending on the date of the election, the notice and candidacy or a certificate of nomination has been filed;and written proof of delivery shall be filed with the secretary and (c) File written proof with the Secretary of State that a copy of copies of the notice shall be delivered to certified candidates no the notice was delivered to each candidate described in para- later than 5 p.m.of the next business day after: graph (b)of this subsection. (A)The amount of contributions received or expenditures made exceeds the amount described in subsection(1)of this section;or (3)The notice and written proof of delivery shall be filed with the secretary and copies of the notice shall be delivered to can (B) A notice received under section 21 of this 2000 Act ther didates no later than 5 p.m.of the next business day after funds with that independent contributions ei expenditures obligated,alone or together for the independent expenditure or expenditures are obligated. ticip contributions received or expenditures made by the subsection The notice and written proof of delivery shall be filed together. ticipating candidate, exceed the amount described in subsection (4)The copy of the notice shall be delivered to each candidate (1)of this section. by registered or certified mail or by another method that provides (4)The copy of the notice shall be delivered to each certified written proof that the copy of the notice was delivered.A copy of candidate registered or certified mail another method the notice shall be considered to be delivered when the copy is that providees s written proof that the copy of f t the e notice was deliv- mailed, sent, transmitted or otherwise delivered. Nothing in this ered. A copy of the notice shall be considered to be delivered section requires that a candidate receive a copy of the notice prior when the copy is mailed,sent,transmitted or otherwise delivered. to the deadline specified in subsection (3)of this section. Nothing in this section requires that a certified candidate receive (5) Each separate independent expenditure or aggregate a copy of the notice prior to the deadline specified in subsection (3)of this section. amount of independent expenditures described in subsection (1) of this section shall require compliance with the provisions of this ( Following the first notice required under this section,a section. arate notice is required each time a nonparticipating candidate (6)For purposes of this section,an independent expenditure is receives contributions or makes expenditures in an aggregate amo obligated when the expenditure is made or an agreement to make unt of: the expenditure is made. (a)$20,000 or more in the case of a candidate for nomination or election to the office of Governor; SECTION 22. DISCLOSURE REQUIREMENTS FOR NONPAR- (b)$10,000 or more in the case of a candidate for nomination TICIPATING CANDIDATES TO ENSURE TIMELY RELEASE OF or election to any statewide office other than Governor;and • MATCHING FUNDS. (1) A nonparticipating candidate for nomi- (c)$5,000 or more in the case of a candidate for nomination or nation or election to statewide office or the office of state Senator election to the office of state Senator or state Representative. or state Representative shall file notice, deliver copies of the (6)The Secretary of State shall provide forms to facilitate com- notice and file written proof of delivery of copies of the notice as pliance with this section. provided in this section if: (7) For purposes of this section, an expenditure is obligated (a) The nonparticipating candidate receives contributions or when the expenditure is made or an agreement to make the makes expenditures during the total period described in ORS expenditure is made. 260.058(1)or 260.068(1) in an aggregate amount that exceeds SECTION 23. POLITICAL ADVERTISEMENT DISCLOSURE the amount of revenues to be distributed to opposing certified REQUIREMENTS FOR POLITICAL ACCOUNTABILITY ACT candidates for the same nomination or office as specified in CANDIDATES. (1) As part of the declaration of intent described 290 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 6 in section 8 of this 2000 Act,a participating or certified candidate as a candidate, or if a certified candidate is required to deliver shall agree to include the information described in subsections(2) money to the fund under section 26 of this 2000 Act, the to (4) of this section in any advertisement advocating the nomi- Secretary of State shall disseminate public notice to that effect nation, election or defeat of a candidate and paid for by the within one business day of the withdrawal or determination made participating or certified candidate or the principal campaign under section 26 of this 2000 Act. committee of the participating or certified candidate. (6)The Secretary of State shall deposit moneys received under (2)A printed advertisement described in subsection (1)of this this section in the Political Accountability Fund. section shall include the phrase"Paid for by"followed by the name SECTION 26. PENALTIES: REMOVAL AS CERTIFIED CANDI- of the candidate or principal campaign committee of the candi ONS: REPAY- DATE FOR RECEIVING PRIVATE CONTRIBUTIONS,date. The advertisement shall also include the following state- DATE O PUBLIC FUNDS. (1) The Secretary State or the ment:"As a candidate participating in the Political Accountability Attorney General may impose a civil penalty not to exceed Act, I take personal responsibility for the content of this campaign $10,000 for any violation of section i 8 (3), 9, n t (2)to (5), ad:'The statement shall be followed by a copy of the signature of 16, ,0 or or n this 2000 Act. the candidate and the legibly printed name of the candidate.As ,2) For violations of section 11 (1) of this 2000 Act, the used in this subsection, "printed advertisement" means a Secretary of State or Attorney General may impose a civil penalty brochure,pamphlet,flyer,newspaper or magazine advertisement or other similar advertisement designated by the Secretary of not to exceed the.greater of$10,000 or the amount of any contri- State by rule."Printed advertisement"does not include any but- bution or expenditure received or made in violation of section 11 ton, sign or other similar advertisement designated by the (1)of this 2000 Act. Secretary of State by rule. (3) Civil penalties under this section shall be imposed in the (3) A radio advertisement described in subsection (1) of this manner provided in ORS 260.995. section shall include the phrase"Paid for by"followed by the name (4) If a civil penalty has been imposed under this section of the candidate or principal campaign committee of the candi- against a candidate or the principal campaign committee of a date.The advertisement shall also include the following statement candidate,the candidate shall be personally liable for the amount made by the candidate: "As a candidate participating in the to be paid under this section. If a civil penalty has been imposed Political Accountability Act, I take personal responsibility for the under this section against a political committee other than a prin- content of this campaign ad" cipal campaign committee,the directors of the political committee (4)A television or video advertisement described in subsection shall be jointly and severally liable for any amount to be paid (1) of this section shall include the phrase"Paid for by"followed under this section. by the name of the candidate or principal campaign committee of (5)A certified candidate against whom a civil penalty has been the candidate. The phrase shall occur visually or audibly. The imposed for violation of section 11 (1) of this 2000 Act shall be advertisement shall also include the following statement made by removed as a certified candidate by the Secretary of State and the candidate: "As a candidate participating in the Political shall not be eligible to receive revenues from the Political Accountability Act, I take personal responsibility for the content of Accountability Fund during the biennial primary and general elec- this campaign ad"The statement shall be made by the candidate tion cycle during which the penalty is imposed.At the time the civil while in front of the camera or while a photograph of the candi- penalty is imposed,the candidate shall deliver to the Secretary of date is displayed. State an amount of money equal to all revenues distributed to the candidate from the Political Accountability Fund after the date the SECTION 24. VOTERS' PAMPHLET NOTICE OF PARTICIPA- candidate was certified, plus interest on the total amount of rev- TION IN POLITICAL ACCOUNTABILITY ACT SYSTEM. If a enues received at a rate of 12 percent per annum. candidate for nomination or election to statewide office or the (6) If the Secretary of State of Attorney General determines office of state Senator or state Representative is a participating that a participating or certified candidate has violated any provi- candidate in the Political Accountability Act, the Secretary of sion of section 23 of this 2000 Act: State shall include with the voters'pamphlet statement of the can- (a) The candidate shall deliver to the Secretary of State an didate at the biennial primary and general elections,a statement amount of money equal to the cost of any advertisement made in indicating that the candidate is a participating candidate in the violation of section 23 of this 2000 Act, plus interest on the Political Accountability Act and has agreed to the terms and con- amount of money delivered at a rate of 12 percent per annum; ditions of the Political Accountability Act, including limitations on and campaign contributions and expenditures. (b) If the Secretary of State or Attorney General determines SECTION 25. WITHDRAWAL OF CERTIFIED CANDIDATE: that a participating or certified candidate has violated any provi- REPAYMENT OF PUBLIC FUNDS WITH INTEREST didate of section e of this 2000 Act three or more times,the can- REQUIRED.(1)A certified candidate may withdraw as a certified didate shall be removed or a participating or certified candidate candidate by filing a written statement of withdrawal with the by the Secretary of State or Attorney General and shall not F nd Secretary of State.At the time the statement of withdrawal is filed, during to receive revenues from the Political Accountability Fund the candidate shall also deliver to the Secretary of State an during the biennial primary and general election cycle during o deliver the violation occurred. If applicable, the candidate shall amount of money equal to all revenues distributed to the candi- date from the Political Accountability Fund after the date the can- deliver to the Secretary t State an amount of money equal to all revenues distributed r the candidate from the Political didate was certified,plus interest on the total amount of revenues Accountability Fund after the date the candidate was certified, received at a rate of 12 percent per annum. (2) A certified candidate who withdraws as a candidate for plus interest on the total amount of revenues received at a rate of nomination or election as provided in ORS chapter 249 shall 12 percent per annum. comply with the requirements of subsection (1) of this section at (7)All penalties and moneys received under this section for hall the time the candidate files a statement of withdrawal. l e pa of any provision of sections 2 d 26 di this 2000 Act shall be paid into the State Treasury and credited to the Political (3)A certified candidate who withdraws as a certified candidate Accountability Fund. • or as a candidate,or who is required to deliver money to the fund under section 26 of this 2000 Act,shall not receive any contribu- SECTION 27. AMENDMENT BECAUSE LANGUAGE NO tion or make any expenditure until the candidate has delivered to LONGER APPLICABLE.ORS 260.188 is amended to read: the Secretary of State any moneys required to be delivered under 260.188. (1) An expenditure not qualifying as an independent this section and section 26 of this 2000 Act. expenditure shall be considered an in-kind contribution to the (4)A certified candidate who withdraws as a certified candidate candidate or the principal campaign committee of the candidate or as a candidate shall be personally liable for any amounts to be and an expenditure by the candidate or the principal campaign paid to the Secretary of State under this section. committee of the candidate. (5)If a certified candidate withdraws as a certified candidate or [ 291 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 6 316.102, as amended by section 27, chapter :HR3B., Oregon Laws 1999(Enrolled Senate Bill 369),is amended to read: .] 316.102.(1)A credit against taxes shall be allowed for volun- [ tary contributions in money made in the taxable year: (a)To a major political party qualified under ORS 248.006 or to a committee thereof or to a minor political party qualified under ] ORS 248.008 or to.a committee thereof. [04] (2) No person, including a candidate or political commit- (b)Except as provided in subsection(4)of this section,to or for tee,shall report an expenditure as an independent expenditure if the use of a person who must be a candidate for nomination or the expenditure does not qualify as an independent expenditure election to a federal, state or local elective office in any biennial under ORS 260.005. primary election,general election or special election in this state. SECTION 28.29.30.31.AND 32 PERTAIN TO MAKING FUNDS The person must,in the calendar year in which the contribution is AVAILABLE FOR THE POLITICAL ACCOUNTABILITY FUND made, either listed on a biennial primary election, general election or special election ballot in this state or have filed in this THROUGH REPEAL OF THE POLITICAL TAX CREDIT FOR state one of the following: CANDIDATES WHO MAY PARTICIPATE IN THE POLITICAL ACCOUNTABILITY ACT.THE POLITICAL ACCOUNTABILITY (A)A prospective petition; ACT WILL MORE EFFECTIVELY ACHIEVE THE PUBLIC POL- (B)A declaration of candidacy; ICY PURPOSE OFTHE POLITICALTAX CREDIT WHICH ISTO (C)A certificate nomination;or INCREASE PUBLIC PARTICIPATION IN POLITICS. CREDIT (D)A designation n of a principal campaign committee. NOT AVAILABLE AFTER JANUARY 1.2001 BUT REPEALED (ti Except it provided i subsection (4) of this section, to a IN 2004 TO ALLOW FOR LATE AND AMENDED TAX political committee, ie defined in ORS 260.005, if the political RETURNS. committee has certified the name of its treasurer to the filing offi- SECTION 28.ORS 316.102 is amended to read: cer, as defined in ORS 260.005, in the manner provided in ORS chapter 260. 316.102.(1) A credit against taxes shall be allowed for volun- (2)The credit allowed by subsection(1)of this section shall be tary contributions in money made in the taxable year: the lesser of: (a)To a major political party qualified under ORS 248.006 or to a committee thereof or to a minor political party qualified under (a) The total contribution, not to exceed $50 on a separate return;the total contribution,not to exceed$100 on a joint return; ORS 248.008 or to a committee thereof. (b)Except as provided in subsection(4)of this section,to or for or the use of a person who must be a candidate for nomination or (b)The tax liability the taxpayer. election to a federal, state or local elective office in any biennial (3)The claim for tax x credit shall substantiated by submis primary election, presidential preference primary election, gen- sion, with the tax return, of official l receipts of the candidate,or committee thereof or political committee to whom contribution w eral election or special election in this state.The person must, in agent, political party w the calendar year in which the contribution is made, either be as made. (4) r credit against taxes shall not y allowed under this sec- listed on a biennial primary election, presidential preference pri tion for voluntary contributions s money made in the taxable year mary election, general election or special election ballot in this to a candidate for statewide office or the office of state Senator or state or have filed in this state one of the following: (A)A prospective petition; state Representative. (B)A declaration of candidacy; (5)As used in this section,"statewide office"has the meaning (C)A certificate of nomination;or given that term in section 3 of this 2000 Act. SECTION 30. If Senate Bill 946(1999)becomes law,section 33, (D)A designation of a principal campaign committee. chapter :HORS., Oregon Laws 1999 (Enrolled Senate Bill 946) (c)To a political committee, as defined in ORS 260.005,orga- nized and operated exclusively to support or oppose ballot mea- (amending ORS 2), is repealed. sures or questions to be voted upon within this state if the politi- SECTION 31.The e amendments to ORS 316.102 by section 28 or cal committee has certified the name of its treasurer to the filing 29 of this 2000 Act apply to tax years beginning on or after officer, as defined in ORS 260.005, in the manner provided in January 1,2001. ORS chapter 260. SECTION 32.PROCEEDINGS OR PROSECUTIONS RELATED (2)The credit allowed by subsection(1)of this section shall be TO ELECTION LAW VIOLATIONS OCCURRING PRIOR TO the lesser of: EFFECTIVE DATE OF THIS ACT WILL BE ADDRESSED (a) The total contribution, not to exceed $50 on a separate UNDER LAW IN PLACE PRIOR TO EFFECTIVE DATE OF THIS return;the total contribution,not to exceed$100 on a joint return; ACT. (1) Sections 1 to 26 of this 2000 Act and the amendments or to ORS 260.188 by section 27 of this 2000 Act apply only to activ- (b)The tax liability of the taxpayer. ities occurring and proceedings, actions, prosecutions or other (3)The claim for tax credit shall be substantiated by submis- business or matters undertaken or commenced under ORS chap- sion, with the tax return, of official receipts of the candidate, ter 260 on or after the effective date of this 2000 Act. agent, political party or committee thereof or political committee (2) Any proceeding, action, prosecution or other business or to whom contribution was made. matter undertaken or commenced before the effective date of this (4) A credit against taxes shall not be allowed under this sec- 2000 Act under ORS chapter 260 (1997 Edition), and still pend- tion for voluntary contributions of money made in the taxable year ing on the effective date of this 2000 Act, may be conducted and to a candidate for statewide office or the office of state Senator or completed in the same manner, under the same terms and con- state Representative [' ditions and with the same effect as though undertaken,conducted or completed before the effective date of this 2000 Act. (3) Nothing in this 2000 Act relieves any person of any obliga- • tion with respect to a tax,fee, fine, civil penalty or other charge, interest,penalty,forfeiture or other liability,duty or obligation. 299.489]' SECTION 33. LAWS REPEALED BECAUSE NO LONGER (5)As used in this section,"statewide office"[mea%,the affise APPLICABLE. ORS 260.160, 260.164, 260.178, 260.180, 260.182,260.184,260.190,260.192,260.202,260.265,260.997 and 260.999 are repealed. 84 the 8-1-IFARI-1 At ]has the meaning given that term in section 3 of this 2000 Act. SECTION 34.POLITICAL ACCOUNTABILITY ACT AVAILABLE SECTION 29. If Senate Bill 369(1999) becomes law, section 28 IN 2002 ELECTION CYCLE FOR CANDIDATES FOR GOVER- of this 2000 Act(amending ORS 316.102) is repealed and ORS NOR SECRETARY OF STATE,ATTORNEY GENERAL.STATE 292 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 6 TREASURER,STATE REPRESENTATIVE AND STATE SENA- EXPLANATORY ST TCMENT TOR.(1) It is the intent of this 2000 Act that candidates for nomi- nation or election to statewide office, as defined in section 3 of this 2000 Act, and candidates for nomination or election to the The Political Accountability Act, Measure 6, establishes an offices of state Senator and state Representative shall first alternative system to provide campaign funds to qualifying candi- receive revenues from the Political Accountability Fund for use in dates who agree to limit the political contributions they receive the biennial primary and general elections held in 2002. and the amount of their campaign spending.Measure 6 provides (2) In accordance with subsection (1)of this section: limited public funding for the campaigns of qualifying candidates (a)The amendments to ORS 260.188 and 316.102 by sections for Governor, Secretary,of State, Treasurer, Attorney General, 27 and 28 or 29 of this 2000 Act become operative January 1, state Senator,and state Representative.Candidates qualify by:1) 2001; agreeing to accept only certain permitted contributions and make (b) Sections 4, 7 to 19 and 22 to 26 of this 2000 Act become expenditures only from those sources;2)receiving specified num- operative July 1,2001;and bers of $5 contributions from Oregon residents to demonstrate (c)Subject to section 39 of this 2000 Act,the repeal of statutes public support. by section 33 of this 2000 Act becomes operative January 1, The number of$5 qualifying contributions for each applicable 2001. office are:Governor– 8,000;Secretary of State–6,000;Attorney (3) The Secretary of State may take any action prior to the General and Treasurer– 4,000; state Senator– 500; and state operative date of any provision of this 2000 Act that is necessary Representative–300. to implement any provision of this 2000 Act on or after the opera- tive date of any provision of this 2000 Act. Money may be spent only on legitimate campaign expenses. SECTION 35.SECTIONS ADDED TO EXISTING LAW.Sections The source of public funds is savings to the General Fund gener- 1 to 26 of this 2000 Act are added to and made a party of ORS tion by the repeal of use a the Political Tax Credit for under chapter 260. lions to candidates who have the option of running under the Political Accountability Act; any unspent money provided to a SECTION 36.APPLICABILITY OF SECTION 21. Section 21 of participating candidate;any money that has been distributed to a this 2000 Act applies to independent expenditures obligated on or participating candidate who withdraws that must be returned;any after the effective date of this 2000 Act. penalties assessed against participating candidates; voluntary contributions made directly to the fund; and additional funds SECTION 37. SEVERABILITY CLAUSE. (1) If any part of this appropriated by the Legislative Assembly. Full funding is man- 2000 Act is held unconstitutional,void or otherwise without effect, dated and the legislature is directed to give priority for reduction the remaining parts shall remain in force unless: of tax expenditures to meet the goal.The use of the Political Tax (a)This 2000 Act provides otherwise; Credit by political committees, ballot measure committees, and (b)The remaining parts are so essentially and inseparably con- candidates for races not covered by Measure 6 is not affected. nected with and dependent upon the part that is unconstitutional, Measure 6 includes an inflation adjustment provision.There is an void or without effect that it is apparent that the remaining parts overall cap to the amount of money that can be distributed to would not have been enacted without the part that is unconstitu- participating candidates in any one biennium.The cap is$5 per tional,void or without effect;or year times the number of Oregonians eligible to register to vote. (c) The remaining parts, standing alone, are incomplete and incapable of being executed in accordance with the intent of this Measure 6 includes increased disclosure requirements for 2000 Act. contributions and independent expenditures. Non-qualifying (2) If any of the provisions of this 2000 Act relating to the candidates must give notice to opposing candidates and the provision of adequate funding of the Political Accountability Act Secretary of State when they receive or spend an amount that are held unconstitutional, void or otherwise without effect, the exceeds the amount of public funds to be distributed for that race. Legislative Assembly shall make adequate funding available, in Any person or organization making an independent expenditure accordance with the provisions of this 2000 Act, at the next of more than$1,000 must give notice to affected candidates and following regular or special session of the Legislative Assembly. the Secretary of State. Matching funds are available to a parti- cipating candidate if a non-participating candidate has received SECTION 38. EFFECT OF SECTION CAPTIONS. The section more contributions than the funding allowed for a participating captions used in this 2000 Act are provided only for the conve- candidate. Matching funds are also available if a combination of nience of the reader and do not become part of the statutory law contributions to a non-participating candidate and independent of this state or express any intent in the enactment of this 2000 expenditures targeting a particular candidate reach the allowed Act. funding level for a participating candidate. Matching funds are SECTION 39. CONFLICT AMENDMENTS. If Senate Bill 369 limited with a cap at double the original amount. (1999)becomes law,sections 27(amending ORS 260.188(1997 Political advertisements for participating candidates must Edition))and 33 of this 2000 Act are repealed. include the statement: "I take personal responsibility for the content of this campaign ad" Candidates participating in the NOTE: Boldfaced type indicates new language; [l3raekets-and Political Accountability Act will be identified in the Voters' stFik8tq*eb10H]type indicates deletions or comments. Pamphlet. Measure 6 will be administered by the Secretary of State Elections Division with expedited hearing options available. Civil penalties up to$10,000 may be imposed for violations. Committee Members: Appointed by: Kappy Eaton Chief Petitioners Representative Diane Rosenbaum Chief Petitioners • Andrew Anderson Secretary of State Fred VanNatta Secretary of State Edward L.Clark,Jr. Members of the Committee (This committee was appointed to provide an impartial explanation of the ballot measure pursuant to ORS 251.215.) 293 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 6 Arguments ARGUMENT IN FAVOR ARGUMENT IN FAVOR Frequently Asked Questions about Measure 6 The League of Women Voters of Oregon asks you to join us "Why do we need it?" in voting YES ON MEASURE 6. n elections.Politicians improve their We have a unique opportunity here in Oregon to help lead the Money helps candidates wi chances of raising money n following the will of those with nation in campaign finance reform. In response to the growing money to contribute.Therefore, those with money to contribute problem of money in politics, the League of Women Voters is have special influence over oe, those nt. proud to have helped create the Oregon Political Accountability 9 Act(now before the voters as Measure 6),which aims for nothing "Can't we just limit the size of contributions?" less than to reinvigorate our democracy. No,it doesn't work.In fact,there are contribution limits in place The League of Women Voters has a long history of support for right now for federal candidates,but these limits haven't given us measures which help address the cycle of cynicism and disinter- an honest federal government. est which threaten our basic relationship to government. After careful study, we have determined that without building a"clean "Why not?" money" alternative tied to strict reporting requirements and The limits are easily and routinely evaded. 1)Big corporations spending limits,our democracy will continue to be threatened by give employees special"bonuses"to contribute.2) Instead of one the dominant role of big money interest. large contribution, individual donors make contributions to multi- Under the act, political candidates who agree to limit the cost of ple political committees that support the same candidate. 3) their campaigns, and to also accept no private campaign contri- Donors can also give money to the political party. 4) Special butions, can receive limited public financing from the Political interests write and air their own political ads. None of these Accountability fund. evasions can be prevented;the first is hard to prove and the rest are considered free speech. This comprehensive campaign finance reform would help level the playing field in Oregon politics and allow those "Can't we limit how much is spent?" candidates with the best qualifications and ideas to compete No.The U.S.Supreme Court has ruled that spending limits are with those with the most money. unconstitutional. Once the Political Accountability Act passes, politicians will be "Why will Measure 6 solve the problem?" able to get elected without trading their votes to big money inter- ests,and we will greatly increase the likelihood that the interests Campaigns educate voters, so candidates must have enough of all Oregonians will be served by our elected officials. money to effectively campaign. But the people and institutions that fund political campaigns dominate our government.Measure Please take a moment to put the voice of the people back into 6 will allow citizens to run for office without relying on private con- our political system.Elected officials should be free to serve the tributions. It will create real political accountability by combining people who put them in office, not the contributors who pay for spending limits, strict reporting requirements, and limited public their campaigns. Measure 6 provides the best opportunity in financing. Oregon history for meaningful, constitutionally valid campaign finance reform. "Won't this mean higher taxes?" PLEASE VOTE YES ON MEASURE 6. No. Eliminating special favors will save Oregon more than Measure 6 will cost. (This information furnished by Paula Krane,President,League of Women Voters of Oregon.) "How can you be sure of that?" Special interests invest money in politicians because they expect to make far more money from favorable legislation, tax breaks,subsidies,outright giveaways,and other legislative favors. That means eliminating these favors will save far more than the cost of replacing special interest campaign contributions. Special interests view paying for political campaigns as a good investment.They're right.Vote YES on Measure 6! (This information furnished by John Flanery.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 294 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 6 Arguments ARGUMENT IN FAVOR ARGUMENT IN FAVOR PEOPLE WHO CARE ABOUT FAIR ELECTIONS Republicans for Campaign Finance Reform CARE ABOUT CLEAN MONEY ELECTIONS Every election,it seems more money than ever before gets raised Having served Oregon as Secretary of State,each one of us has and spent to influence voters, but fewer people bother to partici- spent a great deal of time dealing with problems associated with pate in a system they see as increasingly removed from the our campaign finance system. needs of real people. After careful scrutiny, we believe that real campaign finance Oregon cannot prosper economically without a legislative system reform is not possible unless we address the core of the problem: that can make decisions about what is best for the state as a money. Here in Oregon, the$12.5 million spent on 1998 legisla- whole. Nothing good can come of a system preoccupied with tive races set a new record, with less than 4 percent of those partisan gridlock and the petty agendas of politicians loaded with funds coming from contributions of $50 or less. Meanwhile, the burden of raising increasingly huge budgets.We all lose when another record was set -- for lowest voter turnout for both the our civic and economic infrastructures deteriorate as special primary and general elections.The people of Oregon truly are interests and lobbyists rule through the influence of campaign excluded and therefore turning away from a system run by contributions. wealthy contributors and special interests. Once elected, some individuals can be hamstrung by the role It is frusttating that not a single piece of substantive reform has special interest money plays in discouraging legislators from passed the Oregon legislature since 1973. In the meantime, we thinking and acting independently. have witnessed an exponential increase in the degree of negative partisanship in Oregon politics tied to the narrow agendas of That's why we are asking you to support a fundamental change in special interests. the way we finance elections. Big money interests pour more money into politics through a In 1973, Oregonians were successful in passing comprehensive variety of devices, from bundled campaign contributions to soft campaign finance reform only to have it struck down on a minor money issue ads.As vast amounts of money flow into the system, point by the Supreme Court.None of our efforts to limit campaign costs skyrocket.Candidates consequently spend more time rais- contributions have withstood Supreme Court tests to date. For ing money and less time talking to voters. that reason,we are joining a bipartisan coalition in a new tactic– one which we are confident will survive a court challenge Clearly, the regulations governing campaign financing require because it is working in other states already. fundamental restructuring. Already, four states – Maine, Massachusetts, Arizona, and Vermont – have adopted reform Under the Political Accountability Act, participating candidates measures to create a"Clean Money"option to allow candidates to agree to limit the cost of their campaigns, and accept no private reject contributions from special interests. campaign contributions during the primary or general elections.In return,candidates receive a set amount of public support. As chief elections officials for the state,we each have had a great concern for the integrity of our political process. It's time we created a system where good people can run and serve the common good with only we the people to answer to at We urge all Oregonians to vote yes on Measure#6 to restore the end of the day. integrity to the process. We therefore urge all our fellow Republicans to vote YES ON 6. SECRETARY R STATE BILL ATE NO M (D) NORMA PAULUS,CHIEF PETITIONER AND FORMER SUPER- FORMER SECRETARY OF STATE NORMA PAULUS(R) INTENDENT OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION FORMER SECRETARY OF STATE PHIL KE A ROBERTS( REP.JOHN DELLENBACK,CHIEF PETITIONER AND FORMER FORMER SECRETARY OF STATE BARBARA ROR (D) MEMBER OF CONGRESS (This information furnished by Norma Paulus.) VERNE DUNCAN, STATE SENATOR (This information furnished by Norma Paulus.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the stat@ warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 295 CONTINUED O Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 6 Arguments ARGUMENT IN FAVOR ARGUMENT IN FAVOR The American Cancer Society Supports Measure 6 Ecumenical Ministries of Oregon What if your ballot carried a warning label: Supports Ballot Measure#6 CAUTION: Special interest contributions can be dangerous The Ecumenical Ministries of Oregon (EMO) Board and Public C C our health. Policy Committee view this measure as an important first step in to y campaign finance reform.Because the measure is statutory, any Unfortunately, it doesn't. Yet most of the time, the public is changes that need to be made after its implementation can be unaware of how high-priced lobbyists and a handful of big money addressed by the Legislature.It is our hope that the measure will special interests control the political process. encourage well-qualified candidates to rung especially those who might otherwise have been discouraged for lack of funds. As a public health non-profit, we don't often venture into direct politics.But we know better than most the dangerous influence of NOTE: The Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Portland and the big money contributors in politics.In fact, it is no exaggeration to Greek Orthodox Church abstained from EMO's deliberations say that special interest money can literally kill people by blocking regarding the November ballot measures.The Roman Catholic legislation that would otherwise save lives. Archdiocese releases all public policy statements for the Archdiocese through the Oregon Catholic Conference. Measure 6 is an important and positive alternative to a campaign finance system that most people rightly see as broken.It will start ECUMENICAL MINISTRIES OF OREGON to restore confidence in our basic electoral process,and help give the public an equal voice with special interest lobbyists. (This information furnished by Enid Edwards, Ecumenical Ministries of Oregon.) Of course, no one reform can fix everything, but Measure 6 is a critical first step toward helping restore both our public health and the health of our democracy. Please,consider voting YES on MEASURE 6. THE AMERICAN CANCER SOCIETY NORTHWEST DIVISION (This information furnished by John Valley, American Cancer Society Northwest Division.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the Ptate of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 296 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 6 Arguments ARGUMENT IN FAVOR ARGUMENT IN FAVOR Oregon's Educational Professionals Ask You To Join Us VOTE YES ON#6 In Voting YES ON MEASURE 6. by As educators,we are called upon to teach our children about the OREGON COMMON CAUSE value of representational government and the strength of Since its founding,Common Cause has worked to promote open, American democracy.Thankfully,we are not asked to explain why honest and accountable government. For the past 30 years we it is that our elected leaders talk so much about needing to invest have represented the concerned voice of people fighting against in education, but never seem to have money left over for schools corruption in government. after their backroom deal-making is completed and they go back to the business of raising campaign contributions. Today in Oregon we have a rare opportunity to support a positive alternative to the system of virtual bribery and influence peddling We all know that our political system is corrupted by the influence we currently call campaign finance. Common Cause strongly of a handful of wealthy donors and big money interests,but most endorses Ballot Measure #6 and is proud that our activists and of the time there Is very little we can do to change the equation. members in Oregon have helped lead this effort to rebuild the Until now. electoral foundation of our democracy. Measure 6 will bring fairness and accountability back to the The strength and genius of our system of government is the political process.It will level the playing field so candidates with equation of'one person equals one vote".That core principle is the best ideas and qualifications can compete with those who now threatened by a government of,by and for a very small num- simply have the most money. ber of very large contributors.We believe it is time to put the voter By combining spending limits with more extensive and timely ahead of the checkbook in the electoral process by eliminating reporting requirements, it will also limit the barrage of negative the means by which some special interests control the govern- ment that now dominate our political discourse. The limited ment process. "clean money" public financing it makes available to qualified Many now believe that one vote does not matter as much as the candidates will cut the most direct and powerful link between thousand or hundred thousand dollar checks from a big giver.But big money special interests and politicians. Candidates elected today your one vote can help liberate our democracy from the under this system will be free to vote their conscience,answering clutches of a few wealthy donors and narrow special interests. only to the voters of their district. That is the true essence of We can complain about the corrupt influence of big money in representational government. politics but today we are given the chance to do something about Because Measure 6 makes government more accountable to the it. This election we the people can make all the difference by people,we believe it will be good for education.Most importantly, overwhelmingly passing Ballot Measure#6 as a message to the we believe it is good for democracy in Oregon, country that the spirit of a democracy of,by and for the people is Help us support education and a stronger democracy. still strong here in Oregon. VOTE YES ON MEASURE 6. END POLITICAL TRICKS–VOTE YES ON#6. AMERICAN FEDERATION OF TEACHERS OF OREGON OREGON COMMON CAUSE (This information furnished by Amy Hunter, Director of Government (This information furnished by David Buchanan,Oregon Common Cause.) Relations,American Federation of Teachers–Oregon.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 297 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 6 Arguments ARGUMENT IN FAVOR ARGUMENT IN FAVOR Congressman DeFazio Supports Measure#6 A Farmer Speaks in Favor of Measure#6 Dear Oregonian: As a private citizen, community member, and retired farmer, I Measure#6 will help take special interest money out of Oregon urge Oregonians to strongly consider voting YES on Measure 6. politics.It will limit campaign spending for political candidates and When you've spent time farming as I have, you learn to look at provide a system of real accountability to control how political problems more deeply than how they first seem. If a crop looks dollars are spent and reported. bad,you learn to closely examine the soil it's growing in. Measure #6 is not a cure-all, but it will make a significant While I don't have near as much experience in politics,I think the difference.The "clean money" alternatives it provides will allow same logic applies. Few people I know are pleased about the qualified candidates to run for office without big money election choices we have to make every year especially with all contributors. the money spent on negative campaigns but how can we I volunteered to collect signatures to place Measure #6 on the expect anything better with our current campaign finance system! ballot.As an elected official, it is clear to me that we need mean- It is difficult to get talented and qualified people to run for office ingful campaign finance reform. Big money interests have put when that means spending most of one's time trying to raise democracy at risk, demeaning and demoralizing political candi- money.A few$50 contributions from friends and relatives doesn't dates and discouraging voters from participating.Measure#6 will go far...so candidates have to kiss up to special interests if they put the voice of the people back in Oregon politics. really want to have a chance. I understand that one of the legis- lative races this year in the Portland area is going to cost over Measure #6 has broad, non-partisan support, but needs yours $1 000 000.A million dollars being spent to get a job that pays too.This is our chance to ensure that elected officials in Oregon , , work for all the people, not just special interests. $1,200 a month. Please vote YES on Measure#6.The fairness of Oregon's politi- Clearly,there are many people with a lot at stake in what happens in Salem, people who are willing to give that money.As a fairly cal system depends on it. active member of the farming industry, and as a past legislative Sincerely, candidate, I have witnessed the constant lobbying efforts that go on.I know first hand about the money game going on behind the PETER DEFAZIO, MEMBER OF CONGRESS scenes. (This information furnished by Peter DeFazio.) I think it's time to create a way that people can get elected without being tied to special interests so that farmers and other folks like you and me can be represented in Salem as much as any big money lobbyist. That's why I'm voting yes on Measure 6. MARCUS SIMANTEL, RETIRED OREGON FARMER (This information furnished by Marcus SimanteL) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 298 CONTINUED O Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 6 Arguments ARGUMENT IN FAVOR ARGUMENT IN FAVOR There is a reason why with each election cycle less and less peo- The American Association of University Women of Oregon ple participate in the political process.Low voter turnout and lack Speak Out in Favor of Measure 6 of voter confidence needs to be recognized as two sides of the same coin.Too often,when we complain about declining political The American Association of University Women of Oregon is participation rates we assume that the problem is voter apathy. dedicated to supporting measures that help to strengthen our Elitist efforts to force people to vote will always fail, because they democracy and restore voter trust in the electoral process. fail to respect the logic of non-participation. It is those firmly held values which lead us to support Measure 6, Most people feel that their votes matter very little compared to the and to urge all Oregonians to join us in enacting real campaign influence of big-money contributors.Mostly,they're right.Until we finance reform. confront this uncomfortable truth, we have no business asking "Clean Money"reform is already demonstrating success in Maine, people to believe in representative democracy. Vermont, Arizona and Massachusetts. Oregon can be proud to Money in politics is often talked about without looking at just what help lead a national movement by passing this groundbreaking "special interests"are NOT being served as a result of the current campaign finance reform initiative. system of campaign finance.In our country today,whole commu- We believe the campaign spending limits and reporting require- nities of people are systematically ignored through the legislative ments of Measure 6 are the key to making public financing a process because they are not significant enough financial con- viable reform option.The measure is well crafted to avoid lengthy tributors. Having a handful of minority representatives does little court challenges. to change the fact that the voices of many communities are muted by the volume at which money talks. It is time here in Oregon to make a strong statement in support of bringing democracy back to the people. Measure 6 is the right Politicians from both parties admit that the current system is choice to help level the playing field of golitics while restoring broken,but are unable or unwilling to break the ties of big money. fairness and accountability to our electoral system That's why it's up to the people to enact real reform. Please join the thousands of members of the American VOTE YES ON MEASURE 6. Association of University Women across Oregon who will be REPRESENTATIVE JO ANN BOWMAN(DISTRICT 19) voting YES on 6! (This information furnished by Jo Ann Bowman, Representative, District Katherine"Kappy"Eaton #19.) AMERICAN ASSOCIATION OF UNIVERSITY WOMEN OF OREGON (This information furnished by Katherine "Kappy" Eaton, American Association of University Women of Oregon.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with DRS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 299 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 6 Arguments ARGUMENT IN FAVOR ARGUMENT IN FAVOR Year after year, people who care about our environment and It's no secret that Oregon's current campaign finance system quality of life are called upon to fight against efforts to weaken makes it extremely difficult for real people to run for office.In order protections for our land,air,water,and health. to launch a successful campaign you either need to be indepen- dently wealthy or a full-time fundraiser. These expensive The 1999 Oregon Legislature was among the most hostile to campaigns have forced candidates to spend the majority of their environmental protection in our state's history. Among other time begging for money from special interest groups and lobby- attacks, lawmakers: ists.Unfortunately,this type of campaign environment breeds the • launched a full-scale assault on Oregon's land use laws; potential for abuse and lack of accountability with the voters. • enacted polluter-sponsored legislation to limit citizens'access As an elected official, I know how difficult it is to run a political to information on toxic chemical use in their communities; campaign even in the best of circumstances. Four years ago, had the pleasure of running against an opponent who (like • passed several bills attacking Oregon's landmark Salmon Plan; myself)was committed to running a campaign based on issues– - voted to subsidize heavily polluting companies merely for instead of who could raised the most money. This unique obeying pollution laws;and approach to running a campaign included a mutually established low spending limit.Our race was based on both respect for one • raided funds the voters had approved for improving our under- another and the voters of Deschutes County. funded state parks and protecting threatened salmon. This year Oregonians have an opportunity to take back control of How did our politicians get so out of touch with public support for their future through campaign finance reform. Measure #6 will clean water,clean air,and healthy communities?The explanation help put accountability back into campaign finance – making is obvious:the corrosive influence of special interest money in our candidates accountable for campaign spending,and,most impor- political system. tantly, making politicians accountable to the people who elect The impact of anti-environmental money in politics is clear. them. Money in politics has become a problem of epidemic proportions. Measure#6 will help make our state government serve ALL "Clean money"public financing will sever the ties between politi- the people of Oregon,NOT just big campaign contributors. cians and big money interests, and give candidates who support I'm voting YES on Measure#6 and I hope you will too. environmental protections an independent means of reaching the LINDA L.SWEARINGEN public. DESCHUTES COUNTY COMMISSIONER We hope all those concerned about the future of Oregon's environment and the livability of our communities will vote (This information furnished by Linda Swearingen, Deschutes County YES on Measure 6. Commission.) SIERRA CLUB OREGON LEAGUE OF CONSERVATION VOTERS 1000 FRIENDS OF OREGON (This information furnished by Carol Porto,Sierra Club.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 300 CONTINUED� Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 6 Arguments ARGUMENT IN FAVOR ARGUMENT IN FAVOR The Asian Pacific American Network of Oregon urges all Oregon Oregon Action urges all Oregonians who want to restore voters to support Measure 6 as a way to provide desperately democracy to vote YES on Measure 6. needed reform to our current system of campaign finance,and to create a means of opening the democratic process up to all In 1999, Oregon Action released Undermining Democracy, a voices in the American community report showing the connection between campaign contributions and the progress of more than 3 dozen bills in the last session. Our network of leaders, activists and allies for Oregon's Asian- We don't expose any illegal activities.We don't have to.The real Pacific Islanders (Cambodian, Chamorro, Chinese, Filipino, scandal is what is legal. Hawaiian, Hmong,Japanese, Korean, Lao, Mien, Samoan,Thai, More than 2/3rds of the money given to candidates in 1996 came Tongan,Vietnamese) is relatively new as a community organiza- from donors who gave over$10,000.This isn't tion. Our goal of earning the opportunity to effectively represent g giving; it's invest- our concerns to government leaders is made systematically ing.Contributors invest in access and influence.Their successful difficult by the extent to which money is valued over people in investments undermine democracy by increasing voter cynicism many current political contexts. and distrust.The result is decreased citizen participation in elec- tions and decision-making. We believe that a bridge can and should be built between all communities, regardless of race or background. In that way, our When the 1999 legislature voted to roll back the minimum wage various skills and abilities can translate into prosperity that for farm and restaurant workers, was it because of sincere indif- embraces cultural,spiritual and material success for our families. ference to working families or sincere gratitude for the$700,000 invested by agribusiness and restaurant PAC's and their allies in But to mobilize the collective social, cultural and economic the 98 election campaigns?We cannot know for sure,but sixty of strength of many communities, we need a system that rewards those legislators received an "investment" from at least one of participation in democracy regardless of how much money you them.That undermines democracy. give to a candidate. In another example from the dozens in our report, an investment Measure 6 won't change everything about politics overnight, but of$900,000 in the 1998 elections by electric and phone utilities it will create a more open,fair and honest debate by removing the and their allies delivered over $700 million in returns from the shadow of doubt about whether elected leaders really have the 1999 legislature.We should all invest so wisely., best interest of our community=and all communities within it–at By voting YES on Measure 6, we can invest to strengthen heart when they vote on our future. g Please vote YES on Measure 6. democracy. We can invest in politically accountable elections with public ASIAN PACIFIC AMERICAN NETWORK OF OREGON(APANO) financing.We can invest in electing leaders accountable to no one (Cambodian, Chamorro, Chinese, Filipino, Hawaiian, but the public.We can invest in restoring democracy. Hmong, Japanese, Korean, Lao, Mien, Samoan, Thai, Tongan,and Vietnamese communities) There's a saying in politics, "You gotta dance with them what brung ya." The people of Oregon must do the bringing. If our Thach Nguyen Legislature is to be bought, then let the people buy it free and Taro O'Sullivan clear of cynicism, suspicion and distrust.Vote YES on Measure Katy Yen 6.It's a wise investment. Pamela Richardson Emma Reid Oregon Action's Undermining Democracy report is online at Hongsa Chanthavong www.oregonaction.org, Choeun Neou (This information furnished by RuthAlice Anderson,Oregon Action.) Lee Po Cha (This information furnished by Thach Nguyen,APANO.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 301 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 6 Arguments ARGUMENT IN FAVOR ARGUMENT IN FAVOR Rural Oregonians Speak On Behalf of Measure#6 'The Oregon Working Group for Campaign Finance Reform is proud to have helped craft Measure 6,and urges all Oregonians It's no secret that big money currently rules the electoral process. to support this critically needed campaign finance reform. Here in Oregon,that means a small handful of lobbyists and polit- ical powerbrokers decide who can run for office and what kinds of In 1997 the courts struck down an earlier campaign finance bills will make it through the legislature. measure that Oregon voters had approved overwhelmingly. A broad array of bipartisan leaders and interested organizations Mostly, that means rural Oregonians get short shrift. We can't then came together to craft a new law that would create compre- contribute anywhere near the kind of money that it takes to hensive reform and also stand up in court. compete in Salem, and even our elected representatives are dependent on outside funds to run for office. We took great care to research and develop policy with extensive input over two and half years.This policy work is the basis for Measure 6--The Political Accountability Act--would change that Measure 6, which will enact real and necessary changes in the by cutting the ties that bind candidates to big money contributors, way we fund campaigns for public office in the state of Oregon. therefore allowing elected officials to make decisions based on the merits of legislation and the interests of their constituents This model of reform has already passed in Maine,Vermont, alone. Arizona and Massachusetts.Courts have now extensively tested Measure 6 would allow true community leaders to run for office, its core provisions and found them to be constitutional. instead of just insiders tied to the money game.By eliminating the The care taken to prepare this measure gives us great confidence need for candidates to spend all their time raising money,elected that it will create meaningful change without creating unneces- officials can instead spend their time talking to real people about sary bureaucracy or getting bogged down in the courts.We hope real needs that need to be addressed by our state government. you join us in voting YES on this historic initiative. The Political Accountability Act is Oregon's best, first step to OREGON WORKING GROUP FOR CAMPAIGN FINANCE comprehensive campaign finance reform. REFORM We urge all Oregonians to support MEASURE 6. (This information furnished by Janice Thompson, Oregon Working Group RURAL ORGANIZING PROJECT for Campaign Finance Reform.) (This information furnished by Maidi Terry, Oregon Political Accountability Campaign.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 302 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures .Measure No. 6 Arguments ARGUMENT IN FAVOR ARGUMENT IN FAVOR There are 12.5 million reasons to vote for Measure 6 ACLU OF OREGON URGES YOU That's one for every dollar spent on 1998 legislative races in TO VOTE"YES"ON MEASURE 6 Oregon.As we think of the upcoming Governor's race, we could The American Civil Liberties Union of Oregon urges you to vote add millions more. , "Yes"on Ballot Measure 6. As politicians continue to set new spending records, fewer and The ACLU of Oregon has endorsed Measure 6 because it will fewer voters are willing to participate in a system they see as provide positive campaign finance reform while also protecting removed from their lives and not serving their basic interests. the Oregon Bill of Rights.The Oregon ACLU's endorsement of Measure 6 will bring much needed accountability to the politi- Measure 6 marks the first time that any affiliate of the ACLU has cal process by limiting spending and creating strict reporting endorsed a"clean money"measure that has qualified for the bal- requirements for qualified candidates.In order to put the people lot anywhere in the country. back into politics,it will provide a limited amount of public funding ACLU has opposed many campaign finance proposals in to candidates who are willing to reject special interest Oregon and other states because those measures have either contributions. sought to impose unconstitutional mandatory restrictions on polit- We are proud of the broad bipartisan coalition that has come ical campaigns or have been constitutional amendments together to su port Measure 6. designed to weaken the Oregon or federal Bill of Rights.While ACLU agrees that the current political campaign system needs a Chief petitioners include leading Republicans Norma Paulus and major overhaul,we can't support proposals that would weaken or former Congres§man John Dellenback,as well as Kappy Eaton, violate the Bill of Rights. Statewide Public Policy Chair from the American Association of MEASURE 6 IS DIFFERENT University Women of Oregon. Prominent Democrats, including Representative Peter DeFazio, Multnomah County Chair Measure 6 is different from other campaign finance reform pro- Beverly Stein,and former Secretary of State Phil Keisling have posals because it imposes voluntary restrictions on candidates in also endorsed the measure. exchange for providing "clean money"for campaigns. For those In addition to longtime campaign finance reform advocates such candidates who choose to participate, Measure 6 will eliminate as Common Cause, Oregon Action and OSPIRG, our cam- the need for candidates to go begging to special interest groups paign has built a strong base of support from organizations that for campaign donations. aren't traditionally viewed as active in campaign finance reform. Measure 6 may not fix everything that's wrong with election Oregon AARP Sierra Club Ecumenical Ministries of Oregon campaigns, but it is definitely a step in the right direction. And and the American Cancer Society have backed Measure 6 because Measure 6 is not a constitutional amendment, if some- because they share the concern of many voters that special thing doesn't work right it can easily be fixed by the Legislature or interests and big money contributors have become the dominant through the initiative process. constituency of elected officials. SUPPORT CAMPAIGN FINANCE REFORM It is time for comprehensive, meaningful reform of the way we AND THE BILL OF RIGHTS! finance elections in Oregon.Measure 6 will help level the playing VOTE"YES"ON MEASURE 6!! field of Oregon politics so candidates with the best ideas and For more information on the ACLU of Oregon's positions qualifications can compete with those with the most money.It will Write us at PO Box 40585, Portland,OR 97240 help make our elections about voters,not big money contributors. or go to www.aclu-or.org 1-877-92BFAIR or www.nobiiamoney.com for more information. (This information furnished by David Fidanque, American Civil Liberties (This information furnished by Maidi Terry, Oregon Political Accountability Union of Oregon.) Campaign.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 303 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 6 Arguments ARGUMENT IN FAVOR ARGUMENT IN FAVOR IF YOU WANT REAL CAMPAIGN FINANCE REFORM, Small Business Owners Support Measure 6 VOTE"YES"on 6 As Oregonians, we have been fortunate to avoid many of the kinds of scandals that other states have seen as a result of the AND current systems of campaign finance.Howgver,the logic of cam- "NO"on 98 paign finance still puts many good people in bad positions every day in our political system. These two important measures—6 and 98—go hand in hand. Legal Experts agree that Measure 98 could"trump"Measure 6, As long as there is a direct incentive for politicians to appease even if Measure 6 gets more votes! campaign contributors,the best interests of the voters will always be weighed against the needs of large contributors.Regardless of Measure 6 is good for Oregon how any one decision turns out, we believe elected leaders Organizations including seniors, environmental, labor and con- should simply be free to represent their constituents without sumer groups have put forth the Oregon Political Accountability potentially conflicting considerations. Act-Measure 6.This measure is a major step in returning politics to the hands of working Oregonians—instead of in the hands of Measure 6 will help to make our political system more account- special interests,where it has been. able to the people in several ways: Under Measure 6,a candidate may voluntarily choose to run as a `It will provide an alternative"clean money"campaign finance "clean money" candidate and must demonstrate enough public system to allow elected officials to speak and vote their support in their district by collecting a specified number of small conscience. qualifying contributions from residents in their district.The candi- 'Before they can qualify for public funds,legislative candidates date must also agree to limit spending and pledge to reject private who want to participate in this system must limit out of state contributions. In exchange, qualifying candidates receive public contributions by collecting 75%of qualifying contributions from funds to pay for their campaigns. people in their own district. Although the vast majority of Oregonians support this type "Candidates who want to participate in this new system must of real campaign finance reform,Bill Sizemore's Measure 98 agree to limit their personal contribution to their campaign to could stop Measure 6 from being implemented —even if 6 $100 to keep the playing field level, regardless of personal gets more votes than 98!Sizemore himself knows this.In an wealth. Oregonian article, dated May 31, 2000, Sizemore said that this "proposed constitutional amendment (Measure 98) 'Finally, Measure 6 would change reporting requirements for would trump Measure 6:' special interest groups that run television ads by requiring immediate and full disclosure of the money being spent and In other words because fair campaigns would allow public where it comes from. resources to be used for Qolitical purposes Measure 98 could essentially void Measure 6 and all its supporters have done to We believe that together, these reforms will help rebuild confi- take back Oregon politics from wealthy special interests dence in our political system, and will help good people get Vote no on Measure 98,and clear the way for Measure 6 and elected to political office the right way–with no strings attached. fair politics in Oregon. That's why we are voting YES on Measure 6. Maureen Kirk Patricia M.Dudley Oregon State Public Interest Research Group Tom Kelly Madeline B.Moore (This information furnished by Maureen Kirk, Oregon State Public Interest Mary M.Sellin Research Group(OSPIRG).) (This information furnished by Patricia M.Dudley.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argun ent. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 304 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 6 Arguments ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION MEASURE SIX IS FATALLY FLAWED MEASURE SIX IS NOT CAMPAIGN FINANCE REFORM Measure Six contains a loophole so huge you could drive a freight The supporters of Measure Six claim the measure is a campaign train through it. finance reform measure.They claim it will help get the money out Instead of stopping the flow of money from special interest of politics.Not so. groups and large donors to candidates for public office it The truth is, Measure Six is part of a national campaign financed could increase it.Here's why: largely by some very wealthy, very powerful, extreme left-wing The U.S.Supreme Court has ruled that individuals can spend as individuals and groups. These individuals and organizations much of their own personal money expressing their personal are taking advantage of the public's desire for some kind of political views as they wish.Therefore, Measure Six cannot pro- campaign finance reform and placing measures like Measure hibit independent expenditures,which is money spent,not by the Six on the ballot across the country, using out-of-state candidate himself, but by some other individual, supporting or money, to pass measures like Measure Six which would opposing the candidate. force taxpayers to fund political camnpaigns The fatal flaw with Measure Six is that it requires the taxpayers to If Measure Six passes,taxpayers will be forced to finance half of give matching funds to a candidate,if an independent expenditure the cost of the campaigns of the candidates they don't like while is made supporting his opponent or attacking him. they are also supporting half of the campaigns of the candidates they do like.That's not just a radical idea.It's a rotten idea. Such flawed language will cause an unbelievable mess.Consider the following example Think of the candidate you like the least Maybe it's some left- wing whacko. Maybe it's some right-wing whacko. For some, it Candidates Bob and Sue are both running for governor and both might be some squishy, lukewarm moderate. No matter. If receive the$1.2 million of taxpayer money that Measure Six stip- Measure Six passes your hard-earned tax dollars could very ulates they receive. Both are evenly matched. Then millionaire well help fund that person's political campaign Joe spends $250,000 of his own money running television ads Kind of reminds one of Thomas Jefferson's statement that it was allegedly supporting Sue. Under Measure Six, Bob would then sinful and tyrannical to force anyone to spend money supporting get$250,000 more tax dollars to bring his spending up to Sue's level.Sound Good? a political cause he doesn't believe in.Crazy and un-American as that may seem.if Measure Six passes we will all be doing But wait.Let's look at Joe's independent expenditure television ad exactly that.We will all be paying taxes to support candidates we supposedly"supporting"Sue.The pictures of Sue in the ad are don't like. not so flattering.The voice on the ads says that Sue wants a sales There are lots of campaign finance reform tax;wants to get rid of Oregon's public beach law and wants to proposals being increase gas taxes.Bottom line,the ad doesn't help Sue. It hurts discussed these days. Just so happens Measure Six is about her. Nonetheless, her opponent could get $250,000 in tax the worst of the lot.So, please don't vote for it. paver matching funds to spend attacking Sue even more Measure Six is not campaign finance reform. A reform makes What a mess! things better.Measure Six makes them worse. The net result of this huge loophole: Special interests would be VOTE NO ON MEASURE SIX just as powerful as before;campaigns would be just as expensive; only now those nasty, negative attack ads would be paid for with (This information furnished by Bill Sizemore,Oregon Taxpayers United.) our tax dollars. VOTE NO ON MEASURE SIX (This information furnished by Becky Miller,Oregon Taxpayers United.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 305 CONTINUED-0 Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures . Measure No. 6 Arguments ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION After Oregon taxpayers financed the campaign ads for an Dear Voter: Aryan Nations or Klu Klux Klan candidate a few times the reasons Oregon's political system is not corrupt.Those who serve in our to oppose measure 6 would be easier to explain. legislature and in state offices do so at great personal sacrifice. If the measure 6 process for public funding of campaigns is They forsake"civilian employment;'earn paltry salaries,and open approved it will certainly happen.And that is not all.Every ideo- their lives to immense media scrutiny.But they still serve because logue or self-promoter will be using tax money to run for public they are driven by a personal need to make positive contributions office in Oregon. to our state and communities. All it takes to get public funding is a$5.00 contribution from a Unfortunately, their campaigns are expensive. The cost of number of individuals.The number varies by office but as few as direct mail, radio, television and print advertising has risen dra- three hundred gets you started. matically over the years.Candidates seek resources from those A$1500 investment in"seed money"produces$25,000 of tax who share their views to help cover these costs.Generally, can- didates who espouse differing yet honestly held positions are money, a pretty good deal in anyone's language.A person could equally well supported in their campaigns. And, generally, they stand at the super market in a weekend and qualify for the are not beholden to any particular group or"special interest" taxpayers' money.They then tap into public funds for their per- sonal "political" expenditures...money that should be spent on Measure 6 destroys this balance. By making millions of tax- education or health care for our children. payer dollars available to any group that can gather between 300 Measure six increases taxes by $1,000,000 and will cost the and 8,000 five-dollar contributions, Measure 6 will fund the cam- paigns of fringe candidates whom in all likelihood will not share Secretary of State an estimated $400,000 to administer. It may your views.Talk about"special interests!" cost as much as$24,000,000 an election cycle. A candidate for governor who raises a sufficient number of five Many people find campaign advertising misleading, offensive dollar contributions from his or her mailing list can receive and objectionable. Flooding our campaigns with candidates pro- $1,800,000.00 or more from taxpayers to spread a message.Lon moting extremist agenda's paid for with tax money will not Mabon and the OCA have a constitutional right to speak, but improve Oregon's election process: It may well discourage voter should they spread their campaign message with millions of dol- participation while providing self-promotion to fringe candidates lars of our tax money?Radical environmental groups have equiv- for every imaginable cause. alent free speech rights but should they tap millions of dollars of $1500 seed money to qualify for$25,000 in tax money with few taxpayer money to disseminate their radical points of view? strings attached will be very attractive to many people for many Let them find others who are willing to support their views reasons other than responsible public service. financially and with volunteer time. Imagine:Political Advertisements paid for with tax money. Measure 6 will force you, through your tax dollars, to support Measure 6 must be defeated candidates who broadcast messages which you may personally find abhorrent.Our campaign finance system is certainly not per- It will not improve Oregon's election system. fect. But the medicine prescribed by Measure 6 is much worse VOTE NO MEASURE 61 than the malady it seeks to cure.Please vote no. (This information furnished by Fred VanNatta, Center to Protect Free (This information furnished by John DiLorenzo,Jr.) Speech.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 306 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 6 Arguments ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION Dear Voter: Dear Voter: The authors of Measure 6 ask you to vote for 39 sections of This is the third part of my letter to voters in opposition to new laws.These provisions are rife with opportunities for abuse Measure 6. My first letter emphasized why Measure 6 would and mischief. For instance, Sections 14 and 21 of the measure permit fringe political groups with mailing lists to qualify for mil- require any person who independently runs political advertise- lions of dollars of taxpayer funds to fund the campaigns of their ments that support or oppose a candidate to file notices with the special interest candidates and why you should strenuously candidates in the race and the Secretary of State reporting the object to your tax dollars being used to spread messages which amount of the expenditure. Section 14(2) then permits an you find abhorrent.The second letter pointed out an example of opposing candidate for the same office to receive additional some of the opportunities for abuse which are present in this matching funds in the amount of the independent expenditure technical and lengthy measure.This third letter is written in an which is either made in support of his opponent or in opposition effort to point out how the measure will likely become a financial to him. albatross. However,there is no effective way to determine who the inde- The first responsibility of a new legislature is to pass a budget pendent expenditure was truly intended to support or oppose. to meet the state's needs.But Measure 6 attempts to bind future For instance, Smith and Jones may be opposing one another legislatures to fund the campaigns of the multitudes of candidates in a race.An unscrupulous person might truly support Smith, but who will seek public financing to disseminate their messages. In spend$20,000 on radio ads with the following message:"Vote for particular, section 17 of the measure provides that if the political Jones.She supports a sales tax,it will be good for you Well,that accountability fund will not be balanced before the end of the message is not likely to gain many votes for Jones and will prob- biennium, the legislative assembly must appropriate sufficient ably persuade people to vote for Smith instead. Regardless, funds to make up the difference. In addition, section 17(4) provides that each legislative assembly at a regular session Smith will be entitled to an equivalent amount of money from the public fund to make up for the independent expenditure which occurring after 20m based on a recommendation from the was supposedly in favor of Jones.Jones will protest,but there will Secretary of State must appropriate an additional amount to the be little she can do before the election. Fund for reasonable growth. This is but one problem which immediately comes to mind These provisions may likely be overturned by the courts.But if following a review of the measure.Once the lawyers pick all 39 they are not,as the"free public money"available to special inter- sections over,there will likely be many more. ests becomes irresistible, pressure will grow on the legislature to increase funding beyond the$24 million limit. I hope you share my view that taxpayer dollars should not be As well intentioned as the authors may be, the mechanism used to spread the messages of fringe"special interest"groups. which they prescribe will become a serious competitor to But even if you don't share that philosophy, this measure is Oregon's more pressing needs like schools and public safety.The flawed.It will present many opportunities to the unscrupulous for abuse.In this case,the prescription is worse than the disease. "cure,,is worse than the ailment. (This information furnished by John DiLorenzo,Jr.) Please join with me in opposing Measure 6. (This information furnished by John DiLorenzo,Jr.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 307 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 6 Arguments ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION Are politicians Oregon's most needy citizens? Read a newspaper, watch TV news, or listen to the radio and you'll find a regular list of things many Oregonians consider prior- ities for our state's resources: • Public kindergarten–12th grade education • Road and highway maintenance and improvements • The Oregon Health Plan that provides health care to the poor- est Oregonians • Proactive,citizen-based efforts to help the environment like the Oregon Plan • Oregon's community colleges and universities • Services to Families and Children • Law enforcement and fire protection • Water and sewer plant upgrades It makes you wonder why the sponsors of Ballot Measure 6 want to spend up to$24,000,000 every election cycle paying for politi- cal campaigns. Twenty four million dollars. How many kids would that put through college? How many kids would that immunize from deadly diseases?How many teachers would that hire?How many fire fighters or police would that pay for? How many major road projects? Politicians don't need the money. For example,Gov.Kitzhaber can't even run for another term, and yet he had $136,000 left over in his campaign coffers last spring.Two candidates for state treasurer spent over$200,000 in the primary election,each. Ballot Measure 6 is an alleged solution to a problem that does not exist.All Oregonians have access to our political system as it is, from the family farmer in Medford, to the union pipe-fitter in Portland, to the small business owner in Bend.Worse than that, Ballot Measure 6 will grab up to $24 million dollars every election cycle from those who need it most, and put in the pockets of those who don't need it at all. The family farmers and ranchers of the Oregon Farm Bureau urge you to VOTE NO on BALLOT MEASURE 6. (This information furnished by Dave Dillon,Oregon Farm Bureau.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 308 Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 7 Proposed by initiative petition to be voted on at the General enforceable enactment of government; "real property" shall Election, November 7,2000. include any structure built or sited on the property,aggregate and other removable minerals,and any forest product or other crop grown on the property;"reduction in the fair market value" B A LLOT TITLE shall mean the difference in the fair market value of the prop- /-1 erty before and after application of the regulation, and shall include the net cost to the landowner of an affirmative obliga- tion to protect, provide, or preserve wildlife habitat, natural A�MPiC? Ct1tVvTl?UTIf3P1:�tEtt)1RS areas,wetlands,ecosystems,scenery,open space,historical, iF G01tERFiMEfiFT REC�lUI.ATI£!N archaeological or cultural resources, or low income housing; VALUE_AN N � and"just compensation"shall include, if a claim for compen- sation is denied or not fully paid within 90 days of filing, reasonable attorney fees and expenses necessary to collect Iiu r c7 k'Y '1tC?7 :"Yes"vate requires state, iocai qov- the compensation. ernment paY prop ner if law, regulation reduces Pmgerty (f) If any phrase, clause, or part of this section is found to be ualue, invalid by a court of competent jurisdiction, the remaining REa�ULT CIF,sNC" 3? :"Nf� vote rejects requiring gavernrrtent phrases, clauses and parts shall remain in full force and -pay oompensatkin ff laic+ r'regultion reduces property value. effect. SUI4iMAfY:Arnrnds ttsnstltution OregarrConstitution prohibits #eking private property tartblio rasa wlthqut just crtmperisatl©n. t7regon uprerrte curt Vitas trot ragizired`campersatian when prapertyvaiie tnreiy reduced,h�eesure ruins state,Irrcal gc�v ernrrtertts p lartdawtter arrresunt ttf red U ction itl market Vrilte if regulatfon reduces prdprty value.Darrt# nsatlort required if Winer must act to protect i%prtafn rratur l resaurcp,cultural ualues r tcrw income causlrtc. l�csmptian .far fttnricaffjr rscogritzed nuisance laws or if o�+ a sells tcohol, p©rnt.gra hy, operates uaslno.Appiias if reguiatiot.....adapWd after a v or acquires pro perry ESTIMATE CtF FtA1�1tAL 1MPAL Direct casts t#tie state`are estimafeet to be t.6 bI b n per year. t acal gouarrtment dr"reCt casts ere estlmeted to be�.8 billion per year, 'fh�are is no state ar tracal oavernrnent reveriae impact. - TEXT OF MEASURE BE IT ENACTED BY THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF OREGON: THE CONSTITUTION OF THE STATE OF OREGON IS AMENDED BY ADDING THE FOLLOWING SUBSECTIONS TO SECTION 18 OF ARTICLE I: (a) If the state, a political subdivision of the state, or a local gov- ernment passes or enforces a regulation that restricts the use of private real property, and the restriction has the effect of reducing the value of a property upon which the restriction is imposed;the property owner shall be paid just compensation equal to the reduction in the fair market value of the property. (b) For purposes of this section, adoption or enforcement of his- torically and commonly recognized nuisance laws shall not be deemed to have caused a reduction in the value of a property. The phrase "historically and commonly recognized nuisance laws"shall be narrowly construed in favor of a finding that just compensation is required under this section. (c) A regulating entity may impose, to the minimum extent required, a regulation to implement a requirement of federal law without payment of compensation under this section. Nothing in this 2000 Amendment shall require compensation due to a government regulation prohibiting the use of a property for the purpose of selling pornography, performing nude dancing, selling alcoholic beverages or other controlled substances,or operating a casino or gaming parlor. (d) Compensation shall be due the property owner if the regula- tion was adopted, first enforced or applied after the current owner of the property became the owner, and continues to apply to the property 90 days after the owner applies for compensation under this section. (e) Definitions: For purposes of this section, "regulation" shall include any law, rule, ordinance, resolution, goal, or other 309 CONTINUED O Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 7 EXPLANATORY STATEMENT Ballot Measure 7 would amend the Oregon Constitution to require the state government and all local governments to pay private real property owners when a state or local government regulation restricts the use of real property and reduces its value. "Regulation" is defined as "any law, rule, ordinance, resolution, goal, or other enforceable enactment of government:' "Real a property"is defined to include"any structure built or sited on the property,aggregate and other removable minerals,and any forest product or other crop grown on the property." The Oregon Constitution now prohibits taking private property for public use without compensating the owner for the value of the property.However,the Oregon Constitution does not require any payment when the value of property is reduced by a regulation that only restricts the use of private property. Ballot Measure 7 requires payment to a landowner if an existing or future regulation is adopted,first enforced or applied after the current owner became the owner and still applies to the property 90 days after the owner seeks payment.The payment required is the difference in fair market value of the property before and after a regulation is applied.If a claim is denied or remains unpaid 90 days after the claim is made, "just compensation" would also include reasonable attorney fees and necessary collection expenses. If Ballot Measure 7 passes,state and local governments will have a choice:pay owners of real property under the measure;repeal or change a regulation that is subject to the measure;or contest the application of the measure in court. Ballot-Measure 7 specifically identifies requirements to"protect, provide, or preserve wildlife habitat, natural areas, wetlands, ecosystems, scenery, open space, historical, archaeological or cultural resources,or low income housing"as regulations requir- ing payments to landowners. However, its stated coverage is broad enough to cover every regulation,with certain exceptions, that decreases the value of a real property by restricting its use. Ballot Measure 7 makes exceptions for "historically and com- monly recognized nuisance laws;' for regulations required to implement federal law and for regulations that prohibit the use of a property for selling pornography, performing nude dancing, selling alcoholic beverages or other controlled substances or operating a casino or a gaming parlor.The measure directs that the nuisance law exception be construed narrowly to favor a finding that payment is required. If passed, the amendment would take effect 30 days after the election. Committee Members: Appointed by: Larry George Chief Petitioners David Hunnicutt Chief Petitioners Tim Sercombe* Secretary of State Randy Tucker* Secretary of State George Joseph Members of the Committee *Member dissents(does not concur with explanatory statement) (This committee was appointed to provide an impartial explanation of the ballot measure pursuant to ORS 251.215.) 310 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 7 Arguments ARGUMENT IN FAVOR ARGUMENT IN FAVOR The Dolan family urges you to support Measure 7. If you are like most people,your home and property are the In 1987,we asked the City of Tigard for permission to expand our most valuable thing you own. plumbing store.The City agreed, but said they would not issue a That's why most people are very careful when they buy property. building permit unless we gave them a portion of our property for You check to make sure that you can use your land before paying a bike path. for it.After all,you want to be sure that the property can be used We told the City that we would sell them the land they wanted for for a home, business,or farm or whatever else you had in mind. $14,000 which was the fair market value of the land. But what happens when the government changes the rules But the City said no,and told us that we would not get our permit after you purchase your land, and you can no longer use unless we gave them our land for free. your property as you had planned?In most cases,you lose. We spent the next 10 years fighting the City over a$14,000 strip Why? Because a court cannot award you money for the loss of of land.We went to the Oregon Land Use Board of Appeals, the the use of your land until you have submitted enough applications Oregon Court of Appeals,the Oregon Supreme Court,the United to the government to prove that your land has no value. In some States Supreme Court, and back down again. cases,as many as 25 separate applications must be filed. Finally,after 10 years of fighting,the City had to buy our land and Each of these applications costs money-in many cases,the cost pay our attorney fees.The cost-$1.5 million of your taxpayer to submit the applications is more than the value of the property! dollars. In other words,you have to pay multiple application fees to That's$1.5 million of taxpayer dollars for land that we would the same government that changed the rules and took away have voluntarily sold to them for$14,000.What a waste. all value of your property,just to get your day in court,and even if you win in court,you don't get your application fees We support Measure 7 because it will cut down on endless litiga- back.What a ripoff. tion like ours.If Measure 7 would have been in place in 1987,the City would have purchased our land for$14,000,instead of fight- Measure 7 will end this ridiculous game. Rather than making a landowner submit application after application to the govern- ing us every step of the way and eventually wasting$1.5 million of your hard earned tax dollars. ment, knowing full well that each application will be denied, Measure 7 sets up a'simple process for making your claim for Please vote yes on Measure 7. compensation. (This information furnished by Dan Dolan.) If the government takes your land,they should pay you for it,and they shouldn't tie you up in red tape and outrageous fees just so you can have your day in court. Please vote yes on Measure 7. (This information furnished by Bill Moshofsky, Just Compensation For Regulatory Takings Committee.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 311 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. l Arguments ARGUMENT IN FAVOR ARGUMENT IN FAVOR Protect Oregon's Family Farm Base and Schools Treating people fairly is a foundation of our country. Rural Schools and Communities Depend on Property Values If you are like most voters you know that government is required to pay you if they take your land - in fact, its required by the Not only do farms and ranches depend on property values, local Constitution. rural communities depend on the tax base to run local govern- ments and local schools. When government takes. private Most of the time, government complies with the Constitution and property values,everyone loses. pays for what it takes. If it is Free,Then There is Unlimited Demand But sometimes,instead of paying for what it wants,govern- ment decides that it can simply adopt a law that makes it Unfortunately, even though the Constitution requires compensa- impossible for a landowner to use his land. tion when government takes your land,some governments refuse to pay for what they take.They know that almost no landowner will This is like telling your neighbor he can't live in his house, and have the money or stamina to fight a lengthy court battle just to then offering to buy it from him at pennies on the dollar. recover the lost value of their land.Because there is little chance In order for a landowner to challenge a government regulation that their actions will be challenged, there are no consequences that takes away the value of his property, a landowner must fight to taking land without paying for it. a long and costly court battle.This is fine for large corporations or We Need a Balance Between the Economy and Preservation a few wealthy land barons. There are some Oregonians who want to stop all land uses on But the thought of paying lawyers hundreds of thousands of rural lands, and make Oregon one giant public park. We all dollars to fight a court battle for your home or land is too much for cherish Oregon's public parks and beaches.But we also need to the average American family. Most people give up before they make sure that farmers,ranchers,and foresters have land to farm ever get started. and harvest timber.These industries create jobs and tax revenue That's why Measure 7 is important. for struggling Oregon towns and cities. By allowing government to preserve areas it wants to protect,and Measure 7 will guarantee that you are treated fairly the government.If they want your land,that's fine,provided they allowing other lands to be used,we strengthen our economy,and pay you for it. provide help for so many Oregonians in depressed areas. Vote Yes on Measure 7 Simple, understandable, and fair. That's what Measure 7 is all about. Measure 7 clears away government hurdles to compensation, Please vote yes on Measure 7. and strikes a balance between the economy and preservation. A yes vote on Measure 7 will provide much needed relief for (This information furnished by Bill Moshofsky, Just Compensation For farmers and ranchers, and will strengthen the tax base in all Regulatory Takings Committee.) Oregon communities. (This information furnished by Lawrence George, Oregon Family Farm PAC.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 312 CONTINUED F_ Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 7 Arguments ARGUMENT IN FAVOR ARGUMENT IN FAVOR Protect Family Farms-Vote Yes on Measure 7 Oregonians In Action Asks You to Vote Yes on Measure 7 Family farms form the heart of Oregon agriculture. Many of the Measure 7 provides much needed protection for property rights, foods you eat come from our farms. one of our most basic civil rights. Because we make our living off the land, it is vital to farmers that Measure 7 simply makes it clear that government must compen- we can use our land for farming. sate property owners when regulations take away the right to use We don't fear our neighbor,who wants to live on his land,and we their property to provide public benefits.Unfortunately,some gov- don't believe that the government should pass laws which artifi- ernment regulators believe they can take away up to 95%of the cially destroy the value of our neighbor's property so he has to sell use and value of private property without compensating the it to us at a rock bottom price. We are farmers, but we aren't owner. thieves. It's not fair to require individual property owners to bear burdens But what we do fear are extremists who want to pass laws which that the general public should bear.Also, it's not good policy for would outlaw farming. These people have absolutely no idea government to be able to confiscate private property without about how we take care of our land,or what we do to make sure paying for it. that we put healthy food on your table. Measure 7 will bring balance and realism to government reg- It seems that every year, we are fighting another attack on our ulatory policies. It will force regulators to consider the impacts livelihood in the legislature, in the courts,and through the admin- on property owners of imposing restrictions on the use of property istrative agencies. before doing so. That's why we support Measure 7. Measure 7 will help protect Measure 7 will assure more tax revenues for schools and local farmers from extremist attacks,so that we can continue to provide government by protecting and increasing the value of property on you with quality agricultural products at reasonable prices. the tax rolls. Please join us in voting yes on Measure 7. Vote Yes on Measure 7 (This information furnished by Lawrence George, Oregon Family Farm For more information on Measure 7 or on property rights,feel free PAC) to visit our website at www.oia.ora or call 503-620-0258 (This information furnished by Frank Nims,Oregonians In Action.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- Faccuracy printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the t by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. or truth of any statement made in the argument. 313 CONTINUED-0 Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 7 Arguments ARGUMENT IN FAVOR ARGUMENT IN FAVOR Support Private Property Rights Oregon Grange Vote Yes on Measure#7 The Oregon State Grange Asks You To Vote Yes On Measure 7. Measure#7 does what is right! The Oregon State Grange is the largest grassroots, rural-based Measure#7 sets-up a straightforward process to require govern- fraternal organization in the state with 246 local Granges. ment to pay landowners when its laws or regulations cause a drop Grange members believe that a fair and responsive state govern- in market value to their private property. Presently the Oregon ment is vital for good government, and that is why we are urging Constitution states that state government must pay if it"takes"the you to vote yes on Measure 7. title to private lands for the public's benefit. Today, however, "takings"law is so convoluted that there is little hope of compen- Protect Property Rights sation when government regulations cause the reduction in value Although the Constitution is clear that government shall compen- of private property. sate property owners when it takes private property,government When is enough,enough? has made the process nearly impossible for individual property owners to receive compensation. For generations, Oregon ranchers have voluntarily provided To the process would force an individual property owner beautiful landscapes and wildlife habitat for the public's benefit. to take the state to federal court to receive compensation. It When government requires additional overburdensome regula- shouldn't cost hundreds of thousands of dollars in litigation fees tions that devalue these private lands,the landowner should not to receive what is fair. be required to continually absorb the economic loss.If the public wants to control private lands for their benefit, then the public Protect Our Rural Economies should be willing to pay. Our rural economies and our local governments'tax bases are dependent on the value of private property.In some local areas of The Constitutional "Takings" Clause should not just be for the state, our rural economies are being undermined by state big corporations regulations that were clearly not designed for that local area. Years of litigation,the stress of court action,and financial impact Measure#7 would require the state to evaluate the importance of on the family operation all create a devastating situation for the the regulation as it applies to individual communities--protecting average rancher.The value of the disputed property may be as our economies and the tax base that our local government and small as$10,000,but the court costs for compensation can run in schools depend on. the hundreds of thousands–or even millions.Measure#7 allows Measure 7 is about fairness, common sense, and protecting every property owner to receive fair compensation,not only those private property rights. The Oregon State Grange urges your who can afford the years and cost of litigation. "Yes"vote on Measure 7. It will not cost state government budget busting dollars. (This information furnished by Catherine Johnston, The Oregon State When the public (through government actions)wishes to restrict Grange.) the use of private property, it must first determine an overwhelm- ing public need. If such a need exists, then using taxpayer's money is justified. If there is no such need and there will be no "taking" then no public money will be spent, thus no cost to government. Measure#7 brings much needed balance and fairness to the process. The Oregon Cattlemen's Association urge you to support Measure#7 (This information furnished by John V. Hays, Oregon Cattlemen's Association.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 314 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 7 Arguments ARGUMENT IN FAVOR ARGUMENT IN FAVOR "Why buy the cow when you can get the milk for free?" MEASURE 7 BENEFITS TAXPAYERS This has been the reasoning of politicians when it comes to your Oregon Taxpayers United is Oregon's foremost taxpayer property. Every year government officials enact thousands of watchdog organization. We oppose government waste and are laws, rules and regulations that strip your property of its value responsible for billions of dollars in taxpayer savings. We also (milk)while leaving you with the cost of maintaining the property analyze ballot measures to determine their impact on taxpayers. (cow). Opponents of Measure 7 have claimed the measure will cost Measure 7 promises an end to this disingenuous practice. state and local governments$5 billion dollars per year by requir- Your property belongs to you, not the government. Whether a mg them to justly compensate property owners when government home or saving account, your property is the result of your hard regulations reduce the value of private property. After careful work and effort. consideration we have concluded that these claims are patently false. In fact,the opposite is true. We create governments to protect our freedoms.The right to own Measure 7 will actually save the taxpayers money. Why? property is a fundamental freedom. People work for years to Because when the restrictions government places on private .acquire property. When government officials enact regulations that strip a property of its value, they disregard our rights of property lower the value of that roperty it generates less ownership. No matter what you think of the goals behind such property tax revenue.This forces other property owners to make laws, it is wrong to trample the rights of innocent people to up the difference. achieve them. The effect of Measure 7 would be the spreading of the tax burden Measure 7 corrects this injustice. It serves to check the govern- over a wider base and a lessening of the pressure to increase ment's exercise of arbitrary power.By shifting the cost of regula- property taxes on current property taxpayers.Our research,the tions from the victims to the government, Measure 7 will make conclusions of which were confirmed by independent goy politicians think twice before wrecking lives and dreams with a ernment studies revealed that roperty taxes are current pen stroke. paid on less than 23 percent of property in Oregon! Government officials claim that Measure 7 will cost Oregon billions The 23 percent currently paying property taxes are shouldering of dollars.Not true.There are no new costs involved at all,only a the burden for the 77 percent of the property not taxed.Currently, shift of existing costs to those responsible for creating them. the government is taking additional private property off property tax rolls at an unbelievable rate.Each time they do so,it increases We all know that a fair society is one in which individuals are the pressure on the rest of us. required to be responsible for their actions. The government should lead by example.Measure 7 will make sure it does. If the government's claim that they intend to keep additional$5 billion per year off the tax rolls is true, the result would be an It is time the politicians and bureaucrats paid for their milk. increase of hundreds of millions of dollars in the tax burden borne Furnished by the Libertarian Party of Oregon by the rest of us–renters and homeowners alike. For more information call 1(800) 829-1992 or visit us online at It is our conclusion therefore that claims that Measure 7 will For m Oregon ma cost taxpayers a lot of money are merely scare tactics designed to defeat a fair pro-taxpayer measure. The Libertarian Party is Oregon's third largest political party. WE URGE A YES VOTE ON MEASURE 7! Libertarians are fiscally conservative and socially tolerant,believ- ing that government should be limited to protecting freedom while (This information furnished by Becky Miller,Oregon Taxpayers United.) ensuring personal responsibility. (This information furnished by Eric Winters,Libertarian Party of Oregon.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 315 CONTINUED O Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. l Arguments ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION THE LEAGUE OF WOMEN VOTERS OF OREGON What is the"fair market value"of a wetland? URGES YOU TO VOTE NO ON MEASURE 7 No on 7 The League of Women Voters of Oregon asks you to oppose I caretake 50 acres of land near the Clackamas River.On this Measure 7. land is a wetland naturally replenished by rainfall and under- ground aquifers converging into a series of pools feeding into the Measure 7 would amend Oregon's Constitution to require taxpay- Clackamas River.This river basin is confronted with the same ers to pay compensation to'landowners for regulations which kinds of problems found in other watersheds: deterioration of protect public health,safety,the environment--Oregon's livability. habitat, dams,the destruction of salmon runs, urban growth and Oregon's Constitution (as well as the U.S.Constitution) already development, mismanagement of agriculture and forest lands, has a provision requiring compensation for the"taking"of private and natural resource extraction; all in an ecological imbalance property. Decisions as to what constitutes a "taking" are now begging to be healed. made in court. The vagueness of the language of Measure 7 would add additional challenges to these decisions, still likely to I am in court trying to prevent a proposed mining operation be made in court. from intersecting the underground aquifer and drying up the wet- lands where I live when they remove the aggregate from their WOULD COST TAXPAYERS MILLIONS adjoining land. From the very beginning the odds have been Both state and local government are affected by this measure. stacked in their favor. In Oregon, gravel mining is king and what The estimated fiscal impact of this measure per year for all levels regulations there are,for the most part protect the industry.Now, of government is an astronomic$54 billion.The red tape quag- under Ballot Measure 7, even those regulations will work to mire created for both state and local governments in trying to reward mining operators who can show a reduction in their determine whether the value of property has been reduced will be property values if they are forced to comply with "an affirmative equally enormous, as will the resulting litigation costs. obligation to protect, provide, or preserve wildlife habitat, natural areas, wetlands, ecosystems, scenery, open space, historical, Measure 7 would be effective retroactively.Landowners who have archaeological or cultural resources,or low income housing.'The continuously owned property since before the date a regulation language in this proposed law is far reaching. became effective, could claim compensation. Many large landowners and corporations in the state fall into that category. The Department of Administrative Services estimates that Measure 7 will cost taxpayers$5.4 billion a year.It is hard to com- WOULD HAVE A CHILLING EFFECT ON OREGON'S prehend what this means for all Oregonians and what the cost will LIVABILITY be to our environment when we make the market value of just Given such significant costs, government could be reluctant to gravel deposits alone more important than wetlands and ecosys- enforce existing regulations protecting farm and forestland, tems? In the words of Henry David Thoreau: wildlife habitat, salmon and the health of Oregon's rivers.Vague "And the cost of a thing is the amount of what I will call life language defining "nuisance laws" could lead to litigation and which is required to be exchanged for it, delayed enforcement. Measure 7 could force Oregon to stop immediately or in the long run:' enforcing basic safeguards that protect the health of our families, Vote No on 7 our neighborhoods and Oregon's environment.The chilling effect of having to prove that compensation is not required could be Lloyd Marbet hazardous to Oregon's livability. Candidate for Secretary of State Measure 7 is not in the public's interest. www marbet.ora The League of Women Voters of Oregon urges you to vote NO on (This information furnished by Lloyd Marbet.) Measure 7. (This information furnished by Paula Krane, President,League of Women Voters of Oregon.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 316 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 7 Arguments ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION Oregon Recreation&Park Association Oregonians from across the state urge you to: Oregon Park Association Vote NO on Measure 7 Oppose Measure 7 • Measure 7 will cost Oregon taxpayers billions of dollars-- The Oregon Recreation & Park Association and Oregon Park official estimates say it could cost as much as the entire state Association, organizations with over 500 professional members General Fund budget. that provide park and recreation services throughout the state, strongly oppose Measure 7. • Measure 7 spends tax dollars to pay corporations and Measure 7 could cost Oregon taxpayers billions of dollars for developers simply for obeying the basic rules of our community. questionable purposes.Taxpayers could be forced to spend vast ' Measure 7 could also overturn the rules that protect our amounts on litigation and court fees to determine exactly what state's forest and farmland,and could eliminate local zoning this poorly written measure means. laws that keep inappropriate industry at a distance from your Most parks and recreation services are provided by state and home and your local school. local governments. The severe cuts that could occur if this Measure 7 costs too much. measure passes would seriously harm services in every Measure 7 puts our quality of life at risk. community in the state.Recreation activities such as picnicking; Measure 7 doesn't belong in the Oregon Constitution. tennis and basketball;baseball,softball,football and soccer;trails Vote No on 7. and playgrounds;open space and greenway preservation;skate Commissioner Carol York, Hood River parks; swimming pools; recreation and senior centers; after school recreation and arts programs could be severely affected Mary Sellin,Clatsop County by the budgetary triage which would occur if this measure John Van Landingham, Lane County passed. Measure 7 goes too far and guts the intent of current land use Commissioner John J.Howard, Union County laws in Oregon.It will make the protection of water quality and Commissioner Linda Modrell, Benton County wildlife habitat much more difficult,and it can take decision- Reverend Dr Marilyn making away from citizens and put it in the hands of lawyers. Maril Sewell, Multnomah County No longer will communities or citizens in our neighborhoods be Because We Care about Oregon PAC allowed to participate in the process of determining land use or Beverly Stein,Chair how nearby properties are developed and utilized. Those deci- sions could be made through money-driven claims of self-serving (This information furnished by Beverly Stein, Because we Care About individuals. Oregon PAC.) Please reject measure 7 by voting"NO" Oregon Recreation&Park Association Oregon Park Association (This information furnished by Stephen A. Bosak, Oregon Recreation & Park Association, Oregon Parks Association.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 317 CONTINUED 0 Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet-Statewide Measures Measure No. 7 Arguments ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION OREGON BUSINESS ASSOCIATION OPPOSES MEASURE 7 GOVERNOR JOHN KITZHABER URGES YOU E NO MEASURE MEASURE 7 THREATENS OREGON'S LONG-TERM ECONOMIC COMPETITIVENESS Dear Fellow Oregonians, Over the last decade Oregon companies have created thousands Ballot Measure 7 will cost Oregon taxpayers billions of dollars. of family wage jobs and paid millions of dollars in taxes to support Official estimates say it could cost as much as the entire state important public services. As a result, our state is enjoying a General Fund. And what would our tax dollars be spent on? period of unprecedented prosperity. But this prosperity and the Paying people simply to obey the basic rules of our state. health of Oregon's economy are endangered by Measure 7. Measure 7 could also overturn the rules that protect our farm and POORLY DRAFTED MEASURE WILL LIKELY forest land, and overturn local zoning that keeps someone from HARM BUSINESS putting an auto repair shop or fast food outlet next to your home. Measure 7 is poorly drafted and filled with unintended conse- In addition, Measure 7 is so poorly drafted and filled with unin- quences.It will tie individuals and businesses up in court for years tended consequences it will likely tie Oregon businesses and while lawyers sue trying to determine what the measure means. individuals up in court for years. Something this expensive, this Businesses will have an extremely difficult time planning future poorly written should not be made an amendment to our investments and making investments in their existing businesses. Constitution.I urge you to vote"no"on measure 7 this November. If passed, the measure could result in a cost to state and local governments of$5.4 billion per year, an amount equal to nearly KEEP OREGON'S ECONOMY AND ENVIRONMENT HEALTHY 50%of the state's entire biennial General Fund budget. VOTE NO ON MEASURE 7 MEASURE 7 THREATENS OREGON'S QUALITY OF LIFE (This information furnished by John Kitzhaber,M.D.) Oregon's environment and natural-resource base are among the top reasons our state has a healthy economy. By protecting the environment and preventing urban sprawl,Oregon has created a favorable climate for all kinds of businesses. If passed, Measure 7 will change the remarkably beautiful face of Oregon.It will effec- tively nullify the urban growth boundary,reduce property values in many areas,and as lawsuits pile up,force the federal government to step in and take control. This measure is anti-Oregon and strongly opposed by the Association. The Oregon Business Association is the state's newest statewide business organization representing small and large businesses across the state.The Association urges you to keep this poorly- written measure out of Oregon's Constitution. Tom Kelly Chair,Oregon Business Association Lynn Lundquist, Former Oregon Speaker of the House President, Oregon Business Association OREGON BUSINESS ASSOCIATION URGES A "NO"VOTE ON MEASURE 7 (This information furnished by Tom Kelly, Chairman, Lynn Lundquist, President;Oregon Business Association.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) Faccuracy inting of this argument does not constitute an endorse- Fa rinting of this argument does not constitute an endorse- y the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the or truth of any statement made in the argument. racy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 318 CONTINUED F_ Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 7 Arguments ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION FORMER OREGON GOVERNORS Oregon Police and Prosecutors Say MARK HATFIELD AND MEASURE 7 ENDANGERS PUBLIC SAFETY NEIL GOLDSCHMIDT State and local governments fund important elements of our pub- SAY lic safety system including:state police,county sheriffs,state and MEASURE 7 THREATENS OREGON'S ECONOMY local corrections facilities, crime prevention, drug abuse preven- AND ENVIRONMENT tion activities,and our court system.Each of these elements plays We have spent decades ensuring that Oregon maintains a thriving a vital role in keeping our communities safe places to live. economy in the midst of natural beauty.Oregon's land use system Official estimates put Measurep 7 costs to Oregon taxpayers at which protects farm and forest land;the state's beach bill which $5.4 billion dollars per year.That is more than the state currently opened every mile of beaches to the public; environmental pro- spends on all elements of our public safety system. tections for clean air and water;and the state's overall business climate -- all of these protections and more are threatened by In addition to the enormous cost, if Measure 7 passes, state and Measure 7. local governments would likely be forced to cut important public cost safety programs.We have worked diligently over the past decade This Constitutional measure is so poorly drafted it will likely to make our communities safe places. We cannot afford to put Oregon taxpayers billions of dollars.The official estimated costs this achievement at risk with this poorly written Constitutional of fully implementing Measure 7 are $5.4 billion per year, an measure. amount equal to 50%of the entire state general fund,which pays for important items like education and law enforcement. KEEP OUR COMMUNITIES SAFE Measure 7 threatens our state's healthy economy. Businesses VOTE NO ON 7 require a stable regulatory system enabling them to make impor- Sheriff Ris Bradshaw Sheriff Dan Noelle tant investment decisions about their business.Measure 7 is filled Clackamas County Multnomah County with unintended consequences, and interpreting it will likely tie Sheriff John Pardon our state up in court for years making it difficult for business Sheriff Stan Robson D owners to make important decisions about the future of their Douglas County Benton County companies. (This information,furnished by Sheriff Dan Noelle.) Finally,Measure 7 would weaken our state's land use system and seriously reduce protections for farm and forest land across the state. We and many other Oregonians have fought long hours for farm and forest land protection and we should not let this measure threaten the natural beauty that makes Oregon a great place to live and do business. FORMER GOVERNOR NEIL GOLDSCHMIDT FORMER GOVERNOR MARK HATFIELD (This information furnished by Mark Hatfield.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 319 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 7 Arguments ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION PROTECTTHE COLUMBIA GORGE Teachers and Educators urge you to VOTE NO ON 7 VOTE NO on 7 The Columbia River Gorge is a national treasure that must The state is now responsible for funding 70%of school budgets be protected for our children and future generations. for every school district, large and small, in the state. For the If passed,Measure 7 could steal this scenic treasure from current school year 2000-01, the State Legislature allocated our children or bankrupt the state.This is how: approximately$2.4 billion for our schools. • Measure 7 would require the state to pay special interests to Official estimates say Measure 7 will cost Oregon taxpayers$5.4 obey state and local laws that protects the Columbia River billion dollars PER YEAR.That's an amount equivalent to nearly Gorge from rampant development, pollution, open-pit mining, half of our state's General Fund and twice what the Legislature or irresponsible clearcutting. allocated for schools this year. • Taxpayers may have to shell out millions of dollars to pay devel- There is no simpler way to put it than this:Schools are our largest opers to comply with laws that protect the Gorge and keep our state expenditure and would likely suffer the greatest loss should air and water clean. this measure pass. • The result could be that these laws would not be enforced Oregon depends on our schools to educate and inspire our chil- because we will not be able to pay the ransom to protect the dren. We cannot afford to put their education at risk with this Columbia River Gorge. poorly written Constitutional amendment. Think about your favorite place in the Gorge and the times that KEEP OUR SCHOOLS STRONG you have spent with friends and family at this special place.Now VOTE NO ON 7 imagine it forever ruined because taxpayers couldn't afford to pay Oregon Education Association off developers and polluters.This could be the result if Measure 7 American Federation of Teachers--Oregon passes. Whether you live in the Columbia Gorge or experience it through (This information furnished by Tricia Bosak,.Oregon Education Assoc.) sightseeing, hiking, picnicking or fishing–whether you go to the Gorge often or just once in a while, it is very important to protect this priceless part of our natural heritage. One of the most important things that you can do this year to protect the Gorge is to vote"No"on Measure 7. We urge you to vote"No"on Measure 7. ENDORSERS: Nancy Russell,founder, Friends of the Columbia Gorge Dr.John Reynolds,chair, Friends of the Columbia Gorge Dr.William Bell, Columbia Gorge Community College President, The Dalles Barbara and Robert Bailey,orchardists,The Dalles State Representative Chris Beck Former State Senator Dick Springer (This information furnished by Michael Lang, Friends of the Columbia Gorge.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse - The by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 320 CONTINUED k, Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 7 Arguments ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION OREGON'S BUSINESS COMMUNITY URGES YOU TO NW STEELHEADERS VOTE NO ON MEASURE 7 As members of Oregon's business community, we are proud of VOTE NO ON 7 our role making Oregon work. Over the last decade Oregon IT HURTS FISH AND FISHERMEN companies have created thousands of family wage jobs and paid Anyone who cares about the future of fishing in Oregon should millions of dollars in taxes to support important public services. vote"NO"on Measure 7.The reason why is that Measure 7 will Oregon succeeds when business, government and citizens can require Oregon taxpayers to pay developers and polluters to follow work in a partnership, creating an environment that makes our laws that protect our public resources, such as clean water and state a great place to live and do business. healthy fish runs. As a result,our state is enjoying a period of unprecedented pros- MEASURE 7 WILL BANKRUPT THE STATE perity.But this prosperity and the health of Oregon's economy are threatened by Measure 7. Measure 7 will cost Oregon taxpayers billions of dollars just to pay corporations and developers to obey basic rules that protect our MEASURE 7 WILL LIKELY HAVE quality of life, such as protecting fish habitat and maintaining SEVERE CONSEQUENCES FOR BUSINESS access to Oregon rivers and lakes.The result will be that laws Whatever the proponents of Measure 7 intended,the measure is ensuring public access,protecting water quality and providing for so poorly written that it will tie us up in court for years.A stable, healthy fish rules won't be enforced because taxpayers can't rational business climate that all businesses depend on for afford the ransom placed on these public resources. making investment decisions will be thrown out the window in exchange for years of costly court battles. If passed, official MEASURE 7 WILL REDUCE ACCESS estimates say the measure would result in a cost to the state and Measure 7 could overturn local zoning laws, opening up stream local governments of $5.4 billion per year, an amount equal to corridors to unregulated development. This will limit access to nearly 50% of the state's entire biennial General Fund budget Oregon's best steelhead rivers and harm fish habitat. which funds important services like education and health care. Finally, Oregon's land use system has created a favorable MEASURE 7 MEANS LESS FISH business climate for many businesses in our state in addition to Limits on logging and development along streams could be over- maintaining a high degree of livability for citizens. Proponents turned.This would harm fish habitat and reduce fish runs. Rules assert that this measure would eliminate urban growth bound- ensuring instream flows for fish could not be enforced.No water? aries, and we think this a bad idea. If passed, land use laws that No fish! protect farm and forest land as well as our state's rural character If you care about the future of fishing in Oregon, would be harmed. Measure 7 is poorly ,written and has no place in Oregon's VOTE NO ON MEASURE 7 Constitution. IT HURTS FISH AND FISHERMEN VOTE NO ON MEASURE 7 Association of Northwest Steelheaders BAD FOR BUSINESS.BAD FOR OREGON. (This information furnished by Norman E. Ritchie, P.E., Association of Northwest Environmental Business Council Northwest Steelheaders.) Oregon Business Association Brett Wilcox, Northwest Aluminum Bill Williams, Bear Creek Corporation Fred Miller, Portland General Electric Jim Johnson, Intel Corporation (This information furnished by Nik Blosser,Oregon Business Association.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251,255.) f [The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorsent by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 321 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No.- 7 Arguments ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION STATEMENT IN OPPOSITION BY Trustees and Staff of The Nature Conservancy FORMER OREGON APPELLATE JUDGES Urge You to Vote NO on 7 MEASURE 7 IS UNNECESSARY MEASURE 7 THREATENS OREGON'S WILDLIFE The Oregon and U.S.Constitutions already protect the property Oregon's quality of life includes a precious diversity of fish, rights of citizens by preventing the government from taking private wildlife, native plants and their habitats.As our population keeps property for public use without just compensation.State and fed growing,we must work to preserve Oregon's natural heritage for fed- eral courts have repeatedly rules that such compensation is not our children and grandchildren. warranted when a government regulation merely reduces the value of property, unless virtually all value is lost. Measure 7 will make it impossible to protect Oregon's wildlife MEASURE 7 IS EXTREME and their habitats for future generations. Measure 7 requires the government to pay property owners every By requiring that taxpayers reimburse property owners for so- time any single regulation, viewed in isolation, reduces property called regulatory"takings;'Measure 7 will shred Oregon's safety value by any amount,no matter how small.Moreover many regu- net for wetlands, streams, fish runs, wildlife habitats, parks and lations increase property values,but Measure 7 does not take this open spaces.This radical measure will lead to gridlock, endless into account in calculating required payments.Measure 7 will cost court battles and enormous costs to taxpayers. Oregonians 5.4 billion dollars per year equal to the state's annual Today,415 of Oregon's 3,773 identified plant and animal species general fund budget.We can't risk putting something that expen- –one in every nine–are at risk of extinction.To safeguard our sive into Oregon's Constitution. natural heritage, we need a diversity of approaches, including COSTLY COURT BATTLES purchase of critical lands, incentives for voluntary conservation, Measure 7 has numerous ambiguities that will lead to an and even-handed regulations adopted through the democratic avalanche of litigation due to the large amounts of money at process. stake. Across Oregon, caring individuals, corporate leaders, farmers, • How is the market value determined? ranchers, volunteers, non-profits, cities, counties and elected • What does it mean that nuisances are to be "narrowly leaders are working hard to create solutions that balance private construed"? property rights with environmental protection. We won't always • Are legal pharmaceuticals included in the definition of "con- agree,but people,of good will working together are the best hope trolled substances"? for Oregon's at-risk fish and wildlife. • How will "net costs" be determined, and how will future Measure 7 will make it impossible for Oregon citizens to fairly and increases in value as a result of a regulation be addressed? effectively protect wetlands,streams,water quality and important • Does the measure require payment even to landowners who wildlife habitats. Ironically, by allowing our environment to be bought property knowing its use was restricted when the despoiled, it will even reduce some property values. restriction is"applied",e.g.,by the denial of a permit? p Vote No on Measure 7 Betty Roberts Justice Trustees and Staff of The Nature Conservancy of Oregon: Oregon Supreme Court Ron Berger 1982-1986 Paulette Bierzychudek Jacob Tanzer Brian Booth Justice Ellis Feinstein Oregon Supreme Court Skip Freedman 1980-1983 Brian Gard Robert G.Gootee William L.Richardson Daniel D.Heagerty Chief Judge&Judge Tom Imeson Oregon Court of Appeals Stephen E.Kantor 1976-1997 Peter G.McDonald James T.Post (This information furnished by Betty Roberts.) Mary B.Ruble Patricia L.Wessinger Russell'Hoeflich,Vice President and Oregon Director Catherine Macdonald, Director of Conservation Michael Powelson, Director of Agency Relations Carrie Walkiewicz, Director of Development (This information furnished by Russell Hoeflich, The Nature Conservancy of Oregon.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 322 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 7 Arguments ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION PROTECT OREGON'S COAST OREGON FAMILY FARMERS OPPOSE MEASURE 7 VOTE NO ON 7 As family farmers and ranchers from every corner of Oregon, Oregon's shoreline and coastal region has been treasured by we respectfully ask our,fellow Oregonians to VOTE NO ON our citizens throughout our state's history.In Oregon,the beaches MEASURE 7 to protect Oregon's farm, ranch,and forest land. are reserved for all the people.We protect our dunes and estuar- We are Oregonians who make our living by growing vegetables, ies, and are struggling to restore the salmon runs in our coastal fruit,grains,livestock,and trees.Oregon's land use planning laws, rivers and the ecosystems of our coastal forests, including farm and forest zoning,are what has protected our land One victim of Measure 7 would be our cherished Beach Law, from unchecked urban sprawl and rural development.These laws have been essential to maintaining the basic livelihood which keeps our entire shoreline open to the public. Passage of thou- sands of families who o this measure could block off public access to many beaches by earn their living in agriculture and d have enabling private interests to claim large portions of our shore. enabled Oregon's farms, nurseries, ranches, and forests to con tribute billions of dollars to our state economy. Instead of our open beaches,we could see barriers,fences,"No Trespassing"signs and commercial development. MEASURE 7 WOULD HARM OREGON FARMERS Measure 7 would hamper,if not completely destroy,the Oregon Measure 7 would force taxpayers to pay hundreds of millions.of Salmon Plan and our promising efforts at watershed manage- dollars to developers and speculators—or simply stop enforcing ment.Compensating landowners for theoretical profits will make the laws that protect our farm and forest land from being covered it too expensive to enforce responsible land use that protects with subdivisions.The same goes for the laws that protect your aquatic habitat and Oregon's salmon.This could have an espe- own homes from inappropriate neighborhood development. cially devastating economic impact on the coast's fishing and Either way,we all lose. recreational industries. Measure 7 would very likely thwart efforts to prevent develop- PLEASE VOTE NO ON MEASURE 7. ment in hazardous areas prone to erosion,landslides; and flood- Bob&Barbara Bailey J&T Farms ing.And it could eliminate our ability to prevent landowners from Cherries Vegetable Seed,Grass Seed, destroying the natural shoreline by "armoring" it with sheets of Wasco County Hay,Grain, concrete and rip-rap. Commercial Horse Stables Nowhere is sprawling growth a greater problem than on the Gary L.Harris Marion County coast.Measure 7 would give us the choice of seeing Highway 101 Onion&Carrot Seeds turn into endless strip malls,and private gates blocking off access Jefferson County Michael&Susan McCarthy to Oregon beaches,or bribing landowners not to harm the public Pears,Apples,Hay,Timber, interest. Lois&Clif Kenagy Cattle Row Crops Hood River County Oregon's coastal communities, conservation groups and Benton County responsible officials ask you to Jud&Diana Parsons VOTE NO ON 7. Ambrose&Susan McAuliffe Timber,Christmas Trees, Oregon Shores Conservation Coalition Cattle&Calves Grass Seed Oregon Chapter, Surfrider Foundation Klamath County Jackson and Marion Counties Kalmiopsis Audubon Society Dave&Ellen Vanasche MarkTipperman Cape Arago Audubon Society Grass and Legume Seed Cattle,Timber Citizens for Florence Washington County Union County Citizens for Orderly Development,Curry County Columbia Deepening Opposition Group David&Diana Lett Donald Logan Lori Hollingsworth, Lincoln City Councilor Wine Grapes Christmas Trees,Hay,Timber Cheryl Thorp,Curry County Commissioner Yamhill County Washington County Doug Thompson,Astoria City Councilor (This information furnished by Phillip Johnson, Oregon Shores Jim Wood Jim Monroe Conservation Coalition.) Cattle,Horses,Hay,Timber Sheep,Timber Crook County Linn County (This information furnished by Diana Parsons,Hill Crest Orchards.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 323 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 7 Arguments ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION Measure 7 Would RUIN the Oregon We Love! OREGON NURSERY OWNERS AND OPERATORS Oregon has the nation's strongest program to manage its growth. OPPOSE MEASURE 7 It protects farmland and forestland. It curbs wasteful, sprawling As owners and operators of nurseries,we urge you to VOTE development of endless strip malls that cause traffic congestion. NO ON MEASURE 7 so our industry can continue to thrive It helps guarantee public beaches and makes more affordable and provide jobs for Oregonians. housing available. Nurseries in Oregon are mostly small,owner-operated firms, but Measure 7 would lock into Oregon's Constitution a dangerous, our industry is making a big contribution to our state's prosperity. costly requirement that could force lawmakers to REPEAL the Oregon's fast-growing nursery industry It now the largest co 998, laws that protect our communities and our quality of life. Ore o our state's California billion agricultural economy. ti 1998, Oregon trailed only. Cal and Florida in total horticultural "[Measure 7 author Stu Miller] suggested urban growth production, with a record $532 million in sales—an increase of boundaries might be scrapped, because they limit 8%over 1997. development..." Unlike many other agricultural commodities, most of Oregon's Salem Statesman Journal,7/27/00 nursery products are grown in counties that also have large urban populations.The top five nursery producing counties in the state Measure 7 radically weakens our state's land use laws. It would are Marion, Clackamas, Washington, Yamhill, and Multnomah drastically reduce protections for farm and forest land across the Counties. state,and increase unplanned urban sprawl. By protecting our industry's land base'from uncontrolled urban Measure 7 Threatens Neighborhoods and Property Values sprawl. Oregon's land use and farmland protection laws have Measure 7 is so poorly drafted that if it passed, existing enabled nurseries to flourish,even in the face of rapid population neighborhood zoning could be thrown out, and your neighbor growth.These laws have been essential to maintaining the basic could be allowed to put something next door to you that lowers livelihood of thousands of Oregonians who earn their living in your property value, like a junkyard, an auto repair shop, a fast nurseries and other agricultural operations. food outlet,or a convenience store. MEASURE 7 WOULD HARM LOVE OREGON?VOTE NO ON 7 OREGON'S NURSERY INDUSTRY Friends of Douglas County Measure 7 would force taxpayers to pay hundreds of millions of Jackson County Citizens League dollars to developers and speculators—or simply stop enforcing Citizens for Orderly Development(Curry County) the laws that protect the land our nursery operations need if they Friends of Linn County are to continue contributing to our state's economy.Either way,we Alliance for Responsible Land Use in Deschutes County all lose. Friends of Benton County Don't put this costly and destructive measure in Oregon Shores Conservation Coalition Oregon's Constitution. Friends of Yamhill County Friends of Marion County PLEASE VOTE NO ON MEASURE 7. Hood River Valley Residents Committee Alice Doyle and Greg Lee Bob Iwasaki Friends of Eugene Log House Plants Nurseryman Citizens For Florence Cottage Grove Washington County Friends of Bend Columbia County Citizens for Orderly Growth Susan Anderson Rod Park Friends of Polk County Anderson Gardens Park's Nursery 1000 Friends of Oregon Hillsboro Gresham www.NoOn2and7.com Drew Hunter Marcus Simantel Nursery Operator Retired Nurseryman (This information furnished by Robert Liberty, 1000 Friends of Oregon.) Salem Portland Jim Gilbert Northwoods Nursery Molalla (This information furnished by Alice Doyle.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 324 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. l Arguments ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION I am writing to ask you to please join me in voting NO on Measure Oregon Chapter of the American Planning Association 7.This irresponsible measure endangers the financial stability of It's no accident that Oregon's still a beautiful place to live. For our state,threatens our healthy economy,and restricts our ability more than a century,Oregonians have worked to protect our land to fund essential state and local projects and services. from urban sprawl and uncontrolled development.But Measure 7 This measure is bad for Oregon, and it does not belong in would undo all that.It's a full-scale assault on Oregon's land and our Constitution. environment–and on our pocketbooks. As Oregon's chief financial officer, I am responsible for the Measure 7 is retroactive. It would require taxpayers to pay prudent management of the state's financial resources. Part of landowners for complying with laws passed decades ago. that responsibility is to protect Oregon's credit rating,which allows For example,suppose a big corporation bought a thousand acres the state to issue bonds to fund a variety of important public of forestland along the Willamette River in 1960.The company needs, from new school construction and road maintenance to managed timber there for 40 years quite profitably. But today it health care facilities and affordable housing. wants to cut all the trees, subdivide the land into small lots, and The price tag of this measure is staggering. In addition to $3.8 sell them for development.Right now,several laws would prevent billion in local government costs,the potential cost to the state is that. Land-use laws prohibit subdivisions in forest zones. The $1.6 billion a year—more than 30%of Oregon's annual general Forest Practices Act requires replanting after timber is cut,and it fund budget.For this reason,Measure 7 would likely damage the prohibits tree-cutting along riverbanks. The Willamette River state's credit rating, costing Oregon taxpayers millions of dollars Greenway limits development along our state's largest river. But and limiting the number of projects that can be funded. under Measure 7, the corporation could argue that those laws Estimates show that a single drop in the state's credit rating have reduced the value of its property. It could file a claim (no would cost Oregonians more than$400 million in increased matter how exaggerated)for millions of dollars.The agencies that interest costs on money used to build and maintain needed administer those laws would face a terrible choice:pay the claim projects.That is money that we could be spending on edu- (using your tax dollars.),or don't enforce the laws. cation or health care. Either way, Oregonians would lose with Measure 7. If all the Aside from the serious financial ramifications, Measure 7 is so claims for"lost value"were paid,millions of tax dollars needed for ambiguous and poorly drafted that it could be tied up in court schools, roads, and police would go to timber companies,corpo- for years, leading to unnecessary court costs, further financial rate farms,and land speculators instead.If such claims were not uncertainty and a delay in funding critical projects and services paid, the laws that protect our land would not be enforced.The that many Oregonians rely on. result would be new shopping centers on farmland;subdivisions along our wild rivers and streams; billboards along scenic Measure 7 will cost Oregon taxpayers hundreds of millions highways;a crush of condos on coastal beaches. of dollars, and we will receive nothing for our money.We Oregon doesn't need welfare for developers. We do need to should spend our money on services that will benefit all protect our land from sprawl and speculation. Oregonians. Please join me in voting NO on Measure 7. Vote"No"on Measure 7. Jim Hill (This information furnished by Joe Landry, Oregon Chapter of the State Treasurer American Planning Association.) (This information furnished by Jim Hill,Oregon State Treasurer.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 325 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—$tatewide Measures Measure No. 7 Arguments ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION MEASURE 7 WILL HARM THE HEALTH AND SAFETY SALMON FOR ALL OF OUR FAMILIES AND COMMUNITIES URGES A NO VOTE ON MEASURE 7 Concerned about your health and the health of your children?Of The Costs are Too High course you are. But a poorly drafted initiative could have unintended effects that would be extremely harmful to all of us. Measure 7 is the most expensive measure on the ballot. With Measure 7's Overwhelming Costs a fiscal impact of 5:4 Billion dollars annually – the same as Will Drain Funding from Health Care Oregon's General Fund budget–its impact to local communities and the state will be devastating. And the measure is Measure 7 would impose massive new costs on Oregon taxpay- retroactive – benefiting many large landowners and out of ers–for more bureaucratic red tape.The cost to state and local state corporations. Something this expensive deserves more governments–an estimated$5.4 billion a year or the equivalent deliberation and consideration than this. of Oregon's annual budget–would gut our ability to run important Measure 7 HURTS OREGON SALMON programs like the Oregon Health Plan. Measure 7 Will Derail Critical Health and Safety Rules The high price tag of Measure 7 will ensure many important salmon enhancement programs will likely go unfounded. Measure 7 would also sabotage protections for your health,home Here are just a few examples: and neighborhood.Taxpayers would be required to pay property . Oregon Salmon Plan owners to comply with important laws that safeguard our health– . Select Area Fisheries or we would have to simply stop enforcing the laws that protect . Watershed Enhancement Programs US. Health Regulations that Could Become Impossible to Measure 7 HURTS OREGON'S FISHERMEN Implement or Enforce if Measure 7 Passes Include: Measure 7 will divert funds from important salmon habitat restore- • laws that protect children and nonsmokers from secondhand tion programs and Select Area Fishery programs that benefit the smoke salmon and the fishermen.This measure will move these funds • rules that protect drinking water quality into the hands of wealthy landowners and corporations. • rules to prevent cancer-causing pesticides from being sprayed Measure 7TOO EXPENSIVE FOR OREGON'S CONSTITUTION near schools or neighborhoods • building safety codes Measure 7 is filed with unintended consequences that will tie us • worker safety regulations up in court for years. It's a full employment act for lawyers. • standards that ensure the safety of our food Something this poorly written and expensive doesn't belong in Our Constitution. This harmful measure should not be in Oregon's Constitution. SALMON FOR ALL URGES YOU Protect Your Health.Vote No on Measure 7. TO VOTE NO ON 7 Eric Dover,MD, Portland Salmon for All William Morton, MD, Portland (This information furnished by lovenia Warren,Salmon for All.) David Fitchett, MD,Albany Mary Ellen Coulter, MD, Bend Thomas Ewald, MD,Ashland Craig Mather, MD,Ashland (This information furnished by Caroline Fitchett, Oregon Community Protection PAC.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 326 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. l Arguments ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION MEASURE 7 WILL GUT OREGON'S OREGON CHAPTERS OF THE AUDUBON SOCIETY CLEAN WATER AND CLEAN AIR SAFEGUARDS URGE YOU TO Measure 7 may be the most dangerous and misleading initiative VOTE NO ON MEASURE 7 ever placed before Oregon voters.It is an assault on your right to Should Oregon Taxpayers Pay Billions To Developers To protect your neighborhood and family from pollution. Obey The Law? Environmental Blackmail Ballot Measure 7 will cost Oregon taxpayers billions of dollars— Don't be misled into thinking Measure 7 is just about"land"It's�q official estimates say it could cost as much as $5.4 billion per poorly written that our tax dollars could go to polluters just to yeas enforce clean water and clean air safeguards. And what would our tax dollars be spent on?Paying corporations Measure 7 won't protect your property–it hurts it. Measure 7 is and developers simply to obey the basic rules of our community, written to look gnly at the property of a landowner denied a including environmental laws. Measure 7 could erase the rules that protect our rivers, streams,wetlands, and forests,and over- particular use who sues for payment.It doesn't look at the impact. on neighbors. turn local zoning that keeps someone from destroying important fish and wildlife habitat areas along waterways near your home. We'd have to pay a toxic waste dump not to locate in a neighbor- Should We Amend Oregon's Constitution So Lawyers hood if the corporation building the dump could make more Control Our Quality Of Life? money that way than by building homes.Yet,Measure 7 would not pav a dime to nearby homeowners for the loss they'd suffer. Measure 7 is so poorly drafted and filled with unintended This is an extreme example.There are hundreds of other exam- consequences it will tie us up in court for years and be a full employment act for lawyers.Something this expensive,this poorly ples where tax dollars would flow to polluters just to protect our right to a clean environment.That's wrong. thought out should not be in our constitution. Costly to Taxpayers Measure 7 Will Threaten The Rules That Make Oregon A Special Place The real purpose behind Measure 7 is to make it too expensive to That Is Safe,Fair And Livable. enforce environmental laws. It would be locked into our Oregon's citizens value our state's wildlife,wild places and quality Constitution so the Legislature couldn't fix it.Faced with billions of of life.The supporters of Measure 7 know the price of everything dollars in costs for lawsuits and payments–possibly as high as and the value of nothing.Measure 7 will cost billions in tax dollars the state's entire budget–the Legislature would have no choice and will give power over our health,safety,fish and wildlife,scenic but to make safeguards voluntary.And that's what polluters really resources,wetlands and streams to special interests,out-of-state want. corporations and politicians. Your taxes would go to pay off big polluters to obey basic environ- If Measure 7 passes,we lose our ability to keep our communities mental and safety laws;it's like paying criminals not to rob banks. good places to live for both wildlife and people. The possible ways of wasting your tax dollars are WE URGE YOU TO VOTE NO ON MEASURE 7. endless–and bottomless. Protect clean water and air–and your pocketbook. Audubon Society of Corvallis Vote NO on Measure 7. Audubon Society of Portland Cape Arago Audubon Society Oregon Environmental Council Columbia Riverkeeper Central Oregon Audubon Society Columbia Gorge Audubon Society Oregon League of Conservation Voters Tualatin Riverkeepers Kalmiopsis Audubon Society Sierra Club Willamette Riverkeeper Lane County Audubon Society Rogue Valley Audubon Society (This information furnished by Jeff Allen,Oregon Environmental Council.) Salem Audubon Society Siskiyou Audubon Society (This information furnished by Ron Carley,Audubon Society of Portland.) (This space purchased for$500 In accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 In accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 327 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet-Statewide Measures Measure No. 7 Arguments ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION Congressman Earl Blumenauer urges you to MEASURE 7 WOULD HURT SENIORS— VOTE NO on 7 AND ALL OREGONIANS Oregon has been a national leader in land use, environmental IT DOESN'T BELONG IN OREGON'S CONSTITUTION protection and health care.This innovation has required creative By requiring taxpayers to pay property owners for obeying laws and even courageous legislation and leadership. Our entrepre- that protect the public,Measure 7 would have devastating effects neurial spirit and record of accomplishments are seriously on Oregon.The measure costs too much, mucks ups the consti- threatened by Ballot Measure 7. tution and harms senior citizens. Measure 7 will cost Oregon taxpayers billions of dollars--official HIGHER TAXES estimates say it could cost as much as$5.4 billion PER YEAR,an The state estimates this measure would cost $5.4 BILLION amount nearly equal to the entire state General Fund.And what EVERY YEAR—more than any other measure IL the would our tax dollars be spent on? Paying corporations and individuals simply to obey existing laws. Measure 7 could also ballot—if we continued to enforce basic laws.This is as much overturn the rules that protect our forest and farmland, eliminate as Oregon's entire general fund budget—OVER $1,500 urban growth boundaries, and overturn local zoning that keeps PER OREGONIAN. someone from putting an auto repair shop or convenience store And for what?To pay corporations and developers to obey the next to your home. law. Measure 7 is so poorly drafted and filled with unintended CUTS IN HEALTHCARE AND OTHER CRITICAL SERVICES consequences it will tie us up in court for years and be a full employment act for lawyers.Something this expensive,this poorly Unless the Legislature raised new taxes, it would be forced to thought out should not be made an amendment to our make severe cuts in programs that benefit seniors. The Constitution. Oregon Health Plan would likely see funding decrease dramat- ically,as would many other senior services: Please join me in voting NO on 7 so we can keep Oregon a great • Transportation services for seniors place to live. • Affordable housing Vote NO on 7.It's Anti-Oregon. DECLINING PROPERTY VALUES Earl Blumenauer Because it would weaken or eliminate enforcement of key, Member of Congress community protection laws—like basic residential zoning, which prevents an auto repair shop or fast food outlet (This information furnished by Earl Blumenauer.) which being built next to your home—Measure 7 would expose seniors and other Oregon homeowners to eroding property values and quality of life due to incompatible or excessive development of neighboring properties. VOTE NO ON MEASURE 7.IT HURTS SENIORS. United Seniors of Oregon Oregon Advocacy Coalition of Seniors and People with Disabilities Oregon State Council of Senior Citizens Portland Gray Panthers (This information furnished by Jim Davis, Oregon Advocacy Coalition of Seniors&People with Disabilities,Portland Gray Panthers.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 328 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 7 Arguments ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION VOTE NO on 7 LOCAL ELECTED OFFICIALS OPPOSE MEASURE 7 As a practicing physician on the Oregon coast I am concerned MEASURE 7 IS A RAID ON LOCAL TAXPAYERS about any effort to compromise government regulations protect- ing Oregonians from pollution and toxic materials exposure, and Measure 7 masquerades as a "fairness" measure, but instead as an environmentalist I am concerned about any attempt to establishes unfair standards for paying compensation to special dilute or negate environmental protections. interests.The official estimate is that passage of Measure 7 will Ballot Measure 7 makes no sense. Not only is the projected create an ANNUAL COST of $3.8 billion for local governments annual price tag of 5.4 billion dollars a clear budget buster,but it and $1.6 billion for state government.Where would we get the also forces the state to pay landowners not to pollute or release money to pay those enormous costs?YOUR TAX DOLLARS! +toxic materials, not to destroy riparian areas and create soil This"annual cost"includes only the costs of actual compensation, erosion, not to destroy wildlife and wildlife habitat, not to violate not the costs of determining how much compensation must be local zoning ordinances or land use planning objectives, if any paid.The supporters of this measure argue that all local govern- such restrictions are perceived as decreasing the market value of ments have to do is to either pay the bill received from the that property or corporate asset.In essence it allows a landowner property owner or repeal the regulation.WOULD YOU PAY A BILL to announce an intention to do something detrimental to the IF YOU WEREN'T SURE YOU OWED IT?NEITHER WOULD WE! greater needs of society and then the state would have to decide That means we'd have to hire new property assessors and whether to ignore vital social and environmental concerns by lawyers to assure we don't overpay. How can we keep your tax allowing the offensive action, or come up with the money to pay bills low when Measure 7 forces us to build a BRAND NEW off the landowner. BUREAUCRACY? Such important policies as land use planning, Oregon's open Measure 7 is so POORLY WRITTEN that it's unclear which laws beach law, the Oregon Plan for Salmon Recovery, reforms of and regulations would be affected.Measure 7 could require us to Oregon's Forest Practices Act, state wildlife management plans pay your tax dollars to:allow access to public beaches;compa- and restrictions on air and water pollution all would fall victim to nies to follow mining requirements;builders to follow building code this initiative. or seismic requirements. Ballot measure 7 takes an extremist view emphasizing property Measure 7,if passed,will likely lead to HUGE COSTS THROUGH rights and ignoring the fact that with rights come responsibilities. NEW TAXES, ANOTHER NEW BUREAUCRACY, MORE So frequently actions taken on one's property have impacts far UNNECESSARY RED TAPE AND YEARS OF COSTLY COURT beyond that property's boundaries, and the rest of society BATTLES. impacted by those actions have rights too.Protecting those rights MEASURE 7 IS NOT FAIR TO TAXPAYERS–VOTE NO ON 7! is the purpose of government regulations. It is only common sense that nobody should expect to be paid not to do harm. Todd Kellstrom, Mayor,City of Klamath Falls Measure 7 must be rejected as a fiscally irresponsible extremist Mike Swaim,Mayor,City of Salem view that totally misses the point of the real meaning of steward- Robert E.Ramig, Mayor,City of Pendleton ship of the land. Susan Roberts,Mayor,City of Enterprise Raymond P.Nolan, M.D., Ph.D. Susan Reid,City Councilor,City of Ashland Coos Bay,Oregon Helen Berg, Mayor,City of Corvallis Charlotte Lehan, Mayor,City of Wilsonville, (This information furnished by Raymond P.Nolan,M.D.,Ph.D.) Jim Young, Mayor,City of Bend Mary Nicholson, Mayor,City of Milton-Freewater Association of Oregon Counties (This information furnished by Mary Nicholson.) (This space purchased for$500 In accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 In accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 329 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 7 Arguments ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION "Lawyers will love this.' Advocacy Coalition for Seniors&People with Disabilities "This will be tied up in courts for years.' Oppose Ballot Measure 7 "They should call this'The Full Employment Act for Lawyers'" The Advocacy Coalition for Seniors and People with Disabilities strongly oppose Ballot Measure 7.We are a statewide organiza- Not much of an endorsement for a ballot measure,is it?Yet tion that seeks to ensure quality services and adequate funding these are the kinds of comments people are making about Ballot for programs that are essential to the quality of life and health of Measure 7,the so-called"takings"measure. some of Oregon's most vulnerable citizens, our senior citizens Measure 7 would amend the Oregon Constitution–here we go and people with disabilities. with that again–to require that the public compensate property .Ballot Measure 7 simply is too costly. Legislative fiscal owners whenever a regulation reduces a property value. The impact statements estimate the cost to be approximately 5.4 "public,"of course,is us-the Oregon taxpayers. billion dollars.That price tag is equivalent to our state's entire This Bill Sizemore-authored initiative may sound OK at first blush. budget. There are three key questions to ask before you cast a vote:what Ballot Measure 7 is extreme, poorly written, and will be does it really mean, and how much will it really cost, and who subject to lengthy and expensive lawsuits really benefits? Land use policies encompass protections for senior citizens Measure 7 means,in the simplest of terms,we would be using tax and people with disabilities needing affordable, accessible dollars to pay landowners and developers for merely obeying the housing.We want to keep those protections in place. basic rules of zoning, air and water pollution safeguards and Oregon is a good place to live.Our public services and quality of protection of wetlands and wildlife habitat.The measure applies life is threatened by measures such as this. It doesn't belong in statewide, although it is really aimed at Metro and the Portland our Constitution and it doesn't belong in Oregon.Please join us area. in voting NO on Measure 7. How much would it cost? Official estimates are in the $5 billion Ruth McEwen-Co-Chair,Advocacy Coalition range. Passing this measure would force Oregonians into a no-win situation:we can pay out billions of dollars in"compensa- (This information furnished by Ruth A. McEwen, Advocacy Coalition for • tion"to special interests, or we can simply stop enforcing basic Seniors and People with Disabilities.) safeguards that protect Oregon's unique quality of life. Who benefits?That's easy–large landowners, developers, and anyone else that is required to meet zoning, environmental and open space laws. The cost and consequences of Measure 7 make this an easy choice:Just Say'No!' Join us and Vote NO!On Measure 7. Mary Botkin,Oregon AFSCME Council 75 Tim Nesbitt,Oregon AFL-CIO Rich Peppers,Oregon Public Employees Union (This information furnished by Don Loving,Oregon AFSCME Council 75.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 330 Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 8 Proposed by initiative petition to be voted on at the General years ending in the biennium, in proportion to the amount each Election, November 7,2000. taxpayer paid.This distribution shall not be counted as an appro- priation for purposes of this section. PARAGRAPH 2. If any portion, clause, or phrase of the new BALLOT TITLE section id of Article IX is for any reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional by a court of competent jurisdiction,the remain- ing portions,clauses,and phrases of the new section shall not be affected buts a remain in full force and effect. EXPLANATORY STATEMENT N. - Ballot Measure 8 would amend the Oregon Constitution by linking the rate of growth of state government spending to the rate of growth of personal income in the state.The measure would {ICt1#fitf�€ i � Elf tCfi ��l ; limit all state spending, regardless of the source of the funds,to no more than 15 percent of total personal income of Oregonians earned in the two calendar years immediately preceding the budget period(biennium). fi If the state collects revenues in excess of the limit,the measure Cr i � E � would require that those excess revenues be distributed to Oregon taxpayers in proportion to the income taxes they paid in the biennium. Excluded from this distribution are earnings from dedicated investment funds, such as retirement funds or the yfit>�a Common School Fund. :�tues#mxir� lei The Legislature could vote to increase spending beyond the limit,but only if the Governor specifically declares an emergency, and three-fourths of the elected members of both the House and the Senate vote for the increased level of spending. The limit covers state spending from all sources of funds,such �' as taxes,fees,federal funds,and investment earnings.The mea bCtt # irr[l3tt� sure would exclude from the limit roceeds from state-issued p bonds, although it does include the funds appropriated to repay those bonds. For comparison,the state has recently experienced a spending TEXT OF MEASURE level of about 18 percent of personal income. The estimated impact of the measure on the 2001-2003 state budget would be to limit expenditures to an amount $5.7 billion less than the Be it enacted by the people of the State of Oregon: projected spending of$32.4 billion. PARAGRAPH 1. The Constitution of the State of Oregon.is The measure limits state spending.The measure does not cut amended by creating a new section 1d to be added to and made state taxes, nor does it direct the Legislature or Governor how a part of Article IX,such section to read: state funds are spent within the new limit. SECTION 1d.(1)(a) Appropriations for state government expen- Committee Members: Appointed by: ditures in each biennium shall not exceed an amount which is 15 percent of the state's personal income, except as provided in Joe W.Foxall Chief Petitioners subsection(b)and(c)of this section.For purposes of this section, Don McIntire Chief Petitioners this state's personal income is total personal income for the two Lynn Marie Crider Secretary of State calendar years ending before the beginning of the biennium, as James Scherzinger Secretary of State computed by the Federal Government. Dave Moss Members of the Committee (b)The limitations of this section shall not apply to appropria- (This committee was appointed to provide an impartial explanation of the tions funded by revenues from the issuance of bonds by the state. ballot measure pursuant to DRS 251.215.) Appropriations to pay principal and interest on all state debt and appropriations funded by revenues from all other instruments of debt,are subject to the limitations of this section. (c)Only after a declaration of emergency by the Governor,the Legislative Assembly, by a three-fourths majority vote in each house of all members elected to each house, may enact legisla- tion increasing for a biennium the appropriation limits established by this section. (d)The limitations of this section shall apply to state govern- ment appropriations commencing with the biennium beginning in 2001. (2) Notwithstanding any other provision of this Constitution, revenues, other than earnings from dedicated investment funds, �. received by the state in a biennium that are in excess of the appropriation limits established by this section, shall be distrib- uted to taxpayers who paid state income taxes attributable to tax 331 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 8 Arguments ARGUMENT IN FAVOR ARGUMENT IN FAVOR CHIEF PETITIONERS MAKE THE CASE FOR MEASURE 8 An alarming trend is that spending by all governments in the Taxpayers have learned the hard way 1990's -- federal, state, local -- has skyrocketed.The decade's that limiting a specific tax provides only temporary relief robust economy has produced volumes of cash to all govern- ments, which just hate to give any of it back once they've got it. Trying to control the cost of government by limiting taxes is like Awash in the revenues generated by a booming economy, our squeezing a balloon ...squeeze it in one place and it gets bigger legislature has even proposed a "rainy day fund" where they somewhere else! In no time at all, government agencies would stash our tax dollars to be spent years after they have creatively invent new fees, bigger fines and backdoor taxes to taken it from us! expand the spending balloon. Measure 8 represents a historic opportunity for Oregonians to Instead of limiting taxes, Measure 8 simply limits the cause of lead the rest of the nation in slowing the growth of government by higher taxes--SPENDING! If we limit how much politicians can not allowing state spending to increase faster than its citizens own spend,the balloon won't expand faster than our economy! economic growth.If we pass this measure, revenues collected in For the past 25 years, total annual spending by the State of excess of what the state is allowed to spend will simply be returned to income taxpayers on a proportionate basis. Money Oregon has averaged more than 18% of all Oregonians' total that will be spent by taxpayers, or perhaps put into our own personal income. individual"rainy day funds! Measure 8 would limit that spending to 15%, require any excess This measure requires that the state spend no more than 15%of taxes collected be returned to income tax payers,and includes a the aggregate Personal Income of the people of this state, a clause to break the limit in case of financial emergency. statistic published'by the federal Bureau of Economic Analysis.In • Measure 8 will result in state budgets based on the peoples' essence,this measure limits the size of state government to the ability to pay, rather than on the government's ability to peoples'ability to foot the bills. spend. Measure 8 does not change income tax rates.The 15%does not • Measure 8 will NOT REQUIRE budget cuts. Budgets will refer to a tax rate, but to spending limit that is defined as that simply not be able to grow as rapidly. percentage of the state's personal incomes. • Measure 8 would limit spending in the next two-year budget State legislators recognized the popularity and political appeal of cycle to approximately$30 billion ...about the same amount a state spending limit when they referred a statutory spending. as this budget cycle! limit in 1980.The only problem with the Legislature's spending limit: It hasn't limited spending because the politicians routinely • Measure 8's spending limit will inspire our legislature to find exempt certain spending from the definition of"spending.' efficiencies and eliminate waste, and will create competi- tion among agencies to prove their cost effectiveness and Measure 8 represents a reasonable constitutional spending limit efficiency. that the legislature and the governor will have to abide by. It will finally require them to prioritize their spending, and become • Measure 8 requires that excess revenue collected be returned effective stewards of the citizens'tax dollars. to income taxpayers. Money the state cannot collect because of the spending limit keeps circulating, stimulates the (This information furnished by Paul S.Bleeg.) economy,and ultimately increases income! • Measure 8 will give the State a vital interest in the economic well-being of its citizens because state revenue increases when personal income increases. Measure 8 is good for Oregonians and GOOD FOR THEIR GOVERNMENT VOTE YES ON 8. (This information furnished by Joe Foxall,Don McIntire,Ron Sunseri.) (This space purchased for$500 In accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 In accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 332 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 8 Arguments ARGUMENT IN FAVOR ARGUMENT IN FAVOR AT LAST!AWAY OF PAYING FOR GOVERNMENT BASED ON THE SKY IS NOT FALLING WHAT WE CAN AFFORD INSTEAD OF HOW MUCH THE (Again)! GOVERNMENT WANTS TO SPEND! Remember 10 years ago when the government types said people I'll bet you didn't know that Oregon already has a state spending would be dying in the streets if Measure 5 passed?Well,they're limit.Yep!Voters passed It in 1990,10 to 1.But it's never really back at it,doing their Chicken Little thing on Measure 8. had an effect because it's only a law,not a constitutional limit.So Here are two of their phony attacks on Measure 8: legislators can ignore it,and they do. Measure 8 finally puts a limit in the State Constitution where they ATTACK#1:Measure 8 will cause unacceptable"cuts"in educa- can't ignore it any more! tion,safety,and human services. Measure 8 only puts a limit on how much the legislature and FACT:Wrong!MEASURE 8 CUTS NOTHING,IT JUST DOESN'T ALLOW STATE SPENDING TO INCREASE FASTER, bureaucracies can spend. It still allows complete flexibility on THAN THE GROWTH OF OUR OWN INCOME. how they spend it. Measure 8 doesn't mandate specific budget cuts, or micro- State spending will increase because, ever since they began manage any budget or agency. keeping records, personal income in Oregon has grown every year, without fail. In the last decade, income increased at an It will be up to legislators to prioritize their spending.Agencies will average rate of about 12%per biennium.If state spending can have to be accountable for their budgets and prove their cost- grow at the same rate,what are they complaining about? effectiveness to the legislature. I What they're complaining about is that they won't get to spend Don't get me wrong.Fifteen percent of the personal income of all money faster than we make it.They call that"cuts"! No essential Oregonians for financing state government is still a big pile of services will have to be touched if the Legislature works at finding money,but at least it's a limit! Up until now,with the exception of efficiencies and trimming excesses. the occasional kicker, no matter how much money is collected ATTACK#2: Measure 8 will keep Oregon from receiving federal from whatever source,the legislature spends it all,every time. money. Measure 8 will tie the spending of State Government to the FACT: Wrong! MEASURE 8 IN NO WAY PROHIBITS STATE affordability of those_ who actually pay the bills – Oregon APPROPRIATION OF FEDERAL FUNDS. taxpayers! When our collective income grows, (and it always does), so will Measure 8 does not restrict any kind of appropriation. It simply the amount available for government to spend ... just not more says that at some point,total spending may not exceed the 15% than we can afford. limit. MAKE THE GOVERNMENT LIVE WITHIN OOUR MEANS. One of the best things about Measure 8's limit is that it will force legislators to make some choices and prioritize.Perhaps they will Vote YES on Measure 81 turn down NO federal funds! Or, they may be more discerning about which federal funds they take. Remember, federal funds (This information furnished by Steve Beal.) often require the state to spend money to qualify for federal matching funds which can come with onerous strings attached. Or, if Uncle Sam becomes unusually generous in sending "free money" to the state, it could lead to income tax reduction or reduction of some other taxes and fees. Vote Yes on Measure 8. (This information furnished by Molly Hickman.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 333 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 8 Arguments ARGUMENT IN FAVOR ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION Make Oregon Competitive Measure 8 is a Threat to Oregon's Public Higher Education What happens to businesses that take their customers for We teach on the campuses of the Oregon University System.We granted? are concerned about the damage that Measure 8 would inflict on How about businesses that refuse to innovate, charging higher our universities,our state,and our students. prices without ever improving? Since 1989, the cost of attending has risen beyond the reach of Imagine a company committed to heavy investments that was many.Measure 8 would make this bad situation even worse and unsure of its future earnings? would make Oregon's public universities less able to do the job Oregon expects of it: How long would such a company last if most of its customers This measure would limit spending from all sources that were already dissatisfied? support our institutions, including Federal dollars, tuition fees, No company could perform like this for long, without endless gifts and other sources.Thus we could not use Federal funds resources or an absolute monopoly. for programs like agriculture to replace state funds. Oregon's resources are not endless,but,the state is a monopoly. Because higher education funds are in the same pool as other Oregonians cannot choose a different government, we live in a state agencies,any increase in spending on higher education, monopoly. even from private or Federal funds, would force cuts in other agencies.Yet the Oregon University System should be expand- Fortunately,we do have some leverage over this monopoly.Even ing for the growing number of graduates from Oregon's high though the government ignores us,we have the ultimate power to schools. change it. Ballot Measure 8 promises just that! If applied in the 1999-2001 biennium,Measure 8 would require a 20.4%cut that would have to come out of space for students, Measure 8 guarantees that government spending will not grow new faculty, outreach services such as extension and comm faster than our incomes. By pegging government spending to munity education, and scientific research supporting Oregon's 15% of our personal income, government will not swell out of economy. proportion. Because we care about our students,our schools,and our state, Legislators will work within spending limits. State agencies will we strongly urge that you vote No on Measure 8. compete for tax dollars,this competition will bring about efficien- Mark Clark, Associate Professor, Humanities and Social cies and productivity gains. When government must finally Sciences,Oregon Institute of Technology* respond to market forces like the rest us,it will be on the road to John R.Cooper, Professor of English, Portland State University* accountability. Arlene B. Courtney, Professor of Chemistry, Western Oregon Measure 8 will not result in drastic cuts. University* Jeffrey L. Johnson, Professor of Philosophy, Eastern Oregon With every attempt to rein in government, we hear these same University* frantic cries: Gordon Matzke, Professor of Geosciences and Faculty Senate "Schools will shut down!" President,Oregon State University* Jeffrey A. Myers, Professor of Geology, Western Oregon "Bridges will collapse!" University* "Dogs and cats will engage in unnatural unions!" Adele Schepige, Assistant Professor of Elementary Education, Western Oregon University* HOGWASH! Paul E. Simonds, Professor of Anthropology, the University of Our government can easily provide essential services to us with Oregon* 15%of our money.In fact, it can do it with much less. *Institutions are named for identification purposes only and do not It is time we asked government to compete,to innovate,to make represent positions on this measure by the institutions. priorities,to stop taking us for granted. (This information furnished by John R.Cooper,Jeffery L.Johnson, Mark Vote YES on 8. Clark, Gordon E.Matzke,Adele C.Schepige,Jeffrey A.Myers,Arlene R. Courtney, Paul E.Simonds;Professors United to Save Higher Education Furnished by the Libertarian Party of Oregon (PUSHE).) The Libertarian Party is Oregon's third largest political party. Libertarians are fiscally conservative, socially tolerant, believing that government should be limited to protecting freedom while ensuring personal responsibility. For more information call 1 (800)829-1992 or visit our web site at www.lporegon.org (This information furnished by Eric Winters,Libertarian Party of Oregon.) (This space purchased for$500 In accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 In accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth'of any statement made in the argument. 334 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 8 Arguments. ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION Organizations In Every Part of Oregon, LEAGUE OF WOMEN VOTERS-NO ON 8 From Every Walk of Life, The Leagie of Women Voters of Oregon Urges a Have Joined Together to Say: No Vote on Measura 8 VOTE NO ON MEASURE 8 The League of Women Voters of Oregon is a grassroots,nonpar- This is a small sample of those who have joined in tisan organization which encourages the informed and active opposition to Measure 8: participation of citizens in government. Since 1920, the League League of Women Voters of Oregon has worked to inform voters, improve our political process and strengthen our Democracy. Human Services Coalition of Oregon Alzheimers Association,Oregon Trail Chapter A Massive Cut With Minimal Tax Reductions Oregon State Council of Senior Citizens Measure 8 says it will be a"limit`on state spending. However, it Children First for Oregon probably will be nearly a $5 billion cut from the current level of Oregon State Fire Fighters Council services all Oregonians count on.Yet Measure 8 does not guar- antee tax reductions. And if there are tax reductions, the bulk Oregon Health Care Association could go to higher income taxpayers,which is unfair to the major- Eugene Police Employees'Association ity of Oregonians. Christian Church(Disciples of Christ) Impacting a Wide Range of Important Services Roseburg Police Employees'Association Bend Chamber of Commerce Because it affects all state spending (not just that funded by Reverend William R.Ellis,Jr. Oregon state taxes), Measure 8's probable $5 billion cut would Oregonians for Public Safety seriously impact adequate funding for: American Jewish Committee,Oregon Chapter • schools and higher education Congressman Earl Blumenauer • health care (including the Oregon Health Plan and Medicaid) g • repair and maintenance of our roads and bridges Oregon Education Association • services to seniors and the disabled Oregon State Police Officers'Association • public safety Portland Gray Panthers • protection of our natural resources Oregon Consumer League Losing our Fair Share of Federal Funding Tigard United Methodist Church Measure 8 could force Oregon to turn away hundreds of million of Oregon AFL-CIO dollars in federal funding–dollars that Oregonians pay in federal Oregon AFSCME,Council 75 taxes.This will not lower Oregonians federal tax bills, but will in Confederation of Oregon School Administrators effect force us to send our federal tax dollars to other states. OPEU,SEW Local 503 Please Join the Oregon League of Women Voters in Oregon Catholic Conference Voting NO on 8 Jewish Federation of Portland Community Relations Committee Oregon Council,American Electronics Association (This information furnished by Paula Krane,President,League of Women 9 Voters of Oregon.) . Oregon Council of Police Associations Crown Pacific Oregon School Boards Association Oregon Building Officials Association Oregon Advocacy Coalition of Seniors and People with Disabilities Rabbi Daniel Isaak Too Little Benefit.Too Great a Cost. Vote NO on Measure 8 www.ouroreaon.org (This information furnished by Shannon Floyd, The Committee for Our Oregon.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 335 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 8 Arguments ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION The businesses that keep Oregonians working A Message from Oregon's Leading School Advocates and Like Measure 91, Measure 8 offers Ore g on tax ay ers little or no The people who make Oregon t7ork Say Measure 8 Doesn't Work for Oregon! benefit,at a terrible cost to our schools. p The Oregon Business Council is an association of chief execu- Like Measure 91, Measure 8 will force a nearly 20%cut in state tives from many of Oregon's largest businesses.Its member com- funding.When those cuts get to the local school level,there is no panies employ 88,000 Oregonians and contribute billions of way to avoid significant impacts, including: dollars into Oregon's economy. • Increased class sizes The American Federation of State, County and Municipal • Old and outdated books and materials Employees Council 75 represents 20,500 of the working families • Lost programs like music and art that provide our communities with services such as health care, • Teacher layoffs state corrections,and other public safety services. But in some important ways,Measure 8 is even worse. We are very different organizations. But we thought that by Oregon's school funding system mandates that the vast majority I oining together we could make a point: of funds come from the state. And the way Measure 8 works Whoever you are,whatever you do,Measure 8 is a bad idea would not only make it against the law to replace that state for Oregon. funding, it would make it unconstitutional! Together,we share a vision of a great Oregon future: At the same time,Measure 8 doesn't offer any particular benefits to Oregon taxpayers. • Diverse businesses providing quality jobs and a talented Little benefit.Great cost. workforce able to perform these jobs well. VOTE N. re 8 • Communities that are safe,caring and engaging places to live. Oregon School Boards Association • Quality public infrastructure and services. Oregon Education Association The public sector needs a healthy economy.The private sector Oregon School Employees Association needs high quality public services because they are essential for business to be successful.Both are threatened by Measure 8. Confederation of Oregon Schools Administrators Measure 8 claims to be a limit on government.In fact,the practi- American Federation of Teachers cal effect of this measure would be to arbitrarily cut public services–even those that are largely supported by federal funds (This information furnished by Ozzie Rose, Confederation of Oregon and dedicated fees. It is probable that the state would have to School Administrators;James Sager,Oregon Education Association;John return hundreds of millions of federal dollars to Washington Marshall, Oregon School Boards Association; Debbi Covert, President, American Federation of Teachers–Oregon;Ed Edwards, Oregon School That would become, in effect,a contribution by Oregonians Employees Association.) to the public services of other states. Whether you are running a company,or a working family, voting for Measure 8 would be a bad business decision. Join the Oregon Business Council Oregon AFSCME Council 75 And all those who care about Oregon VOTE NO ON 8 (This information furnished by Duncan Wyse,President,Oregon Business Council;Ken Allen,Oregon AFSCME Council 75.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon,nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 336 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures v Measure No. 8 Arguments ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION A Message from Governor John Kitzhaber,M.D. OREGON'S NURSES SAY: Measure 8 is one of those measures that sound simple.Just a Measure 8 is Hazardous to Oregon's Health! "limit"on government spending,that's all. No one has a better view of Oregon's health than Oregon's But what Measure 8 really does isn't simple. If you look just a nurses.We work in every area of the health care system, in every part of the state.We know first hand the importance of access to little closer,you can see that it makes absolutely no sense at all. quality affordable health care, and what happens when that Measure 8 isn't a limit it is actually a nearly$5 billion cut in the access disappears. next state budget.This magnitude of cut is far too great to avoid That is why Oregon's nurses so strongly oppose Measure 8. significant impacts. And your state income taxes are only about one-third of the Measure will cause a nearly $5 billion cut in resources for critical services in Oregon. And nowhere will those cuts be felt money Measure 8 applies to.It also puts a cap on the billions more than in health care. It will in all likelihood force the of dollars we get in federal funds and from non-tax revenues. discontinuation Instead of using those dollars for Oregon's critical needs,we will for thousands of the Oregon Health Plan, ending coverage have to turn them away. Oregon's most vulnerable families.But this is not just a problem for them:the resulting increase of uninsured visits That won't lower your tax bill.It just means that more of to emergency rooms and hospitals by the uninsured will raise all your federal tax dollars will stay in Washington DC or go of our insurance premiums. to other states. In other words,Measure 8 would be costly to just about all of And where will the state cuts come from? From all state budgets us. –K-12 schools, our universities and community colleges, health And much of the cut in health care will not save us a dime in care, repairing and maintaining roads and bridges, state police taxes!Measure 8 will force us to turn back hundreds of millions of and prisons and more. dollars in federal funds that pay for things like the Health Plan, Will it mean the end of the world? No, it won't.But it will change Medicaid and even some Medicare programs. Oregon from the state we know today.And it will certainly put a Why would we take away our neighbors health insurance halt to efforts to build a stronger,fairer,more prosperous future for and raise our own rates-all for a measure that doesn't all Oregonians. even guarantee real tax savings to most Oregonians? There is plenty of room for Oregonians to disagree about the Please Join the Oregon Nurses Association and extent and role of government. There is plenty of room for Vote NO on Measure 8 Oregonians to disagree about taxes.But one thing we should all be able to agree on is that Measure 8 makes no sense for (This information furnished by Martin Taylor, Nurses United:affiliated with taxpayers,and it makes no sense for Oregon. the Oregon Nurses Association.) Please join me in voting no on Measure 8 John Kitzhaber,M.D. (This information furnished by John A.Kitzhaber,M.D.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 337 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 8 Arguments ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION Seniors Throughout Oregon Say Oregon Educators Ask You To Measure 8 Make No Sense for Oregonians! Vote No on 8 As some of Oregon's most active seniors organizations,we urge It Cuts Deeply Into Education Funding seniors,and all Oregon voters,to VOTE NO ON MEASURE 8. •Measure 8 Makes Deep Cuts in School Funding Even for those who believe in limited government, Measure 8 The reality is that Measure 8 cuts approximately$5 billion in the makes no sense: next biennium.It's no secret that Oregon's schools are in desper- ate need of adequate and stable funding. Measure 8 will mean • It offers no guarantee of tax cuts.And if there are tax cuts,very drastic cuts in critical education programs. little will go to seniors or the middle class. •Measure 8 Hurts Students. • It will force Oregon to turn back hundreds of millions, even Oregon's schools are already facing a funding crisis. In many billions of dollars in federal funding. This will not lower our school districts programs have been cut,textbooks are outdated federal taxes,but will give back money that is ours! and class sizes are growing.There is nowhere else left to cut in • The federal money that we will turn back largely goes for things our public schools except deeply into our classrooms.The ones who pay the price are Oregon's students. seniors count on,such as health care,the Oregon Health Plan and even some Medicare funding. •Measure 8 Is Flawed. • And Measure 8 will force a nearly$5 billion cut in the state's It says one thing but does another. It forces Oregon to return hundreds of millions of dollars in federal funds.The net effect: budget.That is just too big to avoid serious impacts on other Measure 8 takes our federal tax dollars and sends them to other things that all Oregonians count on, including schools, roads states.That's not fair to Oregonians or our public schools. and public safety. •Measure 8 does not belong in Oregon's Constitution. It's Unfair to Seniors,and Makes No Sense for Oregon Oregon's students deserve more than a measure that continues United Seniors of Oregon to slash school funding year after year.It has no place in Oregon's Oregon State Council of Senior Citizens Constitution. Portland Gray Panthers Please Join Us and Vote No on Measure 8 Oregon Advocacy Coalition of Seniors and Martin Bronstein,elementary teacher People with Disabilities Corvallis And the Alzheimer Association,Oregon Trail Chapter All Urge: Carolyn Clontz,elementary teacher Bend/LaPine VOTE NO ON MEASURE 81 (This information furnished by Martin A.Bronstein,Carolyn Clontz.) (This information furnished by Jim Davis,Oregon State Council of Senior Citizens, United Seniors of Oregon, Portland Gray Panthers, Oregon Advocacy Coalition of Seniors and People with Disabilities, Alzheimer Assoc.,Oregon Trail Chapter.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 In accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 338 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 8 Arguments ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION MEASURE 8 IS NOT THE ONLY ONE TO WORRY ABOUT! A MESSAGE FROM THE OREGON PTA Measures 91,93&8 are bad ideas for Oregon in many different Oregon's Children Cannot Afford Measure 8! ways.But there are some things they have in common: Oregon's constitution is supposed to protect the citizens of • They all offer little or no benefit to middle class Oregon Oregon.But Measure 8 would change our Constitution to do just taxpayers. the opposite. • They all hurt basic values and services that all Oregonians Measure 8 says that it limits state spending.What it doesn't tell count on and care about. you is that it limits far more than what your state tax dollars pay • They are all vague or misleadingly worded, and filled with for.In fact,it offers no guarantees of tax relief.What it doesn't tell you is that it will force Oregon to give back to the federal govern- unintended consequences. ment hundreds of millions—even billions—of federal funding that • They all amend the constitution. is rightfully ours. • They don't add up,and they certainly won't work. And what Measure 8 doesn't tell you is the impact it will have on schools and our children. Measures 91,93&8: Far Too Little Benefit.Far Too Great a Cost. If this measure passes it would force the state to cut nearly $5 billion from the 2001-2003 budget.That is far more than we www.ouroregon.org can cut without seriously impacting things we all count on. (This information furnished by Shannon Floyd, The Committee for Our If this measure passed,our state school budget would have to be Oregon.) cut by up to 20%.That would mean cuts to teachers,to textbooks, to computers,to school libraries to school counselors. It would mean an increase in children per classroom.An increase in crumbling school facilities. An increase in problems with troubled children.An increase in illiteracy and learning difficulties. And it would mean cuts to other things important to children: health care,services for at risk and abused children and more. When we invest in our schools and our children,we are investing in our own future.Measure 8 will damage that investment—and all for little or no real benefit for taxpayers. What sense would that make? Say Yes To Oregon's Children. Vote NO on Measure 8. Kathryn firestone, President Lisa Laursen Thirkill,Vice president for Legislation The Oregon PTA (This information furnished by Kathryn Firestone,President,Lisa Laursen Thirkill,VP Legislation;Oregon Congress of Parents and Teachers.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 In accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. [accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 339 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet--Statewide Measures Measure No. 8 Arguments ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION The Oregon Consumer League Says: Measure 8 Puts SENIORS at Risk! Measure 8 Is A Bad Product in A Deceptive Package Seniors in.Oregon would see a dramatic cut in services and The Oregon Consumer League works to make sure that Oregon funding if Measure 8 passes. Not only will Measure 8 create a consumers receive fair and legal treatment in the marketplace. huge hole'in Oregon's budget, it would force Oregon to return Products should be safe,and honestly presented. HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS of dollars in federal funds each year. If Measure 8 was a product being sold in a store, we would Thousands of frail elderly and disabled Oregonians require state demand it was pulled from the shelves. and federal assistance to pay for the nursing home and assisted living care they so desperately need. Protect Oregon's most Limiting government may sound like a good idea in the abstract. vulnerable population:seniors,by voting No on Measure 8. But on closer look, Measure 8 really limits Oregon's future.And Cutting nearly$5 billion Is not only IRRESPONSIBLE from a consumer's perspective,it is a terrible deal. it is DANGEROUS First we would be giving ub millions even billions in Federal Measure 8 seriously threatens many services our government funds—for universities, highway construction, health care and provides including funding for health care, police, roads, and other valued programs.That's a product you won't receive, even education. In a time where these services are already under though you have already paid for through your federal taxes.And stress, Measure 8 would cut essential community programs and you won't be getting that money back. drive funding away from our kids and seniors. Next,we would be slashing our public services with a broadax— Losing Federal Tax Dollars That Rightly Belong To Us instead of a scalpel. If that still doesn't bother you, ask yourself what would happen if you had to slash your household budget Measure 8 would turn back federal taxpayer dollars that rightfully more than twenty percent? belong to us. Because Oregon receives federal matching funds Then think of ,what public services you would cut--schools? for many programs,with this spending Oregon would not only see Police? Fire? Highways? Higher education? Parks and an unnecessary cut in state funding: Oregonians would take a recreation? Public safety? Air and water quality? Job safety? DOUBLE hit by losing needed federal funding. Food safety? Too little benefit.Too great a cost. Oregon has the highest percentage of hungry children in the Oregon Health Care Association Urges You to nation.Shall we offer them less help? ' VOTE NO ON MEASURE 8 Do we cut the Oregon Health Plan?Taking away the health insur- (This information furnished by James Carlson, Oregon Health Care ance coverage of thousands of Oregonians will end up ran sing Association.) insurance rates for the rest of us And to top it all off,we wouldn't just be putting this faulty, misleadingly advertised product in our cupboard:we would be putting it in our constitution. Be a smart consumer: Vote No on Measure 81 Jason Reynolds Oregon Consumer League (This information furnished by Jason Reynolds, Oregon Consumer League.) (This space purchased for$5001n accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 In accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 340 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet--Statewide Measures Measure No. 8 Arguments ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION MEASURE 93 WILL CREATE ATREMENDOUS PROBLEM FORMER JUDGES OPPOSE PLACING FOR RURAL OREGON MEASURE 8 IN THE CONSTITUTION Measure 93 will force a vast number of individual fees on the It's Unclear, Has Unintended Consequences And Is Bad Public statewide ballot. Many of those fees are willingly paid by Policy industries,communities and individuals that rely on the services Fellow citizens: they pay for. Without those fees it could be impossible to sustain business As former judges,we have a deep respect for the State's funda- a9ricultural or professional activity that thousands of Oregonians mental governing document—the Oregon Constitution. count on for their livelihood. That is why we hope you will join us in voting No on Measure Nowhere is that more of an issue than in rural Oregon. It 8. doesn't make sense for city dwellers to vote on things such as: The Constitution establishes our basic system of government and grazing fees, or fees that support vital agricultural research, or protects our fundamental rights.Unlike a simple statute,it cannot help support developing markets for Oregon products. be changed by the Legislature. Only a vote of the people can But that is just what Measure 93 will do:force people to vote change the Constitution. on hundreds of specialized fees that they don't pay for,don't We believe that the Constitution should be reserved for know anything about,and the loss of which will cause others matters of fundamental importance. We believe it is entirely to suffer. inappropriate, and dangerous, to crowd the Constitution with Too little benefit.Too great a cost. provisions that could easily be dealt with statutorily. Vote NO on Measure 93 That is especially true about Measure 8. Whatever one's opinion of limiting government spending, Measure 8 is broad, www.ouroregon.org vague and filled with unintended consequences.Even the propo- nents seem unsure of its ultimate effects.With a high likelihood of (This information furnished by Shannon Floyd, The Committee for Our the meaning of the measure having to be settled in court voters Oregon.) cannot even be sure what they will be voting for. Locking such a measure in our Constitution makes no sense. We happen to disagree with Measure 8 as a matter of policy.It will force Oregon to turn back federal funding,while not lowering our federal taxes. It will force cuts that will undermine services such as schools,health care,social services and public safety. But even if we agreed with Measure 8 as a matter of policy, we would believe placing it in the Constitution is wrong. We hope you will join us in voting"No" (This information furnished by The Honorable Jacob Tenzer,The Honorable Betty Roberts.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 341 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 8 Arguments ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION Measure 8 Puts Oregon's Children Last PROTECT OREGON'S FUTURE Children First for Oregon is the statewide voice on behalf of VOTE"NO"ON MEASURE 8 Oregon's over 800,000 children.We believe that who we are as a 's trap Measure 8 would strangle Oregon's people, now and in the future,depends upon our commitment to 9 9 public universities. the well being of children. Measure 8 puts a cap on all state spending, regardless of the source of the funds. For our universities, this includes tuition, That is why Children First for Oregon asks all Oregon voters to dorm and food service income, research grants and contracts, vote No on Measure 8. and gifts from alumni.How could we operate if these non-state tax Measure 8 will require a nearly $5 billion cut in the entire state sources were cut severely, in order to get total state spending budget.While this will seriously impact almost every area of our under the cap? _state's life from transportation to state parks no group will feel Measure 8 doesn't work for Oregon.Oregon's public universi- that impact more than Oregon's kids ties receive more than$175 million each year to conduct research • Measure 8 will hurt Oregon's K-12 schools, with impacts vital to Oregon and the nation. Our researchers are studying including increased class sizes, loss of programs and other wheat' metals and advanced materials, tree diseases, software classroom cuts. engineering, salmon habitat, and hundreds of other areas of • Measure 8 will cancel the health insurance of thousands of scientific inquiry important to Oregon and our quality of life.They children and families. are supported by federal,foundation,or other funds.If all of these • Measure 8 will slash investment in our universities and com- research funds don't fit under the state spending cap,what don't munit colleges–so important for preparing we study,and what Oregon industry gets hurt? Y 9 p p p g young people for successful careers. Measure 8 hurts Oregonians.Oregon public universities award And the truly senseless thing about these cuts is that many of the more than 13,000 degrees each year, in teaching, engineering, services critical to making sure that all Oregon's children have the agriculture,social work,criminal justice,forestry,and many other future they deserve are paid for with federal funding. Measure 8 subjects. How can we continue preparing Oregon's educated will force us to turn back much of the matching federal dollars workforce, if tuition, room and board, and all the other non-tax Oregon receives for programs like Head Start and Children's revenues in our budgets are restricted because of the cap on all Health Insurance,but won't lower our federal taxes. state spending? Measure 8 hurts some of our most vulnerable kids. When we .VOTE FOR OREGON----VOTE"NO"ON MEASURE 8 invest in children,we invest in ourselves–our neighborhoods,our David Frohnmayer Don VanLuvanee economic well being and our future.Don't throw away that future. President, U of O* President,Oregon State Board Remember to Protect Oregon's children this November! Paul Risser of Higher Education (This information furnished by Marie A.Hoeven,Children first of Oregon.) President,OSU* Tom Imeson Immediate Past President Daniel Bernstine Oregon State Board of President, PSU* Higher Education* Betty Youngblood Joseph W.Cox President,WOU* Chancellor Oregon University System* *Titles used for identification purposes only,and do not constitute a position on this measure by any institution of the Oregon University System or the Oregon State Board of Higher Education. (This information furnished by Shannon Floyd, The Committee for Our Oregon.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 342 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 8 Arguments ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION A MESSAGE FROM OREGON'S Measure 8 does not belong in the Oregon Constitution and it isn't HUMAN SERVICES COALITION good policy for, Oregon. Sure, it sounds good to limit state expenditures, but as Portland State University graduates, we're If you've read the fine print of Measure 8, you have probably concerned about what it will really mean to Oregon's higher figured out that there is a lot more to it than meets the eye. education system. Or maybe, it's a lot less. Let's consider the facts.This measure would limit all state expen- Measure 8 talks about"limits;'"appropriations"and"percentages.' ditures,even those that are paid for by the Federal Government, But what it doesn't have is any guarantee that you will get such as financial aid for college tuition. it would also include anything out of it in tax reductions. faculty research funding paid for by industry,and donations given And because it will cut near) $5 billion out of things we all count by Oregonians to support scholarships and college athletic Y 9 programs. No matter how hard colleges and universities work to on and care about, all Oregonians will pay a price for that,in our seek private support for programs,they would be forced under an economy, in our quality of life and our ability to keep Oregon a arbitrary and capricious cap of 15% for all state government great place to live,work and grow. expenditures. But as a coalition that works for some of Oregon's most vulner- That is a ridiculous policy and it will hurt Oregon's economy. able citizens,we thought it was important to point out a few of the .people who will feel a particular impact. Measure 8 could mean that Oregon would turn back Federal funds for important programs like higher education. That won't You see the authors of Measure 8 did not include in the text of the save you or us a dime,but could send Oregon tax dollars to other measure anything about taking health insurance away from states. thousands of children, pregnant women, seniors and working poor families. We urge a no vote on Measure 8.It just doesn't make any sense. Or cutting in-home living assistance for seniors. (This information furnished by Gary D. Salyers, Chris Groener, Marjorie Or cutting back on reimbursements to the foster arents of Terdal,Roger Capps,Joan C.Johnson,Denise Duncan;alumni of Portland 9 parents University.) abused children. But that's a pretty good description of what Measure 8 does. And the irony is that the federal government pays for much of those services. But while it won't cut a dime of Oregonians' federal tax bill, Measure 8 will force us to give that money back. It doesn't make much sense. But that's what it means. Little Benefit.Tremendous Cost. Please,Vote NO on Measure 8 (This information furnished by Gina Mattioda,Co-Chair of HSCO.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 343 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 8 Arguments ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION OREGON RECREATION&PARK ASSOCIATION OREGON BUSINESS ASSOCIATION OPPOSES MEASURE 8 OREGON PARKS ASSOCIATION The Oregon Business Association joins with Oregonians from all OPPOSES MEASURE 8 over the state who have united in opposition to Measure 8.Urban The damaging cuts to parks will save taxpayers and rural Oregon, business and labor, Republicans, Democrats, little or nothing! Independents, seniors and young families with kids in school – The Oregon Recreation&Park Association and the Oregon Parks folks from all walks of life are saying "Measure 8 is wrong for " Association, organizations representing over 500 professional Oregon! members that provide park and recreation services throughout MEASURE 8 IS ANTI-OREGON the state, strongly urge our fellow Oregonians to VOTE"NO"on Measure 2. Measure 8 will force billions.of dollars in cuts to Oregon's quality of life,hurting health care,hospitals,K-12 and higher Supporters of Measure 8 say it is a limit on spending. But what education, public safety, senior and disabled services, they don't tell you is that it will limit far more than just tax dollars. transportation,natural resources,and nearly all human ser- The limits will extend to federal funds, lottery funds, fees vices now available to the people of Oregon. paid by out-of-state tourists and other non-tax revenues – MEASURE 8 IS DISHONEST that's unfair to Oregon taxpayers and it is a serious threat to our parks. dAeasure 8 is a poorly crafted,shortsighted,shot-in-the-dark Oregonians are rightly proud of our nationally renowned system initiative that dramatically distorts the truth. The Oregonian of state parks.Our parks are an important part of our quality of called it "lying with statistics" (The Oregonian, Editorial, life,and a tourism industry that is vital to the economic well being 8/27/00) of thousands of Oregon families. MEASURE 8 WILL FORCE OREGON TO LOSE FEDERAL For years, however, Oregon has deferred reinvesting in the FUNDS infrastructure of our State Park System.For the first time in a long Measure 8 will force Oregon to send back billions of dollars time there is the hope of reversing that trend, largely because of in federal funds Oregon is entitled to receive or make even lottery funding,fees paid by park users,gifts and federal grants. deeper cuts to health care and hospitals, schools, public Measure 8 will limit our ability to utilize those funding sources and safety,and other services. it may prohibit us from pursuing the acquisition of new parks and the refurbishment of older ones. THE OREGON BUSINESS ASSOCIATION is a non-partisan, statewide business leadership organization working to achieve The result?Our parks will be seriously damaged creative and cooperative solutions to Oregon's public policy And it will save little or no Oregon tax dollars! issues.Without qualification,we oppose Measure 8. Measure 8 is not what it seems. Even if you believe in limited FOR OREGON–VOTE NO ON MEASURE 81 government, or want to see tax reductions, Measure 8 doesn't deliver what it promises.And all Oregonians will pay the price. Tom Kelly Don't be fooled!Save our parks! Chair,Oregon Business Association Vote"No"on Measure 8. Lynn Lundquist, Former Oregon Speaker of the House President,Oregon Business Association (This information furnished by Stephen A. Bosak, Oregon Recreation& Park Association,Oregon Parks Association.) (This information furnished by Tom Kelly, Chairman, Lynn Lundquist, President;Oregon Business Association.) (This space purchased for$500 In accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 In accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 344 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 8 Arguments ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION Oregon State Treasurer Jim Hill OREGON ASSOCIATION OF HOSPITALS AND Urges you to vote NO on Ballot Measure 8 HEALTH SYSTEMS URGES YOUR"NQ"VOTE Please join me in voting NO on Ballot Measure 8. Measure 8 ON MEASURE 8 is not tax relief and it is not tax reform.It is a poorly drafted mea- Measure 8 is a bad idea, because it's passage would hurt sure that will cripple the state's ability to provide vital services. Oregon's most vulnerable citizens: Measure 8 will cut billions Measure 8 will cut more than $5 billion from the state budget, of dollars in essential financial support for programs like the money that Oregon needs to fund basic services like education, Oregon Health Plan,which provides health coverage to Oregon's public safety and healthcare. children and neediest citizens. Other important health-related Measure 8 would not only force devastating cuts in the programs will be severely harmed as well:health care services to seniors,the disabled,and programs for the blind will all be hurt if state's budget, it would also force the state to return Measure hundreds of millions,perhaps even billions of dollars to the t passes. These are the programs that are most federal government. This is money that rightfully belongs to important to all Oregonians,because they provide care for those who are unable to care for themselves. Oregonians,money that we pay in federal taxes that would not be returned to us and instead go to other states. Measure 8 is a bad idea,because it goes too far: If adopted, Measure 8 would cut$5.7 Billion dollars the next state budget.In Measure 8 would devastate our public schools. At a time when addition health care cuts, large cuts Oregon's dropout rate is one of the highest in the nation and our schools are overcrowded and in disrepair,we don't need another system will be likely, and public safety programs like police, fire Oregon's education and prison would face potential cuts. In fact, it's likely that if constitutional measure that would further harm our children and Measure 8 passes, nearly every state program will be subject to deny them the quality education that they deserve.Measure 8 will deep cuts in funding. cause massive teacher layoffs,increased class size and a reduc- tion in Oregon's standard of education. Measure 8 is a bad idea, because it changes the Oregon Aside from the devastation to education, Measure 8 would Constitution: Measure 8 proposes a drastic and arbitrary cut to damage the state's credit rating.Estimates show that a single Oregon's essential programs.Worse,it changes our Constitution, leaving our elected officials powerless to fix the problems it will drop in the state's credit rating would cost Oregonians more create. than $400 million in increased interest costs.That is money that we could be spending on education or healthcare. MEASURE 8 IS A BAD IDEA FOR OREGON! This irresponsible measure endangers the financial stability of our The Oregon Association of Hospitals and Health Systems state, threatens our healthy economy and restricts our ability to Urges you to Vote NO!on Measure 8 fund education and other essential state services. (This information furnished by Ken Rutledge, Oregon Association of Measure 8 is another example of special interests groups trying Hospitals and Health Systems.) to impose their dangerous, narrow-minded views on the rest of Oregon.Please keep this measure out of our constitution and join me in voting NO on Measure 8. Jim Hill Oregon State Treasurer (This information furnished by Jim Hill,Oregon State Treasurer.) (This space purchased for$500 In accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 345 Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 9 Proposed by initiative petition to be voted on at the General EXPLANATORY STATEMENT Election,November 7,2000. Ballot Measure 9 amends state statutes relating to public BALLOTTITLE school instruction regarding homosexuality and bisexuality. The measure prohibits public schools from providing instruc- tion on behaviors relating to homosexuality and bisexuality in a manner that encourages, promotes or sanctions such behaviors. For purposes of this measure, "public schools" include public elementary schools, public secondary schools, community col- leges,state colleges and state universities,and all state and local � vv�a Y 4 d b t akbb 3 A S institutions that provide education for patients or inmates. The measure also provides sanctions for noncompliance by Y k any public elementary school, public secondary school or com- munity college. For public elementary and secondary schools, noncompliance, including guidelines for determining noncompli- ance, will be determined by the Superintendent of Public Instruction. For community colleges, noncompliance, including 9 noncompliance,guidelines for determinin ,will be determined b k � r� P Y � k �, the Commissioner of Community College Services. Sanctions may include the withholding of all or part of state funding.The S santtions are based on rules to be adopted by the State Board of Education. Committee Members: Appointed by: Phillip Z.Ramsdell Chief Petitioners Barry Williams Chief Petitioners ... ..., k.,..,f: a ' Roger Gray Secretary of State Maura Roche Secretary of State Jack Roberts Members of the Committee (This committee was appointed to provide an impartial explanation of the TEXT OF MEASURE ballot measure pursuant to ORS 251.215.) BE IT ENACTED BY THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF ORE- GON: Section 1.ORS 336.067 is amended to read(new section): (e) Sexual Orientation as it relates to homosexuality and bisexuality, is a divisive subject matter not necessary to the instruction of students in public schools. Notwithstanding any other law or rule, the instruction of behaviors relating to homo- sexuality and bisexuality shall not be presented in a public school in a manner which encourages, promotes or sanctions such behaviors. Section 2.ORS 659.155 is amended to read(new section): (1)Any public elementary or secondary school determined by the,Superintendent of Public Instruction or any community college determined by the Commissioner for Community College Services to be in noncompliance with provisions of ORS 336.067 . (e)or ORS 659.150 and this section shall be subject to appropri- ate sanctions,which may include withholding of all or part of state funding,as established by rule of the State Board of Education. • 346 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 9 Arguments ARGUMENT IN FAVOR ARGUMENT IN FAVOR AN EXPLANATION:BALLOT MEASURE 9 MEASURE 9 ALSO • Amends state statutes to make Lon Mabon's personal moral • Tells anti-gay lies to teach"morality." beliefs into public policy. • Misrepresents the Christian values of nonjudgment,tolerance, • Prohibits public schools from providing any instruction contrary and understanding as the"promotion"of homosexuality. to Lon's opinions about homosexuality. • Violates the Ninth Commandment; insists that relentlessly • Establishes precedent for anyone else to make the schools bearing false witness against gays"isn't hatred." teach their beliefs to your children. • Sets a standard of hypocrisy and self-righteous intolerance. • Establishes that morality is determined by popular vote. Dishonestly pretends to speak for all Christians,when actually • Establishes precedent for additional censorship amendments the largest coalition of churches in the state has consistently attacking freedom of speech,censoring library books, and polar- opposed OCA hate initiatives. izing the public schools as a divisive electoral battleground over • Slanders Jesus by misleading people into thinking that all conflicting theologies. Christians are as obnoxious as the OCA. • Dresses in a new disguise the OCA's same old attempt to • Violates religious freedom by legislating Lon's moral beliefs as legislate Lon's personal moral opinion that's been twice defeated the only true beliefs. by Oregon voters. • Abuses the Bible as an excuse for common nonsense and • Increases the teenage suicide rate by instilling children with "time-tested"bigotry by teaching only 0.2 percent of Leviticus, guilt and self-loathing. ignoring the cultural context of the other 99.8 percent of Leviticus, • Increases teenage_AIDS infections by prohibiting accurate which says that eating oysters and shaving are just as wrong information on prevention, as homosexuality! (Coming soon: The Student Facial Hair • Facilitates hatred and violence against your children if they are Protection Act!) gay or lesbian or merely perceived as such, increasing assaults • Sets the stage for reintroduction of OCA"No Special Rights" and killings. Committee initiatives to limit the freedom of religion. Religious • Allows good teachers to be fired for expressing disagreement freedom has meant the right to practice your personal beliefs with Lon Mabon or if a paranoid person imagines them to be gay. and be protected from discrimination, but Lon Mabon wants to • Forces teachers to lie if students ask about scientific studies redefine religious freedom and create a new special"Right of that document homosexuality in more than 450 species of Conscience"for persons who disagree with your moral beliefs to animals(Bruce Bagemihl, Biological Exuberance). oppose your"immoral"behavior. • May prohibit schools from teaching about Michelangelo, • Lon's other initiatives would (1) change the freedom of reli- Leonardo da Vinci, Tchaikovsky, Leonard Bernstein, Gertrude giorr clause in the state Constitution for the first time since Stein, Hans Christian Andersen, and numerous other"danger- Oregon statehood in 1859, (2) declare that straight single ous and destructive"gay artists. parents and their children are not"family,"(3) legalize discrimi- • Perpetrates the lie that gays are a "threat," when actually nation against homosexuals and straight single parents, (4) children are over 100 times more likely to be abused by hetero- establish a precedent for anyone to fire you and evict you if sexual relatives than by homosexuals(Pediatrics,July 1994). they don't like your moral beliefs,and (5) provide a campaign • Scapegoats homosexuals to avoid discussing the real threat income for Lon--GOD'S ONLY MESSENGER--Mabon so he to children:inadequate and dysfunctional parenting. doesn't have to get a real job. • Does absolutely nothing to prevent physical, sexual, and For more information,visit us at www s ep cialrigh_teousness ora psychological abuse of children. on the Web. • Plants the seeds of intolerance for other minorities. • Builds political power for Lon Mabon,who's declared himself (This information furnished by M. Dennis Moore, Special Righteousness to be GOD'S ONLY MESSENGER (Sunday Oregonian, March Committee.) 10, 1996)! (This information furnished by M..Dennis Moore, Special Righteousness Committee.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 347 CONTINUED 4 Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 9 Arguments ARGUMENT IN FAVOR ARGUMENT IN FAVOR What does the Bible say about homosexuality? Biblical scholars If we're going to teach personal religious beliefs in the public note that the,Scriptures, taken in historical and cultural context, schools, let's tell students what Jesus had to say against simply do not address homosexuality as we understand it today. homosexuality: The sin of Sodom is mentioned numerous times in the Bible,and nowhere is it specified as homosexuality,nor did the early Jewish rabbinical commentaries on this text so interpret it;rather,the sins of Sodom included pride and inhospitality to strangers (Ezekiel 16:49).Ironically,the OCA commits the sin of Sodom by refus- ing to welcome the homosexual strangers in their midst. To"lie with mankind"is "abomination"--but so is eating oysters and sixty-some other impure acts."Abomination"means"ritually unclean" These laws were concerned with Jewish ritual purity,not morality.The ancient Jews associated homosexuality with prostitution in the pagan temples,and there just aren't many idol-worshipping Canaanite temple prostitutes in Oregon schools today. Furthermore, both Jesus and Saint Paul rejected the purity laws. Scholars recognize that Paul's comments in Corinthians were mistranslated. Likewise, in Romans 1:67, "against nature" is a mistranslation of "para physin:'for in 11:24, Paul applies these same words to God,and God's work is not"against nature:'Paul is actually condemning idolatry and pagan prostitution,not gay love, as 1:23 makes clear. In 1:28, Paul changes subjects and gives us the laundry list of human failings, including the OCA's "debate,deceit"and"without understanding"before totally expos- ing their hypocrisy in 2:1:"Therefore thou art inexcusable,O mah, whosoever thou art that judgest:for wherein thou judgest another, thou condemnest thyself; for thou that judgest doest the same things" Visit www soecialrighteousness ora, and also see Victor Paul Furnish, The Moral Teachings of Paul,Robin Scroggs, The New Testament and Homosexuality, and Father Daniel Helminiak, What the Bible Really Says About Homosexuality. And what did Jesus say about homosexuality? See the next argument! (This information furnished by M.Dennis Moore,Save the Bible from Bigots Committee.) (That's right:Absolutely nothing!Jesus never condemned gays and lesbians in Scripture. But what does Lon--GOD'S ONLY MESSENGER--Mabon have to say about homosexuality?Well, the next argument is full of it.) (This information furnished by M.Dennis Moore,Save the Bible from Bigots Committee.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 348 CONTINUED) Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet--Statewide Measures Measure No. 9 Arguments ARGUMENT IN FAVOR ARGUMENT IN FAVOR CALIFORNIA LEGISLATORS ASK HELP Some say supporters of Measure 9 are homophobes, who fear FROM OREGON VOTERS and despise homosexuals.We believe this is true of some sup- leading with the porters of this Measure, and wish to distance ourselves from We, the following California legislators, are p voters of Oregon to please protect the children l Oregon. h last those who are motivated by a personal hatred or fear of men four years homosexual activists,led by the Gay,Lesbian,Straight and women who practice homosexuality. Education Network(GLSEN),have greatly accelerated their activ- In Romans 1, homosexuality is put in a list of sins such as ity in California's public schools. fornication, covetousness, envy, backbiting, and disobedience to parents.We abhor the hypocrisy of those who choose to con- Pro-homosexual curricula, films, and handouts have become demn homosexuality while engaging unashamedly in these other commonplace--such as the infamous Los Angeles Unified hand- actions. out claiming Abraham Lincoln was a homosexual! We have school-sponsored homosexual proms and dances in our Having said that, the Bible is the standard which all men's larger school districts, where students are encouraged to meet actions must properly evaluated and governed. It tells us that 9 g civil government is to restrain certain sins by punishing evil-doers adult homosexuals. We have in-services — sometimes called (Rom.13:4). "diversity training"-- at which teachers are taught how"to intro- duce gayAesbian issues in all curriculum areas" Clearly,the Bible asserts that homosexuality is wrong;it's a sin, an evil,a violation of God's holy Word(Rom.1;Matthew 5:17-48; Many of our schools routinely host homosexual speakers who give speeches that often contain graphic descriptions of various Lev.civil go ernme.As such, it must be strongly discouraged by homosexual sex acts.We have pro-homosexual counseling pro- the civil government.On the face of it,then,Measure 9 should be grams such as Project 10,which routinely refer troubled students strongly supported. to outside homosexual organizations. Incredibly, Project 10 Homosexual activity is frequently a life-dominating sin, and, distributes a handbook that contains stories about the seduction according to Romans 1, results from a failure of thankfulness of students by homosexual teachers! and submission to God the Creator. In his self-love, the homo- sexual refuses to accept the God-given"other;'or complement, Even worse, last year two homosexual rights bills passed which were portrayed as simply measures to protect gays from discrim- as represented i a member of the opposite sex. Ultimately,the ination in the schools but have become vehicles to advance their homosexual is refusing using to love the ultimate"Other,"his Creator. agenda. Legal counsel for our Dept. of Education recently The good news is that,as with all sins,the sin of homosexuality, informed us that certain private schools must comply! in spite of the bondage it brings, can be overcome through the GLSEN has targeted your state.What has happened in California work of God in Jesus Christ.Part of the means God uses to effect WILL happen in Oregon unless Measure 9 passes.The public conviction for this sin is a civil government that not only does not promote it via its schogjs, but also actively seeks its suppression schools are not the place to promote or advocate this lifestyle.In from the public arena.We hope you vote Yes on Measure 9. California we are engaged in an intense battle to protect our children from propaganda that promotes a lifestyle that could Prepared by the Parents Education Association,a family-based, takes decades off their lives.However, you now have the oppor- Biblical alternative to the National Education Association. tunity to preempt such a conflict by voting YES on Measure 9. (This information furnished by Dennis R. Tuuri, Parents Education Assemblyman Steve Baldwin Association.) Assemblyman Rico 011er Assemblyman Bruce Thompson Assemblyman George House Assemblyman Dick Ackerman Assemblyman Tony Strickland Assemblyman Howard Kaloogian Senator Ray Haynes Senator Pete Knight Senator Bill Morrow (This information furnished by Assemblyman Steve Baldwin.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 349 CONTINUED official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 9 Arguments ARGUMENT IN FAVOR ARGUMENT IN FAVOR MEASURE 9-A COMMON SENSE MEASURE Regardless of your feelings about homosexuality, if you care Measure 9 is a reasonable measure that simply states homosex about parental rights, you should vote Yes on 9. Measure 9 Mea ea is not to be promoted in public schools. upholds the right of parents to guide the sexual education of their uality children. Frankly, we don't want any kind of sex outside of It's important,however,to answer arguments some have brought marriage to be promoted to school children.Kids are very impres- against the measure. sionable and easily molded by their teachers.When the schools present homosexuality in a way that states or implies that Argument:This measure is not needed because homosexuality homosexuals are born that way, they shape young minds to is not being promoted in the public schools. accept the"gay"side of the debate.What about the families who Response:A couple examples of homosexual promotion include believe the opposite?Why should their children be taught in a way an incident at Cleveland High School in Portland last year when that contradicts their teachings at home? What if they were the Administration, through the Sexual Diversity Committee, teaching one religion instead?It is the same issue.No school has brought in numerous books portraying homosexuality in a positive the right to violate the fundamental beliefs of parents. way.Attempts to bring in a countering view were brushed off. We believe homosexuality is a choice, but we don't hate the Another example occurred in Cottage Grove when the Head Start homosexuals or people who believe differently than we do.We get program promoted prohomosexual books called `Heather Has upset,however,when our kids are pushed to accept the pro-"gay" Two Mommies" and "Daddy's Roommate." The effort was side.They are told that to honor"diversity"they must accept the promptly curtailed when parents complained. Space does not "gay"view that homosexuality is inborn like race.Excuse us, but permit to explain other examples but most people recognize the no one has ever proved that homosexuality is inborn., even increasing influence to normalize this behavior that is harmful and though many people believe that. Even the "gay" movement immoral. admits that no biological cause has been found.So how can the schools get away with acting as if this had been proved? If you Argument: The state should not dictate curriculum or restrict stop and think about it, what if they are wrong? What if homo- academic freedom. sexuality can be learned and is therefore a choice, as many Response: One wonders if those who oppose this measure on therapists and fprmer homosexuals say? If so, we are setting these grounds also oppose state-mandated restrictions on these kids up to be drawn into a lifestyle that could kill them. teaching one's religious viewpoint over another or teaching that Maybe you disagree, but you don't think our kids should get the discrimination is OK?Voters certainly have a right to determine benefit of the doubt, rather than the"gay"activists? Please vote curriculum of the schools they support through their hard-earned Yes on 9 for basic parental rights. tax dollars. (This information furnished by Patricia✓.Beck,Parents and grandparents Argument:This measure fosters hate,divisiveness and bigotry. for basic parental rights.) Response: These tired cliches are convenient to use to stir up fear when well-reasoned arguments are lacking. Just because one proposes a measure to prevent promotion of a risk-filled and controversial sexual behavior doesn't make them divisive or bigoted. The bottom line is that this measure doesn't prevent discussion of homosexuality but only the promotion of it. Besides, schools should be teaching about more important matters such as read- ing, writing, math, science and history. Leave the sex discussion to parents and their children. VOTE YES ON 9 (This information furnished by Nicholas J.Yonker, Concerned Citizens for Sound Education.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 350 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election V6ters'Pamphiet-Statewide Measures Measure No. 9 Arguments ARGUMENT IN FAVOR ARGUMENT IN FAVOR TEACHING"DIVERSITY"PROMOTES HOMOSEXUALITY Teachers&Administrators for Measure 9 In 1992 high school students, in a moc election, passed the old Measure 9 discriminates against no one.It does not oppose gay Measure 9 to stop government promotion of homosexuality.When or lesbian teachers, or students. Opponents make nonsensical a reporter from one of the Portland TV stations ask a local school statements about negative repercussions for homosexuals.Read district representative how they were going to correct this situa- what the measure actually says. It's message is straightforward. tion,she replied that they needed to teach them more diversity. We must not engage in social engineering with children to What is it about the teaching of"diversity"that would change the endorse and promote homosexual/bisexual practices. minds of students regarding the right and wrong of homosexual- Measure 9 protects children from adult attempts to indoctrinate ity?The teaching of"diversity"elevates homosexuality from being them into believing that homosexuality is natural, inherited and an immoral sexual expression to that of being a newly created good, and that children should act out any homosexual urges. minority.Just that easy.Cloak it in the colorful wrapping paper of Children are being told to question their obvious sexual identity "tolerance"and put on the attractive ribbon and bow of"multicul- and to label themselves as homosexual. turalism"and who will know? If anyone does question the actual But homosexuality is not genetically predetermined and contents of this package called"diversity,"just be so intolerant of homosexuals can and do change! him or her that no one will dare continue to question. But in the real world "is" still means "is:'And what's inside the Of the many"gay gene"refutations read Science, April 23, Trojan Horse is more important than the horse.Playing semantics and the parsing of words has trickled down from the Clinton White Also Click on www.na.narth.com House into most of the editorial boards of Oregon's newspapers In their effort to change the minds of children,the Portland Public and into the arguments of Oregon's educational elite.However,to School District's Sexual Diversity Committee has distributed hun- thinking people,promotion by any other name is still promotion. dreds of books to all grade levels affirming homosexuality under "Diversity"teaches that sexual orientation (homosexuality and bi- the guise of"safe schools:' sexuality)is not a sexual sin but a minority on an equal level with Alarmed teachers asked that the list be disseminated to parents one's race,national origin or religion.Since that is what"diversity" but the district refused. Ask the Portland Public Schools for its teaches,then what are the students suppose to learn?When the complete list of books.The district advocates homosexual prac- students master their"diversity"lessons and embrace homosexu- tices, guidance counselors encourage them, but the assistant ality, it will be because the public schools will have "promoted, superintendent refuses to inform students of the dangers of anal encouraged and sanctioned" homosexuality to them. See the intercourse which range from"gay bowel syndrome"to cancer. proof:www.yeson9.com Teachers seeking to balance the district's views were accused of Do you want to stop the promotion of homosexuality to our kids being"hostile and offensive:'Guidance counselors threatened not and students in Oregon's classrooms?If you answered YES,then to place certain students with those teachers because their vote YES on Measure 9. classes were considered "unsafe:'The fact is that speaking out Lon T Mabon has become"unsafe"for teachers. Chairman Become informed about what is happening in schools. Oregon Citizens Alliance Email:measure9info@yahoo.com (This information furnished by Lon T.Mabon,Oregon Citizens Alliance.) Children are highly impressionable. Let's not abandon them.We must protect children from indoctrination encouraging aberrant sexual behaviors. Vote"Yes"for Our Children! Educators Leadership Committee: Larry Ayers, Ed.D. Stanley Bowman, MS John Ditmore, BS Bernadette Kelly, Ph.D. Jose Solano, MS Ed. Terry Williams, MS (This information furnished by Jose Solano, Committee of Concerned Educators.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 351 CONTINUED 11� Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet=Statewide Measures Measure No. 9 Arguments ARGUMENT IN FAVOR ARGUMENT IN FAVOR The Yes on 9 Pastor's Committee represents pastors and Oregonians can send a powerful message to the political and Christian leaders all across Oregon who strongly believe Measure educational establishments on November 7: that schools are a 9 should be passed by the voters of Oregon.It is imperative that place for learning about reading, writing and history — not children in public schools be protected from influences that would homosexual activism. The Student Protection Act will protect be destructive to their morality,their health,and their future. innocent students by stopping pro-"gay"educators from using the To present homosexuality in any of its forms as normal, healthy, classroom to legitimize homosexual behavior. or acceptable, is to teach children that universal moral laws All across the nation, teachers and administrators are turning proven and tested by all cultures in all periods of history are education into an exercise in pro-homosexual propaganda..The invalid, and that the standards set forth in the Word of God may following are just two examples of the brand of "gay" school be ignored and violated with impunity.It is to repudiate the moral activism that is already finding its way into Oregon's schools: standards upheld in our society and schools for the last two hun- In Boston, young teenagers were recently given how-to dred years. lessons on lesbian sex and other homosexual acts at a confer- The fruits of such violations are destroying our society.Children ence sponsored by the Gay, Lesbian and Straight Education are without moral compass,and increasing violence,suicide,and Network, a homosexual group. The "Queer Sex" workshop, sexually transmitted disease are the result.The schools must not advertised for"youth only ages 14-21;'was endorsed by the be allowed to contribute to the problem by encouraging behaviors Massachusetts Department of Education and promoted in city that add to it. schools. Schools should focus on their mandate:To teach reading,writing On May 17,a teacher in the Boston suburb of Newton told his and arithmetic.They have plenty to do without taking time out to first-grade pupils that"if he had a partner, it would be a man" promote and encourage a behavior that is morally wrong and Angry parents asked why they were not notified about the sen- sitive lesson until fir it happened. Schools should not be a recruitment ground for the homosexual Homosexual activists justify their one-sided classroom discus- community,nor should schools be an advocate for the normaliza- sions about homosexuality in the name of compassion,tolerance con of such behavior.The passage of Measure r will help put a and"safe schools! there is no compassion—or"safety"—in stop to it. glamorizing homosexuality to students while ignoring the well-documented health risks associated with this behavior. In a Pastor Max Doner,Chairman,Yes on 9 Pastor's Committee July 12, 2000 study in the Journal of the American Medical Pastor Kelly Boggs,Valley Baptist church Association, based on a survey of 3,492 homosexual and bisex- Pastor Darrell Arneson,Brooks Assembly of God ual men ages 15-22,almost 10 percent of the 22-year-olds tested Pastor Gerald Schmidt positive for the AIDS virus. Another study in the International Pastor Larry Dill Journal of Epidemiology (1997, vol. 26, no. 3) found that Pastor Richard T Adams,Greater Portland Baptist Church homosexuality takes 8 to 20 years off a man's life.Lesbians also Pastor Paul Blikstad,Solid Rock Community Church face added risks.You can ensure that Oregon's schools will not be Pastor Ken McCormick used to advance dangerous and immoral behavior.Vote Yes on 9. (This information furnished by Max Doner,Yes on 9 Pastor's Committee.) Peter LaBarbera Senior Analyst Family Research Council Washington, D.C. (This information furnished by Peter LaBarbera,Family Research Council.) (This space purchased for$5001n accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 352 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 9 Arguments ARGUMENT IN FAVOR ARGUMENT IN FAVOR Measure 9 is right for Oregon's schools and right for TEEN SUICIDE Oregon's families. Defenders of "gay" activism in the schools say that promoting Measure 9 will keep Oregon's schools on the right track.With homosexuality to schoolchildren is necessary to prevent suicides. the quality of our children's education more important than ever, They say that children who struggle with homosexuality must be public schools need to stay focused on building a strong acade- affirmed as"gays"or lesbians or they may kill themselves.This is mic background. If schools promote divisive social issues and illogic with potentially fatal consequences. indoctrinate children with the homosexual activists' social and First, for schools to base suicide prevention policy on the children are really in school l t o learn. political agenda, they do at the expense of the things our unproved hypothesis that a child can be"naturally"homosexual is t an outrageous breach of their duty to children and parents.What The homosexual agenda is built around mainstreaming homo- Oregon schools have embraced is not science but a"gay"recruit- sexuality—defining homosexual behavior as something morally ing strategy. Imagine the pressure "gay questioning" kids (and the same as traditional family life.It's an agenda being promoted their parents)must face when they are told that youths risk death in films, in television programs, and even in the way the news is if they reject their"gay"identity.How many emotionally vulnerable covered.And it's a growing campaign that is waging its battle all kids are swept into the"gay"net just because they entertain the across this nation. thought of trying homosexuality. With increasing pro-"gay" But the fact remains:homosexuality is a moral issue, and the messages in TV, movies and the classroom, how can kids today decision to embrace a lifestyle that is at odds with our traditional NOT think about trying homosexuality,even fleetingly? family values has deep implications.If public schools get involved Second, to suggest that suicide prevention requires affirming a in promoting, encouraging, or sanctioning homosexual behavior, patient's behavior or behavioral tendencies is simply foolish. they are usurping the role of parents and families. Shouldn't Criminal behavior, for example, often leads to suicidal thoughts, parents be the ones to teach their children about moral issues like but no one suggests that we must affirm criminal tendencies to this? stop suicide. When children are in school, they should be safe from the Third, the common denominator in every suicide is a feeling of social and political agenda of homosexual activists. Schools hopelessness.The last thing a suicidal young person needs to should not be social laboratories, and they should not overstep hear is that there is no hope of recovery from his or her supposed their bounds by promoting behavior that may run contrary to the "homosexual orientation" How many teen suicides result from values that parents are trying to teach their own children. losing one's hope of ever having a normal family life?Yet,schools Oregon has the opportunity to take a stand for families and the defiantly cling to"gay"dogma on this point, even in the face of proper focus of our public schools. I urge you to vote YES on substantial evidence that homosexuals can change. Measure 9. By adopting a blatantly political and biased suicide prevention Paul M.Weyrich, President policy,Oregon schools have placed pro-"gay"ideology above chil- The Free Congress Foundation drens' lives and exposed themselves to enormous legal risk of wrongful death lawsuits. Let us hope that Measure 9 goes into (This information furnished by Paul M. Weyrich, Free Congress effect before a child needlessly dies.Vote Yes on 9. Foundation.) Scott Douglas Lively.Esq. The Pro-Family Law Center (This information furnished by Scott Douglas Lively, Esq., The Pro-Family Law Center of Abiding Truth Ministries.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 353 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 9 Arguments ARGUMENT IN FAVOR ARGUMENT IN FAVOR Oregon voters have a tremendous opportunity to reinforce the The Official Legislative Intent For The Student Protection Act special role of families and parents in their children's upbring- The intent of The Student Protection Act is to protect students and ing. Measure 9, if passed, will prohibit public schools from promoting. encouraging, or sanctioning homosexual and children in all public schools in Oregon from any presentation of bisexual behaviors. It will prevent our public schools from pro- homosexuality and bisexuality that would promote,encourage or moting values contrary to the moral and religious views of many sanction those behaviors. parents. Our public schools should focus on educating our For the purpose of this statute,"sexual orientation"is defined as children in the basics and not on promoting an anti-family lifestyle. any conduct, action or state of being derived from yielding to As a result, Christian Coalition of Oregon strongly supports urges to be sexual or romantic with a member of the same the ap ssage of this measure. gender.For the purpose of interpreting and enforcing this statute, The premise that homosexuality is normal and that homosexual this is the definition of"behaviors relating to homosexuality and unions are the equivalent of marriage is degrading to marriage bisexuality." and family.The homosexual movement's effort to teach children The premise of the statute is that the sexual behavior known as that this perversion is to be accepted and celebrated must be "sexual orientation as it relates to homosexuality and bisexuality stopped. is...not necessary to public instruction." Homosexual activists like to say that no such teaching is occur- The prohibition enforcing the premise of the Student Protection ring, but if that were really true why would they spend millions Act is that such behaviors shall not be presented in a public opposing Measure 9? It is obvious that homosexual"education" school in a manner which encourages,.promotes or sanctions actually is a mainstay of their movement. They want to recruit these behaviors. children–if not directly into homosexuality,then into their corps of supporters. Measure 9 will put a stop to the hijacking of our The term public school means any school within the State of educational system by the homosexual activists. Oregon that receives funding from the public.For the purposes of this statute the term "Notwithstanding any other law or rule" For the sake of the family,for the sake of your children,vote YES means this statute takes controlling authority over all other relat- on Measure 9. ing rules or laws regarding, but not limited to, the terms"public Christian Coalition of Oregon Lou Beres schools"or"sexual orientation.' P.O.Box 30029 Executive Director For the purposes of this law,the definitions for the words"encour- Portland,OR 97294 ages, promotes or sanctions"are among those found in Black's (503)669=0104 Sandra Sumner Law Dictionary and which are as follows: Administrative Director 1) Encourages.. ...to instigate; to incite to action; to give (This information furnished by Lou Beres,Christian Coalition of Oregon.) courage to;to inspirit;to embolden;to raise confidence;to make confident;to help;to forward;to advise.See aid and abet. 2) Promote.To contribute to growth, enlargement,or prosper- ity of;to forward;to further,to encourage;to advance. 3) Sanction, V.To assent, concur, confirm, ...or ratify. U.S. v Tillinghast. D.C.R.I.,55 F.2nd 279,283.Approval or ratification. Lon T.Mabon,Chief Petitioner Phillip Z.Ramsdell,Chief Petitioner (This information furnished by Lon T. Mabon, OCA Student Protection PAC.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument: accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 354 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet-Statewide Measures Measure No. 9 Arguments ARGUMENT IN FAVOR ARGUMENT IN FAVOR Oregon public school students have experienced over a decade WE MAY BE YOUNG—BUT WE'RE NOT UNINFORMED of pro-homosexual speakers, skits, books, and films. Public We may be young but we know that teaching homosexuality in our school educators admit referring sexually troubled youth to out- .schools is a bad idea. side homosexual organizations that affirm homosexual behavior, and are including them in student handbooks as resources.Some An example of what is being forced on us in our schools is the students have been told they need to experiment to discover their "Five Oaks" incident. A group of boys from Five Oaks true sexual orientation.Some Portland schools considered purg- Intermediate School in Beaverton were shown a film called"Stale ing the term marriage as too biased against homosexuals.In the Roles and Tight Buns." Boys who were in attendance at the Oregonian(11/19/99),six high school teachers accused the pub- seminar said that after the film the teacher told them to try"gay" lic schools of condoning,affirming,and encouraging homosexual sex"at least twice"and then advised them on condom use.When behavior. The film, "It's Elementary," promotes acceptance of confronted, the school hired an investigator who was later homosexual behavior, ridicules views of conservative and revealed to be the chairman of the"No on 13 Committee"which Christian parents,and is promoted for use in elementary schools, was the pro-homosexual opposition to Ballot Measure 13. along with books like "Heather Has Two Mommies"and Daddy's (Oregonian,07/24/94, Statesman Journal,09/10/94) Roommate." They don't talk about it much with their parents,but teenagers are Public schools teach that homosexual orientation is genetically very familiar with"gay"activism in schools.There is tremendous pre-determined yet a Columbia University review of 135 studies pressure to accept homosexuality as being like race,even though found no evidence of a biological determinant for homosexual we all know it is behavior.But those of us who think it is wrong are behavior.The only adopted-away twin study (ruling out environ- looked down upon, like racists. mental influences) found a concordance rate of zero for homosexual behavior. Dean Hammer, homosexual research We don't need teachers in schools forcing their pro-homosexual scientist whom media claimed located the "Gay Gene" later values down our throats.We are intelligent enough to decide for acknowledged in Time magazine (4/27/98) that all genes deter- ourselves,within our families,whether homosexuality is wrong or mine is temperamental traits which can be controlled by exercis- right.We don't need homosexuality promoted to us as an"alter- ing character.Hammer has also concluded that being a Lesbian native lifestyle"in our schools.We have many sources we can use is culturally transmitted,not inherited. to obtain information about homosexuality if we want it. Homosexual behavior is still considered immoral by a substantial We need a school system that teaches us to read and write, not majority as demonstrated by national polling and recent election a school system that promotes values contrary to those values we results in Hawaii,Alaska and California.It is also potentially lethal! have already learned at home. 30%of 20 year old homosexuals will be HIV positive or dead of Please affirm our right to decide for ourselves what is right and AIDS by the time they are age 30! A U.S. Centers for Disease wrong by voting YES on measure 9. Control and Prevention study indicated 30%of HIV-free individu- als, using condoms with HIV-positive individuals, will get OCA Underground is a group of teens who are committed to HIV/AIDS! impacting our culture through activism. Please visit our website at:www.ocaunderground.org for more information about Measure It is an act of love, not hate, to protect children from "politically g. correct but factually incorrect"liberal dogma capable of destroying their lives physically,morally and spiritually! Jeremy Bowen, 19,president of OCA Underground. Barry D.Williams (This information furnished by Jeremy Bowen,OCA Underground.) Lane Co.OCA Orin K.Camenish Klamath Co.OCA (This information furnished by Barry D.Williams,Lane County OCA.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 In accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 355 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 9 Arguments ARGUMENT IN FAVOR ARGUMENT IN FAVOR HOMOSEXUALITY FROM THE PERSPECTIVE OF RIGHT AND NO SPECIAL RIGHTS FOR LEFTS! WRONG Stop the promotion of left-handedness in the public schools! 1)It is self-evident that the act of sodomy is biologically unnatural. My friends, common sense and traditional time-tested dexterity Simple anatomy teaches us that the body parts used in this act prove that left-handedness is simply wrong.Writing with your are not made for the function described the word"sodomy."In right hand is natural law--WRITE MEANS RIGHT! Righteous fact, many male homosexuals develop severe rectal problems. What happens sometimes is that the Sphincter muscle simply people know the difference between right and left! becomes useless with the end result being,at worst,a colostomy According to the Encylopaedia Britannica(1944), "The percent- or at best, the constant use of protective garments required for age of left-handedness . . . is much higher among inmates of life.Anyone with an honest mind must acknowledge that this is an institutions for the feebleminded and the psychopathic." Yet unnatural act.We should not be condoning it to our students. these"biological errors"are campaigning for special recognition 2)The facts support the truth that those who engage in homo- as a legitimate minority to force you to accept their immoral sexuality contract sexually-transmitted diseases (some fatally) at behavior. Worse yet, the schools are encouraging deviant- disproportionately higher levels than the norm.In America,homo- handed diversity and facilitating the use of sinful southpaw sexuality remains the number one transmitter of AIDS that is scissors! 100%deadly.Do we really want our kids and grandkids to be told The Bible says, "A wise man's heart is at his right hand; but a that this lifestyle is healthy and normal? fool's heart at his left"(Ecclesiastes 10:2),and"Then shall he say 3) The God of the Bible clearly states that He created human also unto them on the left hand, Depart from me,ye cursed, into beings, male and female, and He intended them to be for each the EVERLASTING FIRE"(Matthew 25:41). other--Genesis 2:21-25.Under the Old Covenant, homosexual- "Theories relative to handedness vary in their treatment of it as an ity was called an abomination to God and He prescribed the acquired or a native trait," says the Britannica. Many experts severest punishment -- Leviticus 18:22. The New Testament believe that left-handedness is learned and can be corrected. teaches that homosexuality is"against nature;'that it constitutes With repentance and reparative therapies, sinners caught in the "vile passions,""uncleanness,"and that it is"shameful"--Romans lecherous leftist lifestyle can be converted and cured.Yes, right 1:24-32. 1 Corinthians 6:9-10 says that those engaging in such righteousness and healthy handedness is possible! Many ex- behavior cannot inherit the Kingdom of God.There is no doubt southpaws have become normal, happy right-writers. Some that homosexuality is against the known will of God. have even held hands,gotten married,and had children! Homosexuality is wrong and immoral.But it also says,"such were some of you,"Verse 11, meaning individuals were coming out of But the militant leftist lobby says they were"born that way."They that lifestyle. Homosexuality is not innate;you don't have to feel cite evidence that it's genetic, morally neutral, and normal!,Well, hopeless.God says homosexuality is wrong,but in Christ,He can that doesn't mean we have to teach children that it's OK to also free you from sexual addiction. respect people who are different!Any nonjudgmental mention of left-handedness is"promotion"of wrong behavior,encouraging Marsha A.Weber vulnerable young children to experiment with alternative Bonnie J.Mabon handedness! Lon T.Mabon Restoration Ministries of Oregon Since right-thinking people believe that wrong-handedness is immoral,we will force the schools to teach only OUR beliefs to (This information furnished by Lon T. Mabon, Restoration Ministries of YOUR children! Oregon.) AGREE WITH US OR BURN IN HELL! (This information furnished by M. Dennis Moore, Oregon Right-Handed Righteousness Alliance.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant.the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 356 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 9 Arguments ARGUMENT IN FAVOR ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION LON IS TOO LIBERAL! The Oregon Parent Teacher Association According to Leviticus in the Bible, oysters are UNCLEAN and Opposes Measure 9 an ABOMINATION--just like homosexuality! PROHIBITS PUBLIC SCHOOL INSTRUCTION Oyster-eating is a behavior,as is all dietary activity.Some foods ENCOURAGING, PROMOTING,SANCTIONING are good,some are wrong.The government should not be forc- HOMOSEXUAL, BISEXUAL BEHAVIORS ing acceptance of oyster-eating on its citizens by sanctioning Don't Let The Ballot Title Fool You! deviant dietary behaviors. There is NO curriculum in Oregon public schools that "encour- What a person eats, or with whom, is not the kind of activity for ages or promotes" homosexuality or bisexuality. By attacking a which we should create a minority classification, granting "problem"that doesn't exist this measure endangers the health of oyster-eaters"special protection"from discrimination similar to our children and the quality of our schools. diabetics. The Oregon PTA opposes all legislative attempts to suppress It is not discrimination to make a moral judgment about filthy information about family diversity and sexual orientation. We foods by firing and evicting oyster-eaters! oppose statewide attempts that dictate to teachers how they may My friends,did you know that oysters undergo SEX CHANGES? approach teaching.subjects.This is about local control: these are decisions that need to be made by local school boards, Furthermore,the average oyster-eater ingests five teaspoons of oyster excrement per year!IT'S DISGUSTING! accountable to the parents and students they serve. Public money must not be used to teach children that a danger- If Measure 9 passed it would cut: ous and divisive diet is merely an"alternative"to healthy foods 1)Access to all health education related to sexuality including and traditional nutritional values. abstinence, birth control, sexually transmitted diseases, and The militant oyster agenda to recruit your children into the sinful HIV/AIDS. It would deny all students information they need to shellfish lifestyle under the disguise of dietary diversity and bal- make responsible, healthy choices. Given that our youth are anced menus is anti-Beef bigotry. It's a culinary culture war! among the fastest growing population of those at risk for SURRENDER,OYSTER-EATERS! HIV/AIDS-we cannot afford to ignore this danger to our kids. 2)Counseling or support programs for all adolescent students, But banning public school "promotion"of homosexuality, wrong- making it even more difficult for teenagers to come to terms handedness, and oyster-eating is not enough! Many other peo- with their sexuality or for counselors to give teenagers informa- ple have sincere and deeply held moral prohibitions as well. tion about support groups. The Amish don't drive cars.Christian Scientists don't believe in 3)State funding could be cut because of what one person might medicine. Jehovah's Witnesses don't salute the flag. Mormons say. We can't let the agenda of one extremist organization don't drink Coca-Cola. Muslims believe that dogs are unclean. endanger the health of our children and the quality of their Baptists believe that dancing is IMMORAL. schools Let's eliminate driver education! Fire school nurses! Forbid the The most basic objective of the PTA is to promote the welfare of flag salute! Condemn and cure the sick sinners caught in the ALL children. corrupt Coca-Cola lifestyle! Ban books portraying dogs in a ALL of our kids deserve the best we have to offer, positive or neutral manner! And stop promoting the perverted regardless of their family background,culture,religion, prom! color,or sexual orientation. PURIFY THE SCHOOLS! Measure 9 attempts to suppress vital information that protects the ELIMINATE EVERYTHING THAT OFFENDS ANYONE! health of our children, removes local control, and is discrimina- Visit www.s ep cialriahteousness.ora on the Web. tory,the Oregon PTA opposes Measure 9. (Box 1851, Portland,97207) Kathryn Firestone, President HEY,LON! Lisa Laursen Thirkill,Vice President for Legislation FILE BALLOT MEASURES UNTO OTHERS The Oregon PTA AS YOU WOULD HAVE THEM FILE MEASURES UNTO YOU! (This information furnished by Kathryn Firestone,President,Lisa Laursen Thirkill,Vice Pres.for Legislation;Oregon PTA.) (This information furnished by M. Dennis Moore, Special Righteousness Committee.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 357 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide,Measures Measure No. 9 Arguments ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION Measure 9 will hurt every child in Oregon. PLANNED PARENTHOOD in Southern Oregon We are PFLAG: Parents, Families and Friends of Lesbians and Opposes Measure 9 Gays. We are parents who have watched the Oregon Citizens DANGEROUS FOR OUR CHILDREN Alliance (OCA) and other well-funded extremist groups torment DANGEROUS FOR OUR SCHOOLS our children for the last 12 years,and we have had enough.This planned Parenthood has been a name you could trust measure will hurt, not only our gay children, but every child in for more than three decades in Oregon. Oregon. Help us protect the health and safety of ALL Oregon's And,we oppose Measure 9 children and vote no on 9. Because we are parents of both gay and non-gay children, At a time when our kids need MORE information,Ballot Measure PFLAG is concerned about the health and safety of ALL children. 9 demands we RESTRICT information. Measure 9 threatens the health and safety of our children We need to support and encourage schools to provide accu- because it would: rate information to teens. Measure 9 would prevent our • eliminate effective, life saving education about sexually schools from giving students the very information they need transmitted diseases to keep them safe and healthy. That's why Measure 9 is allow harassment and discrimination already present in dangerous. schools to worsen • give extremists the power of cutting off public funds to our FACT: Oregon's youth need straightforward information in order schools to make responsible decisions about the prevention of diseases like HIV/AIDS; Protection from teen suicide and AIDS demands comprehensive knowledge which our licensed teachers and school counselors FACT: Currently,Oregon is seeing a decline in the prevalence of can best provide.Measure 9 will limit such knowledge by remov- sexually transmitted infections among teens...a decline ing factual information from libraries, gagging teachers, and directly attributable to a record high awareness of such curtailing the services of counselors. This law silences the diseases among youth(8/9/00 Oregonian); Oregonians whom we have entrusted to protect all of our children. FACT: Oregon's parents, like parents everywhere, support.sex Children who are perceived to be gay suffer unremitting harass- education and HIV/AIDS prevention (82%) in the ment and discrimination in school. Measure 9 would encourage schools—we all want the best for our kids, we want to schools to ignore their responsibility to protect EVERY student help them make decisions that will support a healthy from such treatment.Measure 9 would continue to teach children future: to discriminate.Measure 9 would protect bullies. FACT: Local parents, teachers and schools already work Measure 9 threatens schools and community colleges with vague, together to address sex education and HIV/AIDS preven- undefined budgetary retribution.Who will define the language of tion,this measure is unnecessary and threatens the very this law?Who is going to decide who is breaking this law?The programs we need to keep our young people safe and OGA?And, how much is it going to cost our schools? Protect all healthy. of Oregon's children. Planned Parenthood Urges You to Vote No on Measure 9! VOTE NO ON 9! Measure 9 is dangerous for our kids and dangerous for our schools! PFLAG OREGON STATE COUNCIL with chapters in: Ashland, Bend, Coos Bay, Corvallis, The Dalles, Eugene, Forest Grove, Bill Sheppard Reverend Paul B.Robinson Pendleton, Portland,and Salem. Executive Director Board Member Planned Parenthood Planned Parenthood (This information furnished by Donna Zenobia Saffir,PFLAG Oregon State Health Services Medford,Oregon Council.) of Southwestern Oregon (This information furnished by Bill Sheppard, Executive Director, Planned Parenthood of Southwestern Oregon.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 358 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures . Measure No. 9 Arguments ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION PLANNED PARENTHOOD OF CENTRAL OREGON PLANNED PARENTHOOD OPPOSES MEASURE 9 OPPOSES MEASURE 9 BECAUSE IT'S... Dangerous to Oregon's Kids. Dangerous to our kids.Dangerous to our schools. Dangerous to Oregon's Schools. Planned Parenthood knows the importance of good family We're Planned Parenthood.For years,we have been working with communication.And,we have always encouraged it.At the same young people who need to make important decisions about their time,you count on us to provide honest information and counsel- future,and we have led the way in providing responsible informa- ing.For more than 30 years, you've depended on us to give you tion.We oppose Measure 9 because it's just plain dangerous to the facts. Planned Parenthood opposes Measure 9 because it's Oregon's kids. dangerous to our kids. Measure 9 is also dangerous to Oregon's schools. Planned Planned Parenthood also knows the importance of responsible Parenthood supports responsible sex education and HIV/AIDS sex education and HIV/AIDS prevention in Oregon's public prevention in Oregon's public schools.We have been fighting to schools.Teens need access to critically important information that ensure that kids get the information they need to keep them safe will ensure their healthy future. Planned Parenthood opposes and healthy. Measure 9 because it's dangerous to our schools. Measure 9 would jeopardize sex education and AIDS preven- HERE'S WHAT MEASURE 9 WOULD DO! tion classes in our public schools. Please don't let that Measure 9 would: happen! The Facts: • Reverse years of progress that we have made as a commu- nity, and as a state,in promoting policies to give our kids Oregon's students need honest information in order to make information they need to make responsible decisions about responsible decisions about the prevention of diseases like their future HIV/AIDS • Threaten the very programs which are critically needed to Responsible sex education has already had a positive keep kids on the right track...to help them make good impact on our kids.According to The Oregonian(8/9/2000) choices...to help them resist the destructive media images "HIV/AIDS became mainstream enough in the 1990s to they are bombarded with daily scare teenagers, while awareness of sexually transmitted Restrict information at the very time when students need diseases is at an all-time high" MORE information,not less Information, not ignorance, will help students learn how to That's why Planned Parenthood,Nurses,Doctors, avoid sexually transmitted diseases and HIV/AIDS Counselors and Health Professionals The Truth Is: ALL Oppose Measure 9! Measure 9 puts our kids at risk by denying them access to Measure 9 is dangerous for Oregon's kids! information about HIV/AIDS prevention and sex education. And Oregon's Schools! And,that's just being unrealistic! Don't be misled... Planned Parenthood Urges You to Vote No on Measure 9 PLEASE VOTE"NO"ON MEASURE 9! Aylett Wright Lois Backus Robin Klotz Community Education and Training Coordinator Executive Director Registered Nurse Planned Parenthood Planned Parenthood Planned Parenthood of Central Oregon of the Columbia/Willamette Beaverton Center Phyllis Pengelly (This information furnished by Robin Klotz,Planned Parenthood.) Registered Nurse Planned Parenthood Bend,Oregon (This information furnished by Aylett Wright, Planned Parenthood of Central OR.) (This space purchased for$500 In accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 359 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 9 Arguments ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION The League of Women Voters of Oregon Urges You To Oregon Pediatric Society Says: Vote No on 9 Protect All Oregon Children The League of Women Voters is a grassroots, nonpartisan Vote No on 9 organization which encourages informed and active participation Measure 9 is Bad for Children in government. Since 1920, the League of Women Voters has worked to educate voters and strengthen the democracy. - The mission of the Oregon Pediatric Society is to attain optimal The League Opposes Measure 9 because it violates a citizen's physical, mental and social health and well being for all infants, individual rights as well as the basic right to privacy.Respect and children,adolescents and young adults. fairness under the law would be denied. We oppose Measure 9. Our schools should help students learn how to ap rtici an tion • Measure 9 Puts Needed Information at Risk.Measure 9 will the democratic process. not undermine it. limit basic sex education, learning about and prevention of Oregonians have consistently opposed measures, which segre- diseases such as AIDS and HIV, and about other topics that gate certain individuals for the purpose of denying them their will keep Oregon children safe and healthy for their entire lives. rights as citizens. • Measure 9 Will Harm Oregon Children. Measure•9 would Measure 9 is yet another attempt to bring divisiveness forbid trusted teachers, counselors and school-based health into our society. care professionals from referring teens to outside resources when they feel confused about their sexual orientation.With a Join the League of Women Voters in Voting No On 9 large percentage of teen suicide attempts by gay and lesbian youth,we can't afford to put students at risk by denying them (This information furnished by Paula Krane,President,League of Women basic information needed to make responsible choices. Voters of Oregon.) • Measure 9 Puts Funding for Our Schools at Risk. Schools that violate this measure could suffer the loss of their state funding.We should be sending the message to our children that they are worth more money,not less. • Measure 9 Puts Our Common Values at Risk. Our schools should be places that promote respect and remain welcome and safe for all students. Measure 9 does the opposite by closing the doors to certain members of our community. Let's work together to create an Oregon where ALL of our children can thrive and be safe. Vote No on Measure 9 Oregon Pediatric Society A Chapter of the American Academy of Pediatrics (This information furnished by James K. Lace, M.D., F.A.A.P., Oregon Pediatric Society.) (This space purchased for$5001n accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. I accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 360 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 9 Arguments ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION The Oregon Education Association LIBRARIANS OPPOSE MEASURE 9 Urges You To Vote No on 9 Vote No on Measure 9 The special interests that want to limit access to information are Measure 9 teaches intolerance and disrespect.Oregon teach- at it again.The purpose of Measure 9, as it pertains to school ers and educators are united in their opposition to Measure 9.It libraries, is clear. It is to tell local communities what books they stabs at the heart of who we are as educators.In our classrooms can and cannot have in their schools. we strive to meet the needs of all our students.We do not single Stake s a Education it out or target differences among them.We teach tolerance and Vote N of 9 respect.Vote No on Measure 9. Measure 9 puts Oregon's students at risk. As educators, we All institutions that use public funds for education, even colleges can not place Oregon's students at risk by avoiding the realities of and universities,could be prohibited from purchasing books that the world in which they live.This measure threatens sex educa- could be thought to encourage,promote or sanction homosexual- tion programs and could eliminate critical information at a time ity.That's very vague.And if elementary,secondary or community when education is most needed.Students should not be denied colleges don't follow this measure,they could have their funding basic information needed to make responsible choices.Vote No cut. on Measure 9. Oregon Values are at Stake Measure 9 does nothing to solve education's problems. Vote No on 9 Measure 9 is a distraction from the real challenges facing our Many college and university libraries have subscriptions to news- schools, like overcrowded classrooms and stable funding. This papers.If one paper contained a letter to the editor expressing an measure does nothing to solve these problems. Vote No on individual's acceptance of homosexuality, would that paper be Measure 9. banned?Would the college or university have its funding cut for Measure 9 sets a dangerous precedent for public education. having that newspaper on the shelf? In Oregon we appreciate Special interest groups should not dictate what is taught and not fairness,and Measure 9 is not fair. taught in Oregon's public schools. The Oregon Education Local Control is at Stake Association is composed of thousands of teachers and other pub- Vote No on 9 lic school employees from across the state.As education experts, we ask that you allow us to do our job,guiding our students and Measure 9 and the censorship it brings is dangerous for our your children into the future, without interference from special schools.Outside groups with special interests would be making interest groups.Vote No on Measure 9. decisions for our schools, and not local people whose job it is to work with kids. James K.Sager, President Oregon Education Association Please join Oregon librarians in voting No on Measure 9. (This information furnished by ,lames K. Sager, President, Oregon Janet Webster, Newport Terry Rohe, Portland Education Assoc.) Richard Sapon-White,Corvallis Ed House,Albany Nancy Spaulding,Beaverton Connie Bennett,Silverton Nancy Kuhlman,Salem Lorrie Kovell, Phoenix Cindy Gibbon, Lake Oswego Ronnie Lee Budge,Medford Jim Scheppke, Salem Margaret Jakubcin,Williams Anne Van Sickle, McMinnville Charles Stark,Shady Cove Sylvia Lee, Medford Robert Wilson,Talent Meghan O'Flaherty, Medford Anne Billeter, Medford Sara Charlton,Tillamook Bonnie Allen,Corvallis Ruth Allen, Portland Diedre Conkling,Newport Carolynn Avery,Corvallis Kathleen Duffy,Bend Jill Heffner,Lincoln City Angela Reynolds, Portland Colleen Bell, Eugene Mary Norman, Lake Oswego Janeanne Rockwell-Kincanon, Monmouth (This information furnished by Terry Rohe, President, Oregon Library Association.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251,255.) (This space purchased for$500 In accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 361 CONTINUED Officia12000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No., 9 Arguments ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION Rural Oregon says vote No on 9. School Based Nurses Public schools are important to rural communities. As rural Vote no on 9! Oregonians we want our communities, not the OCA, to control As School Based Nurses we oppose Measure 9 it endangers education. the health of students. None of our schools"promote homosexuality"as Lon Mabon Measure 9 charges.And every student deserves to attend school safe from Dangerous to Oregon Schools. physical and psychological harassment. Measure 9 will put the government in charge of dictating what Ballot Measure 9 puts students in danger by tying the hands of health care professionals can and cannot discus with their educators as they work to make schools a safe and productive patients in schools.This is a violation of the relationship between learning environment for all students. patients and their care ploviders. The OCA measure would: Measure 9 Limit what teachers can say in health, literature and history Dangerous to the Health of all Kids. classes As nurses we care about the kids and that is why we are so Mske the OCA the authority, rather than people in our com- concern d about Measure 9 Measure 9 does nothing to rp otect munities,on the meaning of"promoting homosexuality" Put good teachers and counselors at risk simply for being children-- in fact:it puts them in harm's way. honest and caring Measure 9 will severely limit information on basic sex education The groups signed below believe fairness and respect are core and HIV prevention.That puts every Oregon student at risk. It is values Oregon schools should promote.The OCA would take that wrong to deny our kids the information they need to stay healthy. away. Measure 9 Vote No on 9. Dangerous to Kids in Need. Rural Organizing Project members: According to the U.S.Department of Health and Human Services, Baker County People for Human Dignity gay and lesbian teens are at far greater risk of suicide, school Chehalem Valley Coalition for Human Diversity drop-out,violence and drug use.Measure 9 would prevent school Clatsop County Human Relations Task Force nurses or councilors from even discussing one very important Coalition to End Bigotry factor in their mental health and behavior. Columbia County Citizens for Human Dignity Measure 9 would lace a"gaa rule"on school health care profes- Community Voices for Human Rights–Hood River sionals that would put their job at risk even if they were only Concerned Citizens of Lake County answering the healthcare questions of their patients. Coastal AIDS Network–Lincoln County Cottage Grove Community Action Network Measure 9 Discriminates in Health Care. Curry County Citizens for Human Rights Democracy and Sustainability League of Pendleton How can we possibly say the physical and mental health care Douglas County AIDS Council needs of some kids are higher priorities than others? Estacada Citizens for Fairness East Metro Human Rights Coalition Some kids experiment.Some kids are discovering they are differ- Hispanos Unidos of Lake County ent than the majority.Some kids are abused.And some kids come Hipfish Arts and Culture Monthly from non-traditional families. If Measure 9 passes some kids will Human Dignity Coalition be able to talk about these issues with a trained health care Human Rights Advocates of Coos County professional in there school and some kids will not. Illinois Valley Task Force for Social Justice Vote"NO"On 9 Josephine County Human Rights Alliance Klamath County Coalition for Human Dignity Nancy Malone NP,Gold Hill---Jean DeJarnatt NP,Salem--- Movimento de Unidos de Latinos En Accion Bunny Lewis NP,Ashland Neighborhood Women of Oregon Neighbors Talking to Neighbors (This information furnished by Martin Taylor,Nurses United.) North Coast Gay Pride Network PFLAG Eugene/Springfield. PFLAG Pendleton Peace House Progressive Options Sexual Minority Youth Task Force Siuslaw Peace Force Tillamook County Citizens for Human Dignity Together Works Washington County Coalition for Human Dignity (This information furnished by Kelley Weigel, Co-Director, Marcy Westerling,Co-Director;Rural Organizing Project.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 In accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 362 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 9 Arguments ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION Measure 9 is Dangerous for the Health of Oregon's Children Catholic Committee Measure 9 is Dangerous for the Health of Oregon's Schools People of Faith Against Bigotry As social workers,we seek to enhance the effective functioning Oppose Measure 9 and well being of individuals,families,and,communities. VOTE NO ON 9 We oppose Measure 9. As Catholics,we call for fairness for all Oregonians. Measure 9 Is a Threat to Every Child in Oregon Measure 9 Puts Our Ability to • Every student deserves to have factual information presented Live Our Shared Values at Risk to them about HIV and AIDS prevention,and Measure 9 places that information at risk because such education programs Our values call us to be fair and respectful of all people. We would be severely limited or eliminated. Catholics were once hated in Oregon.The Ku Klux Klan attacked us and damaged our churches. People said Catholics would • Every student deserves to have adeg ate support services corrupt children, harm schools and destroy families. In 1922, and counseling,and Measure 9 places those services at risk. Oregonians voted to take away our right to educate children. With a large percentage of teen suicide attempts by gay and lesbian youth,we can't afford to put students at risk by denying We cannot support a law that takes away the strides we them basic information needed to make responsible decisions. Oregonians have made that promote fairness and respect. And we can't stand to lose�n teen to suicide.Cutting services VOTE NO ON 9 to students who are troubled and seek counseling simply does not make sense. Our Bishops call us to accept and love gay and lesbian people.In its 1997 statement"Always Our Children:A Pastoral Message to Measure 9 Is a Threat to Every Public School in Oregon Parents of Homosexual Children and Suggestions for Pastoral • Schools need adequate and stable funding Measure 9 places Ministries", our bishops teach us that it is not sufficient only to that funding at risk because one wrong word by one person avoid unjust discrimination. Homosexual persons "must be could jeopardize the school's public funds. Now is the time to accepted with respect, compassion and sensitivity". (National work together to secure stable funding for our schools so our Conference of Catholic Bishops' Committee on Marriage and children have the excellent education they deserve. Family) • Parents,teachers and local officials need to have input into our VOTE NO ON 9 local schools. Measure 9 hands over more power to bureau- As Catholics we must reject this type of law because it may lead crats who are not in touch with each community's needs. to misunderstanding and intolerance toward gays and lesbians, Measure 9 does nothing but hurt our children and potential for discrimination and harmful,divisive battles. place them and our schools at risk. Please join the Catholic Committee of Join us! People of Faith Against Bigotry and Vote No on 9. VOTE NO ON 9 (This information furnished by Mark F. Oldham, Oregon Chapter of the Sister Kathleen Stupfel, SNJM National Association of Social Workers(NASW).) Sister Carole Strawn,SNJM Mary Anderson (This information furnished by Mary K Anderson,Sister Kathleen Stupfel, SNJM,-Catholic Committee,People of Faith Against Bigotry.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 363 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 9 Arguments ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION Argument Opposed: Legal Rights are Fundamental to American The ACLU of Oregon says Values VOTE NO ON 9—AGAIN!! We stand firmly against efforts of the Oregon Citizens Alliance to Twice Oregonians have rejected the OCA's anti-gay ballot mea- establish laws that would legalize discrimination against citizens sures for good reasons.This year the OCA may have narrowed its of Oregon who are homosexual. focus,but the intent remains the same:to force the government Civil rights for all people is a basic value of our culture and of our to promote the OCA's special interest view of sexuality. country. Many in our history have been inspired by this central Here are more reasons to vote NO on Measure 9: value to struggle for and win civil rights for themselves and others. • Measure 9 will require censorship of HIV/AIDS preventa- Protecting this value means upholding the rights of many diverse tive education to avoid any appearance of "sanctioning" groups.It also means defending against those who would impose homosexuality. on the public their own,narrower standard of who is deserving of civil rights. That's scary.Whether we like it or not, we live,in a world with Ballot measure 9 attempts to establish legal discrimination HIV/AIDS and other sexually transmitted diseases. Our young against one group of citizens,while at the same time insisting that people need to have medically accurate information about HIV it would not take away any constitutional rights from them. prevention and sex education so they can make responsible decisions. Don't be misled:Measure 9 does indeed threaten the civil rights • Measure 9 puts students at risk because educators must of Oregon citizens, remain neutral when they hear homophobic remarks or witness We believe it is the government's obligation to secure the well harassment of gay students. being of all citizens, not bow to the pressures of special interest That's wrong.Our schools should foster respect and tolerance of groups which seek to advance their private agendas at the all people. expense of others. It is extremely important that all of us be aware and resist the • Measure 9 is not fair because it will eliminate existing policies i that promote fair treatment of gay and lesbian students in our influence of special interests like the OCA which threaten to weaken our democracy. public universities,community colleges and schools. we we urge you a vote No on Measure 9. That's a step backwards. Promoting fair treatment of students does not mean a school is promoting homosexuality. Most COALITION TO END BIGOTRY(CEB) Oregonians believe in fairness for everyone. OREGON WOMENS'RIGHTS COALITION Measure 9 will have serious legal consequences for our AMERICAN ASSOCIATION of UNIVERSITY WOMEN of public schools and students-Local schools will have to deal OREGON with legal and administrative challenges whenever the OCA thinks a school is"sanctioning"homosexuality. OREGON WOMEN'S POLITICAL CAUCUS That's a legaltnightmare and a waste of tax dollars. Don't let LARRY R.OBERG the OCA control your local school. GARY M.KLEIN Your NO vote matters. Say No to the OCA one more time. ALICE M.BARTELT VOTE NO ON MEASURE 9!! TED OLKOSKI For more information write the Oregon ACLU at FLORENCE OLKOSKI PO Box 40585,Portland 97240 OREGON COMMON CAUSE or go to www.aclu-or.org (This information furnished by Florence Olkoski,Oregon Common Cause.) (This information furnished by David Fidanque, American Civil Liberties Union of Oregon.)' i (This space purchased for$5001n accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 364 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 9 Arguments ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION Commissioner Sorenson Urges a"No"Vote AGAIN on Measure PHYSICIANS FOR SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY SAY VOTE NO #9 ON MEASURE 9 Dear Oregon Voter, Physicians for Social Responsibility(PSR) is a non-profit educa- My name is Peter Sorenson and I live in Eugene.I'm an elected tional organization committed to the elimination of nuclear and Lane County Commissioner and former elected Oregon State other weapons of mass destruction, the achievement of a sus- Senator.I also served as an elected volunteer board member and tainable environment, and the reduction of violence and its Chair of the Board of Education at Lane Community College.My causes.PSR is the US affiliate of International Physicians for the two children attend Eugene public schools. Prevention of Nuclear War, recipient of the 1985 Nobel Peace Prize. When I was in the Legislature, I served on the Education "Reduction of violence and its causes"is an important mission of Committee which has jurisdiction over schools,colleges and uni- PSR. Members of PSR feel that the Oregon Citizens Alliance versities.I was also a member of the Senate Judiciary Committee and Oregon Christian Coalition are inciting violence through which has jurisdiction over discrimination issues. Measure 9,an obviously anti-Gay ballot measure.We believe that We must not sacrifice control of our schools to extremist ideolog- singling out minority populations for harassment and fear ical groups trying to undermine Oregon's tradition of fairness. often leads to violence,as in the case of Matthew Sheppard. This measure would open the door to any special interests trying We do not agree with the campaign of hate promoted by the to impose their values through a state mandated curriculum. Oregon Citizens Alliance and the Oregon Christian Coalition Lon Mabon and the OCA's anti-gay, anti-education act manufac- through Measure 9. ture a problem that does not exist. Parents involved in local Measure 9 would not only encourage hate and violence against schools know our real problems–lack of funding, overcrowding, Oregonians but would encourage ignorance through prohibition of lack of parental involvement, and school violence. We need to teaching a critical curriculum for today's students. This would concentrate on solving the real problems. harm the health of Oregon children by making it more difficult to properly educate about the risks associated with unprotected sex This measure would deprive kids of the information they need about abstinence,birth control and AIDS/HIV prevention. and the need for prevention of sexually transmitted diseases like AIDS. This measure would take away important support services and Voting for Measure 9 promotes: counseling, increasing the risk of teen suicide. It is wrong to deny our kids the information and support they need Hate • Violence to make responsible choices. • Ignorance,and OREGONIANS SAID NO TO MEASURE 9 BEFORE. Disease. WHAT PART OF NO DON'TTHEY UNDERSTAND? We, the undersigned members of Physicians for Social Thanks, Responsibility - Oregon, urge concerned Oregonians to Peter Sorenson VOTE NO ON MEASURE 9. Richard Bayer, MD This is the most recent of a long list of bad legislation favored by Susan Baumgardner special interests.IT MUST BE DEFEATED Nancy Crumpacker, MD (This information furnished by Peter Sorenson.) Del Greenfield Josiah Hill, III, PA Robert A.McFarlane,MD William Morton,MD Catherine Thomasson,MD (This information furnished by Richard Bayer, MD, Physicians for Social Responsibility-Oregon.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 365 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 9 Arguments ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION Tri County Parent Volunteers Oppose Measure 9 Lane and Marion County's Parent Volunteers Oppose Measure 9 It's Dangerous for Kids and Dangerous for Schools VOTE NO ON 9! As parents we know that there is no curriculum in Oregon's public schools that"encourages or promotes" homosexuality or Measure 9 would: bisexuality.The real problems our schools face are a lack of fund- • Severely limit basic sex education including abstinence, birth ing and class sizes that are too large. control,sexually transmitted diseases,and HIV/AIDS.With half Measure 9 is dangerous for our kids and of new HIV infections occurring in youth 25 years old and dangerous for our schools younger we cannot afford to ignore this danger to our kids. • No special interest like the OCA should be able to tell us what • Make it impossible to teach the Oregon value of respect for we can and cannot teach. If Measure 9 passes state funding others in our schools. could be cut because of what a person might say. . State funding could be cut because of what one person might • Measure 9 would severely limit information that is available to say. We can't let the agenda of one extremist organization our kids, information that they need to make responsible,healthy endanger the health of our children and the quality of their choices.Given that our kids are among the fastest growing popu- schools. lation of those at risk for HIV/AIDS we cannot afford to ignore this There is no curriculum in Oregon public schools that"encourages danger. or promotes"homosexuality or bisexuality. • Measure 9 would cut counseling and support programs for all We know the real problems with our schools:a lack of adequate adolescent students,making it even more difficult for teenagers to funding,and class sizes that are too large. come to terms with their sexuality or for counselors to give teenagers information about support groups. Local school boards, accountable to the parents and students Measure 9 attempts to suppress vital information that protects the they serve, should make these decisions, not special interest health of our children, removes local control of our schools. groups. VOTE NO ON 9! Lane and Marion County's parent volunteers oppose Measure 9, because it attempts to suppress vital information that protects the Susan M.Harding Priscilla Turner health of our children,and removes our local control. Cleveland High School Beaverton High School VOTE NO ON 9! PTA President,Portland Elizabeth Gerot Mary Bauer Opra Rose S.Colett Steven Foster Eugene J4 School District Keizer School District Lake Oswego School District Lincoln High School, Portland Virginia Markell Beth Nead Liz Degner Penny McGinnis Clackamas County Portland PTA Council Springfield School District Springfield School District Jennifer Heiss Gloria Griffith Karen Paulino Linda Brown Clackamas County Lake Oswego School District Springfield School District Springfield School District Janet Hogue William Ward M.D. James E.Heiss Beaverton School District Clackamas County Springfield School District Eliot Spindel Nancy Ward (This information furnished by James E.Heiss,Penny McGinnis,Jennifer Lake Oswego School District Clackamas County Heiss,Gloria Griffith.) (This information furnished by D.Rebecca Levison,M.Ed.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 366 CONTINUED 1 Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 9 Arguments ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION Jackson and Deschutes County's Parent Volunteers OREGON CHURCHES AND FAITH COMMUNITIES SAY Oppose Measure 9 VOTE NO ON MEASURE 9 It's Dangerous for Kids and Dangerous for Schools As people of faith,we share the Oregon values of respect and • There is no curriculum in Oregon public schools that"encour- fairness for all people. ages or promotes"homosexuality or bisexuality. Please join us in voting No on Measure 9 • Attacking a"problem"that doesn't exist endangers the health of our children and the quality of our schools. Rev.Marvin D.Jones, Director Rabbi Emanuel Rose Network Resource Ministries Congregation Beth Israel • We know the real problems with our schools:the lack of funding, Oregon/Idaho Annual Portland and class sizes that are too large. Conference of The United This is about local control: these are decisions that need to be Methodist Church made by local school boards, accountable to the parents and The Reverend Robert Corsner Rev.Dr.Hector Lopez students they serve. The Reverend Stephen Schafroth United Church of Christ If Measure 9 passed it would CUT: St.Paul's Episcopal Church Portland Counseling or support programs for all adolescent students. Ecumenical Ministries of Oregon Rev.Dr.Marilyn.Sewell Information on abstinence, birth control, sexually transmitted Rev.Thomas Disrud diseases, and HIV/AIDS. Given that our youth are among the Lavelle side U Portland fastest growing population of those at risk for HIV/AIDS - we Methodist C United Methodist Church cannot afford to ignore this danger to our kids. Salem Iris Gibson State funding could be cut because of what one person might Past President ex-officio say.We can't let the agenda of one special interest organiza- Rev.Dr.Eileen Dunn Church Women United tion endanger the,funding of our schools. Ashland ALL of our kids deserve the best we have to offer. Rev.Martha J.Cook Robert Morris Smith Jackson and Deschutes County's parent volunteers oppose Christian Church in Oregon Willamette Quarterly Meeting Measure 9,because it attempts to suppress vital information that Disciples of Christ of the Religious protects the health of our children,and removes our local control. Society of Friends VOTE NO ON 9! Rev.Dr.Joe E.Smith . Rev.Lynne Smouse Lopez David G.Young, Rev.Michelle E.Manicke Ainsworth United St.James Lutheran Church Church of Christ Lincoln Elementary,Ashland (ELCA) Portland Linda Young Rev.Wesley Taylor Kate Lore, Lincoln Elementary,Ashland Tigard United Methodist Church Social Justice Council Amy Amrhein First Unitarian Church Lincoln Elementary,Ashland Portland Susan Lopez Pastor Karl and Jean Vercouteren The Rev.Patt Herdklotz Lincoln Elementary,Ashland The Dalles Rogue Valley Unitarian Peggy Penland Universalist Fellowship North Medford HS, Medford Rabbi Marc Sirinsky Roger Carlson Stacy Dycus Judith Visser, Director of Pathways of Faith Westside Village Elementary, Bend Prayer and Education Florence Cathy Shaw Temple Emek Shalom Ashland High School,and Mayor of Ashland Ashland Rick Shaw Rev.Susan Leo The Reverend Tim Tiffany Ashland High School Bridgeport Community Medford United Church of Christ (This information furnished by Rick Shaw,Cathy M.Shaw.) Portland Judith Schwartz Pastor David Knapp Florence Area Jewish Havurah Portland Rev.William R.Ellis,Jr. The Rev.Stephen V.Schneider Bend Portland The Rev.John A.Langfeldt Pastor Stan Rosengren C.Floyd Emeren (This information furnished by Ellen Lowe.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 367 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 9 Arguments ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION ARGUMENT'IN OPPOSITION Religious Society of Friends Oregon Educators and School Counselors A Regional Group of Quakers OPPOSE Measure 9 Opposes Measure 9 Measure 9 is dangerous to our students and to our schools pP and school districts. For many years, Friends have struggled to grow in mutual under- Measure 9: Limiting critical information for our students' standing about issues relating to the lives of gays, lesbians and education bisexuals within our Meetings,in our communities,and within our Sponsors of Measure 9, the Oregon Citizens Alliance, want to families. In our Meetings, we include sexual minority members, take critical information away from Oregon students. Lon Mabon some of whom are in same-sex marriages, and we have shared says that HIV/AIDS prevention education must be eliminated from times with each other's families. our classrooms. We have found evidence,once again,of the truth to which Friends Why is HIV/AIDS prevention instruction have witnessed throughout the years,that there is that of God in important for ourstudents? every person. Over 1/2 of the new HIV/AIDS infections in the country occur North Pacific Yearly Meeting of the Religious Society of Friends in young people under the age of 25.With this high rate of believes that all children deserve schools which affirm them and infection among young people, we cannot afford to deny their families regardless of sexual orientation.We believe freedom them life-saving information allowing them to make healthy of speech is essential for education and the search for truth. decisions in their lives; Therefore we oppose Oregon Ballot Measure 9. Measure 9:A recipe for intolerance and disrespect Our schools now welcome all students from every walk of life. United on by North Pacific Yearly Meeting of the Religious Society Measure 9 will single out gay and lesbian students for harassment of Friends 7/22/2000. and fear.We should instead be teaching our students to respect North Pacific Yearly Meeting is a 28-year old regional group, all people. including Quakers in Idaho, Montana, Oregon and Washington. Measure 9 is a solution in search of a problem. Two regional groups,North Pacific Yearly Meeting and Northwest Not once have we encountered a single instance of any teacher Yearly Meeting, exist side by side in the state of Oregon. No "promoting or encouraging" homosexuality. What we encounter organization speaks for Quakerism as a whole.Seeking to follow are real problems such as a lack of stable funding and over- the leading of the Holy Spirit,North Pacific Yearly Meeting speaks crowded classrooms. These are the problems that need our for itself. attention. (This information furnished by Jay Thatcher,Presiding Clerk,North Pacific We are educators and counselors from across Oregon. Yearly Meeting of the Religious Society of Friends(Quakers).) Together,we see thousands of students each day.Let us do our job, in our local schools, guiding our students and your children into the future,without statewide special interest groups telling us what to teach and what not to teach. Vote No on Measure 9 Kristie Duyckinck,Teacher Peter Thacker,Teacher Hillsboro Portland June Buck,Teacher Trisha Parks,Teacher Medford Beaverton John Howry,Teacher Barry Hinkson,Teacher Corvallis Sandy Chris Morrison,School Counselor V.Gaile Baack,Counselor Bend Portland Barbara I.Heyerman,Teacher R.Michael Caughell,Teacher Ashland Hillsboro Mardella L.Stevens,Teacher Henry Harris,Administrator Gresham West Linn Wilsonville (This information furnished by Elizabeth A.Kaufman,No on 9 Campaign.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 In accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 368 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 9 Arguments ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION Measure 9 will harm Oregon's Colleges and Universities "Measure 9 is bad for the health of young Oregonians.Even while We are student body presidents and active students at Oregon half of all new HIV infections in the U.S. occur among people colleges and universities around the state. under 25 years of age, Measure 9 threatens the most basic, common sense health education programs in our schools.It puts We urge you to VOTE NO on BALLOT MEASURE 9 Oregon's youth at higher risk by denying them potentially life- Measure 9 will take important curriculum away from saving information,and removes needed support and counseling Oregon's college students for students who have questions about their health.Measure 9 will • Measure 9 will limit or eliminate critical health information create a school environment of government-sanctioned discrimi- nation by targeting many of Oregon's most vulnerable youth,and from college studies,including HIV/AIDS prevention mati n f will result in fewer young Oregonians feeling comfortable asking on. Students need this information to make responsible decisions in their lives! questions about their health. If students do ask, Measure 9 will make it illegal for trained adult school counselors and teachers to Measure 9 will insist that we teach intolerance and disre- honestly answer their most basic questions.The chilling effect of spect at Oregon's colleges and universities Measure 9 will make some schools even more hesitant to conduct • Measure 9 will mean that gay and lesbian students may be or request HIV prevention programs for fear of losing desperately treated with harassment and fear. We believe all students needed funding, already in short supply. We strongly urge all deserve respect at our colleges and universities. Oregonians to vote'No'on 9.Don't put the health of Oregon's kids Measure 9 threatens to take away state funding of Oregon's at risk:' colleges and universities (This information furnished by Thomas Bruner,Cascade AIDS Project.) • Any community college found to be in violation of Measure 9 can lose their state funding. At a time when we need adequate and stable funding for colleges,this measure puts our education at risk! It's our future.Vote No on 9. Don't put Oregon's college students at risk. Brian Lord,Student Body President Eastern Oregon University Mary Cunningham, State Affairs Director Associated Students of Portland State University Scott Young,Associated Students of Southern Oregon University Susan Whitmore, President Associated Students of Lane Community College (schools listed are for identification purposes only.) (This information furnished by Mary Cunningham.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 369 CONTINUED O Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 9 Arguments ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION The American Friends Service Committee,a Quaker organi- People of Faith Oppose Measure 9 zation,seeking to understand and address the root causes of Vote No on 9 poverty,injustice,and war,says Preserve Our Community People of Faith say no to discrimination Vote Preserve on 9 Our diverse faith and spiritual traditions teach us the wisdom and compassion to know that all of our children matter.We believe it "The fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, is wrong to discriminate against students,their families or educa- generosity, faithfulness. There is no law against such things" tors because of their sexual orientation. People in each of our (Gal 5:22-23) religious traditions have been singled out for discrimination Protect Our Children-Vote No on 9 leading to persecution.It was wrong then.It is wrong now. We are called to speak out against any attack on the civil and People of Faith say that all people count human rights of persons because of their sexuality or gender We know that words and beliefs matter.Measure 9 forbids teach- identity.We find that some religious rhetoric has been used to ing that all people are equal.Our moral compass guided by faith deny civil and human rights and, worse, used as justification by teaches that all of God's children count.There is room at the table those filled with hate to commit violent and aggressive acts for all.We must not allow a state law to be enacted that says that against those who only seek to love.These acts are contrary to some of our citizens are not equal to others.It's not fair to all of us our own experience of God. for the OCA to impose its own views on everyone else.We are all Protect Our Communities-Vote No on 9 free to hold our opinions,but policies for Oregon's schools should not be determined by the religious beliefs of-one organization. Our testimony against all forms of violence, which includes our people of Faith say protect our values testimony against war, also encompasses social and psychologi- cal violence.We are ashamed of and condemn hate-filled speech Public schools must not be allowed to exclude any student from a and the rhetoric of violence especially when used in the name of complete and full education because of religion, race,class,sex, Christ or by Christian groups.We believe that violence in deed or disability, national origin, or sexual orientation.We cannot allow in word against anyone violates"that of God"in every person.We fear, ignorance, intolerance, and bigotry to become part of our work to create a climate in the United States and the world in schools'curriculum.We believe that only by including all and by which such acts and words of hate will be recognized as violence strong academic standards based on freedom of conscience, and will not be tolerated. thought,and inquiry,can we build real community. Protect Our Children WE CALL UPON ALL PEOPLE OF FAITH AND ALL PEOPLE Protect Our Communities OF GOODWILL TO VOTE NO ON American Friends Service Committee Says MEASURE 9. Vote No on 9 503.230.9430 (This information furnished by Dan Stutesman,American Friends Service Committee.) (This information furnished by Dan Stutesman, People of pith Against Bigotry.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 370 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 9 Arguments ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION Basic Rights Oregon Please Vote NO on Measure 9 urges Oregonians: vote'no'on Measure 9. Lon Mabon's Oregon Citizen's Alliance and the Christian Coalition Measure 9 is dangerous for kids and dangerous for schools. If Measure 9 is a danger to Oregon's kids passed: and a danger to Oregon's schools. . Measure 9 would severely limit schools from teaching HIV Measure 9 outs the health and safely of our kids at risk by greatly prevention which puts Oregon kids at risk. limiting the teaching of basic sex education. Measure 9 would • Measure 9 will single out gay and lesbian students, teachers, force schools to stop offering honest sex education classes on and school staff for harassment and intimidation, instead of HIV prevention,abstinence,birth control and sexually transmitted allowing schools to teach tolerance and respect for everyone; diseases. • Measure 9 would take away local decision-making for curricu- Measure 9 is bad for Oregon schools because it threatens public lum from parents and teachers,and put it in the hands of a new school funding. Under Measure 9, if a faculty or staff person at state bureaucracy that could take away local school funding. any public school made a statement which could be perceived by We are Oregonians from across our state who believe that our an unelected bureaucrat in Salem as promoting or sanctioning local schools should be welcoming places for all students and homosexuality, that school would be at risk of losing all state teachers,no matter what their,sexual orientation. funding. We urge you to VOTE NO on Measure 9 Measure 9 would change the way public schools teach and open More than 1,000 Oregonians from 14 counties across the state ate in Oregon. It would-take control of public schools away from local school boards and give control to a special interest group. signed petitions to submit this voter's pamphlet statement, including: Measure 9 undermines the teaching of tolerance. fairness,a d and Clackamas, Washington, Lane, Jackson, Deschutes, Lake, respect in our schools. Public schools in Oregon have a duty to be welcoming, inclusive, and safe for all students. Measure 9 is Umatilla, Clatsop, Marion, Tillamook, Yamhill and Multnomah, dangerous because it would stigmatize students,faculty,and staff Baker,Benton Counties who are,or who are wrongly perceived to be,gay or lesbian. Because We Care About Oregon PAC Basic Rights Oregon is dedicated to ending discrimination based Beverly Stein,Chair on sexual orientation in our state. In the spirit of fundamental (This information furnished by Beverly Stein, Because We Care About fairness and equality,Basic Rights Oregon will build and mobilize Oregon PAC.) a broad coalition of citizens to ensure democratic freedoms for all Oregonians. Basic Rights Oregon urges you to vote"No on 9!" (This information furnished by Jennifer Webber,Basic Rights Oregon.) (This space qualified for by a petition of 1,000 Oregon voters in (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The pfinting of this argument does not constitute an endorse ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 371 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Statewide Measures Measure No. 9 Arguments ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION ARGUMENT. IN OPPOSITION United States Senator Ron Mden Urges Oregonians to The Libertarian Party of Oregon and Log Cabin Republicans of Vote NO on Measure 9 Oregon urge your NO vote on Measure 9. Our schools face enormous challenges. Funny how the pendulum swings. As the world changes,and jobs of today and tomorrow for our Just when we think we have enough of the politically correct children become more complex,our schools need to keep up. speech codes from the left,along comes another group of social reformers demanding"religiously correct"speech codes. The last thing we need is a political distraction like Ballot Measure 9. Our schools should focus on safe classrooms. Our schools This measure has Big Government written all over it. should emphasize teaching the basics. Our schools should Does anyone believe that state bureaucrats are able to determine concentrate on accountability. the best way to educate children? Measure 9's hidden agenda is Our schools should not have to spend time and resources that it shifts control away from local school districts, centralizing responding to the political agendas of fringe groups that simply control in a state bureaucracy. don't approve of certain people. This expensive state bureaucracy will be required to determine Let's put excellence first in our schools. And keep political the new religiously correct speech codes. agendas far away from our children. This bureaucracy will have to prevent and investigate any Please Vote No on Measure 9. instances of"forbidden speech". (This information furnished by US Senator Ron Wyden.) Busybodies with no connection to your school will run to this bureaucracy with wild tales,requiring expensive investigation and litigation. School resources will be diverted to defending accusations, no matter how groundless. High school counselors will turn away students who have "forbidden problems". Instruction will suffer because teachers will avoid discussing subjects that might lead students to ask"forbidden questions". Even college professors will be prohibited from discussing sci- entific theories that contradict Lon Mabon's theories on sexuality. Do we really want Oregon to become the battleground for the "Scopes-Monkey Trial"of the 21st Century? Do we want professors to turn off the light of inquiry upon "forbidden subjects"? Education will suffer under Measure 9, because it will create far more problems than it could ever possibly solve (like most Big Government solutions). If you don't like what is being taught at your local school,there are better ways to make a difference. Pay attention to your child's homework.Talk to your child's teacher or principal.Run for school board.Don't delegate local control to an anti-student,anti-parent bureaucracy. Vote NO on Ballot Measure 9. Adam Mayer Chair, Libertarian Party of Oregon Lee Coleman President, Log Cabin Republicans of Oregon (This information furnished by Lee Coleman, Log Cabin Republicans of Oregon;Adam Mayer,Libertarian Party of Oregon.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) (This space purchased for$500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.) The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorse- ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the ment by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. 372 Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—General Information Voter Registration Information VOTER REGISTRATION Who May Register To Vote You may register to vote for the November 7, 2000, General Election if: 1.You are a citizen of the United States; 2.You will be at least 18 years old by November 7,2000;and 3.You are a resident of Oregon. How To Register To Vote To register to vote in the November 7, 2000, election, your com- pleted voter registration card must be either: • Postmarked by October 17,2000; • Delivered to a county elections office by October 17,2000;or • Delivered to any voter registration agency(e.g., DMV)by October 17,2000. If Your Name, Mailing Address or Political Party Affiliation Has Changed If you are currently registered to vote in Oregon but your name, mailing address or party affiliation has changed since you last completed a voter registration card, complete a new voter regis- tration card and mail it to your county elections office. If Your Residence Address Has Changed If you are currently registered to vote in Oregon but your resi- dence address has changed since you last completed a voter registration card,complete a new voter registration card and mail it to your county elections office. If you notify your county elections office of your change of resi- dence address after October 17, 2000, you must request that a ballot be mailed to you or go to your county elections office to get your ballot. Where to Obtain a Voter Registration Card Voter registration cards can be obtained from the Secretary of State's Office, any county elections office, many state agencies, and most banks and post offices,and are also in some telephone books. It is also available on-line at the Secretary of State's web page at http://www.sos.state.or.us/elections/other.info/vreg.htm --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Request for Voter Registration Card (Please Print) Name: Address: City: Zip Code: Telephone: #of forms requested: MAIL TO: Office of the Secretary of State Elections Division 141 State Capitol Salem,OR 97310-0722 373 Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—General Information Voting Information VOTE BY MAIL Can the public watch the election process? All steps of the process are open to observation by the public. Contact your county elections official to make arrangements. What is Vote by Mail? Vote by Mail is a method of conducting elections.Instead of using When will election results be known? traditional polling places where voters go to cast ballots on elec- Ballot counting cannot begin until election day. Initial results tion day,a ballot is automatically mailed to each registered voter. are released at 8:00 p.m. election night and will continue to be The ballot is then voted and returned to the county elections updated through election night until all ballots have been counted. official to be counted. When are the ballots mailed the voters? VOTERS WITH DISABILITIES Ballots are mailed between the a 18th and 14th days before the election. As a voter,what do I have to do? If you are unable to vote your ballot without assistance,because Your ballot packet will automatically be mailed to you. Inside the of a physical disability or because you are unable to read or write, packet you will find the ballot, a secrecy envelope and a return contact your county elections official.They will provide two per- envelope.Once you vote the ballot, place it in the secrecy enve- sons to assist you in voting.In order to assure the county receives lope and seal it in the pre-addressed return envelope.Be sure you your voted ballot by Election Day, contact your county elections sign the return'envelope on the appropriate line. After that just office early to arrange for assistance.You may also select some- return the ballot either by mail or at a designated drop site. one else of your own choice to assist you. What if I am uncomfortable voting my ballot at home? A cassette edition of.the Voters' Pamphlet is available for Privacy booths are available for you to cast your ballot.There are Oregonians who cannot read standard print due to a visual or privacy booths at your county elections office and there may be physical disability.To order a cassette of the Voters'Pamphlet, others at drop site locations elsewhere in your county.For further please contact Independent Living Resources at 503-232-7411. information,call your county elections official. What if I make a mistake or need a new ballot? If your ballot is lost, destroyed, damaged or you make a mistake in marking your ballot, you may call your county elections office and request a replacement ballot. One will be mailed to you as long as you request it by November 2.After that,you may pick it up at the elections office.If you have already mailed your original ballot before you realize you made a mistake,you have cast your vote and will not be eligible for a replacement ballot. What if my ballot doesn't come? If you are registered to vote and have not received your ballot within a week after they are mailed, call your county elections office.They will check that your voter registration is current.If it is, they will mail you a replacement ballot. What if I have moved and have not updated my registration? If you were registered to vote by October 17 but now have a dif- ferent address,call your county elections office for instructions on how to update your registration and receive a ballot. Do 1 have to return my ballot by mail? You have the choice of mailing your ballot or returning it to any county elections office or any designated drop site in the state. The times and locations of drop sites are listed in the Voters' Pamphlet and are also available at your county elections office. How much postage is required to mail the ballot back? Your voted ballot can usually be returned using a single 33¢ stamp.In those instances where additional postage is necessary, it will be clearly indicated on the ballot materials. When must the voted ballot be returned? The voted ballot must be received in any county elections office or designated drop site by 8:00 p.m.on election night.Postmarks do not count! How do I know if my ballot is received? You can call your county elections office and ask if they received your ballot.A record is kept showing each voter whose ballot has been returned. Can anyone find out how I've voted once I mail my ballot? No.All ballots are separated from the return envelope before the ballots are inspected.This process ensures confidentiality. What if I forget to sign the return envelope? Generally,your elections office will either return it to you for sign- ing or they will contact you, if possible, to come to the elections ` office to sign it.If the return envelope does not get signed before f 8:00 p.m.on November 7,the ballot will not be counted. 374 Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—General Information County Elections Offices Baker Harney Morrow Julia Woods Maria Iturriaga Barbara Bloodsworth Baker County Clerk Harney County Clerk Morrow County Clerk 1995 3rd St.Suite 150 Courthouse,450 N.Buena Vista PO Box 338 Baker City,OR 97814-3398 Burns,OR 97720 Heppner,OR 97836-0338 541-523-8207 TTY 541-523-8208 541-573-6641 541.676-9061 TTY 541-676-9061 Benton Hood River Multnomah James Morales Sandra Berry Director of Elections Elections Division Dir.Assess/Rec. 1040 SE Morrison 120 NW 4th St. Courthouse,309 State St. Portland,OR 97214-2495 Corvallis,OR 97330 Hood River,OR 97031-2093 503-988-3720 Fax 503-988-3719 541-766-6756 TTY 541-766-6080 541-386-1442 Clackamas Jackson Polk John Kauffman Kathy Beckett Linda Dawson Clackamas County Clerk Jackson County Clerk Polk County Clerk Elections Division Courthouse, 10 S.Oakdale Ave. Courthouse, Room 201 825 Portland Ave. Medford,OR 97501-2902 Dallas,OR 97338-3179 Gladstone,OR 97027-2195 541-774-6148 TTY 541-774-6719 503-623-9217 TTY 503-623-7557 503-655-8510 TTY 503-655-1685 Jefferson Sherman Clatso Linda Cornie Nicole Williams& Debbie Kraske Kathy Marston Jefferson County Clerk Sherman Co-Acting Clatsop County Clerks PO Box 365 County Clerk PO Box 178,749 Commercial Courthouse,75 SE"C"St. Astoria,OR 97103-0178 Madras, 97741 Moro, 97039-0365 503-325-8511 TTY 503-325-9307 541-475-4451 TTY 541-475-4451 541-565-3606 Fax 541-565-3312 Columbia Josephine Tillamook Elizabeth Betty) Huser Georgette Brown Josephine Veltri Columbia ounty Clerk Josephine County Clerk Tillamook County Clerk Courthouse PO Box 69 201 Laurel Ave. St.Helens,OR 97051-2089 Grants Pass,OR 97528-0203 Tillamook,OR 97141 503-397-7214 TTY 503-397-7246 541-474-5243 TTY 1-800-735-2900 503-842-3402 Fax 503-842-1599 Coos Klamath Umatilla Terri L.Turi, CMC Linda Smith Patti Chapman Coos County Clerk Klamath County Clerk Director of Elections Courthouse,250 N.Baxter St. 305 Main St. PO Box 1227 Coquille,OR 97423-1899 Klamath Falls,OR 97601 Pendleton,OR 97801 541-396-3121, Ext 301 541-883-5134 or 800-377-6094 541-278-6254 TTY 541-278-6257 TTY 1-800-735-2900 Lake Union Crook Shirley Olsen R.Nellie Bogue Hibbert Deanna(Dee) Berman Lake County Clerk Crook County Clerk 513 Center St. Union County Clerk 300 NE.Third, Room 23 Lakeview,OR 97630-1539 1001 4th St.Ste"D" Prineville,OR 97754-1919 541-947-6006 TTY 541-947-6007 LaGrande,OR 97850 541-447-6553 TTY 541-416-4963 541-963-1006 Lane Curry Annette Newingham Wallowa Renee Kolen Chief Deputy County Clerk Charlotte McIver Curry County Clerk 135 E.6th Ave. Wallowa County Clerk PO Box 746 Eugene,OR 97401-2926 101 S.River St., Rm 100 Gold Beach,OR 97444 541-682-4234 TTY 541-682-4320 Enterprise,OR 97828-1335 541-247-7011,Ext.223 541-426-4543, Ext.15 TTY 541-247-6440 Lincoln Deschutes Dana Jenkins Wasco Mar Sue Susie Penhollow Lincoln County Clerk Karen LeBreton Y (Susie) 225 W.Olive St., Room 201 Wasco County Clerk Deschutes County Clerk Newport,OR 97365 Courthouse,511 Washington St. Deschutes Services Bldg. 541-265-4131 TTY 541-265-4193 The Dalles,OR 97058 1340 NW Wall St. 541-296-6159 TTY 541-296-6159 Bend,OR 97701 Linn 541-388-6546 TTY 541-385,-3203 Steven Druckenmiller Linn County Clerk Washington Douglas 300 SW 4th Ginny Kingsley Doyle Shaver,Jr. Elections Division Douglas County Clerk Albany,OR 97321 150 N. 1 st Ave., MS3 PO Box 10 541-967-3831 TTY 541-967-3833 Hillsboro,OR 97124 Roseburg,OR 97470-0004 Malheur 503-846-8670 TTY 503-846-4598 541-440-4252 Deborah R.DeLong Gilliam Malheur County Clerk Wheeler Rena Kennedy 51 "B"St.W., Suite 4 Marilyn Garcia y Vale,OR 97918 Wheeler County Clerk Gilliam County Clerk 541-473-5151 TTY 541 473 5157 PO Box 327 PO Box 427 Fossil,OR 97830-0327 Condon,OR 97823-0427 541-763-2400 TTY 541-763-2401 541-384-2311 Marion Alan H.Davidson Grant Marion County.Clerk Yamhill Kathy McKinnon Elections Division Charles Stern Grant County Clerk 4263 Commercial St.SE,#300 Yamhill County Clerk 201 S.Humbolt St.#290 Salem,OR 97302-3987 Courthouse,535 NE 5th St.Rm.119 Canyon City,OR 97820 503-588-5041 /1-800-655-5388 McMinnville,OR 97128-4593 541-575-1675 TTY 541-575-1675 TTY 503-588-5610 503-434-7518 TTY 800-735-2900 375 SECRETARY OF STATE NONPROFIT Bill Bradbury U.S.Postage State Capitol PAID Salem, Oregon 97310-0722 * Portland,OR ¢ Permit No.815 it q RESIDENTIAL CUSTOMER voters I mphlet VOLUME 1 OF 2 ° F o Ar MEASURES L * z * T EU I l -' General Election ***** ***** November 7, 2000 18 5 9 «1 Please RECYCLE this pamphlet `f III i f�$'g- sua"Fyy`�,'��fi� ifs�"�a<'��, �'g �� F'�E•S�3 �g g�a a' ;. F� d,�:,a`°�Sg `.�3 g r,gf �£ & x�a$��.>E%$�E�3�'r '�'. � R� 3,'�•'� ` ' L, a f � 3t fi 0C CL VOTE BY MAIL GENERAL ELECTION, NOVEMBER 7, 2000 oF Compiled and Distributed by N' '2 ,859 Oregon Secretary of State This Voters'Pamphlet is provided for assistance in casting your vote by mail ballot. OF O BILL BRADBURY �� STATE OF OREGON SECRETARY OF STATE SECRETARY OF STATE SUZANNE TOWNSEND m Z 136 STATE CAPITOL DEPUTY SECRETARY OF STATE SALEM,OREGON 97310-0722 1 59 (503)986-1500 Dear Oregonian: This is volume 2 of a two-volume 2000 General Election Voters' Pamphlet.This volume contains information about candidates.Volume 1 with information about state ballot measures was mailed earlier. If you did not receive a copy of volume 1, please call my office at 503-986-1518. This volume contains: • A list of state candidates; • Statements filed by individual candidates; • Congressional and district maps; • Voter registration information; • Political party statements; and • Your county voters'pamphlet with information about local measures and candidates. The Voters' Pamphlet has been an important tool for Oregonians since Secretary of State Frank I. Dunbar produced the nation's first voters'pamphlet in 1903. It remains today the single most important tool that Oregonians use in deciding how to vote. urge you not to be turned off by the record length of the two-volume Voters' Pamphlet. Please take the time to study the candidates and measures on the ballot.The decisions we Oregonians make together in this election will have a profound effect on our state for many years to come. With this election Oregon will make history. Ours will be the first presidential election ever conducted entirely by mail. I am challenging Oregonians to make history in another way: to have the highest voter turnout of any state in the nation this fall.We are consistently among the highest, but I want Oregon to be the highest. To promote this effort, I have launched a web site (www.oregonvotes.com) as a clearinghouse for election information. If you need additional information beyond what is in this publication, www.oregonvotes.com is an excellent place to begin looking. To participate in this election, there are some important dates to remember: • October 20 to 24 is the period when ballots will be mailed to registered voters— if you are registered and you do not receive a ballot in the mail, call your county elections office for assistance; and • November 7 at 8:00 p.m. is the deadline for your ballot to be received by a county elections office— if you do not return your ballot in the mail, return it to the official ballot drop-off site nearest you. Thank you for taking the time to study the candidates and measures on the ballot and for participating in the election. Sincerely, Bill Bradbury On the cover. The crisp clear light of a December morning reflects off the glass of the Yaquina Head Lighthouse. At 93 feet, it is the tallest lighthouse on the Oregon coast. First lit in 1873, it is still in service. 1998 photo courtesy of Ron Benton of Waldport, Oregon. Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—General Information Information GENERAL WEBSITE Your official 2000 General Election Voters' Pamphlet is divided Most of the information contained in'this Voters'Pamphlet is also into two separate volumes.This was necessary because there available in the Online Voters'Guide on the World Wide Web at are 26 statewide measures and 607 arguments filed in support of http://www.sos.state.or.us/elections/nov72000/nov72000.htm or in opposition to these measures.The amount of information is too large to be bound into one book in a cost-effective manner. This is Volume 2 and contains information on candidates only.You VOTER REGISTRATION INFORMATION should have already received Volume 1,containing information on the statewide measures. If you have not received Volume 1, please call the Oregon Elections Division at(503)986-1518. The deadline to register to vote for the November 7, 2000, General Election is October 17, 2000. If you register after that In this volume, partisan candidates appear before nonpartisan date,you will be entitled to vote only in future elections.To obtain candidates.All space is purchased;statements and photographs a voter registration card for future elections,you may use the form are submitted by the candidates or their designated agents.The below.You may also obtain a card at any county elections office, information required by law—pertaining to occupation, occupa- most banks and post offices, and many state agencies.The form tional background,educational background and prior governmen- is also available in some telephone books and on-line at tal experience—has been certified by each candidate. www.sos.state.or.us/elections/other.info/vreg.htm. Volume 2 also includes other voting aids,such as congressional If your voter registration status is inactive because you have and district maps, drop site locations and a complete list of the moved and not updated your registration, or because you have state candidates.If your county has chosen to produce a Voters' not voted in the last five years,you may contact your county elec- Pamphlet in conjunction with the state, drop site locations will tions office to find out how to update your registration and receive appear in your county Voters'Pamphlet. a ballot for this election.You may update your registration and The Voters' Pamphlet has been produced by the Secretary of receive a ballot for the November 7, 2000, General Election up State since 1903,when Oregon became one of the first states to through Election Day.Your ballot must be voted and received by a provide for the printing and distribution of such a publication.One county elections office by 8 p.m.on Election Day. ------------------------------------------------ copy of the Voters'Pamphlet is mailed to every household in the Request for Voter Registration Card state.Additional copies are available at the Elections Division in q g the State Capitol, local post offices, courthouses and all county (Please Print) election offices. Name: RANDOM ALPHABET Address: While the candidates'statements appear in alphabetical order by City: their last name in this Voters'Pamphlet, you will notice that they appear in a different order on your ballot. Zip Code: Pursuant to ORS 254.155, the Secretary of State is required to complete a random order of the letters of the alphabet to deter- Telephone: mine the order in which the names of candidates appear on the ballot. #of forms requested: The alphabet for the 2000 General Election is: MAIL TO: Office of the Secretary of State Z,0,D,E,B,J,M,L,C,K,R,W,F,N,T,Y,H,S,I,P,U,G,A,0,V,X Elections Division 141 State Capitol Salem,OR 97310-0722 ATTENTION: The State of Oregon prints measure arguments and candidate statements as submitted by the author. The state does not correct punctuation, grammar, syntax errors or inaccurate information. The only changes made are attempts to correct spelling errors if the word as originally submitted is not in the dictionary. TABLE OF CONTENTS Page Page Candidate Statements–Nonpartisan.............................. 25 Index to Candidates....................................................... 31 Candidate Statements–Partisan.................................... 5 List of State Candidates................................................ 4 Congressional Map........................................................ 11 Political Party Statements.............................................. 26 DistrictMap.................................................................... 30 YOUR VOTED BALLOT MUST BE RETURNED (POSTMARKS DO NOT COUNT)TO YOUR COUNTY ELECTIONS OFFICE BY ELECTION DAY,TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 7, 2000. County Elections Offices are open on election day from 7 a.m.to 8 p.m. 3 Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—General Information List of State Candidates This is a complete listing of the state candidates for the General Election,November 7,2000,as prepared by the Secretary of State, for the counties covered in this pamphlet.On election day,your ballot will include 26 state measures and may also include additional measures and candidates from your county and local governments.PLEASE NOTE:Each candidate listed does not necessarily have a statement in the Voters'Pamphlet.Some candidates do not choose to purchase.space. PARTISAN CANDIDATES (C) Constitution; (D) Democrat; (1) Independent; (L) Libertarian; (P) Pacific Green;(RF)Reform;(R) Republican;(S)Socialist UNITED STATES PRESIDENT AND VICE PRESIDENT—(Vote for One Ticket)—Harry Browne, President, Art Olivier, Vice President (L); Patrick J. Buchanan, President, Ezola Foster, Vice President (1); George W. Bush, President, Dick Cheney, Vice President (R); Ralph Nader, President, Winona LaDuke, Vice President (P); John Hagelin, President, Nat Goldhaber, Vice President (RF); Howard Phillips, President, J. Curtis Frazier,Vice President(C);Al Gore,President,Joe Lieberman, Vice President(D) REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS,2ND DISTRICT—(Vote for One)--Greg Walden(R);Walter Ponsford(D) ` SECRETARY OF STATE—(Vote for One)—Bill Bradbury (D); Lloyd Marbet(P);Lynn Snodgrass(R);E.J.(Ed) Pole, II (L) STATE TREASURER—(Vote for One�—Leonard Zack (RF); Randall Edwards (D); Carlos F. Lucero (C); Jon Kvistad (R); Mitchell T Shults(L) ATTORNEY GENERAL—(Vote for One)--Hardy Myers(D);Kevin L.Mannix(R);Thomas B.Cox(L) STATE SENATOR, 27TH DISTRICT—(Vote for OnerBev Clarno(R);Anne N.Philiben(D) STATE REPRESENTATIVE,54TH DISTRICT—(Vote for One}— Ken Cooper(D);Tim Knopp(R) STATE REPRESENTATIVE,55TH DISTRICT—(Vote for Ones Douglas Dunlap(D);Ben Westlund(R) NONPARTISAN CANDIDATES JUDGE OF THE SUPREME COURT, POSITION 2—(Vote for One)—Paul J.DeMuniz;Greg Byrne JUDGE OF THE COURT OF APPEALS,POSITION 6—(Vote for One)—David V.Brewer 4 Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Partisan Candidates United States President United States Vice President HARRY ART BROWNE OLIVIER Libertarian Libertarian : OCCUPATION:Author s OCCUPATION: Engineer S°:y OCCUPATIONAL OCCUPATIONAL BACKGROUND: Best-selling BACKGROUND: Project author;financial advisor; Manager-Boeing newsletter editor;public speaker. EDUCATIONAL i BACKGROUND:A.A., Design EDUCATIONAL BACKGROUND:Some college. Technology, Cerritos College. Web Development Certificate, PRIOR GOVERNMENTAL EXPERIENCE: US Army 1953-56, University of California, Irvine. honorably discharged. PRIOR GOVERNMENTAL EXPERIENCE: Mayor, City It is important to have a candidate in the race who believes the Councilman. Constitution is a literal document, especially the 9th and 10th As a Libertarian Mayor, I made sure the taxpayers got their Amendments which limit the size and power of the federal money's worth. Most of what people consider vital government government. services are paid for by the general budget of their local munici- pality.These include building and maintaining the city's infrastruc- so small that we won't need w income tax at all,or the IRS -and ture and law enforcement.Your local government is able to do this and more with only two to three percent of the total taxes that you we don't need anything to replace them.I want you to be keep every dollar you earn--to spend it,save it, or give i free to t away pay' as you think best,not as politicians deem best. The Federal budget takes about half of your tax money without providing the things that improve your day-to-day life.The Federal I believe we should privatize Social Security.Even the most con- servative investments would produce a far better yield than Social government has a Department of Education that educates no one Security.Your money should reside in an account that you own, , a Department of Transportation that transports nothing, a free from political misappropriation. Department of Energy that produces no energy, and a Department of Agriculture that grows no food. Your money is I believe you should be able to live in a safe neighborhood--free being wasted on these departments that are not authorized by from the criminal black markets,the gang warfare and the drive- the Constitution and do nothing to improve your life. by shootings that are fueled by the Drug War. I would end drug Even worse, the Federal government has laws that result in prohibition. making our communities unsafe. The other candidates believe they can run your life–I disagree.I The biggest threat to the safety of our communities comes from don't believe I can know how much you should put aside for your the Federal government's failed war on drugs, making some of retirement or what schools your children should attend.I want you our neighborhoods war zones. Because some drugs cannot be to be able to live your life by your values. sold at the local drug store, criminals sell them in drug houses. Harry Browne was born in New York City and lived most of his life And because drug dealers operate outside of the law, disputes in Los Angeles.He and his wife Pamela reside in Tennessee.He are often settled with violence.Only by putting an end to the drug has a grown daughter. war will we end this violence in our communities. Browne was a successful investment advisor for 30 years and is By having the Federal government follow the Constitution, there the author of 11 books that have sold more than 2 million copies, would be no need for federal income tax.People would have more three of which were New York Times bestsellers(one going all the of the money they earned to spend at local establishments and way to number one).He will appear on all fifty state ballots. parents could afford to spend more time with their children.The end result will be you will have more control over your own life and http://www.HarryBrowne.org our communities would be a better place to live. (This information furnished by Harry Browne,Libertarian For President.) (This information furnished by Art Olivier,Libertarian for Vice President.) 5 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Partisan Candidates United States President United States Vice President GEORGE W. r DICK BUSH s CHENEY Republican Republican OCCUPATION:Governor of OCCUPATION:Vice Texas. Presidential Candidate OCCUPATIONAL ' OCCUPATIONAL BACKGROUND: F-102 Pilot, BACKGROUND:Secretary of Texas Air National Guard;CEO, Defense during Desert Storm Bush Exploration;Senior under President Bush;Former Adviser to 1988 Bush U.S.Congressman from Presidential Campaign; Managing General Partner, Texas Wyoming;White House Chief of Staff to President Ford;and most Rangers Baseball Team recently, Former Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive EDUCATIONAL BACKGROUND:Yale University, B.A.; Harvard Officer of Halliburton Company University, M.B.A. EDUCATIONAL BACKGROUND: University of Wyoming, B.A. PRIOR GOVERNMENTAL EXPERIENCE:Governor of Texas and M.A. Dear Oregonian: PRIOR GOVERNMENTAL EXPERIENCE: noted above I'm running for President because I believe our prosperity must Dear Oregonian: have a purpose. The purpose is to leave no one out...no one America is ready for new leadership:Leadership that will continue behind. I believe government's role is to create an environment this great prosperity we enjoy–but extend it to every corner of where entrepreneurs and families can reach their dreams and America and use it for greater goals. Leadership that lifts our flourish. sights and makes Americans proud again. As President, I will improve our schools by insisting on high I see in Governor Bush the qualities of mind and spirit our nation standards, local control,and real accountability.There can be no needs,and our history demands. second-rate schools because there are no second-rate children. In a time of partisanship, Governor Bush reaches across party I believe all children can learn.And no child should be left behind. lines to do the people's business.In a time of bitterness,he brings I will also save and strengthen Social Security for this generation people together. After an era of tarnished ideals, he will return and the generations to come.Under my administration,there will honor and dignity to the Office of President. be no change in existing benefits for retirees or near-retirees.And As Governor of a large and diverse state, George W. Bush has for younger workers,I support giving them the option of investing kept his commitments. He said he would improve the public a portion of their Social.Security taxes into sound investments schools,and he has.He promised to reduce taxes and he has– they control. twice–while keeping the budget in surplus.He pledged to reform As President,I will also work to reduce taxes for all taxpayers and the legal system–to get rid of junk lawsuits–and he has. rebuild our military with better pay, better training, and better He did all these things because he is a uniter, not a divider ... equipment. someone who works with Democrats and Republicans for the I also want you to know what kind of leader I'll be as your common good,and shares the credit for success.That is what we President.I am a uniter,not a divider.I don't need polls to tell me need in the White House.A leader with an agenda and the know- how to think.I'm guided by principles ingrained in my heart–trust how to get it done.Governor Bush is that leader.And I will work local people to make decisions for their schools and communities; with him to enact his plans to improve schools, save and understand that peace is best kept through strength, not weak- strengthen Social Security, reduce taxes, and rebuild the military ness;limit government with tax cuts and spending restraint;fight and encourage new efforts to confront suffering and poverty. for American interests and America's workers; promote strong Sincerely, families and personal responsibility. Dick Cheney Sincerely, George W.Bush (This information furnished by Bush/Cheney 2000,Inc.) (This information furnished by Bush/Cheney 2000,Inc.) 6 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Partisan Candidates United States President United States Vice President AL JOE GORE LIEBERMAN Democrat Democrat OCCUPATION:Vice President OCCUPATION: United States of the United States Senator representing Connecticut OCCUPATIONAL BACKGROUND: Private, United States Army;Reporter, OCCUPATIONAL Nashville Tennesseean BACKGROUND:Attorney; ' Assistant Dean,Yale University EDUCATIONAL BACKGROUND: B.A., Harvard University; School of Art and Architecture Attended Vanderbilt Graduate School of Religion and Vanderbilt EDUCATIONAL BACKGROUND: B.A., Yale College; J.D. Yale Law School Law School PRIOR GOVERNMENTAL EXPERIENCE: United States PRIOR GOVERNMENTAL EXPERIENCE: Connecticut State Congressman 1977-1985; United States Senator 1985-1993; Senate, 1971-1980 (Majority Leader, 1975-1980); Connecticut Vice President Of the United States 1993-Present Attorney General, 1982-1988; United States Senator, 1989- I'm running for president because I want to use our historic present. prosperity to benefit everyone, not just the few.To do that, I will I'm running for vice president because I want to reform the way pay down the national debt and make smart investments in health our government works,improve our public schools,help America care,education,middle-class tax cuts and a secure retirement for recommit to a basic set of common values,and protect America's all.If I am entrusted with the presidency, I will fight for you. consumers and environment. I will: • Balance the budget every year and completely eliminate the I have spent 30 years in public service dedicated to these national debt by 2012 to keep America prosperous far into the causes,and as Vice President I will continue to: future. • Cut taxes to help you save for college and pay for health insur- Stress fiscal responsibility by using government surpluses to ance or child care.I will not go along with a huge tax cut for the pay down the national debt, meet obligations to Social Security and Medicare, cut middle class taxes, and make wealthy at the expense of everyone else and that wrecks our key investments in education. good economy in the process. • Fight for a prescription drug benefit for all 40 million Americans . Stand up for the interests of consumers by fighting to reduce on Medicare. the costs of gasoline and home heating oil,cable television • Push for a real, enforceable Patients'Bill of Rights to protect service,and consumer credit cards. everyone who gets their healthcare through a health mainte- nance organization(HMO)or insurance company. • Safeguard our natural environment by pushing cleaner air • Provide access to affordable health care for every child in standards for smog and soot, conserve natural resources America by 2005. conservation and preserve open space, and lower green- • Work to rebuild and modernize our crumbling schools, reduce house gas emissions to combat global warming. class sizes and make high-quality pre-school available to every . Aggressively push for comprehensive campaign finance four-year-old,in every family. reform to blunt the impact of special interests on our law- • Strengthen Social Security and fight for a new,tax-free retire- making process. ment plan to help you save and build a bigger nest egg for your retirement. • Work to guarantee every child a quality education by invest- • Protect and defend a woman's right to choose.This country ing in our public schools, offering more support to teaching does not need a Supreme Court that overturns Roe v.Wade. professionals, improving accountability and performance, • Take on the polluters to clean up our nation's air and water and wiring every 'classroom to the Internet, helping parents reverse the silent tide of global warming. afford the rising costs of college tuition, and promoting American history education. (This information furnished by Gore/Lieberman,Inc.) • Expand the economic winner's circle so low-income working families have a chance to realize the promise of the American dream. (This information furnished by Gore/Lieberman,Inc.) 7 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Partisan Candidates United States President United States Vice President JOHN NAT rx HAGELIN GOLDHABER Reform Reform OCCUPATION: Research OCCUPATION: Internet physicist,educator,and entrepreneur,educator, public policy expert and venture capitalist OCCUPATIONAL OCCUPATIONAL BACKGROUND:Currently BACKGROUND: Director, Vice Chair and Director, Institute of Science,Technology -• MyPoints.com.Founded and Public Policy, Fairfield, Iowa Cybergold, Inc., in 1995 and served as CEO, President and EDUCATIONAL BACKGROUND: Ph.D. in Physics, Harvard Chairman until Cybergold merged with MyPoints.com in August University, 1981; M.A.in Physics, Harvard University, 1976;A.B. 2000. Previously CEO of Kaleida Labs, the multinational joint in Physics,summa cum laude, Dartmouth College, 1975 venture between IBM and Apple. Founder and CEO of Centram Systems West, Inc., which developed TOPS, the first IBM/ PRIOR GOVERNMENTAL EXPERIENCE: Natural Law Party Macintosh local area network; served as President and CEO of candidate for President, 1992 and 1996; worked with the U.S. TOPS and Vice President of Sun Microsystems, Inc., after Sun Congress for the past two decades,and spearheaded the forma- purchased Centrum Systems West in April 1987. President of tion of the largest bipartisan congressional caucus, dedicated to Cole Gilburne Goldhaber& Ariyoshi, Inc., a venture capital firm scientifically proven,prevention-oriented solutions in health care, based on high-technology development; later, President of the crime, international conflict,and the environment National Pacific Fund and the Incubator, Inc. Served on the In this 2000 election,I am seeking to unite all of America's reform- advisory boards of PC Expo and MacWorld Expo,the Center for minded voters to break the two-party stranglehold on our political Creative Imaging, and the multimedia group of the National process. I stand for crucial democratic reforms and forward- Association of Broadcasters; currently serving on the Executive looking,prevention-oriented solutions, including Board of the University of California at Berkeley. • Ending special interest control of our politics through the elim- EDUCATIONAL BACKGROUND: M.Ed., University of California–Berkeley ination of PACs and soft money,public sponsorship of election campaigns, and prevention of lobbying by former public PRIOR GOVERNMENTAL EXPERIENCE: Special Assistant to servants Pennsylvania's lieutenant governor William W. Scranton III; ran • Promoting a balanced, tailored trade policy that promotes the the State Energy Agency as its interim director economic welfare of all Americans, provides markets for our n h domestic small businesses,safeguards American employment I am honored to serve with my presidential running mate Jo H and labor. agelin, I bring 20 years' experience in Silicon Valley to standards, and ensures that imported goods meet campaign and offer a new mainstream voice to American politics. our environmental and product safety standards I have been an entrepreneur my whole life, and I am running to to a disease-care s • Creating a p oriented health care system,as opposed bring entrepreneurship to the White House, introduce proven carystem bought and paid for by special interests solutions to America's problems, and break the two-party stranglehold on our democracy.Entrepreneurship is not limited to able, safe, non-polluting energy s • Protecting the environment thrrgy sources development of renew-rces that will end our business; it is also necessary in politics. Ross Perot taught us that.Now John and I will build on Ross's foundation and,with the dependence on foreign oil and save hundreds of billions of dedicated support of thousands of Reform Party members all dollars in health and environmental costs over the country, we will create, at long last, a mainstream third • Safeguarding America's food supply through sustainable and organic agricultural practices party that will break the two-party stranglehold and take back our• Cutting taxes deeply and responsibly—while protecting Social stolen democracy. Security and Medicare and paying down the national debt— (This information furnished by Hagelin 2000 Committee.) through elimination of government waste and fraud, and through cost-effective solutions to costly social problems • Promoting education that develops the full mental potential of each student • Reducing crime through innovative, field-tested crime preven- tion programs • Promoting more prosperous and harmonious international relations (This information furnished by Hagelin 2000 Committee.) 8 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Partisan Candidates United States President United States Vice President RALPH WINONA a�3.. NADER LADUKE Pacific Green Pacific Green OCCUPATION: Consumer OCCUPATION: Full Time Advocate mother of three;community organizer;small business OCCUPATIONAL entrepreneur;and author. BACKGROUND:Wrote best- ` selling book Unsafe at Any OCCUPATIONAL Speed exposing unsafe BACKGROUND:school automobiles,which forced principal;helping to create small changes in the industry and saved many lives. Founded rural businesses for the processing of wild rice, maple syrup, numerous citizens'groups that combat corporate greed and work roasting coffee,raising buffalo and horses to forming progressive for consumer rights. organizations that address the needs of women, environmental, EDUCATIONAL BACKGROUND: Princeton University; Harvard ecological and human resource needs. Law School EDUCATIONAL BACKGROUND: Graduate of Ashland (OR) PRIOR GOVERNMENTAL EXPERIENCE: Advocate before High School;B.A.from Harvard University,1981;Master's Degree in Rural Development from Antioch University. I have also been Congress and governmental agencies for stronger environmental blessed with invaluable lessons and wisdom from elders and consumer protections. I worldwide. Ralph Nader is a genuine American hero. He courageously PRIOR GOVERNMENTAL EXPERIENCE: I have never held an stands up for the interests of common people against the most elected public office.My"prior government experience"includes powerful institutions in our society.He is running for President as litigation, administrative hearing processes, testimony at the Green Party candidate because the only way we are going to Congress and the UN,all seeking to improve quality of life. regain control of our political institutions is to build a progressive political movement that will break up the concentration of wealth Dear Oregon voters, and power in the hands of the few.Nader is working on behalf of I am an active human being in pursuit of a healthier self- all Americans who understand the urgent need to wage peace, sufficient respectful earth and better democratic processes for protect the environment,end poverty and build a deep democracy our great nation. that involves all citizens. Nader seeks to end the environmental violence of air pollution, I have worked to create organizations and tools within an water pollution and toxic chemicals. He wants to change current atmosphere of selforldwiinacorp and independence from the energy policy, which is run by oil lobbyists, and create a new growing impact of worldwide corporate power.I have had a wide policy focusing on conservation and alternative energies.He also presentations on behalf of the Indigenous Women's Network at range of opportunities to present on these same, including te s wants to end all commercial logging to public land and protect United Nations conferences. 60 million acres in national forests from road building. Nader advocates a living wage,publicly-financed clean elections, I believe that decision-making should not be the exclusive right universal health care coverage for all Americans, and stronger w the privileged.That those who are affected h policy-not those labor laws that protect workers' rights to organize. He wants to who by default often stand above n should be heard in all debates. negotiate fair global trade policies with protections that pull up, ,help our petition at www v ationaer org/debates/index html to rather than push down labor and environmental standards. The Ralph Nader in the national presidential debates The Nader 2000 Campaign is taking on the Democratic- I am interested in reframing the debate on the issues of this Republican duopoly and is reaching out to the non-voters who society: the distribution of wealth, the abuse of power and the made up more than half of the eligible voters in the 1996 rights of the natural world, the environment and the need to Presidential election. For more information, visit our website at consider an amendment to the U.S. Constitution in which all www.votenader.org. decisions made today, will be considered in light of their impact on the seventh generation from now. (This information furnished by Nader 2000 General Committee,Inc.) To Learn More about the Nader/LaDuke Campaign www.votenader.org or www.pacificgreens.org campaign@votenader.org Phone:(202)265-4000 Fax:(202)265-0183 (This information furnished by Winona LaDuke.) 9 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Partisan Candidates United States President HOWARD PHILLIPS Constitution rg�i3 Y. OCCUPATION:Chairman, The Conservative Caucus OCCUPATIONAL BACKGROUND: Director, U.S. Office of Economic Opportunity, Executive Office of the President EDUCATIONAL BACKGROUND: Boston Latin, 1958; Harvard College,A.B., 1962 PRIOR GOVERNMENTAL EXPERIENCE: Executive Director, President's Council on Youth Opportunity If you don't vote for what you believe,you won't get what you want. Democrats and Republicans have raised Federal taxes and spending since 1994 by$600 billion annually. They have bailed out the U.N., sent$18 billion more to the IMF, voted permanent MFN status for Communist China, restricted your gun rights, and pushed government control of your health care. They fund the National Endowment for the Arts, Planned Parenthood,and homosexual activist groups. The U.S.Constitution requires that no person may be deprived of life without due process of law.As President,I will acknowledge that the unborn child, is, without exception, a legal person and appoint U.S.Attorneys to prosecute abortionists. Education must be accountable to parents, not to politicians. I will eliminate the U.S. Department of Education and terminate funding to advocacy groups. We will abolish the IRS. Taxes on income, capital gains, gifts, inheritances, and business activity will end, replaced with a revenue tariff, plus limited excises. Social Security will be privatized, with beneficiaries receiving what was promised.No more FICA taxes. No more undeclared wars---no wars at all except to defend the U.S.When our troops go to war,they will serve under no foreign commander. The U.S. military will be strong enough to deter or defeat any adversary.We will put troops back into Panama. It will be America's policy to be the friend of liberty everywhere, but the guarantor of ours alone. Our Constitution vests all legislative powers in Congress. It is unconstitutional to transfer control over Federal policy and resources to the Federal Reserve,regulatory agencies,unelected bureaucrats, private organizations, the Judiciary, international organizations,or the President. I will repeal all unconstitutional Executive Orders. (This information furnished by Howard Phillips.) 10 Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—General Information Congressional Map < 4� 3 ° 1 x I � r ffZ rr < I < / m • C ~� J I r- J � r • < I I Z • " Z � I Q I • � LVi ir z x Cn CD• W t , Q W I W 1 I I = I ° I I I J Q W i V) I _ z lL LL• h-- I I - W V 0. I K to • I- � old I - I z [Ln , ----------- U < Z if ❑ Z 0 Y alp < i ? f I C \J ° v i /r _ B o y py w I to Y y <I _ •Y z 1 g � —W- rO � Y J O i j • ' CL Y •_ _ I N J r o o JW a I , o p Q8 Qf Z I _r� om OZ 0 ° ��^ o]f u7 r In r m U U Z L�Ld cc LU J O.N-.O r6i O /�--q UO U❑ U I O I I 11 Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet-Partisan Candidates Representative In Congress Representative In Congress 2nd District 2nd District WALTER GREG PONSFORD WALDEN Democrat Republican OCCUPATION: Farmer t OCCUPATION:Congressman; Small business owner. OCCUPATIONAL BACKGROUND: Retired Teacher OCCUPATIONAL BACKGROUND: Greg and his EDUCATIONAL wife, Mylene, have owned and BACKGROUND:B.S.Western operated Columbia Gorge Oregon, M.S.University of Oregon Broadcasters, Inc.for 14 years. PRIOR GOVERNMENTAL EXPERIENCE: ESD member,State EDUCATIONAL BACKGROUND:Journalism Degree,University Advisory Council for Citizen's Review Board. of Oregon;Graduate, Hood River Valley High School. You,the voter,can choose between a self-professing conserv- PRIOR GOVERNMENTAL EXPERIENCE: Congressman, 1999- ative Republican and me,a progressive Harry Truman Democrat. present;Oregon legislator 1989-97. 1 can win if people vote wisely.I will vote for no one's undeserved Greg Walden to improve schools. benefit. g 9 P I spent this summer operating my farm and traveling Second As the parent of a fifth grader, Greg is working to make sure District.I have only spent a few thousand dollars while my oppo- schools have the resources they need. He's supported giving nent has hundreds of thousands at his disposal. When I am parents, teachers and local school boards more say in using elected, I will owe little except to people who freely worked and federal funds.He's voted to make the federal government pay its voted forme. fair share for federal mandates. To help college students, he's supported increases in Pell grants and other financial aid.He will I am concerned with greed as practiced by public and private continue to work for higher standards for all students. policy makers.We pay too much for a health system that neglects over forty million working people. If we are serious, we can Greg Walden...working to improve health care. change the system. Everyone can have good, affordable health Greg has a strong commitment to improving access to health care.I will vote for health care change. care.He's supported HMO reforms and is working for prescription I believe that doctors,nurses,and their support personnel must drug coverage for seniors.He's working to make health insurance be independent and well paid. more available and affordable.He will continue to work for health care reforms that will keep our hospitals open and health care The public deserves to know why Americans pay the highest providers in our communities. drug prices in the world.We must have affordable prescription medicine. If the public is being cheated, I will vote for price Greg Walden...working to improve our way of life. control.I will vote for accelerated medical research. Greg is working to open new markets for our agricultural products I will vote to make social security secure by paying back and to fight unfair trade practices by other countries. He per- monies previously borrowed by our government. suaded three congressional committees to hold hearings in our district to learn firsthand about the unique problems we face. I will vote funding for world birth control information.Abortion Greg will continue to work for Oregon-based solutions to timber, disturbs me; but I would not vote for any unenforceable prohi- water,and natural resource issues. bition law. Greg Walden...working to pay down federal debt, I will vote decent pay for men and women in service. reform taxes. Because we spend one-half of all the world's defense funds, I Greg helped stop the"raids"on the Social Security and Medicare will closely monitor useless,expensive military spending. trust funds.He backed efforts to require a balanced federal bud- will vote policies that stabilize small business and farm get and to pay down record amounts of debt—nearly$500 billion enterprises. in four years.He's working to repeal the marriage tax penalty and the death tax.Working American families deserve to keep more I will work for salaries that allow more single-wage earner of what they earn. families to be successful in today's economy. Congressman Greg Walden... I will vote for sustained timber harvest. Making a Real Difference for Us! I will vote fair trade for jobs,agriculture and timber. (This information furnished by Walden for Congress.) (This information furnished by Walter Ponsford.) 12 Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—General Information IN fli 3 � � �q 3 F.'• Y c Y � k `v, k il 8. 205 feet above the sea, the Heceta Head Lighthouse was first lit in 1894 and automated in 1963. 1998 photo courtesy of Becky Lippmann of Keizer, Oregon. 13 Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet-Partisan Candidates Secretary of State Secretary of State BILL LLOYD BRADBURY MARBET �a Democrat Pacific Green OCCUPATION:Secretary of t3:i OCCUPATION:Caretaker; State Citizen Activist;Program Manager;More detailed OCCUPATIONAL information on resume at BACKGROUND: Executive www.marbet.or.9 or get copy `. Director of For the Sake of the at(503)771-7254. Salmon;television journalist; owner of a restaurant and of a video production company OCCUPATIONAL BACKGROUND: Citizen activist; Opposed EDUCATIONAL BACKGROUND: Graduated University of Vietnam War,nuclear power,destruction of initiative and referen- Chicago High School;attended Antioch College dum process. PRIOR GOVERNMENTAL EXPERIENCE: Senate President EDUCATIONAL BACKGROUND:One year of college. 1993-1995; Senate Majority Leader 1987-1992; State Senator PRIOR GOVERNMENTAL EXPERIENCE: 1966-1967 U.S.Navy; 1985-1995;State Representative 1981-1985 1986-1994 Citizens Utility Board; 1996-2000 Clackamas River Bill Bradbury Basin Council Oregon's Secretary of State - A PROVEN OREGON A Real Choice for a Changet LEADER We as citizens have power to make great change. In Bill Bradbury is a hands-on state executive who has a dis- Oregon we have a history of standing up for justice,the environ- tinguished career serving Oregonians as a Legislator from ment and integrity in government.So why is it that over 50% of the South Coast.In the past year,he has proven that he can those eligible to vote are not registered, and of those who are, make tough decisions in a fair, even-handed manner. As 23%are registered Independent?I believe this hidden majority of your Secretary of State, Bill has proven that he is a person Oregonians have become disillusioned with the Democrats and of integrity who is objective and unbiased. Republicans and are disenfranchised by "the best government BETTER,SMARTER GOVERNMENT corporate money can buy" Accountability and Efficiency It's time for real Campaign Finance Reform. It's time to As Oregon's chief auditor, Bill ensures that our tax dollars take corporations out of elections. Our country was not are not wasted. founded on the principle"of the corporation,by the corpora- Fair and Honest Elections tion,for the corporation:'As Oregon's chief elections officer, Bill takes a nonpartisan When you elect me Secretary of State: approach to Oregon elections.He presided over the nation's • As your chief elections officer, I will seek to enact real first Vote By Mail primary with the highest turnout since Campaign Finance Reform. 1988. • I will promote using Instant Runoff in elections so we can stop Protecting Our Environment voting"lessor evils" in fear, and instead vote our preferences As a member of the State Land Board, Bill fights to protect and,by doing so,our.convictions.. Oregon's natural heritage. Bill has worked hard to ensure . As the auditor of state agencies, I will ensure that your money that the owners of the New Carissa pay for clean-up costs. is spent cost effectively and services to be performed are Benefiting our Schools provided. Bill will fight to ensure that we get the highest value for our timber products to benefit schools. . As one of three members on the State Lands Board,I will work to manage state owned land with stewardship and environ- A PUBLIC SERVANT OREGONIANS CAN TRUST mental sustainability. Democrats, Independents and Republicans alike are proud • When addressing reapportionment, I will ensure that political to endorse Bill Bradbury for Secretary of State.The following boundaries are drawn respecting the integrity of our communi- have endorsed a man who The Oregonian called"a political ties rather than gdrrymandering districts for the benefit of pro with a lot of integrity"(October 3, 1999)and a"quintes- Republicans or Democrats. sential consensus builder"(January 17,1993). In this election I ask you to bring back democracy. Governor John Kitzhaber(D) Mrs.Tom(Audrey) McCall(R) "Lloyd Marbet is a towering public citizen who makes Former Secretary of State Phil Keisling(D) democracy work in Oregon" Former Secretary of State Clay Myers(I) Ralph Nader,8-28-2000 Former Governor and Secretary of State Barbara Roberts(D) (This information furnished by Lloyd Marbet For SOS.) Oregon State Sheriffs Association Phone:503-233-2311 Online:www.bradbury2000.com. (This information furnished by Friends of Bill Bradbury.) 14 CONTINUED 0 Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Partisan Candidates Secretary of State Secretary of State E.J. (ED) LYNN SNODGRASS POLE,II y �u Libertarian Republican s OCCUPATION: Engineer, OCCUPATION: Small business Electronics owner, Drake's 7 Dee's Garden Center and Landscape Co.; OCCUPATIONAL Oregon House Speaker. BACKGROUND: Intel (1996) including Intel Achievement OCCUPATIONAL !. Award(2000);IBM(1968) BACKGROUND:Teacher; including,member Apollo 11 Personnel Manager; Launch"Team (1969), Outstanding Contribution Award (1976), Landscape designer. member task force defining.requirements of personal computer EDUCATIONAL BACKGROUND: Portland State University,B.S. (1979), retired(1998). Elementary Education;Oregon State University;Clackamas High EDUCATIONAL BACKGROUND: BS Engineering Science, School. Florida State University PRIOR GOVERNMENTAL EXPERIENCE: Speaker of the PRIOR GOVERNMENTAL EXPERIENCE: None Oregon House, 1999-Present; House Majority Leader, 1997; ED POLE State Representative, 1995-Present;Damascus School Board. THE ONLY TRUE CHOICE Community Involvement: Mt. Hood Medical Foundation, past president;Albertina Kerr;Junior Achievement teacher;Habitat for I will bring fresh ideas, practical management, professional atti- Humanity;Good Shepherd Community Church. tudes,and a real concern for the taxpayer and citizen to the office of Secretary of State. LYNN SNODGRASS Strong Leadership and Vision A vote for Ed Pole is: • A vote for efficient management based on out-sourcing to INVEST IN ACCOUNTABLE SCHOOLS: "Better schools begin private companies under competitive bids. with accountability, discipline and higher standards.As a former • A vote for real campaign finance reform with less government schoolteacher, I'll improve schools, secure the funding our chil- regulation, no tax support for candidates and parties,and real dren need, and require administrative and classroom account- respect for the principles of the Constitution. ability."Lynn Snodgrass • A vote to stop welfare for political parties by ending tax-funded "As a citizen legislator, Lynn has made education a prior- primaries. ity throughout her public service and volunteer work. She • A vote to protect the Oregon Initiative Process from "sneak cares about our kids and will always be there for them.As attacks", hidden agendas, secret policies, and unequal Speaker she increased K-12 funding 10 percent and higher treatment. education 25 percent."Gail Wilhelms, Beaverton teacher • A vote for redistricting based on population and unity of inter- ests not partisan politics. "Oregon needs Lynn's balanced stewardship managing • A vote to end term limits,a bad idea whose time never was,so natural resources on behalf of the Common School Fund.' YOU can decide who represents you. Senator Gordon Smith DON'T WASTE YOUR VOTE! The only way YOU can win is to BETTER GOVERNMENT: "Families should keep more of what vote for the better candidate,not the lesser evil.Only Ed Pole and they earn.The tax surplus(the kicker)should be refunded so you Libertarians offer smaller government, fewer laws and regula- can save or spend as you choose.As a business woman, I'll run tions, lower taxes,and true reform. government with more efficiency and less waste" Lynn Paid for by the Committee to Elect Ed Pole. See us at Snodgrass httl27Hwww.e6 olr� eii.org, e-mail einoleii @ej old eii.org, or call "I trust Lynn Snodgrass to make government efficient and (503)648-6013.Write us at 1221 NE 51 st Ave,#39,Hillsboro,OR to guarantee that our tax dollars are not wasted. She'll 97124. demand results for the taxpayer" Randy Ridderbusch, AFSCME, President Local 2376 (This information furnished by Committee to Elect Ed Pole.) FAIR ELECTIONS:"Whether sponsoring the Voter Protection Act or increasing voter participation, I'll implement changes quickly, fairly and properly.I'll ensure our election laws protect voter rights and our initiative process:'Lynn Snodgrass "Lynn Snodgrass will fight for everyone's right to vote and sign a petition.She has a deep respect for our demo- cratic process.She'll place high value on her constitutional duty to create fair election laws"Jim Torrey, Eugene Mayor (This information furnished by Citizens for Lynn Snodgrass for Secretary of State.) 15 Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—General Information i 8%iB iii,NI f.. ��il`By99 aft F•i'S{�i I e 'F 4 3E$ 4 t t L � 1 a � Although only 38 feet tall, the Cape Meares Lighthouse sits atop nearly 200-foot tall cliffs.It was commissioned New Year's Day 1890 and replaced by an automated light in 1963. 1997 photo courtesy of Sharon Crawford of Cornelius, Oregon. 16 Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Partisan Candidates State Treasurer State Treasurer RANDALL JON EDWARDS E KVISTAD Democrat Republican OCCUPATION: Managing OCCUPATION:Small Business Partner, EDJE Consulting; Owner;Coffee Company Co r: Oregon State Representative Owner;Metro Councilor OCCUPATIONAL OCCUPATIONAL BACKGROUND: Oregon State BACKGROUND: Kvistad.& Treasury,manager and senior Associates;JAK Designs advisor;Treasury Retirement Task Force, manager EDUCATIONAL BACKGROUND: Oregon State University EDUCATIONAL BACKGROUND: MBA, George Washington Graduate University;BA, Economics PRIOR GOVERNMENTAL EXPERIENCE: Metro Presiding Officer and Councilor, Finance and Budget Committee; Chair, PRIOR GOVERNMENTAL EXPERIENCE: Vice Chairman, Regional Transportations Chair, federal advisory committee on Oregon Debt Policy Advisory Commission;State Representative, transportation;Staff Assistant/intern, Senator Mark O.Hatfield Revenue Committee,Special Committee on School Finance Jon Kvistad:Oregon Values Personal:Married,father of three Jon grew up working on the family Century Farm in eastern RANDALL EDWARDS...A PROVEN FINANCIAL LEADER Oregon and helping relatives in Astoria.His parents,one an edu- cator, instilled strong Oregon values in Jon. Running a business "Randall Edwards will fight for the financial security of and being a local elected leader honed his skills.Jon is a solid Oregonians.He'll put taxpayers'interests first!" manager and fiscal conservative. --U.S.SENATOR RON WYDEN "We are impressed with Jon's strong grasp of the issues... RANDALL EDWARDS...Fights for Schools, Creates College Having a farming background gives Jon first-hand knowl- Savings Plan edge...We feel he is well qualified to represent the people of • Edwards created Oregon's new College Savings Plan, the State of Oregon:' allowing Oregonians to save $2,000 a year tax free for. Carol Russell, Chairman of AG-PAC; A Leader in Oregon college. agriculture • Edwards is the only candidate who has improved school funding and advocated school district audits to put cost Jon Kvistad:Honesty and Integrity savings into classrooms. Oregon needs a leader with vision who can help do more with • Edwards' "School Investments" plan creates a special less.Jon is a proven leader who can work effectively with others. Treasury fund to help repair older school buildings and build He will provide maximum return for the taxpayer dollar. Honesty new schools--without additional taxes. and integrity are the values that make Jon so effective. "Our schools need Randall's financial leadership and new "I have known Jon Kvistad for many years and his honesty ideas." and integrity are assets we need in a State Treasurer." --An Nice,Oregon Education Association The Honorable Greg Walden,Member of Congress RANDALL EDWARDS...Saving Taxpayers Money Jon Kvistad:A Leader with Vision • Edwards'School Bond Guaranty Act reduced bond interest A proven leader,Jon will work to create family wage jobs,help rates,saving taxpayers and schools$69 million. family farms remain in the family, invest in Oregon and increase • As a Treasury manager, Edwards helped improve Oregon's the return on State Lands for Oregon Schools.Jon will create an credit rating to the best level in two decades,saving taxpay- environment for success by building coalitions to get things done! ers millions. "Jon is a problem solver. His nonpartisan approach makes "Randall Edwards is the only candidate with extensive financial Jon an outstanding public servant:' experience at the Treasury,saving taxpayers money." The Honorable Jack Roberts, Oregon State Labor --Pamela Leavitt,VP,Oregon Credit Union League Commissioner RANDALL EDWARDS...Building Financial Security for We Endorse Jon Kvistad(partial list) Seniors Former Congressman Bob Smith • Edwards is fighting to ease the property tax burden on Senate President Brady Adams seniors, helping them stay in their homes. 14 Oregon Mayors • Edwards will use his Treasury experience to wisely invest 40+Oregon Legislators state pension funds and protect Social Security. Ag-Pac • Endorsed by Oregon State Council of Senior Citizens, Oregon Forest Products Transportation Association former Governors Barbara Roberts and Neil Goldschmidt. (This information furnished by The Friends of Jon Kvistad) "Randall Edwards is the most qualified candidate to manage Oregon's$49 billion portfolio.We endorse him." --State Treasurer Jim Hill --former State Treasurer Bill Rutherford EDWARDS FOR TREASURER A Proven Financial Leader...A Record of Results (This information furnished by Randall Edwards for State Treasurer.) 17 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet-Partisan Candidates State Treasurer LState Treasurer CARLOS F. MITCHELL T. LUCERO SHULTS Constitution Libertarian OCCUPATION: I am a systems OCCUPATION: Director, analyst with a wide range of Business Development, Intel. financial and computer experience. OCCUPATIONAL BACKGROUND: Investment OCCUPATIONAL and marketing professional for BACKGROUND: Includes Intel.Co-founder of successful Dallas County until 1971 technology business.Senior and moved to Portland, Oregon, worked for U.S. National Bank; manager,Arthur Andersen/Andersen Consulting. Wells Fargo Bank; other financial institutions including various EDUCATIONAL BACKGROUND: B.A., magna cum laude, Rice government agencies;and Tektronix. University, Economics and Political Science, 1982.Wilson High EDUCATIONAL BACKGROUND: Includes three years at San School, Portland,Oregon, 1982. Diego Jr.College and The University of New Mexico.I then served PRIOR GOVERNMENTAL EXPERIENCE:Member,professional Uthe U.S.Army m rd Transportation Division, in Europe,and the staff, Oversight and Investigations Subcommittee of the U.S. United States from 1960 o anon I received my honorable x s- Congress'Committee on Interior and Insular'Affairs, 1982. charge in 1966.I joined Automation Service Center in Dallas,Texas in 1965 where I got my certificate as a computer programmer. The Best Qualified Candidate PRIOR GOVERNMENTAL EXPERIENCE:None,but I am deeply Mitch Shults is a proven business professional with almost 20 concerned about the lack of accountability in state government. years of experience dealing with large financial systems. He is As Chief Financial'Officer of Oregon, I will concentrate on fully qualified to work with fund managers and other personnel in accountability to the people for the investment and expenditures a cost effective way. Mitch's campaign hasn't been bought and of the people's money. paid for by special interests.Close to$55 billion of your money is I am honored to be a candidate for State Treasurer of the great held by the Treasury.if you want these assets handled by a busi- state of Oregon. I am a 62 year old, businessman, in Portland. ness professional,not a professional politician,vote Mitch Shults. Born in Antonito, Colorado, I am married to my beautiful wife Building the Common School Fund Rene' and have five children, Dawn, Tina, Tony, David, and Danny.I have three grandchildren, Brittni, Blair,and Zarin. The Common School Fund generates about $20 million per year from about$800 million in assets.As a member of the State In the forefront of my convictions and beliefs are the principles of Land Board, Mitch Shults will work to sell most state lands (not Life, Liberty, Family, Property, Constitution, State Rights, and parks or beaches) to commercial and environmental interests. American Sovereignty. When I read them in the Constitution Once invested,the over$2 billion in proceeds will generate over Party's principles and platform, I knew I had found the party 1 $200 million every year for Oregon's children - without raising would call my party. taxes.Mitch will use part of that money to finance scholarships for I believe that we have a lot of work to do.Starting with education low-income children to attend the public or private school of their and bringing the country, the state, and the constitution back to choice. the people under God.I have dedicated myself to do this,and the Protecting Your Money Constitution Party has the platform,that expresses my convictions. Mitch Shults will work to: What I want is clean,efficient and accountable state government. Accountability in all state agencies.Accountable to the citizens of ' Fully implement the tax-advantaged college savings program the state of Oregon. that the current Treasurer has failed to deliver. (This information furnished by Carlos F Lucero.) • Encourage saving by eliminating State taxes on interest and dividends. • 'Allow Oregonians to'opt out'of Social Security in favor of pri- vate retirement savings accounts. • Give Public Employee Retirement System (PERS) members the option of managing their own.accounts. VOTE MITCH SHULTS "Because It's YOUR Money" www.shults2000.com•infoOshults2000.com 800-631-8292 (This information furnished by Friends of Mitch Shults.) 18 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Partisan Candidates State Treasurer z LEONARD ZACK E Reform OCCUPATION: Restaurant Service OCCUPATIONAL BACKGROUND:Treasurer, ' Oregon Right to Know EDUCATIONAL BACKGROUND: Economics, University of Oregon 1983-89 PRIOR GOVERNMENTAL EXPERIENCE: None Oregon needs effective solutions to its problems—solutions that can be implemented on a realistic financial basis.That's why I'm running for State Treasurer as a coalition candidate for the Reform Party and the Natural Law Party.I want to unite Oregon's reform-minded voters behind crucial democratic reforms and forward-looking,prevention-oriented solutions,including • Ending special interest control of our politics through the elimination of PACs and soft money,and prevention of lobbying by former public servants • Cutting taxes deeply and responsibly through elimination of government waste and fraud, and through cost-effective solutions to costly social problems • Creating a prevention-oriented health care system,as opposed to a disease-care system bought and paid for by special interests • Protecting the environment through the development of renew- able,safe,non-polluting energy sources that will end America's dependence on foreign oil and save hundreds of millions of dollars in health and environmental costs • Safeguarding our food supply through sustainable and organic agricultural practices,and protecting family farms and our rural communities • Promoting education that develops the full mental potential of each student Here's how these programs can work together for your benefit. Prevention-oriented health care can cut costs by 50%, thereby saving hundreds of millions of dollars that can be reinvested in education, environmental protection, and other critical social programs.Likewise,effective crime prevention,renewable energy sources, sustainable industries, and elimination of government waste can create new revenues that will help create new jobs, build a stronger Oregon, and reestablish our reputation as a pioneer among the U.S.states.As State Treasurer, I will ensure that our present financial resources are wisely invested and that new,effective revenue-generating programs are quickly explored and implemented. Please join me. Together, we can secure a more prosperous future. (This information furnished by Leonard Zack.) 19 Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Partisan Candidates Attorney General Attorney General THOMAS B. KEVIN L. Cox MANNIX Libertarian Republican OCCUPATION:database � �� OCCUPATION:Attorney; architect State Representative OCCUPATIONAL OCCUPATIONAL qw BACKGROUND:Assistant BACKGROUND:database Attorney General,Oregon; architect, information Assistant Attorney General, management consultant, Guam;Administrative Law author,public relations professional Judge; Circuit Court Judge, Pro-Tem; District Court Judge, EDUCATIONAL BACKGROUND: BA Behavioral Science, Pro-Tem;State Senator;State Representative College of the University of Chicago, 1986 with honors EDUCATIONAL BACKGROUND: Bachelor of Arts and Law PRIOR GOVERNMENTAL EXPERIENCE: none. degrees, University of Virginia Fully Informed Juries PRIOR GOVERNMENTAL EXPERIENCE:Judge;Senator;State Under the Oregon Constitution, every jury has the right to judge Representative;Chair,House Judiciary Criminal Law Committee; both the facts and the law of a case. Every juror has the right to member, Ways & Means, Labor, and Rules Committees; vote Not Guilty if he or she disagrees with the law, regardless of Emergency Board; Capitol Planning Commission; Chair, Farm Worker Housing Task Force the facts.This prevents the government from enforcing laws that the citizens don't believe in. I will direct my staff to inform every Personal:Married 26 years,father of three school-age children jury of this right. Courage,Leadership,Results Asset Forfeiture Mannix had the courage to fight to enact Oregon's landmark anti- My office will not pursue asset forfeiture cases except when crim- stalking law,mandatory minimum sentences for violent criminals, inal charges are filed, and will only allow forfeiture upon criminal and tougher laws against repeat drunk drivers. He led efforts to conviction.We will only seize assets when they pose a flight risk expand consumer protection, reduce unnecessary regulations, in criminal cases, and will only seize those assets named in the provide fair tax hearings for taxpayers,. reform Workers' criminal charges.We will prosecute any police officer or agency Compensation, and improve services for senior citizens and that seizes and confiscates property without due process, in developmentally disabled persons. violation of the Fourth Amendment of the Constitution of the In The Ore.oa nian(8/5/99), Peter Glazer,Chair of the Governor's United States. Advisory Committee on DUII stated, "Oregonians owe a debt of Harm During Warrantless Searches gratitude to Rep.Mannix..."for his leadership in passing Oregon's My office will prosecute any law enforcement officer or agency repeat drunk driver law. Salem Statesman Journal (5/17/99): that wrongfully harms any person during any warrantless search. Mannix is"a consensus builder.' We will seek restitution for that harm and for any property Awards damaged during wrongful searches. 1999 Co-Legislator of the Year, Oregon Council of Police Focus on Violent Crimes Associations My office will set as its goal that every violent crime be prose- 1999 Friend of the Children Award, Children's Healthcare Is A cuted fully, and without plea bargains. Given our limited Legal Duty, Inc. resources, we will shift all effort away from crimes that have no 2000 Honoree, Oregon Certified Fraud Examiners Association victim,toward crimes that threaten life and limb. Endorsements Official Corruption Oregon State Police Officers Association I will create a continuing task force to investigate any reports Multnomah County Deputy Sheriffs Association of corruption on the part of the state's elected and appointed Oregon Agricultural PAC officials.It is only fair that the people who create and enforce the Oregon Forest Products Transportation Association laws should be the first ones expected to live by those laws. Oregon Farm Bureau PAC (This information furnished by Thomas B.Cox.) Safety and Protection Mannix will deliver safer homes, schools, and neighborhoods because he is tough on accountability, smart on prevention, and sensitive on treatment.He gets results. Mannix's comprehensive approach to public safety includes classroom discipline,with teacher authority to maintain a positive learning environment, and full enforcement against property crimes. Mannix will work with honest businesses to promote consumer education,toughen consumer protection laws,and quickly prose- cute businesses that cheat Oregonians. Elect Kevin Mannix: The courage to fight for Oregon; the courage to fight for you. (This information furnished by Kevin L.Mannix.) 20 CONTINUED Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Partisan Candidates Attorney General HARDY 4' R MYERS a d o 6 Democrat OCCUPATION:Attorney General OCCUPATIONAL BACKGROUND:Attorney EDUCATIONAL BACKGROUND: Bend, Prineville schools;University of Mississippi;University of Oregon Law School PRIOR GOVERNMENTAL EXPERIENCE:State Representative, Speaker of the House; chair, Oregon Criminal Justice Council; State Sentencing Guidelines Board; chair, Metro Charter Committee; Commission on Judicial Branch; Governor's Domestic Violence Council;Oregon Law Commission PERSONAL: Hardy and Mary Ann have three sons: Hardy III, Christopher,Jonathan RE-ELECT HARDY MYERS YOUR DEDICATED ATTORNEY GENERAL Hardy was elected Attorney General after long private practice, distinguished public service. Surveys twice rated him Oregon's most outstanding legislator. He also served on panels that improved court 'procedures, strengthened criminal sentences, drafted Metro's charter. SUPPORTS STRONG LAW ENFORCEMENT Hardy Myers diligently helps prosecutors and other law enforce- ment punish and prevent crime.He achieved major expansion of victims'services, and defended over 4,700 criminal convictions on appeal.Hardy's public safety record includes forming his Safe Schools/Communities Coalition and seeking improved law enforcement funding.That record has earned him endorsement by many prosecutors like Michael Schrunk, Josh Marquis, Doug Harcleroad, Mark Huddleston, Mike Dugan; sheriffs like Ris Bradshaw;police chiefs like Bernie Giusto. COMMITTED TO OPEN,HONEST GOVERNMENT Heading state government's lawyers, Hardy works to assure open, honest government by legal advice unaffected by his per- sonal political views. He has fought for strong consumer protec- tion, including Oregon's tobacco litigation. He works for effective child support, other family services; fights elder abuse and Medicaid fraud;and safeguards the honest conduct of charities. COMMITTED TO STRONG LEADERSHIP Hardy Myers contributes to Oregon's quality of life with strong, nonpartisan leadership in applying the rule of law to government, citizens, and corporations. He will give special priority to school safety,domestic violence reduction,victims'services,youth crime prevention/smoking reduction, enhanced consumer protection, elder abuse prevention, and strengthened law enforcement funding. Hardy's bipartisan supporters include statewide leaders like Ron Wyden, John Kitzhaber, Barbara Roberts, Bill Rutherford, Neil Goldschmidt, and citizens throughout Oregon. He has earned your confidence and support. www.hardymyers.com (This information furnished by Re-elect Attorney General Hardy Myers Committee.) 21 Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Partisan Candidates State Senator State Senator 27th District 27th District BEV » ANNE N. CLARNO PHILIBEN Republican Democrat OCCUPATION: Rancher OCCUPATION: Retired Army Officer(Lieutenant Colonel OCCUPATIONAL Nurse Corp),Small Business k BACKGROUND: Real Estate Owner. Broker;Appraiser;Securities OCCUPATIONAL Examiner;Circuit Court Clerk; i BACKGROUND:Director of -' Nursing,Weed Army Hospital EDUCATIONAL BACKGROUND: Redmond High School; National Training Center, Ft. Irvin CA; Asst. Director of Nursing Marylhurst BA;attended Northwestern School of Law Frankfurt Army Medical Center, Director of Maternal Child PRIOR GOVERNMENTAL EXPERIENCE:Legislator 1989-1996; Nursing King Faisal Specialist Research Hospital Riyadh Saudi Speaker of the House 1995-96 Arabia; Researcher Women in the Army Studies (MAX WAX) Army Research Institute, Washington DC; Project officer Member: United Methodist Church; High Desert Museum; Renovation and Reconstruction Nurnberg US Army Hospital Museum Warm Springs; Community Dispute Resolution Nurnberg Germany;Research Nurse King Veteran's Home, King Program; Community Policing Team; Victims' Assistance WI; Waupaca County (WI) Immunization coordinator. Taught at Foundation;Deschutes River Conservancy;Bank Director City Colleges of Chicago, Viet Nam Veteran. Organizer 36th "Bev Clarno has demonstrated a commitment to the welfare of all Evacuation Hospital reunion. Central Oregon's children and families.I am proud to be counted EDUCATIONAL BACKGROUND: Diploma Nursing Presbyterian among many Democrats who appreciate Bev's deep commitment St. Luke's Hospital School of Nursing (Rush University Chicago, to these issues and enthusiastically support her election to the IL);Bachelors of Science in Nursing Medical College of Georgia Senate:"Dennis Maloney Augusta GA; Master of Nursing in Nursing Administration "I'm please to endorse Bev Clarno for the Senate.Bev earned a University of Washington Seattle,WA reputation as a watchdog for the taxpayers while serving in the PRIOR GOVERNMENTAL EXPERIENCE:Twerity two years as a Oregon legislature.We need Bev's tenacity in pursuing govern- military officer ment waste and demanding accountability to taxpayers. I served POLITICAL CONCERNS with Bev Clarno and observed first hand her ability to buck the EDUCATION SCHOOLS NEED OUR GREATEST ATTEN- system and insist on common sense in government rules and TION. regulations."Congressman Greg Walden A First Class Education must be guaranteed "Bev will go into the legislature with a strong voice and a reputa- for all Oregonians. tion that will give her and our community a huge advantage in Reduce class sizes and do more to prepare Salem. I have served with Bev in the past and have seen first students for school. hand her ability to bring consensus to many difficult issues.' SENIORS Keep Seniors and disabled persons in their Senator Neil Bryant. homes. "Bev has the experience to understand the job and the dedication Develop community partnerships to support and integrity to do it right.We need more people like Bev in the them with health care, nutritional, housing, Senate so we can continue to hold the line on spending and limit transportation and recreation needs. the burden state government has on our everyday lives"Senator HEALTH CARE Support the rights of patients and health care Gene Derfler,Senate Majority Leader providers to make decisions! Bev respects the contributions seniors have made to our Assist At-Risk Families! society Educate at-risk individuals! Bev believes our veterans should be honored with adequate Treat drug abusers! benefits ENVIRONMENT Saving the clean air and water of Oregon a Bev believes education is a top priority for our children must! GOVERNMENT Campaign Finance Reform crucial to good Bev supports early intervention for at-risk children government! Bev advocates prevention programs to avoid spending millions http://www.annephiliben.com on prisons email anphibnObendcable.com (This information furnished by Clarno for Senate.) 541-318-5713 (This information furnished by Anne Phifiben for State Senate.) 22 Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Partisan Candidates State Representative State Representative 54th District 54th District KEN I y TIM COOPER �I KNOPP Democrat x s.. Republican OCCUPATION: Retired OCCUPATION:State E:. educator,33 years Representative;Small business w,.. owner. OCCUPATIONAL OCCUPATIONAL BACKGROUND: High School BACKGROUND:Congressional teacher;Oregon National campaign aide;Insurance and Guard;Television Repair Shop securities;Laborer,field trainer, Owner;logger. petroleum industry;Timber worker. EDUCATIONAL BACKGROUND: Cottage Grove High School; EDUCATIONAL BACKGROUND: Center for Professional Oregon Institute of Technology; University of Oregon, B.S. Studies, continuing education courses; York Community High Education;NE London Polytechnic School School, Illinois;Bend public schools. PRIOR GOVERNMENTAL EXPERIENCE: Chair, Bend Library PRIOR GOVERNMENTAL EXPERIENCE:State Representative; Advisory Council; Executive Secretary, Cottage Grove National United States Senate Deschutes County Council, appointed by Guard;Bend/LaPine School District,Technology Team;Co-chair, U.S.Senator Gordon Smith;Precinct Committee Person. County Committee for Public Library Systems. TIM KNOPP...KEPT HIS COMMITMENT TO VOTERS Civic involvement: Chair, State Legislative Council AARP;Past Our State Representative, Tim Knopp represented Central and President, Oregon Association of Classroom Teachers; County Southern Oregon just like he said he would.While some politi- Library Outreach Program for children and homebound seniors; cians say one thing to get elected, then do another, it's nice to Campaign Finance Reform,volunteer. know we can count on Tim Knopp to keep his word. Let's send Providing opportunities for our children's future him back to Salem so he can continue to work for us. As a teacher, I know children will do better if we make greater "Knopp performed as advertised:' educational opportunities are a priority.We must provide the tools The Bulletin July 28,1999 students need to reach higher academic standards and reduce TIM KNOPP...MADE EDUCATION HIS class sizes so students and teachers can focus on education. NUMBER ONE PRIORITY Strengthening community programs for youth will help them Tim supported increased funding for K-12, education service become responsible citizens. Access to an affordable college education will be a top priority. districts, community colleges and our university system, without raising taxes. He.also supported greater accountability. Tim Promoting prosperity and livability sponsored a bill that will support teachers as they work to achieve Oregon natural resources and quality of life attract residents, better discipline in the classroom. He also supported charter tourists and business.Working to protect livability while increas- schools and legislation that will strengthen school safety for our ing economic prosperity helps all the people in our region.Let's students. make sure our economic needs and our desire to preserve TIM KNOPP...FOUGHT FOR TAXPAYERS Oregon's natural beauty march into this new century hand in hand. Tim Knopp was the legislatures'most consistent and reliable vote to protect taxpayers from unwanted tax and fee increases.Tim Healthy families for strong communities supported returning over-collected income taxes("the Kicker")to Seniors shouldn't have to choose between buying medication taxpayers.He also worked to lower property taxes. after buying food. Working families shouldn't have to choose "Give the guy credit for keeping his promises:' between paying the mortgage or having health insurance.I sup- The Bulletin August 23,2000 port the Oregon Health Plan and improving coverage for Oregon's children. TIM KNOPP...STRONGLY SUPPORTED SENIORS Working for responsible government Tim voted for better access to prescription drugs at lower cost. I'm retired on a fixed income and know the financial burden of Tim supported property tax rebates to enable seniors to live in taxes and how to live within a budget. I will listen to the people their own home as long as possible. of my district to set responsible priorities for our tax dollars.State Endorsed by government should strengthen families and communities by Oregon State Council of Senior Citizens helping them find local solutions. TIM KNOPP...SUPPORTED SAFE NEIGHBORHOODS Ken Cooper--A Leader who Listen AND HIGHWAYS 389-6500 Tim supported placing 100 additional state police officers on the road in our communities.He also supported cracking down on sex (This information furnished by Citizens for Ken Cooper.) offenders that prey on our citizens. I would appreciate your vote! (This information furnished by Tim Knopp for State Representative Committee.) 23 Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Partisan Candidates State Representative State Representative 55th District 55th District DOUGLAS BEN DUNLAP WESTLUND Democrat Republican OCCUPATION: Forest Engineer 3 :rte OCCUPATION: Businessman, Agribusiness OCCUPATIONAL BACKGROUND: Forest road OCCUPATIONAL 4 engineer,Confederated Tribes BACKGROUND:Small of Warm Springs;contract businessman in agricultural ik supervisor,Warm Springs enterprises Forest Products Industries, Aviation Electronics Technician, U.S.Navy 1968-73 EDUCATIONAL BACKGROUND: Whitman College, BA EDUCATIONAL BACKGROUND: AS in Forest Technology, (Education&History) Southwestern Oregon Community College; BS in Forest PRIOR GOVERNMENTAL EXPERIENCE: Two Term State Engineering, Oregon State University Representative, District 55: Joint Ways & Means Committee; PRIOR GOVERNMENTAL EXPERIENCE: Mayor of Metolius Legislative Audit Committee; Emergency Board; Governor's 1995-96& 1999-present;Metolius City,Council 1991-94& 1997- Public Safety Policy & Planning Council; Joint Interim Cultural 98; Board Member, Central Oregon Intergovernmental Council Task Force;Governor's Commission on Senior Services;National 1993-present Conference of State Legislatures, Fiscal Affairs Committee - Chair CIVIC INVOLVEMENT: Central Oregon Community College COMMUNITY SERVICE: High Desert Museum Supporter; St. Forestry Advisory Committee; Society of American Foresters; Frances School Board;Odyssey of the Mind Coach;4-H and FFA Madras Elks supporter;St.Charles Vision 2000 Campaign Doug Dunlap-working together for stronger communities When Ben Westlund ran for office in 1998,he promised to follow A quality education for every Oregon student is my highest these principles while representing us in the legislature: priority.As the son of a timber faller from southwestern Oregon, I LEADERSHIP-COMMON SENSE know the benefits of a small class size and increased teacher CENTRAL OREGON PRIORITIES availability.As a graduate of a community college and a university, I understand that both play important roles in higher education When Ben Westlund ran for office in 1998, he laid out what he Oregon's strength is drawn from its families.Strong families make believed our priorities should be: strong communities,so we must support them by providing qual Support for schools and preparing our kids to meet the chal- ity,affordable health care,and provide opportunities to earn a fair lenges of the workplace. wage and guarantee their safety on the job. -Strong law enforcement and tough sentencing. -Compassion for the truly needy without fostering dependence. As council member and mayor of a small city, I believe that gov- BEN WESTLUND KEPT HIS PROMISES ernment can be responsive to the needs of its constituents and responsible for investing wisely in its future.This same experience Ben became a legislative leader on the demanding and powerful has galvanized my belief that the government closest to the Ways and Means Committee,responsible for the state budget.He action is best suited to provide for peoples'needs. made sure good local programs were funded, programs like the Central Oregon is known around the world for it's clear water, Deschutes County Juvenile Justice Program that is saving money clean air and the beauty of its forests. In order to leave this and turning kids around. heritage of natural beauty for future generations,we must insure Ben supported expanded prison space to keep the violent offend- that natural resources are used as they are best suited while still ers.in jail and to stop the revolving doors of justice. holding strong against the pressure to weaken Oregon's land use laws. Ben voted for record funding for local schools and equity for schools throughout Oregon. He voted for increased funding for "With his involvement with local and regional issues he is Higher Education and supports the efforts to get a four-year col- prepared - I believe that Doug represents my interests an the lege in Bend. interests of the voters of District 55:" Jeffrey Sanders, Sr. Ben Westlund voted for strong spending priorities,without raising Jefferson County School Board taxes;and he supported the return of the surplus tax collections to the taxpayers. (This information furnished by Douglas Dunlap.) ELECT- BEN WESTLUND-AGAIN LEADERSHIP-COMMON SENSE-PRIORITIES (This information furnished by Committee to Elect Ben Westlund.) 24 Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—Nonpartisan Candidates Judge of the Supreme Court Judge of the Supreme Court Position 2 Position 2 GREG PAUL J. BYRNE �s� DEMUNIZ Nonpartisan Nonpartisan OCCUPATION: Business OCCUPATION:Judge, Attorney Oregon Court of Appeals OCCUPATIONAL OCCUPATIONAL BACKGROUND: United States BACKGROUND:Judge, Court Marine Corps 1959-67,Vietnam of Appeals,elected in 1990, Veteran;Small Business Owner re-elected in 1996;private law practice, 1977-1990; EDUCATIONAL BACKGROUND: Harvard Law School; South Deputy Public Defender, 1975-1977 Carolina University EDUCATIONAL BACKGROUND: J.D., Willamette University, PRIOR GOVERNMENTAL EXPERIENCE: Circuit Court Judge 1975;B.S., Portland State, 1972;Madison High School, 1965 Pro-Tempore PRIOR GOVERNMENTAL EXPERIENCE: Oregon Supreme FAMILY:Wife Debra,father of four,grandfather of three. Court Access to Justice for, All Committee, since 1997; COMMUNITY SERVICE:President,Northwest District(neighbor- Commission on Judicial Fitness,since 1998;Supreme Court Task hood) Association; President, American Amputee Foundation Force on Racial and Ethnic Issues in the Judicial System of Oregon; Chair, Oregon Community Foundation Advisory Implementation Committee Chair, 1994-1996; Oregon Criminal Committee Justice Council, 1985-1990 EXPERIENCED MILITARY SERVICE: U.S. Air Force, Vietnam veteran, 1966- 1969. Appointed by Secretary of Defense to Defense Advisory An Oregon lawyer 29 years,Greg has argued dozens of cases Committee on Women in the Services, 1998 to present before the Supreme Court and has earned the highest rating for COMMUNITY SERVICE: North Salem High mock trial coach, legal ability and integrity(Martindale-Hubbell Directory). since 1998; Board of Visitors,Willamette University, since 1995; "Greg Byrne has all the skills and experience to be a great Volunteer coach for youth athletics,since 1983 Supreme Court Judge.We need his perspective on the bench" PERSONAL:Wife, Mary;Children-Carrie, Peter,and Michael Bob Smith, Former Oregon Congressman PROFESSIONAL Experience.Integrity.Fairness. The bar association has selected Greg to investigate unethical "Judge DeMuniz is an individual of strong character and a life- attorneys and to advise new attorneys on professionalism. long commitment to dregon.He brings common sense to resolv- ing conflict." INDEPENDENT Mark O.Hatfield Greg Byrne isn't supported by the powerbrokers or the trial Former U.S.Senator lawyers association,insiders who want to keep the status quo on "Judge Paul DeMuniz is one of the most even-handed and prac- the Supreme Court.He is an independent thinker who would do tical judges to serve in Oregon. His decade of experience and what is right,not what is politically popular.Greg Byrne is the kind passion for fairness are what sets him apart in this election.' of person Oregon needs on the Supreme Court. THE TAXPAYERS'CHOICE District Attorney Mike Schrunk Sheriff Dan Noelle Greg Byrne is supported by those of us who pay taxes, not by Multnomah County politicians and special interests that spend our tax dollars.He has "Judge DeMuniz is one of the hardest working, most productive fought government abuse and saved taxpayers millions. it : and most influential jurists to have served on the Court of Byrne4SC.org, Appeals. Oregon would be very fortunate to have him on the COMMON SENSE Supreme Court" "Greg Byrne's opponent sided with criminal defendants in four Mary Deits of his five opinions reviewed by the Supreme Court.The court Chief Judge,Court of Appeals unanimously reversed him all four times, including when he "I am proud to have had the opportunity in 1990 to appoint Paul overturned a rape conviction because the prosecutor didn't DeMuniz to the Court of Appeals. I enthusiastically endorse him prove that Coos Bay was in Coos County! That's why we today.His service has been exemplary." support Greg Byrne" Steve Doell.Crime Victims United of Oregon Neil Goldschmidt GREG BYRNE WANTS AN OPEN COURT Former Oregon Governor "It's time to lift the veil of mystery from the Supreme Court. °I admire Paul DeMuniz as a person with enormous integrity.He When elected, I will work to have the court hear cases all has an immense capacity for hard work and a profound devotion around Oregon, not just in Salem, and to televise all of its to judicial duty and judicial ethics." proceedings" Dave Frohnmayer (This information furnished by Greg Byrne for Supreme Court Committee.) Former Oregon Attorney General Visit www.demuniz.com for more information. (This information furnished by Judge DeMuniz for Oregon Supreme Court Committee.) 25 Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—General Information Constitution Party Statement The Constitution Party of Oregon maintains that our true heritage is freedom. Constitution Party members recognize that our nation was founded by God-fearing men wanting freedom from human tyranny,so they could obey the dictates of their consciences in accordance with the Bible. They applied the principles of the Declaration of Independence when constructing the Republic spelled out in the Constitution of the United States. We acknowledge that government derives its just powers from the consent of the governed. We concur with those who framed the Oregon Constitution in the late 1850's.They said in Article I,Section 1,"...all men,when they form a social compact are equal in right:that all power is inherent in the people, and all free governments are founded upon their authority,and instituted for their peace,safety,and happiness..." We will lead the way back to the foundations of America's greatness,nominating and/or supporting candidates who are committed to these foundational principles: Our rights are inalienable,coming from the hand of the Creator.They are not given to us by ourselves or by government.These rights include the right to life from conception until natural death,the right to own property,and the right to choose how to live that life and use that property,without violating the rights of others as determined by a jury of their peers. Government is Divinely instituted to protect our rights by punishing evildoers and encouraging righteous behavior. Our system of laws is based on the Judeo-Christian moral code.The one known as the Father of the Constitution, James Madison,told his generation that they had staked the whole future of American Civilization and all our political institutions upon the capacity of mankind for self-government according to the Ten Commandments. Our nation is a sovereign nation,one nation under God.We must steer clear of entangling alliances with any portion of the foreign world and we must maintain a strong national defense. The powers of the federal government in our Republic are restricted to those specifically granted in the Constitution of the United States.That Constitution is not an instrument for government to restrain the people;it is an instrument for the people to restrain government--lest it come to dominate our lives and our interests.The Bill of Rights appended to our Constitution has a reminder to the national government that it has only the powers delegated to it by'We the people'through the Constitution. This then is our heritage, a heritage that in the past has produced a moral environment with unparalleled individual liberty and economic prosperity,a heritage that has been the envy of the nations of the world.It is a heritage worthy of our efforts to rebuild. We ask you to vote your conscience when electing new guardians for your future peace, safety and happiness.We remain con- vinced that voting for the lesser of two evils is still voting for evil and will not recover our heritage.We are raising a standard around which the wise and honest can rally, believing that the events of history are in the hands of God.The Constitution Party has honored that heritage.by nominating candidates who believe in our heritage. Remember, if you don't honor them with your vote, the candidates you really want can never win.Please vote for your Constitution Party candidates this election and take a step in the direction of restoring our heritage.Checkout our presidential candidate Howard Phillips and our other candidates for various offices around our state listed in this voters'pamphlet. If you have internet access,study our platform and other documents on line at our national party website,which provides links to all the state party websites:www.constitutionparty.org Chairman Bob Ekstrom Constitution Party of Oregon 51163 Bankston Road Scappoose OR 97056 (503)543-7312 (This information furnished by Constitution Party of Oregon.) 26 Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—General Information Libertarian Party Statement The Libertarian Party stands for individual freedom and personal responsibility.We believe these twin pillars of a civil society are inseparable;undermining one impairs the other.The only legitimate purpose of government is to protect the life,liberty and property of its citizens. The LPO State Committee urges you to vote on the following measures: MEASURE 83-NO The government should not be in the business of loaning money to anybody. MEASURE 84-YES When the state requires a city or county to do something,the state should bear that cost. MEASURE 85-YES A few things have changed since 1857.Let Oregonians form counties that represent their interests in this century. MEASURE 86-YES Any surplus taxes belong to the taxpayers. MEASURE 87-NO Zoning should not become a tool for censoring unpopular speech. MEASURE 88-neutral Vote for Measure 91 instead. MEASURE 89-neutral This money was extorted from tobacco companies. We won't suggest how to spend the fruits of blackmail. MEASURE 90-neutral We may as well be rearranging deck chairs on the Titanic. This dilemma stems from excessive government entanglement in the energy markets. MEASURE 91 -YES Expect honesty from the government.You should not pay taxes for wages you never received. MEASURE 92-YES Union members can be trusted to choose where to send their political contributions. MEASURE 93-YES Oregonians deserve a chance to veto excessive taxes. MEASURE 94-YES Let judges prevent injustice.Replace them at the ballot when they fail us. MEASURE 95-neutral Whenever government provides a service, it should strive for specific results.This measure demon- strates a desire to make public education results-oriented and accountable, which is great, The problem is that the results sought(increase of appropriate knowledge)seem vaguely defined. MEASURE 96-YES The Initiative is our best defense against an unresponsive legislature.Protect the Initiative from special interests. MEASURE 97-NO People have the right to protect their families and livestock from predators.This will measure will be less appealing when cougars begin eating kindergarteners. MEASURE 98-YES Public resources should not be used for private political purposes. MEASURE 99-NO An additional layer of regulation is unnecessary.This will make it more expensive to receive and provide home care. MEASURE 1 -NO "Adequate funding"is a vague and meaningless term that does not belong in our Constitution.This amounts to a public-works project for lawyers. MEASURE 2-YES Give Oregonians the right to petition the legislature to reject burdensome regulations. MEASURE 3-YES People are innocent until proven guilty in a trial by jury. Police departments should not profit from seizing the property of Oregonians. MEASURE 4-neutral See Measure 89. MEASURE 5-NO Favored by gun shops, this will limit private gun sales between citizens. It increases the cost of defending yourself,but will not prevent criminals from getting guns. MEASURE 6-NO This is political welfare.Forcing us to subsidize the political speech of others is an insult to our freedom of speech. MEASURE 7-YES When we strip a land of value through regulations,it is only fair to compensate the landowner. MEASURES-YES The best way to limit the growth of government is to limit its ability to spend our money.This will make sure that government spending cannot outpace changes in our personal income. MEASURE 9-NO Public schools should not be burdened with"religiously correct"speech codes. The Libertarian Party of Oregon is the third largest political party in the state. Libertarians are fiscally conservative and socially tolerant,we believe that government should be limited to protecting our freedoms while ensuring personal responsibility. We stand up for your rights before government.....All of your rights. For more information call 1 (800)829-1992 or visit our web site at www.lporegon.org (This information furnished by Libertarian Party of Oregon.) 27 Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—General Information Pacific Green Party Statement ON FRIDAY,AUGUST 25, PORTLAND'S MEMORIAL COLISEUM WAS ROCKING. Nearly 11,000 people from across Oregon and the Pacific Northwest paid at least$7.00 to attend.They cheered until they were hoarse.They clapped until their hands hurt.And they left feeling empowered. What event caused this reaction?A rock concert?A hometown team victory?A religious extravaganza? It was none of these. Thousands of people poured in to hear Ralph Nader. Winona LaDuke and other Pacific Green Party candidates urge citizens to take back this country and state from out-of-control corporations and their handpicked politicians DEMOCRACY FOR ALL The Pacific Green Party (PGP) is unlike any other party in Oregon.While the RepubliCrats bathe themselves in special interest money and do the bidding of only the wealthy,the PGP is driven by the dedication and activism of people from all walks of life. In his speech at the Coliseum, Ralph Nader remarked, "You saw the Democratic and Republican conventions.They were marinated in corporate money....It was like legalized bribery meeting legalized extortion:'(The Oregonian,8/26/00) The PGP embraces a radically different vision. We believe democracy should serve ALL the people and the rights of our communities should be protected alongside the rights of each individual. MAKE YOUR VOTE COUNT Despite the fact that many of you are tired of corporate-driven politics and having to choose between the"lesser of two evils",you are worried that voting for a PGP candidate might throw a race to the"greater"evil.You genuinely want to vote your conscience,but the media and the RepubliCrats have scared you into thinking that any vote outside the two-party system is a wasted vote. Our candidates don't necessarily have to win to bring about a revolution in Oregon.If Ralph Nader or Lloyd Marbet tallies 15%of the vote,the PGP will clear the first and biggest hurdle to achieving major party status.The media will then cover the PGP and our pro-environment,pro-worker,pro-social justice,pro-citizen and anti-corporate control agenda.Progressives will find they have the loudest,clearest voice in their lifetime.The political landscape in Oregon will be forever changed. BE PART OF HISTORY You can play a critical role in changing the tide of history and Ralph Nader knows it."Right here in this arena[Memorial Coliseum] are the votes that will carry the.state of Oregon for the Green Party ticket,"said Nader."Our goals are realizable.They're long overdue.We have the resources for them.The constitution enables it,the majority of the people want it,and we're going to go for it!"(The Register Guard,8/26/00) SEETHE DIFFERENCES FOR YOURSELF PGP RepubliCrats Limit Corporate Power Increase Corporate Power AND Corporate Welfare Universal Health Care Empower HMO's at Patients'Expense End Commercial Logging on Public Lands Nonstop Destruction of Forests/Ecosystems Renewable/Non-Polluting Energy Sources Continue Subsidizing Nuclear Power Industry Support Unions&Worker's Rights Dehumanize Public Employees&Working Families Progressive Taxes&Living Wages Regressive Taxes&Minimum Wages Campaign Finance Reform Business as Usual(Special Interest Money) Campaigns that are Issue-Based Sound Bytes, Spin Doctors&Mudslinging THIS YEAR VOTE PACIFIC GREEN--VOTE YOUR CONSCIENCE&CHANGE THE WORLD! PresidentlVice President Ralph Nader&Winona LaDuke Secretary of State Lloyd Marbet U.S.Congress,District#3 Tre Arrow State Senate District#8 Whitney Smith State House District#16 David Tillemans State House District#18 Barry Joe Stull State House District#47 Christina Alexander Benton County Commission,#2 Mike Bellstein Linn County Commission,#2 Lori Burton The PGP Encourages a YES vote on Measures:3,6,94,96,97 The PGP Encourages a NO vote on Measures:2,7,9,85,86,89,90,91,92,939 95,98 Pacific Green Party 333 State St. Salem,OR 97301 (503)378-7812 Portland:(503)223-1399 Behd:(541)382-0032 Eugene:(541)607-8093 vote4pgp@wvl.com www.pacificgreens.org (This information furnished by Pacific Green Party of Oregon.) 28 Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—General Information Reform Party Statement The Natural Law Party and the Reform Party have merged into a historic coalition forging itself into a viable, alternative movement that can break the two party duopoly that the Republicans and the Democrats hold in our country and in Oregon. The REFORM PARTY is YOUR REASON TO VOTE. The Natural Law Party has a platform bases on commonsense solutions with"Best Practices"as it's foundation such as: • The Natural Law Party--America's fastest growing political party--offers voters forward-looking, prevention-oriented, scientifically proven solutions to the nation's problems, including • Creating a true health care system(as opposed to a disease care system)by adding cost-effective,prevention-oriented health care programs scientifically shown to prevent disease, promote health, and save money in the best possible way--by keeping people healthy • Education that develops the student's full potential through curriculum innovations proven to increase intelligence, creativity, and academic performance • Preventing crime--not warehousing criminals--through effective criminal and drug rehabilitation programs,and through proven pro- grams to reduce high levels of societal stress • Cutting taxes deeply and responsibly through cost-effective solutions to crime,spiraling health costs,and other social problems-- not through cutting essential services • Protecting the environment through energy efficiency and the use of renewable,safe, nonpolluting energy sources such as wind, solar, and biomass • Safeguarding America's food supply through sustainable,organic agricultural practices proven to produce healthy,high-quality food without hazardous chemical fertilizers and pesticides • Mandatory labeling and safety testing of genetically engineered foods,and a moratorium on the release of these experimental life- forms into the environment until proven safe • Ensuring a strong economy by (1) more effectively harnessing our greatest national resource--the unlimited creativity and intelli- gence of our 270 million citizens,and(2) implementing powerful, pro-growth tax and fiscal policies • Promoting more prosperous and harmonious international relations by shifting our foreign policy away from the export of weapons towards the export of U.S. know-how and technical assistance in key areas, such as business, entrepreneurship, education, sustainable agriculture,and environmental technologies • Ending special interest control of our politics through (1) elimination of PACs and soft money, (2) public sponsorship of election campaigns,and(3)prevention of lobbying by former public servants on behalf of domestic and foreign interest The Reform Party brings with it a party based on foundational government reforms.The Reform Party of Oregon's Principles begins with support of the Constitution of the United States of America.We believe in the Constitution as written by our forefathers. Our elected leaders must have the utmost integrity and be fully accountable to the people of Oregon.We demand that due process of the Law be available to every citizen of this state.To this end the Reform Party of Oregon's principles are: • Upholding the Constitution-We expect our members to uphold the Constitutions of Oregon and the United States. • Integrity-We expect honesty,ethics,and integrity from each of our members at all times. • Accountability-We demand legislative oversight of all state agencies.Administrative rules shall not be enforced as Law. • Justice-The courts of Oregon need to be opened to provide Justice for all the people. Due process and equal protection under the Law shall be accorded to all citizens.No person should be made immune from responsibility and accountability for their actions. • Service and Community-We believe that citizens should be of service to the community by participating in the political process. We encourage all people to demonstrate responsibility to their families and their communities and to reduce the volume of demand upon government for services.We believe our government should not legislate social and moral issues,but become more involved in managing the infrastructure of the state of Oregon. • Election Reform-The Reform Party of Oregon supports election reforms that increase voter participation.We demand equality and fairness in the election process through voting reforms such as SDVR(Same Day Voter Registration)and de-linking ballot access from state-wide elections,and by reducing taxes through moderation of services provided,and by maintaining government actions locally whenever possible. • Principles -The people of the Reform Party of Oregon expect our candidates to embody these principles.The motivations for decisions of our elected servants should be in the people's best interest as opposed to special interest. Please join our party.REGISTER TO THE REFORM PARTY OF OREGON.Please keep in mind that when a political party changes it's name PARTY AFFILIATION is not transferred! Please Re-register REFORM PARTY!Let your voice be heard!Be INVOLVED.This is a unique opportunity to really affect change in the political landscape.Our party can be anything we want it to be!And with your involvement and participation we can succeed. Reform Party of Oregon (This information furnished by Reform Party of Oregon.) 29 Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—General Information District Map 49 - DISTRICTS - l HOUSE SENATE 54 & 55 = 27 HOOD RIVER - wASCO Tygh Valley CONGRESSIONAL = 2 21 Maupin O Wapinitia W A S C 0 Shaniko N W a � 26 21 El s ' -- Antelope 9 Warm Springs O It J E F F R S 0 NW Metolius MADRAS it JEFFERSON Culver CROOK 5 5 20 26 I Redmond -_ Sisters 126 20 97 20 N BEND Wy � I5 r 20 4 Brothers La Pine D E S C H U T E OESCXUTES DESCHUTES ------ ID.AMATX I LAKE LEGEND _ HOUSE DISTRICT BOUNDARY JEFFERSON & DESCHUTES DISTRICT HOUSE DISTRICT NUMBER -- COUNTIES AP COUNTY BOUNDARY 30 Official 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet—General Information Index CANDIDATES Page Page Bradbury,Bill......................................................................... 14 Lieberman,Joe..................................................................... 7 Browne, Harry....................................................................... 5 Lucero,Carlos F.................................................................... 18 Bush,George W.................................................................... 6 Mannix, Kevin L.................................................................... 20 Byrne,Greg.......................................................................... 25 Marbet, Lloyd........................................................................ 14 Cheney, Dick......................................................................... 6 Myers, Hardy......................................................................... 21 Clarno, Bev........................................................................... 22 Nader,Ralph......................................................................... 9 Cooper, Ken.......................................................................... 23 Olivier,Art............................................................................. 5 Cox,Thomas B..................................................................... 20 Philiben,Anne N................................................................... 22 DeMuniz, Paul J.................................................................... 25 Phillips, Howard.................................................................... 10 Dunlap, Douglas........................:.......................................... 24 Pole, ll, E.J.(Ed)................................................................... 15 Edwards, Randall................................................................... 17 Ponsford,Walter.................................................................... 12 Goldhaber, Nat...................................................................... 8 Shults, Mitchell T.................................................................. 18 Gore,Al................................................................................. 7 Snodgrass, Lynn................................................................... 15 Hagelin,John........................................................................ 8 Walden,Greg........................:............................................... 12 Knopp,Tim............................................................................ 23 Westlund, Ben....................................................................... 24 Kvistad,Jon........................................................................... 17 Zack, Leonard....................................................................... 19 LaDuke,Winona.................................................................... 9 ATTENTION: Don't be alarmed if this copy of the 2000 General Election Voters' Pamphlet has one or two 1/4-inch flaps as illustrated. To reduce the cost of this publication, the combination of pages and the type of printing press used may require the flap(s) to ensure proper binding. The Voters' Pamphlet is NOT missing any pages, the flap is only a product of the printing press used. Thank you. 31 v SECRETARY OF STATE NONPROFIT Bill Bradbury U.S.Postage State Capitol # P A I D Salem, Oregon 97310-0722 Portland,OR Permit No.815 t4— :*:��:]L 1 � L RESIDENTIAL CUSTOMER voters P m hiet OIF VOLUME 2 OF 2 �* CANDIDAT ES * THE U I General Election l 8 5 9 November 7, 2000 8 Deschutes Please RECYCLE this pamphlet .. , NEW. ji se ' ix;?iw: ;ay rya; 3 GENERAL ELECTION NOVEMBER 7, 2000 MARY SUE "SUSIE" PENHOLLOW DESCHUTES COUNTY CLERK £4 ,.� °sir; .: ATTENTION < <" This is the beginning of your county voters'pamphlet.The county portion of this joint voters'pamphlet is inserted in the center of the state portion. Each page of the county voters' pamphlet is clearly marked with a black bar on the outside edge.All information contained in the county portion of this pamphlet has been assembled and printed by your Deschutes County Clerk. 0, Official Deschutes County 2000 General Election Voters' Pamphlet mm J. y::.. REMEMBER! All ballots must be received at a drop site or the Deschutes County Clerk's Office =4 by no later than .... n:: 8.00 m November 7, 2000. t 9-2 Official Deschutes County 2000 General Election Voters' Pamphlet TABLE OF CONTENTS Letter from County Clerk ...........................................•••.••............................... 9-4 LocalMeasures.............................................................................................. 9-5 CountyCandidates....................................................................................... 9-21 CityCandidates................................................................ ........................... 9-25 DropSites ..................................................................................................... 9-42 VotingInstructions........................................................................................ 9-41 Index (Local Measures and Candidates for Deschutes County) ................. 9- 43 QUESTIONS ABOUT VOTING? Call your Deschutes County Clerk's Office at (541) 388-6546 9-3 JTES C Office of the County Clerk r ; y;FV Deschutes Services Bldg., 1340 N.W.Wall St. • Bend,Oregon 97701 Telephone:(541)388-6544 Facsimile:(541)389-6830 Dear Deschutes County Voter. Mary Sue"Susie"Penhollow,County Clerk In 1998 Oregon voters passed a ballot measure to have all elections conducted by mail. Ballots will automatically be mailed to each registered voter for all elections. This replaces the traditional elections held at the polling place. You will be asked to make many important choices for the November 7, 2000 : . .. General Election. Due to the numerous state ballot measures you will receive two ballots. One ballot will have all the state measures. The r second ballot will have the Presidential candidates federal state and local candidates and local measures. This Voters' Pamphlet is a cooperative effort between the Deschutes County .M...,n. Clerk and the Secretary of State. It is provided to help you become a more Y� informed voter as you cast your ballot. In this pamphlet you will find the ballot measures, explanatory statements designed to provide you with impartial and fair information, and paid arguments for or against certain measures. The names of the candidates will appear in a random alphabet on your ballot. There is an alphabetical index of local candidates and measures for Deschutes County on Page Deschutes 9-43. r Please remember you will not vote on every office or measure in this pamphlet. Your ballot will contain only those issues for which are ou eligible to vote Y 9 based on where you live. Please Vote! Sincerely, Mary Sue"Susie" Penhollow Deschutes County Clerk Quality Services Performed with Pride Official Deschutes County 2000 General Election Voters' Pamphlet CITY OF LA PINE INCORPORATIONj . Measure No. 9-86 x'10 .. F .%.. E' +.� MR MiMp s fX �S i SEE MAP OF PROPOSED \Y �r ti ° rr INCORPORATIONr ON FOLLOWING PAGE 9-6 igp, IN 9 h F EXPLANATORY STATEMENT , Approval of this measure would incorporate the City of stitution and state laws.The Economic Feasibility State La Pine and establish a permanent property tax rate of ment submitted by petitioners includes the following pro- *q $1.50 per $1,000 of assessed property valuation as posed services: maintenance of public roads; planning, NE$' determined b the Deschutes County Assessor.The city zoning and building services; cemetery maintenance; Y tY tY 9 9 rY would contain 14,767 acres and have a population community recreation and events (including city parks); uncertified of approximately 7,000 people. economic development,including ownership and admin- 'a v , (uncertified) PP Y P P P 9 P Under Oregon law, the permanent tax rate cannot be istration of the La Pine Industrial Park; sanitary sewer changed.While the effective date of incorporation would service and municipal water.The city council would have k=<' the authority to determine which services the city would be the date of the election,the permanent tax rate can-not be be levied and collected until Jul 1, 2001.The city provide. would be required to adopt a budget under Oregon Bud- Sanitary sewer and water services,totally user fee-sup- �x F: get Law to collect and expend property tax revenues. ported,would continue to be provided to the same prop- erties and accounts that are current) served. Expansion Y P ;SEE of these services would be limited b state administrative councilors to serve as elected representatives, effec Y '_ ' tive only if the incorporation is approved.The council rules to the current urban area as designated on the a .; may hire staff as necessary to conduct city business. Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan or areas that have been or in the future are approved as an exception �. As provided by state law, incorporation would dissolve to the rules. five special districts wholly contained within city bound- In addition to property taxes, revenue may be derived aries: La Pine Special Sewer District, La Pine Water _ District,Special Road District#8,Ponderosa Pines East from the following sources: state gasoline,cigarette and yy L\'L Road District and Forest View Road District.The City of liquor taxes,transient room tax;privilege taxes upon utili La Pine would then be required to assume all assets ties;state revenue sharing; and grants. N ; : and liabilities of these districts on the effective date of The city would be required to prepare a comprehensive incorporation. Property taxes certified b these districts plan, including an urban growth boundary, and land use M. f.. P P rtY Y 9 9 Y to the Deschutes County Assessor for the 2000-2001 regulations within four years from the effective date of fiscal year would be unaffected.Collected property tax incorporation.In the interim,Deschutes County's plan and revenues would be transferred to the City of La Pine to regulations would govern land use decisions in the city. :`r=.•;,-- . be budgeted and expended according to state law.Be- 9 P 9 Be- ginning July 1, 2001 district property taxes will be re- (This information furnished by Linda L. Swearingen, placed with the city's property tax.The incorporation has Board of County Commissioners of no such effect on other special districts. Deschutes County, Oregon) '-.' a;, . The City of La Pine would have all the authority and s. responsibilities accorded to cities by the Oregon Con- 9-5 f Official Deschutes County 2000 General Election Voters' Pamphlet CITY OF LA PINE INCORPORATION z.. Measure No. 9-86 tC�3 rye ss==�< �rimtt Boundary p Y of Proposed City of La Pine i;.. P RX DR SPARKS tN �? , ysrr #t 7 a DA1lYN RD, r U�N ILI ou MILL t?D eutNkvmulm a c m P QEEDON t N z z z uY a Opp c ;'Q-14 RD BORGESS RD 4O z a , ran c~rr CQ� 0 �Q LL 031 1 s � '�vqry rs RE[D F1D j i 3RD at FQSS RD �•• s R Z 6TH ST FttdLEY.MATE .. . z: t :Y River N may° Roads ` Railroad w Parcels S City Pro osed p Y Limits o.s o as Miles Map Date:August 31.2000 Excluded from City CRDpynght 0 WOO by DescnutesCmnty.OrW. Aa Riots Reserved.Printed in the United StategW Ammerica. 11 a 9-6 Official Deschutes County 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet ........................ CITY OF LA PINE INCORPORATION Measure No. 9-86 ARGUMENT IN FAVOR ARGUMENT IN OPPOSITION WHY SHOULD LA PINE INCORPORATE NOW? CITIZENS AGAINST INCORPORATION OF LAPINE La Pine has reached that point in history when it is time The catch phrase for proponents of the incorporation of to start accepting responsibility for solving local problems LaPine is "Local control". Apparently the "local control with our own resources.Currently,we send thousands of they refer to means"giving them control".Twice the citi our tax dollars out of this area every year.Without legal zens of LaPine have voted on a form of incorporation standing we are dependent on the decisions of people (Incorporation itself in 1985 and formation of a Port Dis who live elsewhere for our every need. We continue to trict in 1994), both proposals were soundly defeated grow at an ever increasing rate while our medical ser- That's called local control.Unfortunately some folks seem vices decline, our local roads deteriorate, our kids have unable to comprehend that"NO"means"NO".They are fewer opportunities, and good paying businesses stay determined to get control. away from this unincorporated area.The best time to start What does the average citizen get with incorporation? solving problems is when they are still small enough to Higher tax rates. Remember, the initial rate of $1.50/ be manageable. For La Pine, that time is now. M is just the beginning and none of this money applies INCORPORATION IS NO MAGIC WAND to road service. No,all problems won't be solved overnight. But as a city Another layer of government. Along with the county, with a small,fixed tax rate,the door is opened to receive state and feds, we'll have the city to deal with. hundreds of thousands of dollars each year;dollars that are rightfully ours. Combined with a small local govern- One more"big brother"to dictate what you can do with ment comprised of local people, we can begin to shape and on, your own property. It's likely you will lose the y our future as WE want it to be. ability to keep any animals deemed"livestock"on your ONLY WITH INCORPORATION CAN WE START: property. The right to keep livestock will have to be To remove snow; improve and upgrade ALL of our to "Grandfathered"by the city council,and once the prop- erty dirt-based roads. erty changes hands or a complaint is filed no variance can be allowed. To begin a program of dust control on ALL of our roads. Higher cost for rents,services and goods as property To work on improving health care facilities. and business owners pass along their increased tax 3 To protect and improve the quality of our rural lifestyle. burden. 3'� To develop industries with family wage jobs. How about what you don't get? To develop recreation programs and parks throughout • No additional sewer,water, school control or police& the community. fire protection. To manage our overwhelming growth before it man- • If you live on a County road you get absolutely no road benefits. If you are due road benefits, the first year ages us. Y Y Every journey starts with the first step and it is time for u with substantial snowfall will overwhelm the $325,000.00 budget and leave nothing for maintenance to begin.240 cities in Oregon have charted the way.Our r and upgrades. own people have developed the plan and experts from around the state support it. Now it is your turn. It's easy to see why the proposed city limits encompasses 28 square miles, an area larger than Redmond and <u-F: Prineville;the core area needs your money so they can <s ; KEEP LA PINE GREAT have control.Your tax dollars will be spent to benefit the ; VOTE YES FOR INCORPORATION chosen few within the core area while you struggle with increased costs for property ownership, rent,goods and services. (This Information furnished by Harry E. Godsil, VOTE SMART:VOTE NO Citizens For Local Control of La Pine.) (This Information furnished by Charles Robert Bartch, Citizens Against Incorporation of La Pine.) r The printing of these arguments does not constitute an endorsement by the County of Deschutes,nor does the county warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the arguments. 9-7 Official Deschutes County 2000 General Election Voters' Pamphlet REDMOND SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 2J ^. p Measure No. 9-87 ` Two Elementary Schools(K-5th graders) _ EtaL. 3f »tt+rA'I' 450 students each(expandable to 700 students) :> � � triUET1� Shad the f3€strict be aufhor€zed tb€ssue Middle School(6th-8th graders) jraneral C�ktt€gef€on bor€tls in art sggregate prirldlsafl 450 students(expandable to 680 students) arrto€nt n rtex eed€ng$�f8,1bf} ft € bttnc�0 ate , High School(9th-12th graders) pp'00.. -.4.- will k�e payabt from faxes ori`pro " ert)r gr propeEE)r fiwner5htp thdt: r€nit subjt lc�tt€e 700 students(expandable to 1400 students) M. f€r€lifs of�ttzr�s 11 artd l 1 b,Article?41 of a�regcrt Why .......... . .............................................................. Z Oor€st€t€f€on Redmond School District is the second fastest growing Im �{fIIINfxtliY Ifrovet3,this r€€ asure providesf�€nds district in Oregon of districts 5,000 students and larger. rF tthets#r€Ctt fifr€arliifheCOSfofoap€talCdnth[o • Since the 198990 school year, student enrollment t€onan capitel!€mprowments;?rtclud€rs. fautr'tit!€rr€ has grown 29%. `' ited to,prauidirig fttrrds for • Twenty seven portable classrooms, throughout the „ 3 Acrfuiitian of prriperty ftr school costruc#icrt, district, provide over 700 seats for students; • Cep€tCprtetuo8ong9twveiUertfiaryschocairone In 2 community surveys, residents said they want to rrtiddle schoofnd' tte ttit�h school;! keep the district's schools their current size and.no + Capitar impr r errron S equipping ai d furnfshii larger. the Sho{}IS; School classroom space for 2000 students will be • Atfv lGe r�frund f,the DiS#rtCt' $$,075,0 Lase.;' needed by 2004-05. :' PUttfese Agreerr€ent w(ffk' 1 " (/ester€€ Crust According to state and local projections,student growth 3 Ot arr€ fB�Fib es" f DeCBrr€l eA 1 tggo Tfie rte s p will continue at a rate of nearly 300 new students each oees � Gj € ffnanc►ng were used;fo puret€ase year. Deschutes County is now the 11th fastest grow € [ani�f�€r�iE c€le end':rnodutar U. and fo ply tem y ing county in the United States. Isfed co�t�,�,n€�tor tc� . Ply iBuGB hosts, When .......................................................................... ���'•� The, 13istr€Ct Iserves Crootced Ritter f�e�ntxh 7errebttrtrte, i edmo€d Tumalp endf t If ft it tho Construction Schedule: seCff fasfest'grow€ng d+StrtC#€r€ reg0r€of ditrtte Opening September 2002—Two Elemeritary 5, 3 Studer€t �rger. ' Schools " � on rita€�ts determir€ed thet tudent'ar€roflrhpr€t is Opening September 2003—Middle School 3r� 1t�fot aerthepaci#yb#thesoY€oc€te, r€daetirnimu� Opening September 2004—High School nay survq IS Both elementary school designs will replicate the cur- .........sr€c€us pr�sblern fussing this:txcrnd measure pre- rent Vern Patrick Elementary School.The middle school pars fer fiutur st€dent growth ff€rruh LQ1{f, and one elementary school will share a 25.33-acre site, �� similar to the Obsidian Middle School and Lynch EI- � Ar€y seraes of Brtds will mature in 21 years or,less ementary School site. How Much .............................. W This bond measure totals $48.1 million and will cost R Ya:- EXPLANATORY STATEMENT property taxpayers an estimated $1.68 per $1,000 of What................................ """°""""'°""""""""""""' assessed value.That amounts to a cost of$14.00 per 1 The Redmond School Board, in partnership with the month (or $168 per year) on a $100,000 home. With community, has developed a school bond measure that growth,the tax rate is projected to drop over the twenty- proposes to build four new schools.This bond measure year life of the bond. New homes and businesses will p g pay a portion of this bond, reducing taxes for all other prepares for the future growth of student enrollment K through the year 2010.The bond measure will fund the property owners, as well. k4 following: (This information furnished by s Judy Delahunt, New Construction to meet the demands of schools Redmond School District 2J) � that are currently 11%over capacity and the demands of new students in the five major communities served by the school district, Terrebonne, Crooked River Ranch, Redmond,Alfalfa and Tumalo.An analysis of construction costs to add on to current schools re- vealed it is more cost effective to build new. School Construction includes the construction of ex- � ;.011 y::: pandable schools that will be built with core structures, ex.size of cafeteria, gymnasium, library,that will ac- =vK commodate additional classrooms in the years be- yond 2010. 9-8 Official Deschutes County 2000 General Election Voters' Pamphlet REDMOND SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 2J s ON uw .: Measure No. 9-87 ARGUMENT IN FAVOR ARGUMENT IN FAVOR , Dear Voter: `A community is known by the quality of its schools."And w As a community, we have no greater obligation than to our schools and children need your support to pass a 71MEN,,' provide our children with a quality education.Our youth school construction bond this fall. I am a parent of two will need the best education we can provide in order to school age children.1 am a business leader and a com munity volunteer working with children and families. Ev- eryday, d� compete in the work force of the 21st Century. I seethe importance of preparing our children to Today,the Redmond schools are overcrowded.Within the become productive and committed citizens.The future of j next few years the growth that our community is experi- our community and nation depends on our children. encing will make this situation much worse.By 2005,our The Redmond School District is the second fastest grow high school will have almost 500 more students enrolled ing district in Oregon. Last spring, a dedicated group of beyond the capacity of the school. Our middle schools thirty citizens carefully examined data that showed our will have almost 600 students in excess of the capacity of schools need 2079 new seats by 2004—and 3750 new a: : Hugh Hartman and Obsidian Middle Schools.The over- ii- xr > seats by 2010! This is in addition to the already over- crowding is even worse in our elementary schools where {w=r;; » growth projections anticipate that almost 750 students will crowded schools.Tr walking the halls of Redmond High ; Y 9 9 � ,.. be enrolled in our elementary classes beyond the capac- School or our middle schools to experience the real factika = it of our current buildings. that our crowded schools are not conducive to healthy . y g learning.The citizen's committee recommended a con The Redmond School Board has gone through a long struction bond measure that prepares our school district and arduous process to gather public input and to weigh for future growth through 2010 by building four new all options to address that overcrowding.Based upon the ' schools, recommendations received during that public process,the district is proposing the construction of a new high school, !n addition,the bond ensures our facilities can provide a a middle school and two elementary schools.The pro- safe, orderly, and smaller school environment for stu- dents. Each of the schools is expandable as the student posed bond measure is a balanced response to the grow- population outgrows the facility. However, all of the core ing crisis within our school district.It will address the cur- : : functions of the buildings are large enough to accommo- �,.„. rent overcrowding situation and provide sufficient space for the district's growing needs over the next decade. date additional classrooms through and beyond 2010. 9 g Our children deserve the very best environment to learn— Via;:,£, There is no question that the cost of these improvements is substantial: $48.1 Million Dollars. That cost will be to become future leaders—to be employed in our busi spread throughout the accessed property in the district. nesses—and to make our community a better place to ,t It should be noted, that this cost will in all probability be live.We owe our children a legacy of support.Their suc p ty cess is directly related to how we raise and care for them `'< lower than the estimate—even at the time the bond pay- 1, for one, will always place the safety and education of ments begin.As our community grows,the assessed valu- our youth at the to of m list. I know you will,too. ation will increase.The spread of the bond cost over the Y p Y Y increasing assessed valuation will lower the cost to each I urge you to say YES to our community, to our schools,ky.. home and each business. and most importantly,to our children! Please insure the future quality of our children's educa- tion and vote "YES to our community, to our schools, James A.Diegel > r... and to our children. Q,€ ..• Executive Director Oregon Central Ore District Hospital (This information furnished by Ed Fitch, Mayor, City of g P Redmond.) :. (This information furnished by James A.Diegel.) n 81 ON ' n I , •...,. M. The printing of these arguments does not constitute an endorsement by the County of Deschutes,nor does the county warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the arguments. 9-9 Official Deschutes County 2000 General Election Voters' Pamphlet REDMOND SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 2J Measure No. 9-87 ARGUMENT IN FAVOR ARGUMENT IN FAVOR We live in oner of the fastest growing school districts in The Redmond Chamber of Commerce Board supports the state.Many new businesses,adults and families with Redmond School District Bond Measure 9-87. children are moving to the five communities served by The Redmond Chamber of Commerce has typically made the Redmond School District: Crooked River Ranch, it a policy to stay neutral in political issues, and instead, Terrebonne, Redmond, Tumalo and Alfalfa. They come works hard at providing all the information possible on a for the many opportunities offered in our area, including subject, so that our members can make their own edu- quality schools.The problem is that our schools are over- cated and sound decisions. crowded! In the case of the Redmond School District Bond Mea- Adequate classroom space for our growing student popu sure 9-87,The Chamber Board feels strongly enough that lation is a responsibility of the entire community.Currently, we need to encourage our members and community to nine out of ten of our schools are well over capacity.Stu read the facts about the need for more schools.We are dents who do not have classroom space inside one of sure you will come to the same conclusion,that we must our schools are receiving instruction in.one of the district's invest in our youth and provide the needed learning fa 27 portable classrooms. It is time to address the over- cilities for a proper eduction.Yes, it is a sizeable invest- crowding problem. ment, but it is just that, an investment in our youth, our By the time new schools can be built, continued student community and our future. enrollment will only add to the challenges of overcrowd- So what are the facts?The facts are that Redmond has ing. For example, if new schools are not built, Redmond been one of the fastest growing communities in the State High School will soon have an actual enrollment of 2000 (over 6%) for several years.The Redmond School Dis- students in a building designed for only 1500 students. trict expects to have 1,800 plus students over its current By 2004, our six elementary schools will have an enroll- building capacity by the 2004-2005 school year. ment of over 3000 students in buildings with a capacity The proposed bond measure is estimated to increase the for 1100 children. We need to pass the bond now and property tax rate by$1.68 per thousand on the assessed start on the construction of new schools immediately. value of a home.This rate will remain the same or de- .......... Our children must be able to compete in the workplace, crease as the population grows.The Chamber Board rec- and must have a quality education to be ready for their ognizes the impact that this will have on all of us, and futures. As adults, it is our responsibility to provide the again encourages you to read the facts(information pack- best education possible for them. The quality of our ets available at the Redmond School District office) and children's lives and the quality of our community's schools assess the need. depend on our children's education, and on our support. The Redmond community must continue to invest in its Please vote YES on the bond measure to construct youth by building the needed schools for a proper educa- needed space for our students.Thank you. tion.The Redmond Chamber of Commerce Board of Di (This information furnished by Elton Gregory, rectors would like to encourage you to Vote "Yes" on Deschutes County Fairgrounds.) Redmond School District Bond Measure 9 87. (This information furnished by Eric Sande, Redmond Chamber of Commerce Board.) NO ARGUMENTS AGAINST THIS MEASURE WERE FILED The printing of these arguments does not constitute an endorsement by the County of Deschutes,nor does the county warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the arguments. 9-10 Official Deschutes County 2000 General Election Voters' Pamphlet CITY OF BEND M- K ` ,; Measure No. 9-88 3x. , rF6 YEAR Tlf�slaT ARGUMENT IN FAVOR Tf�N>ML)GAk.ftPTItN TAtX In order to preserve our quality of life in Bend,we need to , QkJlE5Tt{?N Shatl the City Imp©se S5 cents perthota take steps to address our traffic congestion.Bend voters will be asked to VOTE YES for the Transportation Local 3 sand doll ars taxabke assessed valuation frsr traris. Option Tax.This 5 year le will cost 35 cents per$1,000 ortation im rovemen#s for fine gars be tnmtin Y `N P P P: Y g' 2r01• t3f}2 assessed value of property. For example, a $150,000 home will be assessed$52.50 per year for 5 years. 1111. � Thls IMeas�fre may cause property tars tit Incrsa t? The money raised will pay for the following improvements amore# Peen#` to Bend's transportation system: UMM I Y This measure provtdas furtdil'igf0tr;t fns _ Expansion of Bend's Dial-a Ride program to serve 's Port4ltltf-1... Improuernents,lncludtrtg: 1)ttlairt# afiCe the entire general public;currently limited to seniors ; fer stdawalk f�W lanes,traits ands#sets„( )cctri k} s#r€ictl©n of.stdewalks;(principatly for sidewalk in fill and disabled.This is the first step toward a transitF atortg arterial anti cc�llectcir sires#s}� ( ) aegis�tton system. wwx HIM antlnstxuc#ion of trails;anti{4}expansion at the – Construction of the missing links in our sidewalk sys- l lal a Rlde Pr rare tc7 serve the gatte at pObIld The tem on arterial and collector streets. t levy would apply durirg each of the next fate years, – Acquisition and construction of a majority of the off- ,�» beginmtins In Iwiscat YearfJ01- 002.This tavy wilt street trails on the city's master plan , rases an estima#ed $1,'t79,929 to 2CIt1 02; – Ongoing maintenance to improve current sidewalks, -5-.-1 ;°��� in 20©2'€f f $1,417,s376 in 20i�3"0`fr bike lanes, streets, and trails. $I,507,555 in 004.p a and$1,588,970162W&.061: These improvements are not the final solution to our trans ll fvr artStmatetf total of $5,99 ,94 over#ft flue- P � yearparlod•Etch 35+ per thpusitr#d dollars aw ed portation problems,but they are a critical step in the right M '' valu€ttttn raised urtder#his le�rji wilt b spent fer the direction.We cannot afford to put off constructing these , fatl�ving#ranspartatiatt improement5 important elements of our transportation system.In addi- k 5r for maintenance of sidewalk f bike tanes7 tion,it is essential that we begin the process of develop ing a fixed route transit system.A community of our size #Calf and streets; ;. must provide access to work, school and essential ser- 10 fcir sidewalk constructfon, {dmtncipatly far vices such as medical appointments for all citizens.Please '100 . si tewaltr in-fill along,artenal:and t;o1100 it vote YES for the Transportation Local Option Tax in order s#r efs}; to reserve and enhance our quality of life in Bend.The c0 { P q Y �f 7 5rG for trail acquisition and crtnitri cttctri;and following people and organizations have endorsed the s 112 5j.o for expansion'of the total a Rlde program to Passage of this measurer serve!the ganara1 pubttc. Bend Chamber of Commerce For Et residence with a total taxable a9s0v§ value Brooks Resources ° 'y 3 tf$taft,000, this levy,would mean sin three of Senator Neil Bryant $x2,50 annOally to t roperty taxes to 0910k of,thE3 next Central Oregon Environmental Center TWO years.The.es#imated tax post cif flits measure is g = z an E571MATE'ONLY,kissed art the bps#information Central Oregon Resources for Independent Living "k avaitatle from'the County Assessor st e:::time of (CORIL) ' the estimate. Citizens for Livable Bend ti xx Commute Options for Central Oregon Michael Pulzone, Mary Ellen Coulter, Co-chairs— NO EXPLANATORY STATEMENT FILED Deschutes Count Bic cle/Pedestrian Advisor Commit- Y Y Y Commit- Rig tee M Friends of Bend. Global Action Plan—Ecoteam Program '-- Pathways Tennant Developments This information furnished b Trisha Picknel/for Committee for Transportation Solutions.) NO ARGUMENTS AGAINST THIS _ . MEASURE WERE FILED 0 ?aIE _<n:.My" .g,M Una: The printing of these arguments does not constitute an endorsement by , the County of Deschutes,nor does the county warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the arguments. 9-11 Official Deschutes County 2000 General Election Voters' Pamphlet -`' OREGON WATER WONDERLAND UNIT II SANITARY DISTRICT Measure No. 9-89 initially set at $3,000. Existing on site systems (septic/ �{ z m 44k sand filters) 9 provid- ing not be charged a connection fee s r3 AtlTHCR�T[rw3N they connect within a set time. 1 U t�fll M c Shat[the District be aut rrrzad to issue The total project cost is$6,867,157 of which$3,090,221 red�ttecTrt [s ,a an atriourtt ,neat tc3 exceed.' will be in grants from Rural Development and Oregon s s ? Economic Development. �.. .: lll [ A�f.A"yes vQt on than measure a vrrte to Please support your volunteer Sanitary District Board of [rrcreasa tares.""axes"means ;rv.06 and e. nnec- Directors by voting YES on this measure. Win: f�trr prcape�;:*O wraufd be levied: a his a rreasure ate#fiirrzes the Ci[sfir[ct tit iaSUe revenue (This information furnished by Ery Remmele, Secretary bands cif not tp exceed$3,9 f30t1,tea acquire ar I e E3rttr,damn;approve mnd eacpand Its serer trea#rraiant Oregon Water Wonderland Unit 11 Sanitary District p[an#and related fac[![t[es and to pay el[cxets Iraol- Board of Directors.) dentat theretrr.`Ctte tt�#fit oast i�f#fte �St�ject is est[- �; V mated#a b $x,$67,t 7 The Drstr[ct nr![[ apply ftsr >ederat!loans and grants and.th[ areruld ,.s � ul +artze the District to issue btrrids[n ari amour#to paY3 he a[anee of the bb Ct b li would#rxia#ur a over W00.4 ire of not to exceed Ott yea s, The.#fl#ai pry- ' '; ected.es�matetl c+rst of ttre bonds if sa[d to the tlrrit�ad Mates Mural ttiNOW5 Serv[ce,prtncfpat and[nterest, t1ti era a #lrnated rra#e e& rate ref er ,woul bv rage annual debt service issrlated ;�t �� 76 �rtr�c�a#[ I��ertue�vautd fire rodu+ �# �£ anrrulty t pay rapes#€can and rnatnteraarrce, futad rresetves and gray debt eeruioe: NO ARGUMENTS FOR OR AGAINST THIS MEASURE WERE FILED EXPLANATORY STATEMENT The purpose of this measure is to correct sanitary inad- equacies with the existing sewer system serving a por- tion of Oregon Water Wonderland Unit 11,and to provide a collection system to all remaining lots within Oregon s^t Water Wonderland Unit IL Currently the sanitary district is operating out of compli- ance with the department of environmental quality and Aar permit requirements. The reason the district is out of compliance is inadequate capacity for pond holding of sewage (November thru April) and inadequate ground area for dispersal of the processed effluent (May thru October).Additional acreage is needed for ponding and g irrigation. With high ground water within much of Oregon Water Wonderland Unit 11, on-site sewage disposal systems do not function as is desired,which is to minimize con- taminates from reaching the ground water and river sys- tem.The systems which are most susceptible to migra- tion of untreated effluent,are the many septic/drain fields ; which are currently in service.The district believes that the most suitable sanitary system for Oregon Water -- Wonderland Unit II is a collection and treatment sys- tem. ^ Oregon Water Wonderland Unit 11 Sanitary District vol- unteers are committed to working towards keeping waste materials from ground water and the river by efforts to expand the collection system to all lots using grant and low interest loan monies.The District expects 45 per- "'` 0 cent of the project cost to be grant funded and the re- <,µ maining 55 percent coming from the sale of revenue bonds to USDA Rural Development. The low interest bonds would be repaid over a 40 year term.Repayment will come from a portion of the revenues received from monthly service fees of$38.00 from those connected to <= the system, and connection fees for new connections 9-12 Official Deschutes County 2000 General Election Voters' Pamphlet ADMINISTRATIVE SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 1 (BEND LA PINE) M Measure No. 9-90 s-sa1tkRIRTtfi tL al�x Ora ;._ a�f theJstr€ t irrtt4# per, ARGUMENT IN FAVOR �V Fellow Community Members: value Qr 0pet ett fqr fete yew -' £ �elfBrttCt+ ThjS rCt8a5Lit ttty daee As PTA members, parents and school volunteers, we Rrope�taxes tt�irtere se rttare tfisttt three nt: witness,daily the critical need for additional teaching staff. Because of our concern,the Central Oregon PTA Coun- SUWARVA_ oti this tnessui"e lS a VEttb cil passed, unanimously, a motion to support the " i Bend reasei ll be addjtlt x reyei� V La-Pine School District's ballot measure to secure funds used to;ftrrarra�ttaal teachers,W lxll wojd're- ` to hire new teachers. As 100% of these funds will be stilt to rnasrlas sfz : at tlt0:0 1Bel qy.3G1ttpls used to hire new teachers,the PTA Council feels this is a ` ..n 0 GO prehenstva .Wurae tremendous opportunity to reduce our class sizes and tle"+ ptyahoiS.tttset€trte�;.thaptcijaefl ensure that young students will be given the attention ..e.uftt rake$ ,0 _ lfl 2t)f}itli + =B28,38t} and instruction they need to allow them to become suc cessful readers and students. trt 20t X05 a td ,1 ,i lrt 200 008 for a tJ tal of � + This local option will allow us to step forward and join in the education of our students.The cost is truly minimal ($1 per $1000 assessed or less!) and all of our Bend La-Pine students, Kindergarten through 12th grade,will . benefit. 100%of the funds will stay in our community to EXPLANATORY STATEMENT serve our own students with the majority of the funds BEND-LA PINE SCHOOLS dedicated to reduce elementary school class size. Our '° , LOCAL OPTION BALLOT MEASURE recently built facilities can provide classrooms for many WHAT.......................................................................... of the proposed teachers and the district has plans for ffil temporary facilities when classrooms are not an option. _ 1,,' The Bend-La Pine School Board has proposed a local w ' y MINE, . option tax measure that would add 50 teachers to The research is clear that reduced class sizes increase k;x :. ,,�: :. schools beginning in the 2001-2002 school year.This the success of students, especially in the early years in Fgx: ;. measure is intended to reduce class size in elementary the content areas of reading and math.The Bend La schools and provide for additional instructional courses Pine School District is asking us to support them in their € . at middle and high schools. No other resources have mission to serve our students wisely and efficiently.This been identified to fund the proposed teaching positions. is a remarkable chance to positively affect the lives Of our students and demonstrate the community's commit- , WHY.............................................................................. .., ment to our student's education and success. Existing state funding levels for education have not per- Please join us and vote YES for this important local op- mitted Bend-La Pine Schools to reduce class size. tion! School district enrollment has grown by approximately 3,300 students or 34.4%since 1990.At the same time, Holly Remer, PTA Council President ; the district has added 175 teachers, yet class size has Council Members: remained essentially unchanged.According to state and Diana Oberbarnscheidt local projections,district growth is expected to continue at a rate of approximately 300 new students each year. Barbara Brutsch The local option measure is proposed to fund additional Elaine Kelley teachers to meet growth needs and reduce class size. Marion Craig WHEN........................................................................... Deanna Heckel The local option measure will be on the November 7, 2000 ballot. This is a mail-in election. Ballots will be (This information furnished by Holly Remer, mailed beginning October 20, 2000 and are due at the Central Oregon PTA Council.) County Clerk's office no later than 8:00 p.m.on election day. To be eligible to vote you must be registered by October 17, 2000. Registration materials are available at the County Clerk's office and the School District Superintendent's office. HOWMUCH ................................................................. This local option measure would raise at least $3 mil- lion each year for five years and cost property taxpay- ers a maximum of$1 per$1,000 of property value.The local option may raise an additional $3 million during the five years on new property developments. That amounts to a maximum estimated cost of $12.50 per month (or$150 per year) on a $150,000 home.Taxes for each property owner will depend on the difference between the real market value and assessed value of The printing f these arguments does not constitute an endorsement or each property. the County of Deschutes,nor does the county warrant the accuracy or ' (This information furnished by John M. Rexford.) truth of any statement made in the arguments. Y 9-13 Official Deschutes County 2000 General Election Voters' Pamphlet h ADMINISTRATIVE SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 1 (BEND LA PINE) Measure No. 9-90 `'- ARGUMENT IN FAVOR ARGUMENT IN FAVOR "Give us smaller class sizes.""Provide more diversity of Passing the local option tax provides increased educa ;.ffi programs:That is the challenge the Bend-La Pine School tional opportunities for all students in the Bend LaPine Board has heard from the community.We listened to a Schools. clear mandate from the public to put more teachers First of all, the tax reduces class size in elementary in our schools. schools. Given more individualized attention, in less We now have a chance to meet that challenge. There crowded and therefore more focused classroom environ- was a built-in inequity in the structure of the property tax ments,students strengthen reading and math skills.These 4 Y P P Y 9 9 a°>s" limitation.The last legislature created the"local option"to skills are the foundation upon which much of their future k give each community the choice to correct that inequity. academic and job growth depends. With fundamental It real) should be called a"local o ortunit :' skills in lace,students become efficient learners,involved Y opportunity." p Our children are our future.The quality of that future participants in school, and lifelong contributors to our depends on the excellence of-their education.We mem- society. Reduced class size is a critical component to in- bers of the Bend-La Pine School Board have promised to creased student success. dedicate every penny of the dollars raised by this mea- In the middle and high schools, the tax provides for a sure to hire additional teachers. Not administrators. more diversified curriculum. An everchanging, problem- Not equipment.Not buildings.Teachers!The result will atic, and technological world awaits students and they ' - be smaller class sizes for our elementary schoolchildren require the tools to enter it confidently. Not only do they and more diverse program offerings in middle school and need specific technical training, but they also need criti- high school. cal thinking and creative problem solving skills to meet coming, unpredictable challenges. This is absolutely the right thing to do for our children. 9, P Through an expanded curriculum,which offers a variety rigorous and relevant =N`� For many taxpayers it will cost nothing, or very little. In- Y of g vestigate the facts.Call the school district for information learning opportunities, Bend-LaPine students can face about exactly what this measure will cost you, individu' their futures eagerly.B Y P as sin g the local option tax our community encourages and participates ally.Then join us in voting yes on this very important Y g p pates in their success. ;. local opportunity for our kids! Finally, passing the local option tax returns, in part, con- y.The passage trol of our schools to our community.Members of the Bend-La Pine School Board p sa a of Mea- #:;; Deborah Hogan sure 5 in 1990, by a mere 1500 votes statewide, ripped g local funding control away from citizens; now is our op- Ron Paradis Jan Taylor portunity to take it back. >' Vote in favor of the local option tax and provide our chil- Randy Gordon dren with the education they deserve and need to live Patricia Cappy successful,joyful, and productive lives.And as the sage Bill Smith succinctly says, "If you think education is expensive, try ' Mara Stein ignorance." ., (This information furnished by Ron Paradis, C.0.R.E. Central Oregonians for Responsible Education.) (This information furnished by Bend Education ARGUMENT IN FAVOR Association, Carolyn Clontz, President.) A"Yes"vote on the Local Option Measure is your oppor- tunity to help reduce the crowded classrooms in our local >: schools. This measure will provide funds to hire new i>' teachers. All funds will be used for additional teachers, itME not additional classrooms or buildings. Important highlights Im hi ,.. p g g is of this measure include: NO ARGUMENTS AGAINST THIS *100% of the funds approved will be used to hire new teachers. MEASURE WERE FILED *100%of the funds will be used locally in the Bend-LaPine School District. *The pumber of students in elementary classrooms will «" be reduced. s<fr < *A wider range of classes will be offered to middle and =f high school students. *The cost for these improvements is reasonable(a maxi- ,..':„ mum of$150 per year for a$150,000 home,and much less for most people,with the average being just$78). A"Yes"on Measure 9-90 is a vote of support for our local kids and for our entire community. The printing of these arguments does not constitute an endorsement by >>% (This information furnished by the County of Deschutes,nor does the county warrant the accuracy or - ``" Robert S. Lovlien, Julie F. Hood, truth of any statement made in the arguments. Central Oregonians for Responsible Education.) 9-14 Official Deschutes County 2000 General Election Voters' Pamphlet CASCADE VIEW ESTATES TRACT #2 SPECIAL ROAD DISTRICT Measure No. 9-91 9-91 RVE YeAR LOCAL OPITt�?�I FCC OUSSTtOtN: 5hali 8.604 C?ietr ct irr�pe�i4e 1. (1 per !. 1,000of assessed Vaiue for five years for generai operating purposes begnr 1ng 2Oi 22?1»hismea7 sure may cause ptt3peq taxe t to.,nor "se r ,ore than three percent. SUMMARY: The tax revenue fr€.m Phis measure would a'It Casc T ade View Estates rait#2 Special Road District tp pay far additional grading and pur.. chase additional gravel and read matt3llatS.With re» cent rapid population growth and subsequent ire» creased road usage,addition ) revenue is required to maintain andimpres existing rdatts.The proposed rats is estimated to raise$1 (1Ct in 2t1-x(102, $13,61.40 in 2f>a2 2t3f ,$l 028 tltt n 2 3 $14,4 49.00 in 2404-2036,$14,883 4�116 2t6-2006, for a totai 0f 70, 02,0 3.' EXPLANATORY STATEMENT This proposed Five Year Local Option Tax would be in addition to the current permanent rate limit of $1.3569 per$1,000.00 of assessed value. The Road District was established in May of 1986.There has been no request for additional tax revenue since formation of the district. With recent rapid population growth and subsequent increased road usage,additional revenue is required to maintain and improve existing roads.The tax revenue from this measure would allow Cascade View Estates Tract#2 Special Road District to pay for additional grading and purchase additional gravel and road materials. (This information furnished by Karen L. Engeman, Secretary, Cascade View Estates Tract#2 Special Road District.) NO ARGUMENTS FOR OR AGAINST THIS MEASURE WERE FILED 9-15 Official Deschutes County 2000 General Election Voters' Pamphlet y,a SISTERS SCHOOL DISTRICT #6 IIA+� sure No. 9-92 t � ARGUMENT IN FAVOR There is no question that the money from the Local Op- tion tax will improve the quality of the education of the �� ,B x students in our community, by reducing class sizes, in- e #[ gf{ou � L creasing the programs available to our children, and giv- 9utrttay€ 8tuse ing our teachers the textbooks and supplies they need to % �e percent by actually teach.These improvements will benefit our com- � Va� � } munity as well 1fWMilIR if1rlft x bod In the short term, ever wants to see their tax dol- lars used wisely,and the same is true for education.Teach- rrtetertaf ,# E ers can teach more efficiently and effectively if there are fewer students in each classroom,and if they have good g att `� textbooks and supplies to use.The bottom line is that we pay tax dollars for education so that our children can learn, f and they will be able to learn more with Local Option. ( , fir In the long term,whether our students go on to college or on to work, whether they eventually become employers EXPLANATORY STATEMENT or employees, they will probably be a little more bright, creative,and productive if they have received a good edu- SISTERS SCHdOLS cation along the way.This is good for our children and ; z# € LOCAL OPTION BALLOT MEASURE good for our community. WHAT: As parents,we understand the importance of education, The Sisters Schools has proposed a Local p p Option tax and for anybody who values education,this Local Option :.. measure that is intended to reduce class size,preserve tax is an obvious "YES" vote. As business owners, we programs,and provide for textbooks,library books,tech- can also see that the Local Option tax will make good nological equipment, software, and other instructional financial sense for everybody in the community.For these materials. In addition, it will address maintenance and and many other reasons,we wholeheartedly support this repair of current facilities and other pressing needs of Local Option tax. the District. Please join the co-chairs of the Committee for Sisters WHY: School Children in supporting Sisters schoolchildren: yr Existing state funding levels have caused a reduction s of 5-1/2 teaching positions. In addition, a reduction in - Bob Grooney r instructional aide time and custodial services has oc- • Jean Wells Keenan curred.Further, urgently needed maintenance projects, - Patti Little have been deferred.These repair projects are essential - Brian Witt,Treasurer keep buildings good condition. Presently, there are not sufficient numbers of text- (This information furnished by Robert E.Grooney, Co-Chair, Committee for Sisters School Children. books and many of.them are out of date. Class sizes ) have continued to increase while the variety and avail- ability of classes have been reduced.The Local Option measure will address these needs. WHEN: y The Local Option measure will be on the November 7, 2000 ballot.This is a mail-in election.Ballots will be i€ mailed beginning October 20,2000,and are due at the County Clerk's office no later than 8 p.m. on Election 's m< Day.To be eligible to vote you must register by October 17, 2000. Registration materials are available at the County Clerk's office and at each of Sisters Schools. HOW MUCH: Y;. This Local Option measure would raise in excess of $475,000 each year in a four-year period for the opera- MEASURE 9-92 ARGUMENTS tionofschools.This will cost property tax payees amaxi- mum of$.75 per thousand of property value.Taxes for each property owner will depend on the difference be- tween the real market value and assessed value of each h property. fR IN 1' The printing of these arguments does not constitute an endorsement by the County of Deschutes,nor does the count (This information furnished by Diane Shelly, Sisters ry y warrant the accuracy or School District#6.) truth of any statement made in the arguments. 9-18 Official Deschutes County 2000 General Election Voters' Pamphlet SISTERS SCHOOL DISTRICT #6 N' ' 3 f Y' k V(- Measure No. 9-92 1_ MIXM ARGUMENT IN FAVOR ARGUMENT IN FAVOR �,. The most important things we can do to improve the qual- Many people in our community have lived here all of their 5th ity of education are reducing class sizes,and giving teach- lives, and many have arrived here in recent years, at ers the textbooks and supplies they need to efficiently tracted by the many things our community has to offer. >;g teach. Local Option will accomplish both of these goals. But we all share one thing in common,a sense of pride in it r ` For many years,funding for schools was based on local our community.This sense of pride also extends to our tax assessments.This changed about 10 years ago, af- schools.It is this sense of pride that makes Local Option "Nov, t� ter Ballot Measure 5. Our money now goes into a state- an obvious choice. NIONNN R; wide fund, and is distributed on a per-student basis The funding for schools is now determined in Salem, not throughout the state.We now have more equality of fund- in Sisters, and when we were told that we will all have toK ing, but we have lost local control of funding. do with a little less,there wasn't much we could do about : This year the Sisters School Board was forced to reduce it.We then had to watch our school district go through the process of la in off teachers and reducing or elimi- sa, our teaching staff by six teachers due to school funding P Y 9 gas cutback decisions made by State government.These de- nating many programs for our students.This was a very cisions were made beyond our local control. The text- Painful process to watch. Y '" book situation throughout our school district is poor.Many The only option we have to improve this situation is thet of the courses have outdated textbooks that are over 10 Local Option.With the Local Option we can reduce the MP situ„ : years old. Some of our courses have no textbooks at all class sizes for our children and give them the textbooks ' and teachers have resorted to handing out photocopied and supplies they need to be good students.We can re w pages from teaching manuals to our students. In addi- store pride in our school district and in our community tion, we need to keep our library books and software The voters in our district can't change the way the entire X., materials current and expand them to meet student needs. state pays for its schools.But we can do something right ; The only irect action our community can take to improve Y Y P here and right now to make things better.It is not enough the situation is Local Option. to just have a reputation for having good schools. Our 911 By passing Local Option, we will be able to hire more community wants to actually have good schools. Local ;. teachers,thereby reducing class sizes and expanding the Option will make that happen. z >M curriculum available to our children. We will be able to The time has come for each of us to step forward and buy new textbooks,so that every class in our District has cast a YES ballot for Local Option and affirmatively state up-to-date course materials.We will also be able to take that we want our children to have a good education, so M. care of a variety of pressing maintenance needs now, that when they grow up,they too can feel the same sense before they become much more expensive repair projects of pride towards our community that we have.Please join later. me in supporting the Local Option. With the Local Option and Bond,the voters of Sisters will get to decide whether we want to have good schools here r in Sisters.Please vote Y es for Sisters schools. * �, ” T This information furnished b Glen Lasken, (This information furnished by William G. Willitts and ( Y >... member of Board of Directors Sisters School Board.) Patricia Z Willitts.) ; ;'?• fin^ Y Y ^`s NO „ 3 ARGUMENTS AGAINST R. THIS MEASURE WERE FILED Y The printing of these arguments does not constitute an endorsement by the County of Deschutes,nor does the county warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the arguments. . 9-17 Official Deschutes County 2000 General Election Voters' Pamphlet SISTERS SCHOOL DISTRICT #6 Measure No. 9-93 1,TER may be even higher.To meet the growth needs of both X 01. schools the Community Plan is to build a new High School, 0LtC'�l`C1 �tttlO convert the current High School to a Middle School,and ?t�ST1# N hf)t �t�6 €tt�f +Eit3 iS4t retire the existing Middle School.This would address the goneral.rs:"':"j Qn fl tf trt *r ttn rtt t x� needs of students at all levels. WHEN: t+flC be paYabfe frsrrt t� � � If approved, the Plan calls for the new High School and 4wnersflip th8t 8th n ttb�ir € t� the conversion of the existing High School to a Middle t'fons 1 i end 41 kt,ArtroCt t# rn cntttt3 trop s School to be completed by December,2002. SJMM,tI;} If HOW MUCH: This Bond measure will total $22,000,000 and will cost tttftaC?itrtcttr�'� i > tvtstf7 property taxpayers an estimated $1.68 per thousand of Mott Cilte �' assessed value.That amounts to a cost of$14 per month rted ttiroutditx (or$168 p er year) per$100,000 of property value. With ' Capits! ttt5t+titlttEiifgft growth the tax rate is projected to drop over the 21-year achtatl ancf ratite life of the Bond. New homes and businesses will pay a • Cap►t tilt�t rrte r tS it to �� & portion of this Bond,reducing taxes for all other property .furnisFtir(g � � owners, as well. • Cap ta[ irnpro�rern �a#flttte (This information furnished by Diane Shelly oprrrent,stxtt rol , Szr � r ttt(rtY Sisters School District.) C.c7n19�2Cttt}fT�, • aptafrrrxfrir�1tt1 ARGUMENT IN FAVOR toEV1 f�tGl The current Sisters Middle School was first built in 1929, . pitlhas prr pt tt�retttl with later additions in 1937, 1948 and 1984.The building trioC f�tr t1t �� 0€t � is in serious need of major repairs.For example,the en- • R�f�nd f��� o�it� fear` � �t�1r;�� ��, tire heating and electrical systems will need to be replaced and upgraded.These and other repairs will cost many land iJSe ptnCrtt ' � t � ) hundreds of thousands of dollars, and we will still be left lar costs 1ecfrCt wtkfafft f3fdlfh with a school that is already too small to serve as the proj�fits,and � middle school.This would be like painting the deck of the Psy:bor t8nr Titanic after it has struck the iceberg.We cannot do this. a Theoncis wttt ft1tF ttir t We in Sisters learned a painful lesson about putting off the inevitable. If we had built our sewer years ago, we EXPLANATORY STATEMENT could have saved millions of dollars on the construction SISTERS SCHOOLS costs.Instead,we waited until the last possible moment, GENERAL OBLIGATION BOND MEASURE and we are paying a premium for that delay.Now we are WHAT: faced with the need to replace an old,crumbling,inadequate middle school. Even with a conservative estimate of a 5% After seeking advice from the community, the Sisters increase in construction costs each year,the cost of build- School Board has developed a School Bond measure ing a replacement school will go up more than a million dol- that proposes to construct a new High School, and do lars every year that we wait.Let us not make the same mis- the conversion of the current High School to a Middle take twice.We need it now, let's build it now. School.The project will: Provide for growth in student numbers Finally, our community is growing, and as more people move here,there will be more people to help pay for this • Provide for retirement of the inadequate Middle Bond.This means that the amount we individually pay School Building will actually be less each year as the community grows. Provide sewer, roads and other utilities to both As parents,we understand the importance of schools and r schools education, and we support pport the Bond.As business own- Provide space for more meaningful instruction ers, we also support this Bond because it makes good WHY: financial sense.Please join me in voting YES. join the co-chairs of the Committee for Sisters Please The current Middle School is old, crowded and inad- equate.Students lack sufficient classroom,locker room, School Children in supporting Sisters school children: restroom, playing fields, library and cafeteria space. • Bob Grooney Currently one modular unit is in use on the site. One Jean Wells Keenan portion of the Middle School was built in 1929;one por- tion in 1937;and one portion in 1948.The latest remodel • Patti Little was in 1984. • Brian Witt, Treasurer The existing Middle School is over capacity.The High (This information furnished by Robert E. Grooney, School is at capacity. New construction and growth in Co-Chair, Committee for Sisters School Children, ' the community indicate that there will be a minimum of Brian Witt, Treasurer.) 300 more students in the next five years at the middle and high school levels.Other studies indicate the growth The printing of these arguments does not constitute an endorsement by the County of Deschutes,nor does the county warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the arguments. 9-18 Official Deschutes County 2000 General Election Voters' Pamphlet SISTERS SCHOOL DISTRICT #6 Measure No. 9-93 ARGUMENT IN FAVOR ARGUMENT IN FAVOR The current Sisters Middle School started with a m built We the voters of the Sisters Area will have an o ortu- g_'4 a. " 9Y PP ..�'`a� ` in 1929.Buildings were added in 1937, with additions in nity to put children first. In our heart we all know, our p, 1948 and 1984.Unfortunately,while patchwork may work children are our future. _'i to well in quilting, doesn't work well for building a school. -' 0 0 q g' g We in the Sisters Area are blessed by the natural beauty ,NE Our Middle School students are using a school that does of our surroundings and a great sense of community and not have mu,enough classrooms.The computer, library,g p Y pride. Now we must take our sense of community and sic and art facilities are all antiquated and inadequate.q q pride one step further and vote for the replacement of There are not enough bathrooms.The kitchen and caf- our patchwork middle school. eteria facilities are too small.The gym is tiny and Crum- Excellence in education requires a safe,well lighted place tiling and has dungeon-like locker rooms.We had to shrink with adequate space.Then,with the support of involved T` '3 q P PP the one remaining playground to squeeze in a temporary a< parents and our inspired teaching staff we can lay the , modular structure.These assorted buildings do not of groundwork for positive self esteem in our children. fectively serve as a Middle School. Even if our commu- nity was not growing, we should be taking this building Our children deserve the same safe, quality education off line. that our parents afforded us.The quality of our children's lives will forever be impacted by the education they re- ` With the growth that is occurring in our community,popu- ceive. May the ride and goodness in the hearts of the lation studies show that there are going to be several Y P 9 Sisters Area residents shine through. r ' hundred more students in the near future, and most of them will be coming to the Middle School and High School. Yi2 Our existing Middle School is currently overcrowded,and �. the High School is already close to capacity.Where will (This information furnished by William& be put these new students? Patricia Z. Willitts.) We can't build another addition to the Middle School,and <'€_ just building a replacement Middle School won't address the growth needs at the High School;and we will end up having to expand that building in a few years, too.The solution is to build a new larger High School now.We can then convert the current High School building into the new Middle School,and retire the old Middle School build- ; < ing. We will avoid the expensive repairs and upgrades at the Middle School; we will ease overcrowding, and have enough room at both the Middle and High Schools to handle our growth.We will be planning for our future in- stead of just reacting to it.Please vote yes. <3 - (This information furnished by Glen Lasken, member <hi < of Board of Directors, Sisters School Board.) NO ARGUMENTS AGAINST THIS MEASURE WERE FILED M. "€ 31:ir .; :<- :. , `. . The printing of these arguments does not constitute an endorsement by the County of Deschutes,nor does the county warrant the accuracy or ; truth of any statement made in the arguments. 9-19 Official Deschutes County 2000 General Election Voters' Pamphlet CROOKED RIVER RANCH RURAL FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT p Measure No. 16-31 which limits District replacement vehicle options.The ? � larger station would alleviate current crowded condi- a ��� F tions for volunteers. 2.Provide funding to complete development of P roperty to be used as a future north satellite station.The pur- chase of this property is not dependent upon passage Y P of this measure. A developed north satellite station would shorten distances for volunteers from the north =tK r portion of the District to reach emergency vehicles � � � A1et for responding to calls. 3.Provide funding for vehicle/apparatus replacement.In- .... � BEit eluded in this measure is funding a replacement fire Y `£ engine with additional equipment-carrying capabilities, and a 1982 ambulance.Additionally,funding would al- low of rescue- type it Os � p type vehicle,specially manu- �x�, factured to permit storage and transport of rescue h equipment including rope,water,and vehicle res- 6e tom: i �t �N� t Et8 t 4 111g f D t ���teEthttfii� �� cue equipment. pravzrts t c•opbtkiis Tl I#if� srttlSft78sSit?tiaS (This information furnished by Patrick Reitz, Chief, . EXPLANATORY STATEMENT Crooked River Ranch Rural Fire Protection District.) The Crooked River Ranch RFPD serves an area that £:.1XI :9 has changed from a rural recreational getaway to a de- a veloping full-time residential community.The District serves this area from a station constructed 1976,a time when the Ranch was a vacation destination with few permanent residents. a ,sMS : The elected Board of Directors for Crooked River Ranch 3 RFPD has approved the placement of a funding mea- 9 sure on the November general election ballot.The pro- posed measure asks District residents to consider the ` sale of$985,000 in bonds,to be paid over the course of 10 years.The money would be used to build a new cen- NO ARGUMENTS FOR OR AGAINST tral station,develop a north satellite station,and replace THIS MEASURE WERE FILED ;� .. fire apparatus(vehicles)and related equipment. The District's current and permanent tax rate is$1.8379 per $1,000 of assessed property tax valuation. This measure would represent an additional$.94 per$1,000, for a combined tax rate of$2.7779 per 1,000 of assessed property value for ten years.The estimated tax cost for this measure is an ESTIMATE ONLY,based on the best information available from the county assessor at the time of the estimate. Crooked River Ranch RFPD is a "special service dis- trict",a unit of government equal to a city or county.The A: a District is governed b a board of directors elected from � g y � kffi residents and property owners.As elected representa- tives for the District, Board members are responsible for making the decisions that govern the provision of fire and EMS services to the District. The ballot measure would do the following: 1.Provide funding for a new District fire station, to re- place the current station located at the corner of Shad ez and North Hill Roads which was built in 1976.A new fire station would allow the storage of emergency 9 ve- hicles indoors, rather than outdoors. A new station would also provide additional useable wall and stor- age space and its garage door openings would be -?a built to meet full-size fire truck height specifications. ` The current station does not have this configuration 9-20 Official Deschutes County 2000 General Election Voters' Pamphlet DESCHUTES COUNTY � . COMMISSIONER, POSITION 2 MIKE DALY s RANDY GORDON � REPUBLICAN `` INDEPENDENT k10 iNNN OCCUPATION:Small Business Owner(Mike Daly Excavation/ OCCUPATION: . 16 ears) Retired Police Dept.Division Commander OCCUPATIONAL BACKGROUND: Oregon State Police Of- Former Law Enforcement Instructor rc:. • Parent , ficer,Private Pilot and Investigator for Local Law Firm,Licensed Realtor,Construction Superintendent,Owner/O p erator of Ex- OCCUPATIONAL BACKGROUND: {rs, •. Police department Patrol Officer, Sergea nt, Lieutenant, Investi- 3t1< cavation Company. gations Division n Command;US Army Sergeant,Second and First EDUCATIONAL BACKGROUND: Graduate Culver High Lieutenant;City Council;Board Chair,Bend-La Pine School Board; _=,g� _ School. Umpqua Community College, Police Science & En- Community College Instructor, %B,W.'"' glish studies. Central Oregon Community College, Real Es- EDUCATIONAL BACKGROUND: '"W tate and business Law Studies. Government Budgeting,Evergreen State College,Olympia,WA; PRIOR GOVERNMENTAL EXPERIENCE: Marketing/Business Administration, Seattle City College; Law 9 tY 9 •State Construction Contractors Board Enforcement,Green River Community College,Auburn,WA •Chairman of State Construction Contractors Board PRIOR GOVERNMENTAL EXPERIENCE: " •Redmond Planning Commission US Army,wounded in Viet-Nam;received Direct Commission. •City of Redmond Standards&Specifications Committee In the middle of my 25 year law enforcement career, I was n stabbed in the abdomen in the line of duty;was off work for 5 CIVIC INVOLVEMENT) Habitat for Humanity, Boys and Girls years,during this period I was ELECTED to the City Council. Club,Dave Jacqua"Field of Dreams",Rotary Club of Redmond. I recover and returned to my career and retired as a Division The County Commissioner's position is a complex job requir- Commander. ing a wide variety of`real-life' experiences to be effective. I ELECTED:Chair,Bend La Pine School Board(99-00) have that`real life'experience.. ELECTED:Current Member Bend-La Pine School Board " A County Commissioner faces law enforcement issues...I was a State Police Officer for 9 years.Our rapidly growing county ELECTED: Bend La Pine School Dist., La Pine Attendance is dealing with issues at the Bend and Redmond Airports... I Area Advisory Board hold a commercial pilot's license and have flown in and out of APPOINTED:Deschutes County Commission on Children and both airports many times.I understand and have a good work- Families ,, ing knowledge of the airport issues.A County Commissioner RANDY GORDON:SERVING THE COMMUNITY must be able to work effectively with the legislature in Salem... • Past president of the La Pine Community Action Team Two Oregon governors have appointed me to the Oregon Con- • Scoutmaster ` struction Contractors Board...A consumer protection agency • Member of Green River Community College Vocational Advi- in Salem. Deschutes County maintains over 800 miles of sory Board roads... I have built some of these roads. • Law Enforcement Explorer Post Advisor Youth Soccer Coach • Youth Basketball Coach "V All this points to one thing... I am the experienced,thoughtful H and common sense candidate for Deschutes County Commis- Youth T-Ball Coach ,: _ sioner... I am Mike Daly and I would like your vote! Campfire Council Board of Directors 3 .f. • Charter Member of Battered Women's Task Force • Founding Member,Battered Womens'Shelter • Eagle Scout WHAT KIND OF COMMUNITY DO WE WANT? WE CAN NO LONGER REACT TO SOMEONE ELSE'S . AGENDA! r„ Growth,Transportation,Cell Towers, Airport Expansion,Driving Range Nets All are symptoms of the larger problem:the lack of communication with citizens and the lack of a county-wide long-term vision. INPUT?QUESTIONS?CALL ME AT 420-0439 THANK YOU, RANDY (This information furnished by Mike Daly.) (This information furnished by Randy Gordon.) 9-21 Official Deschutes County 2000 General Election Voters' Pamphlet DESCHUTES COUNTY COMMISSIONER, POSITION 2 ON `lz � 4E LARRY KIMMEL CURT WAGONER DEMOCRAT LIBERTARIAN bF y OCCUPATION:Part-owner&managing partner,Hawk Develop OCCUPATION:Small business owner ment(developers of La Pine Chevron and A&W Restaurant), OCCUPATIONAL BACKGROUND: 1998 to present Landscaping;Timberworker; Home construction; Professional OCCUPATIONAL BACKGROUND: musician. 1995-97 Consultant in gasoline distribution EDUCATIONAL BACKGROUND: 1976-95 General Manager/Secretary Treasurer,Traughber Oil Torrance High School Co.,Bend PRIOR GOVERNMENTAL EXPERIENCE: 1974-76 Manager,Cascade Investment Co-founder;twice elected Vice-Chair and current Chair of the 1971-74 Credit analyst,salesman,Dun&Bradstreet Libertarian Party of Deschutes County EDUCATIONAL BACKGROUND: 1967-71 Gonzaga University,B.S.Business Administration, 1 WANT TO GIVE YOU BACK YOUR MONEY AND LEAVE Marketing major YOU ALONE! PRIOR GOVERNMENTAL EXPERIENCE: LIMITED GOVERNMENT—MAXIMUM FREEDOM •1994 to present Deschutes County Budget Committee •1997/1998 Budget Committee Chair •1993 to 1995 City of Bend Transportation Committee Taxes– No one should be forced to pay for services that they do not re- ceive. I oppose all forms of coercive taxation and will work to Experienced in Government– Kimmel's involvement in gov- lower our taxes buy privatizing or eliminating all non-essential ernment began with two years on the City of Bend Transportation county governmental functions. Committee.For the last six years,he has served on the Deschutes County Budget Committee,working with elected officials and citi- 100%Pro-Property Rights. zens to ensure that tax dollars are spent wisely. I oppose all governmental interference with private property,such Experienced in Business–With over 25 years of business ex as confiscation, (asset forfeiture), nationalization, and eminent perience in Central Oregon,Kimmel will apply business principles domain,and support the prohibition of robbery,trespass,fraud, and practices to the management of county programs.He appre- and misrepresentation.If elected, I will defend the private prop ciates the importance of local government working in partner- erty owner in all land use decisions. ships.Kimmel can help to build collaborative relationships among county departments,community organizations,local businesses, La Pine incorporation and individuals. Incorporation will bring the very things people moved to La Pine Experienced in Community Service–Volunteering time for to et away from—Bi intrusive government and higher taxes. P h/ g 9 Y 9 9 9 sports and educational programs has allowed Kimmel to repay this community for the support given his three children during 100%Pro-Second Amendment Rights their time in local schools. He's spent 16 years as a volunteer Every American citizen has the right to self-defense and this right basketball coach for Mountain View High School and Bend Metro extends beyond the home.I support the right to carry a concealed Park and Recreation District,worked with at risk kids at Bear Creek handgun without the need of a costly permit and I oppose all Elementary for two years,and served on the United Way Cam- governmental gun registration schemes. paign for two years. Kimmel's Commitment–As your Deschutes County Commis—DRUG PROHIBITION IS A FRAUD AND A FAILURE sioner,I will bring knowledge,compassion,and responsibility to www.StopTheDrugWar.org this office,and will continue to keep your tax dollars working effi- We spend 50 billion dollars a year on prohibition yet any kid ciently. can buy any drug they want on any public school ground. Kimmel Knows Government America has more of its citizens behind bars and is putting Kimmel Means Business them there faster than any nation on earth. Kimmel Cares Drug treatment is far more cost effective than incarceration. Vote for Kimmel It costs more per year to warehouse one non-violent drug of- fender than it costs to hire one full-time school teacher. Our drug problem can be solved but,not by prohibition. Decriminalization,regulation,and truthful drug education based on personal responsibility and informed decision making is the only way we will ever get a handle on crime and drugs. (This information furnished by Larry Kimmel.) (This information furnished by Curt Wagoner.) 9-22 Official Deschutes County 2000 General Election Voters' Pamphlet yxi<< DESCHUTES COUNTY '` SHERIFF '• ,a Mw fs em� .gn mg- mg GREG LES BROWN STILES NONPARTISAN NONPARTISAN OCCUPATION:Sheriff—Deschutes County OCCUPATIONAL BACKGROUND: OCCUPATION:LIEUTENANT,BEND POLICE DEPARTMENT ` y° Deschutes County Sheriff's Office 1973-present .BACKGROUND: Police Officer; Corporal; 3,, Sheriff, Administrative Lieutenant, Detective Sergeant, Patrol - Detective,Patrol Sergeant;Detective Sergeant;Detective Lieu Sergeant;Resident Deputy,Search&Rescue volunteer. '.. , Lieu- tenant;Watch Commander;Chief of Police. EDUCATIONAL BACKGROUND: EDUCATIONAL BACKGROUND: Masters Degree-Public Ad- ' • M.S.Ed.Western Oregon State University 1987 g 9 tY ministration,University of Northern Colorado;Bachelors Deg ree- • • Executive Certificate—Oregon Public Safety Board English,Illinois State University;FBI National Academy;Manage- • Bend High School 1971 ment Certificate,Oregon DPSST. PRIOR GOVERNMENTAL EXPERIENCE: PRIOR GOVERNMENTAL EXPERIENCE:Adams County Colo- Sheriff—Deschutes County rado Juvenile Diversion Program;Chair—Management Training • Director:Sisters—Camp Sherman Fire Board 1984-present Committee—Denver Regional Council of Governments; Board • Oregon Attorney Generals Safe Communities Council 1999- 9 Y Member—Deschutes County Juvenile Services Commission; m> resent =g P Chair-Region Six Training Committee,Oregon DPSST;Faculty �A�«, �., • Co-Chair—Oregon Sheriff's Legislative Committee 9 9 Member—COCC; Metropolitan State College;Denver Commu- >.. • Oregon Law Enforcement Legislative Council nity College. %sue rz>.. GREG BROWN HAS UNDERSPENT THE SHERIFF'S BUD- GET EVERY YEAR HE HAS BEEN IN OFFICE As Sheriff,Les Stiles will insure delivery of more police protection And while Greg Brown has spent less than the budget allows,he at reduced cost to citizens of Deschutes County by abolishing has increased our public safety services because he has worked redundant services and unnecessary spending.By working closely hard to get dollars through contracts and grants without increas- with other agencies and citizens, solutions to community prob- ing our property taxes. lems can be found. Honesty and integrity are cornerstones of Greg has been endorsed by 32 Oregon Sheriff's,County Com- effective leadership.Les will provide strong leadership. missioners,elected officials,and others who recognize his lead Les Stiles has a proven record of Public Service and Leadership. .£,..; ership and willingness to make the right decisions for the public. In addition to 25 ears of police work,Les served 5 1i2 ears on Y P Y "Public safety in Central Oregon has been significantly enhanced active duty in the United States Army and was Commissioned a and taxpayer dollars saved with Greg Brown's leadership" 2nd Lt in the Corps of Engineers.Les then served 6 years in the .: Rodd Clark Jack Jones active Reserves leaving with the rank of Captain. Crook County Sheriff Jefferson County Sheriff Les Stiles participates in the community:In the past 25 years he GREG BROWN IS AN EFFECTIVE PUBLIC SAFETY VOICE served on many boards and committees relating to community issues such as Juvenile Justice programs,Community Policing, IN DESCHUTES COUNTY AND STATEWIDE . l - and Drug Awareness Programs.Les volunteered to work in Head ., Greg Co-chairs the Oregon Sheriff's legislative committee and Start Programs,the Family Resource Center,and conservation `' serves as the sheriff's representative on the Oregon Law Enforce- g Y z -h = P g programs.Les has taught Criminal Justice at the college level for ment Legislative Committee. 20 ears. "Sheriff Brown is a solid partner in Oregon's efforts to protect 20 y ears. - public safety and juvenile crime.Sheriff Brown has provided out- Les Stiles has an excellent reputation within the law-enforcement standing statewide leadership for public safety in Oregon,and I community of Deschutes County and will provide positive change = and leadership as exemplified by the endorsements of:Deschutes '' am pleased to endorse Sheriff Brown" John A.Kitzhaber,M.D. County Sheriff Employee Association;Deputy District Attorneys - of Deschutes County;Oregon State Police Officers Association; . Governor Redmond Police Association;Bend Police Association;Redmond GREG BROWN APPRECIATES AND ENCOURAGES CITIZEN Fire Association;Bend Fire Association;Oregon State Police Tele- ,�,•.�;.€, INVOLVEMENT Communicators Association; and Oregon State Police Crime Citizens serve on the sheriff advisory council, the local parole Lab—Bend. board, volunteer to staff sheriff stations and assist with the in- mate drug and alcohol treatment program.Citizens have formed community policing teams and have actively participated in the 64 Town Halls that Sheriff Brown has sponsored. (This information furnished by The Committee to Elect (This information furnished by Greg Brown.) Les Stiles Sheriff.) 9-23 Official Deschutes County 2000 General Election Voters' Pamphlet y DESCHUTES COUNTY JUSTICE OF THE PEACE STEPHEN P. FORTE NONPARTISAN OCCUPATION: Attorney at Law—private practice x- ', Deschutes County Juvenile Court Referee 3i Circuit Court Judge,pro tem—Hearings Officer OCCUPATIONAL BACKGROUND: Municipal Court Judge,Sisters,Oregon EDUCATIONAL BACKGROUND: Parkland Junior College, Champaign, IL—Associate Degree in Science Northern Illinois University,DeKalb,IL—Bachelor of Science with magna cum laude honors University of Idaho,Moscow,ID—Juris Doctor PRIOR GOVERNMENTAL EXPERIENCE: Municipal Court 'i Judge,Sisters,Oregon Juvenile Court Referee,Deschutes County,Oregon s Circuit Court Judge,pro tem Stephen P.Forte,Attorney at Law,was appointed by Governor city candidate Kitzhaber as Justice of the Peace for Deschutes County on Au- gust 15,2000. statements begin 'I "':' Since 1983,Forte has been in private law practice,focusing on s civil and criminal cases.Forte has served as Juvenile Court Ref-eree since his 1998 appointment, in which he handled juvenile delinquency and dependency cases for the Eleventh Judicial Dis- trict in Deschutes County.Additionally,he has been the Hearings Officer for the same Judicial District.Stephen Forte was appointed to Circuit Court Judge,pro tem in July, 1999.He served as the City of Sisters Municipal Court Judge from 1991 to 1998. A native of Illinois, Forte received his Bachelor of Science de- ::,,;:::<:o:h:, gree,graduating magna cum laude from Northern Illinois Univer- sity and obtained his Juris Doctor degree from the University of sg,ara�: Idaho.He became a member of the American Bar Association / ' : and the Oregon State Bar in 1983.Forte is serving as Chairper- son of the Deschutes County Law Library Committee and is Presi- dent of the Deschutes County Bar Association.He assisted in the creation of a portion of the Peer Jury Project for the City of Bend and was a volunteer judge in the program from 1992 to 1998. Forte has been an active member of his community,serving on several community boards and participating in a variety of youth programs in Central Oregon. A father of two teenage sons, Forte and Karen, his wife of 23 years,have lived in Bend for the past 18 years. 4 F (This information furnished by Stephen P. Forte.) u 9-24 Official Deschutes County 2000 General Election Voters' Pamphlet CITY OF BEND CITY COUNCIL BRUCE ABERNETHY "' SHAWN W. R, CORRIGAN NONPARTISAN ' NONPARTISAN OCCUPATION: Central Oregon Intergovernmental Coun- OCCUPATION:Builder/student cil (COIC), Program Planner, Employment and Training De- OCCUPATIONAL BACKGROUND: partment Volunteer and Sub-Director of projects in Columbia, South OCCUPATIONAL BACKGROUND: Amerioa,Hawaii, New York,Oregon From 1985-1993 Massachusetts Healthcare Purchaser Group,Associate Di- Volunteer Outdoor Guide rector Commission on Children and Families, Program Develop- 23 yrs independant contractor in Bend,OR ment Specialist • Member of Bend Oregon Outrigger Canoe Club since 1994 Bend Area Habitat for Aumanity,Project Director Founder,Organizer,&volunteer of Bend Oregon Outrigger EDUCATIONAL BACKGROUND: Harvard University,MA,John F.Kennedy School of Govern- Youth Program; encouraging development of healthy ment;Master of Public Policy in Housing and Community De lifestyles&team cooperation for youths of all backgrounds. velopment, 1989 EDUCATIONAL BACKGROUND: 1978 l i h High School coon Swarthmore College,PA; B.A.Economics/Political Science, Graduated from Hillsboro 1985 Independant studies include physical science,bio-chemistry PRIOR GOVERNMENTAL EXPERIENCE: land use,planning&development&architecture • Board of Directors,Bend-La Pine School District(1997-98) PRIOR GOVERNMENTAL EXPERIENCE: • Board of Directors, Bend Metro Park and Recreation Dis- Bike-Pedestrian Sub-committee 2000 trict(1995-98) CENTRAL OREGON CIVIC INVOLVEMENT As a 23 yr resident of Bend I believe it is crucial for the leaders • Board of Directors, Big Brothers Big Sisters of Central Or- in this town to anticipate&plan for the future.We will experiance egon(1996-98) higher fuel prices at$5.00, $10.00 to$15.00 pr gallon in the • Steering Committee, CORE—successful School District next 20 years.Also more crowding and traffic problems! Asa bond measure(1998) city council member I would focus on pathways sidewalks & some type of mass transit to provide safe transportation op- Bend faces many serious challenges: rapid growth...traffic tions for those who choose not to use the auto. congestion and a lack of public transportation...the loss of open space...the lack of affordable housing...a shortage of family- I support the State of Oregon Dept. (DLCD) whose primary wage jobs...and a sense that individuals are powerless to ef- goal is"to reduce reliance on cars&provide every community fect how we grow. I believe we can moderate Bend's rapid w/alternative options for transportation"! growth in ways that better balance our community needs and I have shown this belief by founding the pathways organiza- preserve our unique quality of life. tion devoted to promotion of alternative transportation&public As an independent, open-minded thinker, and a consensus health. n builder with experience serving on two local Boards,I look for- I believe growth should only be permitted after the infrastruc- ward to working with many talented people in the public and ture is ready for it.While every effort should be made to pre- private sector developing creative solutions to strengthen our community and bring better balance to our growth. serve the natural places we all love(River& Parks&Lakes, etc.)!Tighten up on litter enforcement &implement our under- As an elected official, I promise to: ground utilities policy. • Take an active role in shaping how we want Bend to grow— Encourage healthy use of public space&public facilities which making the hard decisions now instead of letting growth make encludes the wilderness&parks(for festivals,art hops,etc.) the decisions for us(fighting for public transportation,open while at the same time be more restrictive on polluting activi- space and affordable housing) ties&porn sites in our public libraries. Promotion of environ- • Focus on individuals and businesses who already live and mentally friendly commerce. operate here(and pay local taxes) rather than on potential "future residents" If I am elected I will do all that I can to be open for public input • Work with other communities to create a healthy regional while doing my best to make these goals happen. economy • Enhance our local economy by investing in people through education and training a (This information furnished by Bruce Abernethy.) (This information furnished by Shawn W. Corrigan.) 9-25 Official Deschutes County 2000 General Election Voters' Pamphlet CITY OF BEND ul CITY COUNCIL 3£f y KATHIE ECKMAN AUGUSTINE z° FLORES NONPARTISAN NONPARTISAN OCCUPATION: Human Resources Specialist, Bend-LaPine OCCUPATION Juvenile Correction Counselor, Minority liaison, Public Schools;City Councilor State of Oregon OCCUPATIONAL BACKGROUND: OCCUPATIONAL BACKGROUND: Executive Secretary to Superintendent and School Board;Of- U.S.Marine Corp fice Manager, Curriculum & Instruction; City Recorder/Trea EDUCATIONAL BACKGROUND: surer/Municipal Judge, City of Burns; Bookkeeper/Recording Attending COCC for a Community Justice Degree;Clatsop Com Secretary,City of Burns;Small Business Owner; munity College,Astoria;Marine Corp Institute,Washington,D.C. EDUCATIONAL BACKGROUND: PRIOR GOVERNMENTAL EXPERIENCE: Burns Union High School;Working toward Degree from East- Budget Committee Member,Associated Students,COCC ern Oregon University through Central Oregon Community College,emphasis on Political Science;Long Term Goal:Mas- COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT:Oregon Council for Hispanic Ad- ters Degree in Public Administration vancement—member; Nominated to Leadership Bend; Oregon PRIOR GOVERNMENTAL EXPERIENCE: Leadership Institute—mentor; youth basketball coach; VFW vol- Appointed to City Recorderfrreasurer/Municipal Judge Posi- unteer. tion,City of Burns 1974-78 AUGUSTINE FLORES WILL HEAR YOUR VOICE Appointed to Bend Urban Area Planning Commission 1979- 80; Everyday traffic congestion is frustrating to the citizens of Bend Elected to City Commission/Council in 1980,1982,1988,and We need a transportation system that works for everyone 1992, 1996; Public transportation benefits the young,the low-income,and Mayor of Bend, 1991 those who cannot drive. Community Involvement Our neighboring communities should be included in the Quota International,Past Treasurer,Program Chairman,Presi- solution dent,Secretary; VOTE FOR FLORES Central Oregon Battering and Rape Alliance—Board Member; Rapid growth is stressing our comipunitv s United Way Board of Directors,Liaison to Hospice; Growth must be managed to ensure we remain environmen- ='=y Bend Development Board; tally sound and economically diverse. City of Bend Committees, Solid Waste Task Force, Budget New growth should pay its share. Committee,Cemetery Committee,Audit Committee,Your Com- Our children deserve quality of life. munity 2000, Water and Sewer Committee, Street Priorities VOTE FOR FLORES Committee; Bend needs more family wage iobs Central Oregon Community Action Agency Network, Provide incentives to businesses that pay good wages. Toastmasters Morning Club,President; Work with community programs to train workers for higher Bend Chamber of Commerce Committees, Free Enterprise paying jobs. F Education Task Force,Legislative Action Committee, VOTE FOR FLORES <<t Governmental Affairs Council Bend needs to address affordable housing • Many people working in Bend can't afford to live here "It is the responsibility of every City Councilor to make deci- As your city councilor,I will work to provide solutions for ^k°` sions based on a thorough review of all points of view and families seeking affordable home ownership and rentals. < opinions. l strongly believe in preserving the livability of the City of Bend and I appreciate the value of citizen input.I bring "Augustine Flores shows concern for the citizens of Bend. 2 a balanced perspective to the process. His competence,leadership,vision,and enthusiasm will Every citizen can make a difference in their community.It is make him a strong advocate for the residents and their city" each of our individual responsibility to make our city,our county, Carol Elliot,Commander,Post#1643,Veterans of h Foreign Wars 1;x;,1 si our state, our nation a better place to live—not only for today, g but for the future,not only for this generation but for the gen- erations to come. average working citizens and has the ability to bring those /have solid experience and proven commitment to our com concerns to the table effectively." munity. I would appreciate your vote to continue the work to Michael Pageler,Senior Union Organizer serve the residents of Bend."Kathie Eckman "Augustine Flores cares deeply about our community.He will represent the best qualities of public service by putting people and livability first.Augustine will bring leadership, Experienced,Committed,Proven Leadership competence and vision to the Bend City Council." Elli Work (This information furnished by Kathie Eckman.) Questions?385-1104 (This information furnished by Augustine Flores.) 9-26 Official Deschutes County 2000 General Election Voters' Pamphlet CITY OF BEND CITY COUNCIL F LINDA FROST JOHN HUMMEL NONPARTISAN NONPARTISAN4 MOM. f �Z 3% OCCUPATION:Rental owner,Officers Quarters Apartments OCCUPATION:Attorney—Crabtree&Rahmsdorff,Bend,Or- OCCUPATIONAL BACKGROUND: egon ; ` Volunteer High Desert Museum,1982-2000;Juniper Utility Co. OCCUPATIONAL BACKGROUND: ' Board of Directors, 1999;Tutor,reading and ESL, 1999-2000; Attorney—Garland&Associates,Hillsboro,Ore on. a 9 Q Rental Property Manager in Bend and Yucatan,Mexico,1986- EDUCATIONAL BACKGROUND: 1994; Elementary teacher Coos Bay and Bend, 1965-1975. University of Arkansas School of Law; Little Rock, Arkan- EDUCATIONAL BACKGROUND: sas. Post graduate work U of O,special education;Teaching certi- J.D. Degree, 1995. fication OSU; B.S. Psychology, St. Lawrence Univ., Canton, Roanoke College;Salem,Virginia B.A. Degree, 1991. NY, 1965;Beaverton High School. Double major in Political Science and Criminal Justice. °10:, PRIOR GOVERNMENTAL EXPERIENCE: PRIOR GOVERNMENTAL EXPERIENCE: Tillicum Village Homeowners Association Board, President in • Bend Transportation Advisory Committee(BTAC). =IM: yr 1985, 1986, 1998;Oregon Board of Clinical Social Workers, ' ` appointed by Governor Atiyeh, reappointed by Governors Appointed by the city council in February,2000.BTAC was ;,• created to provide recommendations for a more convenient - Goldschmidt and Roberts, public member, 1985-1993; and efficient transportation system. Deschutes County Library budget election campaign manager ryf _ Po 1982;Central Oregon Rental Owners Association Board,Presi Oregon State Bar House of Delegates. ;; dent 1987,various positions 1980-2001. Elected in May, 2000 to be one of the Representatives for r_ the 18 counties which comprise Central and Eastern Or- egon.The House of Delegates is the legislative body for the The 20 thousand citizens who were annexed to Bend last members of the Oregon State Bar. :.. year deserve to have their concerns heard on the City Coun- cil.I can provide their representation.Issues such as road main- tenance and utility connection in the annexed area will be im- portant topics in the near future.Taxes went up considerably Let's Keep It That Way!" with annexation,and these citizens deserve to have their money spent wisely.As a moderate,28 year resident of the outskirts REDUCE TRAFFIC CONGESTION: r> ; < •of Bend l can see that all neighborhoods including the Eastside ' Transportation and traffic are vi al aspects of Bends future.As and Southeast are well represented. Bend is now more than P ( P the core area. a member of the Bend Transportation Advisory CommitteeF BTAC gained valuable insight into this important issue. I Traffic through Westside and Eastside neighborhoods will ( ) I g g p 9 . believe traffic can be controlled without necessarily laying more only t worse unless we plan now,including building the South Y 9 P 9 9 asphalt.I'm open to innovative solutions. Bridge, planning for future traffic and developing and encour- „ h"=,c-�:. aging methods of transportation other than passenger cars. As long as the economy is good Bend will grow, but we must PRESERVATION OF OPEN SPACES: plan to grow wisely and well. Maintaining Bend's natural beauty is of the utmost importance. I agreed with the recent fight to preserve Shevlin Park and will fight to preserve all of Bend's open spaces. • RESPECT FOR ALL RESIDENTS: Regardless of one's race,age,economic class,sexual oven- ._., tation,religion,neighborhood of residence,or appearance,they .: „'_? deserve to be heard and respected by our City Council. I'll ; listen to everyone. (This information furnished by Linda Frost.) (This information furnished by John Hummel.) �. 9-27 Official Deschutes County 2000 General Election Voters' Pamphlet CITY OF BEND CITY COUNCIL KYLA MERWIN JON RHOADS Y NONPARTISAN NONPARTISAN a r� OCCUPATION: Executive Director, Central Oregon Environ- OCCUPATION: Retired January 1997 u mental Center OCCUPATIONAL BACKGROUND: ° OCCUPATIONAL BACKGROUND: Carlson Sign Company 1977 to 1997 ' • 10 years with Ceridian Corporation,working in administra- (President and Co-general manager) tion,customer service,marketing and consulting Oregon Metal Fab 1976-1977 • Freelance writing (Sales Manager) EDUCATIONAL BACKGROUND: Riverhouse Motor Inn 1973-1976 Bachelor of Arts,Washington State University (General Manager) PRIOR GOVERNMENTAL EXPERIENCE: Sunriver Resort 1970-1973 XxI City of Bend Budget Committee (Convention and Banquet Manager) CIVIC INVOLVEMENT: EDUCATIONAL BACKGROUND: Leadership Bend Washington State University 1963-1967 sF ; Big Brothers/Big Sisters (Bachelor of Arts in Hotel and Restaurant Administration) z ; SMART Reading Program PRIOR GOVERNMENTAL EXPERIENCE: Tower Theatre Foundation Event Committee ee Bend-LaPine Schools Budget Committee Central Oregon Arts Association , Bend Chamber Government Affairs Council State of Oregon Travel Information Council Healthy Communities Initiative (Chairperson for two terms—appointed by Governor) "I want to see Bend grow better—with economic vitality,safe COMMUNITY CIVIC INVOLVEMENT: and healthy citizens,and the preservation of natural areas and Deschutes Humane Society;Greater Bend Rotary Club--Char- open spaces. I know it can be done—when we start thought- ter member 1976;Skyliner Ski Club;Bend Chamber of Com- fully choosing how we want to grow, and who, as a City, we merce-1984 President want to be. Pauline and I were married in 1969 and moved from Portland A My commitments are to: to Bend in April, 1970.We have two grown sons—Jeff,26 and F ` Intelligent,conscientious growth—mixed use and infill de- Andy, 22. My wife and I enjoy family activities,camping, hik '`'' velopment,safe neighborhoods,parks and open space,of mg,golf,skiing,travel,fishing,and hunting. r fordable housing. It is important for a candidate to be knowledgeable,sensitive and aware of the current issues involving the citizens of this - ,, Traffic solutions that work—Public transit,trails,pathways, community. In order to gain a perspective of the challenges } ; bike lanes,sidewalks,skinny streets,boulevards,and traffic that a council person encounters as an elected official,I have <F calming devices. spent this year attending the bi-monthly council meetings. In Culture and the arts—events and rams ro which bring addition, I have walked the neighborhoods in our city,visiting P 9 9 our community together and nurture creativity. with individuals.This has provided me with the opportunity to A responsive Cit y Council—visionar y leadershi p that lis- listen to the concerns of our citizens re gardin g the issues.The tens to the people and strives to build a balanced,vital com- concerns are:rapid growth,transportation,job availability,edu- munity. cational opportunities and preserving our beautiful environment. '-?<? We must all work together as a team to determine what solu- =t; Bend has a unique signature that we don't want to lose tions will work best for our community,in order to preserve the - i through senseless urban sprawl,traffic congestion,and short character and livability of Bend. sighted planning. It's time for good change.We can see that change.We can have a better Bend."—Kyla Merwin I can offer leadership experience, sound fiscal management, Kyla Merwin has a demonstrated history of success common sense and a historical perspective to this position. I .�....�,, � partnering with businesses,arts organizations,and youth pro- have the time,energy,desire and the commitment to work hard grams in Central Oregon.She can help bridge diverse sectors as a council person. in our community to build positive,working partnerships,mak- ing way for a better Bend. Many of our citizens feel it's time for visionary,progressive leadership.These citizens are voting for Kyla Merwin for their Bend City Council (This information furnished by Citizens for a Better Bend, (This information furnished by Jon Rhoads.) Peter Geiser, Treasurer.) 9-28 Official Deschutes County 2000 General Election Voters' Pamphlet CITY OF BEND CITY COUNCIL PATRICIA M. RODEN DIRK D. SHARP NONPARTISAN NONPARTISAN Dy OCCUPATION: Director, School-to-Career Alliance 1997- OCCUPATION: Attorney;Teacher at Morning Star Christian present School OCCUPATIONAL BACKGROUND: OCCUPATIONAL BACKGROUND: .::..;•: VP/General Manager, Lumbermens Insurance 1993-1997 Attorney;Teacher;Bookkeeper;Security Guard " Regional Manager,Easter Seal Society of Oregon 1991-1993 EDUCATIONAL BACKGROUND: Fireman's Fund Insurance Company 1978-1991 Business Development Manager California State University Long Beach, B.A. Marketing Manager Southwestern University,Juris Doctor Director,Sales Training Assistant Sales Executive PRIOR GOVERNMENTAL EXPERIENCE:None. Sales Representative EDUCATIONAL BACKGROUND: Bend is a city which people move to for its beauty and clean Graduated Rio Linda School,Rio Linda,CA.1965 living along with its recreational opportunities. Attended American River College, 1965-1966 Bend is a growing city and that growth can not nor should it be Attended COCC, 1997-1998 halted.What is necessary is to control and guide the growth to PRIOR GOVERNMENTAL EXPERIENCE:None maintain the quality of life that is inherent in Bend. My late husband and I moved to this special place over nine With growth comes change and concern over that change.The years ago. In that time, I have enjoyed what the area has to manner in which the change comes about must take into offer,participated in a variety of community activities,and made concideration the needs of the current residents not only plan- sure I was contributing to our progress. ning for future residents. 2000-present Mt.Bachelor Rotary Club The change must be a viable change and not disturb the beauty �wl 2000-present Bend LaPine School District Sites&Facilities of the city nor overburden the residents. g` Committee, State, Regional and Local It is important to maintain the quality of life in Bend. Workforce Investment Board Youth Councils, As a City Councilor it will be my goal to put quality of life in Healthy Communities Initiative 1999-2000 Bend Chamber Governmental Affairs Commit- Bend above economical and financial concerns. tee 1999-present Community Youth Connections r 1994-1998 Deschutes United Way Allocations Committee 1994-1997 Quota International of CO,President,96/97 ? 1994-1997 Central Oregon Battery&Rape Alliance Board Member,President 95/97 1994-1996, Rising Star Alliance Board Member A 1991-1994 Local Advisory Group (EI/ECSE), Chair, 93/ 94 This is my first opportunity to have a voice in city government h because of the recent annexation.I am ready and able to serve as your advocate. I will bring to the Bend City Council over 30 years of business and management experience to deal with the complex issues currently facing the city.I will use common sense,a balanced approach to problem solving,and sound fiscal management. The growth Bend has experienced over the past several years has been painful at times,yet it has created a healthy economy. We need leaders with a clear vision to support a strong eco- nomic and positive business climate.We can manage growth through strategic planning,keeping Bend a great place to live, work,and play. AM THAT LEADER AND YOUR VOICE. ;<,,,,:„,:,;_; (This information furnished by Dick D. Sharp.) (This information furnished by Patricia M. Roden.) 9-29 Official Deschutes County 2000 General Election Voters' Pamphlet CITY OF BEND CITY COUNCIL sg� y Sa �y a f . � r ORAN TEATER JIM YOUNG NONPARTISAN NONPARTISAN ... �,hf OCCUPATION: Financial Advisor, Raymond James Financial OCCUPATION:Retail Store Owner Services since 1985 OCCUPATIONAL BACKGROUND: =F OCCUPATIONAL BACKGROUND: Vice President Operations—Packard Press .. gw Financial Advisor 17 years Small Business owner 12 years Manufacturing Manager—American Bank Stationery s Plant Manage r—Datag raph ics EDUCATIONAL BACKGROUND- B.S. Degree,Southern Oregon State University EDUCATIONAL BACKGROUND: a Business Administration&Economics Graduated South Side High School, Fort Wayne, Indiana Five Year Printing Apprenticeship PRIOR GOVERNMENTAL EXPERIENCE: 9 PP P Elected Bend City Council,four year term, 1996 PRIOR GOVERNMENTAL EXPERIENCE: From a pioneer Central Oregon family,dating back to the early 5 1/2 years—Bend City Council 1900's:a proven Public spirited leader who brings to the coun- 1 1/2 years—Bend Mayor cil a wealth of practical business experience—a man who can distinguish between the voice of the community and the up Jim Young wants Bend to remain an outstanding city in which roar of the vocal minority. A man who has the courage and to live and work.As a member of City Council for almost six years and Mayor for nearly two he has helped to effectively good sense to make the right choices for Oregon's fastest deal with the growth Bend is experiencing, by updating the growing city. General Plan as well as implementing a Design Review Ordi- —August,2000 appointed by Gov.Kitzhaber to the Governor's nance and initiating a new Sign Review Ordinance and Subdi- Council of Economic Advisors vision Ordinance.These activities were accomplished with a ' maximum of public participation,— Past President,Bend Chamber of Commerce, 1980 P p pation,one of Jim's primary goals. P� Y 9 y"z — Past President,Greater Bend Rotary Club, 1999 2000 Under Jim's leadership communication and public involvement Y . has dramatically improved through a series of outreach pro- V , Co-chair, Bend School Foundation, 1993 present grams that include reformatting of the Council Agenda to allow — Site Council member,Cascade Middle School, 1993-1995 more public input, regular meetings with the Planning Com- mission,School District,Bend Development Board as well as w'?.'^`; business and community leaders. In addition Jim, along with i<€:.,: velopment Council Councilor Oran Teater laid the g groundwork to initiate Neigh- Chair,Chair, Growing Tree Children's Center, 1985-1989 borhood Associations in Bend whereby eve citizen will have Y rY Little League baseball coach, 1987-91 the opportunity to participate to the extent they desire in help- k,. — Basketball coach, 1991-1996 ing to determine the destiny of the area in which they live. Eli ram a began As Mayor Jim program with elementary y g p g school chit ?< dren to include them in the citizen input plan, he also held meetings with the student leadership at Bend High in an effort '; to determine the concerns of these young citizens. In addition to the City Council,Jim has served the community '. f ... as a board member of EDCO, COCAAN, COVA, COIC, the ,. 0 Boys and Girls Club of Bend and two terms on the League of y << Oregon Cities Board.He is active in the Oregon Mayor's As- N sociation and Eastern Oregon Mayor's Coalition. ` '> Jim believes in teamwork and consensus building and is con- € „ vinced that is what will make an effective Bend City Council. Ell r! (This iniurrnation furnished by Oran Teater.) (This information furnished by Jim Young.) 9-30 Official Deschutes County 2000 General Election Voters' Pamphlet NIM�k PROPOSED CITY OF LA PINEI<tFNH. CITY COUNCIL S.; 1\0 VICKI ALLEN 11\0 THERESA (TERI) '° v. OQ� �� BAKER � �0� NONPARTISAN C3�6� . .. NONPARTISAN OCCUPATION: Co-owner Earl Allen Construction,Inc. OCCUPATION: Presently unemployed,semi retired bookkeeper • ? V.P.La Pine Community Action Team OCCUPATIONAL BACKGROUND:Full charge bookkeeper for Tres.La Pine Industrial Group,Inc. small contruction companies with 20 years of experience in ac- x OCCUPATIONAL BACKGROUND: Co-owner/realtor John L. counting. Scott Real Estate,La Pine EDUCATIONAL BACKGROUND:Attended Vintage High School Teller,vault teller,new accounts US Bank in Napa,California where I graduated in 1973. `x" EDUCATIONAL BACKGROUND: P g s,•.,M PRIOR GOVERNMENTAL EXPERIENCE:No prior governmen- ,W-11"", Sherwood Union High School ` lt ` Central Oregon Community College Real Estate License tat experience. '` 9 tY 9 ^s _ My husband and I purchased property in La Pine in 1990.In March `_' of 1999 we eager became full time residents. N "N"1r PRIOR GOVERNMENTAL EXPERIENCE:None I have spent the majority of my time volunteering for the La Pine Vicki,and her husband Earl,have lived in the La Pine community for thirteen years.They own a construction company,serving the community.First as volunteer office manager for the La Pine Com KIN Nxflrl munity Action Team,then as a member of the Incorporation Com- g greater La Pine area. mittee and now as President of LCAT.I also served on the board of directors this year for La Pine Frontier Days Association. ',ffi Being in the construction business for over thirty years,and also y y ".g working as a local Realtor,has given Vicki a working knowledge ' I participated in revising La Pine's strategic plan and physical of building codes,zoning requirements,land use laws,and con design for the community. Like many residents, I would like to £,<F tractual and financial dealings. z. see La Pine keep it's rural flavor and gain the ability to direct Volunteer work has been a large part of Vicki's life in La Pine. growth that is in the best interest of the people that live here. aw£,_=I€ She has organized several successful community events andti' M objective is to challenge m capabilities and utilize m ac- projects. Having served several ears on the boards of the Cham y l g Y p y 9 years skills and education to help move La Pine's future in a ' ber of Commerce,La Pine Industrial Group,La Pine Community positive direction.I would like to be part of a growing city that has Action Team, and also serving on the board for the Boys and i+w> the vision to recognize that sucess is a by-product of its respect ; - Girls Club,participating in the SMART program,sitting on the La and commitment to its residents and to gain growth as a team Pine Incorporation Committee, working on the original and the member executing critical services that contribute to the profit- revision of the La Pine Strategic Plan and also on the community '' design workshop,Vicki feels she has a good pulse on the com- munity. ability of a city. 9 P 9 P Her love for the community was acknowledge in 1993, Accomplishments and Capabilities when she was named"Citizen of the Year"by the La Pine Cham- P P � f bar of Commerce.Throughout her years of volunteer work,she Project budgeting and cost containment "`• ->? has also taken classes and workshops on meeting management `" i�> and group facilitation. Quickly incorporate and implement new procedures __` : Skilled in all aspects of accounting ` ;. Vii... Vicki's spare time is spent remodeling and decorating homes, Extensive public contacta=; gardening, baking,camping, boating, softball, and all the won v>. derful activities this area provides. Strong organizational skills N Successful track record with high responsibility positions < La Pine is Vicki's home.A small,rural,friend) lace to live.She Y P Good analytic and planning skills an.,% >: would like to see it stay that way.Vicki say's,"Through hard work, innovative thinking and cooperative measures,we can develop Hard working,reliable,able to collaborate in a team enterprise _ La Pine in a way that is harmonious to all." Aptitude for leaming new skills quickly Ability to work well under pressure Ability to show compassion and understanding ~f%' Easily establish rapport with people of all ages,cultures and be- '" liefs 'I;,r _ (This information furnished by Vicki Allen.) (This information furnished by Theresa M. Baker.) 9-31 Official Deschutes County 2000 General Election Voters' Pamphlet { PROPOSED CITY OF LA PINE � riE CITY COUNCIL v5 :. y� ; d ` HARRY E. GODSIL ' . KEN MULENEX F NONPARTISAN _ - ' ° NONPARTISAN OCCUPATION: Retired OCCUPATION: Retired OCCUPATIONAL BACKGROUND: OCCUPATIONAL BACKGROUND: United States Air Force,Computer Maintenance&Engineering School teacher;Franklin High;Portland,OR. MSGT ski Television Producer/Director and Sales;KPTV;Portland Digital Equipment Corp.,San Francisco District Operations Man- ' ` Sales Manager;Telerep; Detroit, MI: Krem TV; Spokane, WA; ager KgwTV,Portland,OR. Marina Wine&Spirits,Retail Business Owner General Manager: KVDOTV Salem, OR; KPVI, Pocatello, ID; Best Landscape&Maintenance,Service Business Owner l ,.,. �. KBVI,Boise,ID. EDUCATIONAL BACKGROUND:San Jose State University,San >? EDUCATIONAL BACKGROUND: Jose,CA,BA-Marine Biology ME r-: Elementary and High School;Milwaukie,OR PRIOR GOVERNMENTAL EXPERIENCE:None =f Graduate,Lewis&Clark College;B.S.Communications g � I've lived in La Pine for 5 years.I have been married to my wife, Graduate stud Vanderbilt U. Vicki,for 31 years and we have two daughters.I retired from the US Air Force as a Master Sergeant after 20 ears of service.I az PRIOR GOVERNMENTAL EXPERIENCE:None completed my Bachelor of Arts degree in Marine Biology from San Jose State University.I retired from Digital Equipment Cor- R,R I believe in the incorporation of La Pine and would like to be part poration as the San Francisco District Operations Manager.I have of the team that organizes the government and makes it work for been very active in community affairs in La Pine serving 3 years the citizens of the new city.Unchallenged growth is already caus- as a Board Member on the La Pine Chamber of Chamber,cur- ing problems for us and unless we do something soon the prob rent President of the La Pine Frontier Days Association.I was a � lems will become worse. member of the La Pine Community Action Team's Governance �sr Committee which developed the proposal of Incorporation for the My priorities are to start the process of preserving our rural lifestyle La Pine Community,and am currently Chairman of the La Pine and also improving the quality of life.To me,this means to start Road Services Advisory Committee. I believe La Pine citizens improving ALL of our local roads,removing the snow and begin a should be able to control their own destiny through local control program of dust control.Dust is more than a nuisance;it is also a and also believe La Pine should continue to maintain its rural health hazard.Mosquito abatement is a program we should be- atmosphere. in. Development of our telecommunication infrastructure and SI'>; industrial area to help provide better jobs round out my top priori- ties. The project of forming a city government will test my managerial skills.I have been a successful manager in television production; lL „ K sales and general management.Also employed by a company £�,.; supplying transportation information nationwide as a manager in :f5.INN marketing and sales,I have worked with multi-million dollar bud- €l gets and many people. I have the time,the energy and the dedication to be contributing team member.I would appreciate your vote for city council of La r? Pine f snaXi (This information furnished by Harry E. Godsil.) (This information furnished by Ken Mulenex.) 9-32 Official Deschutes County 2000 General Election Voters' Pamphlet PROPOSED CITY OF LA PINE CITY COUNCIL r� i �& JUDY L MYERS ERNIE POOLE PER NONPARTISAN NONPARTISAN !Im Willi OCCUPATION: Mgr.St.Vincents Thrift Store.La Pine,OR. OCCUPATION:Retired OCCUPATIONAL BACKGROUND: OCCUPATIONAL BACKGROUND:Worked 34 years with Shell USPS Postmaster.Ret.25 yrs Chemical Company;last osition Training Coordinator,Chemical = <gggi=..' Y P 9 ;:��:: :> Gro.Store Owner 22 yrs. Operations;Currently Treasurer and Member of Board of Direc- a's tors of Central Oregon Senior Living Communities,Inc. IwIij: EDUCATIONAL BACKGROUND: ;>RN Burroughs High School–Grad. EDUCATIONAL BACKGROUND: High School graduate; At _< Victor Valley Jr.College—CA– tended University of Nevada, Reno; Hold a California Commu- nity College Limites Service Teaching Credential in Business and Chem Comm College– Industrial Management. I Portland State College– PRIOR GOVERNMENTAL EXPERIENCE:Appointed and served j<; PRIOR GOVERNMENTAL EXPERIENCE: Planning Comm 2 years on the City of Benicia,California Waterfront and Planning Chairman 11 yrs-,Committee Member 3 yrs. and Development Commission;Elected to the City Council of the 4 Y City Benicia, California and served 4 ears;Appointed City °` Budget Committee tY Y PPo tY ,` `>` g 0 .. Clerk Pro Tempore,City of Benicia,California and served 2 years; City Appointed City Council Delegate to League of California Cities, Ci Events Planner—Bi-Cen-Halloween,Easter Parade PP tY 9 9 Redwood Empire Division;Appointed by the Deschutes County Commission to the La Pine Community Action Team and served .<N. am interested in serving you as your representative on the LaPine over 2 years. -- ` ' City Council,if incorporated in November. < x ., I have served and lived in a similar sized town in Oregon for the It is vital to La Pine's future that the area is incorporated into a city ,w past 25 years. and that the registered voters elect a city council that is respon- sible to the residents of the area.Without the control that a local I have been active in man ways city committees. I most re government would give us we cannot create or protect our vision , > Y Y Y z cently finished serving 11 years as a Planning Commission Chair- for the area.I would like to bring my leadership and experiences in local government to community.I understand the need forI`'`° man,after serving on the committee for several ears. 9 Y tY• proper planning and administration of land use laws. I support I have also served on many City Budget committees and under- the concept of country living and protecting our rural character.I stand well how our County and State taxes are determined,as will work to keep the cost of government low while striving to well as how they can be spent.This is an especially important provide the needed services that people expect from a local gov item for a candidate to know. It is your tax dollars that will be_ ernment.I will work to unite us as a people who are responsive to �:;_•:? spent and hopefully,wisely. solutions to local problems and who are proud to live here.I hopes that you will support our community with a vote for incorporation As a representative of your vote, I will always put your wishes and a vote for Ernie Poole for leadership for the City of La Pine. above my own personal ones.I think every elected position should be separated from personal feelings and issues should be acted « =" upon,based on the wishes of the people being represented. A vote for Judy Myers for City Council would be a vote for your voice to be heard at the City level. Thank you for your consideration. Judy Myers y� (This information furnished by Judy L Myers.) (This information furnished by Ernest J. Poole.) � r 9-33 Official Deschutes County 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet PROPOSED CITY OF LA PINE CITY OF REDMOND F y CITY COUNCIL CITY COUNCIL �O TED SCHOLER s F JOHNNY CORBIN NONPARTISAN NONPARTISAN z.F g F}} OCCUPATION: Realtor OCCUPATION:Automotive Mechanic,Hertz Car Sales,Bend . - OCCUPATIONAL BACKGROUND: Recreation Therapist; OCCUPATIONAL BACKGROUND: Director of Rehabilitation Services; ASE Automotive Master Technician Owner-Operator-Guest Ranch; Automotive Technology and Math Instructor R: ¢, Owner-Manager of Several Hospitality Industry Businesses. EDUCATIONAL BACKGROUND: EDUCATIONAL BACKGROUND: B.A. Industrial Arts, Area of Power, Energy and Transporta- s_:<. ' Lake Grove Grade School-8 yrs. tion,California State University;Long Beach Lake Oswego High School-diploma Graduate School, Education—CSU, Long Beach and CSU, £'. Univ.of Utah—B.S.degree Chico Univ.of Minnesota—postgraduate courses PRIOR GOVERNMENTAL EXPERIENCE:None. s PRIOR GOVERNMENTAL EXPERIENCE:City of Umatilla,OR. Bud et Committee; 1 foresee rapid growth in our community and we must be able ' g City of Rockaway Beach,OR. Chairman of Planning Commis- to plan for this growth smartly,with much forethought.By be sion ing progressive and smart we, as a community, can prepare for the future. Most of us want to see our tax dollars spent wisely and not on projects that benefit only a few. I feel that I am well qualified for the position having erved the La Most of the residents I have contacted are most concerned r ' q p g with the traffic r Pine area as; member Community Campus Board; Executive problems here in Redmond.There are also con- 6-`; Director La Pine Chamber of Commerce; Board of Director of cerns regarding the future of downtown Redmond businesses. Chamber of Commerce;Board of Directors of La Pine Commu- With careful planning solutions can be obtained. nity Action Committee;member of incorporation committee;Board If elected to the city council,I will take the concerns of Redmond P• P residents to the Mayor and other council members and keep of Director La Pine Industrial Group. I also have experience in City Government as a member of City budget committee and the residents informed as to the recommendations and deci- Chairman of City Planning Commission.1 would appreciate your sions made by this body.In essence,the people of Redmond support for the City Council of La Pine. deserve to know the business of their city and where their tax �.E.1. " dollars are being spent. As a veteran, I can also represent the concerns of other local veterans and as a former educator,the needs of our youth are also a major concern. MIR Aai:g ,t s a (This information furnished by Ted Scholer.) (This information furnished by Johnny Corbin.) 9-34 Official Deschutes County 2000 General Election Voters'Pamphlet CITY OF REDMONDfi CITY COUNCIL k' rc 5 •bf 3 BOB GREEN JOE MANSFIELD NONPARTISAN NONPARTISAN -11 Sk MW y OCCUPATION: General Contractor; Bob Green Contracting OCCUPATION:None. sr° (Owner) Since 1963.Residential excavation specialty. OCCUPATIONAL BACKGROUND: : OCCUPATIONAL BACKGROUND: Retired as Physicist from NASA, Ames Research Center; Timber and sawmill;Purchasing,construction&maintenance Owner small science/engineering firm, 1988 to 1996;Gradu- supervision and corporate pilot for Crown Pacific;Gooselake ate Teaching Assistantship,Oregon State University,1958-62; Lumber;WTD Corp.; Logging company owner;aircraft sales; USAF, Electronics/Radar repair,1950-54. logging and construction machinery sales; heavy duty me- EDUCATIONAL BACKGROUND: chanic;heavy equipment operator and eight years U.S.Naval Masters Degree, Physics,Oregon State University;BS,Gen- Reserve—Submarines. eral Science,University of Oregon;Graduated Redmond High EDUCATIONAL BACKGROUND: School, 1949 Eleventh grade, Roosevelt High School,Seattle,WN. PRIOR GOVERNMENTAL EXPERIENCE: Aircraft Commercial,Instrument, Multi-Engine Pilot. Budget Committee(2 years)city of Redmond PRIOR GOVERNMENTAL EXPERIENCE: '* Redmond Traffic Safety ommittee;Redmond Standard and Y Born and raised in Redmond, returning after 39 years;I have Specificaitions Committee; Committee for Redmond Street an interest in Redmond,and will make an honest effort to rep- Levy; Four(4)Y ears Redmond City Council;Member Airport resent its people—all of them. g, Commission;other various city committees and taskforces. Without hesitation I think that growth is the most difficult and The City of Redmond is undergoing drastic changes, finding sensitive issue we have, and citizens are increasingly aware that it is quickly becoming the "Hub"of Central Oregon. As of its importance.We are confronted daily with the problems of Redmond's future moves into this new era—the growth the city traffic and the costs of roads to remedy this,the costs of build- will undergo will be tremendous and will need focus,due con- in and maintaining new schools,and so on.The problems are 9 9 P 0 :„°a sideration and forethought, so that each item presented and not simple,as any council person can attest.Some growth is Y inevitable,and we can only work especially hard to govern and � „'. voted for are in the best interest of the community.I have con- �;. fronted city staff and consultants and boldy defended the tax control it fairly and intelligently. dollars of the Citizen's of the City of Redmond, and will con- tinue to do so.This growth and how it effects the City of Redmond and its Citizen's is my primary concern. I consider my council responsibilities to be a sacred trust.It will be a great honor and awesome responsibility to sit again on the Redmond ' City Council x I was born in Springfield, Oregon, on May 10th, 1936. In my travels throughout the United States, Canada and Mexico, I find that those of us fortunate enough to live in the Pacific North- west have been blessed by our creator. I wish very much to contribute something of myself back to the service of the men ;' •;�> and women in this community,and I will keep these thoughts ' xs s€ as I carry out the duties of this office. `i`yi'Y i• This information furnished b Bob Green. (This information furnished by Joe Mansfield.) ( Y ) , N :...., 9-35 Official Deschutes County 2000 General Election Voters' Pamphlet F CITY OF REDMOND CITY COUNCIL k IRV NYGREN ALAN UNGER .r4 NONPARTISAN NONPARTISAN r; ;,•,;:,,; OCCUPATION: Retired March, 1998 OCCUPATION: General Contractor specializing in small in- `> Substitute teaching in local schools dustrial,Commercial and Residential projects. �. Volunteering:Habitat for Humanity, ESL teaching 9 Y 9 OCCUPATIONAL BACKGROUND: OCCUPATIONAL BACKGROUND: Multnomah County Sheriff's Department—Corrections Division Pastor and public school teacher 8 rs 1973-1975 p ( Y ) Missionary educator overseas rY (35 yrs) Central Oregon Paint Supply,Co-Owner 1982-1999 4 3 EDUCATIONAL BACKGROUND: EDUCATIONAL BACKGROUND: < xl_= Hillcrest Lutheran Academy H.S.Diploma Redmond Public Schools; graduated in 1968 Prairie Bible Institute Diploma University of Portland; Bachelors of Science, 1973 Pacific Lutheran College BA PRIOR GOVERNMENTAL EXPERIENCE: »: I' I«ii Pacific Lutheran University MA Redmond Urban Area Planning ommission 1992-present PRIOR GOVERNMENTAL EXPERIENCE: 9 With Town Council, Roy,WA Central Oregon Area Commission on Transportation 1998- , . Councilor(elected):May, 1958 to May, 1960 present Mayor(appointed):Sept, 1959 to May, 1960 Vision 2020, Redmond's Comprehensive Plan update Com- Understandably, people ask me why I want to be on the mittee 1996-1999 Council.The answer is in two words-interest and opportu- Site Council, Redmond High School 1999-present nity. Politics interests, even fascinates me;I like the give and take of ideas and discussions,the possibility of accomplishing I understand the issues that will define Redmond's future: F something for the common good,the chance of serving people. <n= For many years 1 taught American government, (and I have PLANNING:I have spent four years updating Redmond's Com N <x,,,.•.. never failed to vote in a Presidential election).However,living prehensive Plan to prepare us for the next 20 years of growth. overseas for most of m adult life,I haven't had opportunity to Redmond is one of Ore ON 1;; Y pp y Oregon's fastest growing,at a average pro e>w> be involved in political service.When I learned that there were jected rate of 4.5%per year.We either manage growth or be local City Council positions to be filled,it came to me that this managed by it. : was an opportunity that fits my interest to serve my commu TRANSPORTATION:For 7 years, I have been involved in try, nity,and I decided to seek election. in to improve our transportation system. y g p p y em.Our City and State My position on issues of our community facing the Council requirements make street construction complicated and ex- will be formed as I function as a Council member,hearing and pensive.I support sidewalks that connect for safe pedestrian sifting the various views held,including those of the citizens. access,and well thought out roads that facilitate traffic flow. As vital as issues are, I try to remember that people are al- HOUSING:The quality and availability of housing is an issue. ways more important. It is my pledge to treat all with respect We need to develo p more affordable housing that is com pat and fairness. ible with our life style.We are not the bedroom community for Finally just a few more personal words about myself.Though Bend and Sisters. ><: retired, I am quite involved. I am active in a local church, do TAX RATE:Redmond had the highest tax rate in Central Or- .,„ sub-teaching in both public and private schools,volunteer with egon.We need to bring our tax rate in line with other cities.We i Habitat for Humanity,tutor folks learning English as a second need to raise our tax base so that we can all pay less and still language.Liz and I have been married 46 years;we have three get the same level of services for our community. - - children and five grandkids.And last and least,I collect model cars and attempt both golf and fishing. COOPERATION: Redmond and Bend are sister cities in the same county.We need to work together not grow together.We can stay strong as separate communities but it will require mutual respect,understanding and hard work. -�- If you elect me to serve on your City Council, I will work on N - these issues to keep Redmond a livable community. (This information furnished by Irving P.Nygren.) (This information furnished by Alan G. Unger.) 9-36 Official Deschutes County 2000 General Election Voters' Pamphlet DESCHUTES SOIL AND WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT ="p` MINI DIRECTOR AT LARGE DIRECTOR, ZONE 2 Si 33j �1I� ` '\0� CARLTON YEE KATE KIMBALL 1 NONPARTISAN ��6 NONPARTISANA , S .. g OCCUPATION: Attorney, Sisters Forest Planning Committee OCCUPATION: Consulting Forester Member,Deschutes Groundwater Steering Committee OCCUPATIONAL BACKGROUND: OCCUPATIONAL BACKGROUND: 1970-2000:Professor,Emeritus,—Forestry,Humboldt State Univ. r. Deputy Assistant Secretary for Oceans&Atmosphere,National 1983-91:Chairman,Calif.State Board of Forestry `' Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Department EDUCATIONAL BACKGROUND: of Commerce counsel,U.S.Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works B.S.–Forest Management,Humboldt State Univ. EDUCATIONAL BACKGROUND: M.F.–Industrial Forest Management,Yale Univ. ' University of Minnesota,B.A. Ph.D.–Forest Engineering,Oregon State Univ. Indiana University,J.D. PRIOR GOVERNMENTAL EXPERIENCE: s 8 ears—State Board of Forest California !' PRIOR GOVERNMENTAL EXPERIENCE: Y Forestry, Deputy Assistant Secretary, NOAA, Dept.of Commerce Coun- sel,U.S.Senate Environment and Public Works Committee I have worked as a natural resource professional and academic '= EF for over 35 years.With a life-long interest in natural resource con- I have 20 years'experience in natural resource and environ- servation and wise-use,I believe that serving as a Director of the mental issues. I have worked on national policies, such as the Deschutes Soil and Water Conservation District is a good way for Clean Water Act and the Clean Air Act;regional issues such as me to serve this community with my expertise and experience. Pacific salmon restoration;and local issues through my work on the Deschutes Groundwater Steering Committee.The Descutes Basin presents a unique opportunity for local leadership.The population is knowledgable and committed to resource protec- tion.The Basin remains relatively pristine,although pressures on our natural resources are increasing.Many efforts are underway to reduce adverse effects of these pressures and I would like to 3' be part of this work. If elected as an at-large Director fthe Deschutes Soil and Water t Conservation District,I would join my policy and legislative back- ground with my experience as a small farmer in the County to support practical and effective initiatives that protect our Basin. ,,. My background also has provided me with skills to work effec- tively from people of all different viewpoints toward a common end.My goal is to make a difference in Deschutes County. (This information furnished by Kate Kimball.) (This information furnished by Carlton S.Yee.) b 9-37 Official Deschutes County 2000 General Election Voters' Pamphlet -, DESCHUTES SOIL AND WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT DIRECTOR, ZONE 3 DIRECTOR, ZONE 5 ` x° PATRICIA M. O'(O . KELLY WALKER 01 GAINSFORTH Xs NONPARTISAN Sv NONPARTISAN OCCUPATION: Real Estate Broker owner of Bachelor Realty, OCCUPATION: Sunriver Owners Association u. Inc.since 1981 Environmental Manager 1 Breeder and trainer of registered Quarter Horses. OCCUPATIONAL BACKGROUND: . OCCUPATIONAL BACKGROUND: Conservation for Central Oregon/The Recycling Team .. State of Oregon Industrial Accident Commission and Oregon USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service Department of Motor Vehicles New Mexico State University EDUCATIONAL BACKGROUND: Socorro Independent School District Elysian,Minnesota public schools; p Salem public schools including South Salem High; EDUCATIONAL BACKGROUND: A`wi% Sacred Heart Academy,Salem; New Mexico State University—M.S.Agronomy y , Woodburn High School; Ambassador University—B.A.En lish Willamette University; � g Central Oregon Community College; PRIOR GOVERNMENTAL EXPERIENCE: Linfield Off Campus Program Deschutes SWCD—Director,Zone 5 PRIOR GOVERNMENTAL EXPERIENCE Deschutes County Weed Board First elected to Deschutes Soil&Water Conservation District in ti 1986 It is so exciting and fulfilling to be able to lend a hand in efforts to 1992 Eagle Valley Soil&Water Conseration District Baker County, keep Central Oregon's environment healthy and productive!I have Oregon appreciated serving on the Deschutes Soil and Water Conserva- Appointed to Healthy Streams Partnership 1997 tion District as an interim director.The ability of this group to get Appointed to Oregon Youth Conservation Corp Advisory Com- needed conservation done in our watershed is exceptional,and I mittee 1996 `y Deschutes County look forward to continuing to contribute. ; ty Land Use Plan review Committee s Y Advisory A little about me...I hold a Master of Science degree in agronomy « : Bend Parkwa Adviso Committee Oregon Soil&Water Commission 1993 to 1999 with a major in soil science.I am currently employed as Environ- mental Manager for the Sunriver Owners Association and serve as a volunteer for the Deschutes Soil and Water Conservation Through more than eight years on Oregon's Soil and Water District Board, County Weed Board, and a new ODA Upper '' Conservation Commission and long service to Central Oregon Deschutes water quality committee.My wife and I publish From -->` � k' on the Deschutes Soil and Water Conservation District,Patricia the Ground U p g p Gainsforth is committed to Stewardship. p,a newsletter and membership designed to help Central Oregon gardeners and raise awareness of native plants. When rivers are clean and flowing cold and fast, When the I give several free seminars each year on composting and soil land is well-tended,When ranchers and regulatory agencies work care in Central Oregon. I enjoy rock climbing,mountain biking, together to solve problems,then Central Oregon can produce: mountaineering and creative writing.Coming from a long line of t " native Oregonians,our beautiful environment is very dear to me. - A great quantity and wide variety of food for people, ani- mals,and wildlife Enough clean water for farmers,fish,families,and our fu- : F ture. ` ;.. - An amazing choice of recreational opportunities,economic prosperity,and provide for an outstanding quality of life! (This information furnished by Patricia M. Gainsforth.) (This information furnished by Kelly Walker.) a x 9-38 Official Deschutes County 2000 General Election Voters' Pamphlet CROOKED RIVER RANCH SPECIAL ROAD DISTRICT =iIE"y :w DIRECTOR POS. #1 DIRECTOR, POS. #2 EM :.. "0'�OO STEVE �0�O� RAY MAID . �� RUNION O �g ���� NONPARTISAN 5 I`T NONPARTISAN . Oyu OCCUPATION: Retail Grocery—Fred Meyer(parttime) OCCUPATION: Self employed Ray's Auto&Cart Repair OCCUPATIONAL BACKGROUND: Have contract with golf club maintenance .,:., ,. art golf c :: Retired—Operating Engineer–Local#3.Heavy equipment opera- 80 go tion:highway&freeway projects,earthmoving to finished asphalt, OCCUPATIONAL BACKGROUND: subdivision projects,operator of rock,sand&gravel plant. Worked 7 yrs C.R.R.Maintenance Ass. EDUCATIONAL BACKGROUND: ` 5 yrs on roads-2 yrs.-inshop.Worked on small engines&up to <::::� •. Castlemont High School grad;Vernon School Real Estate—State 350 cummins drove dump truck water truck run back hoe frontend Licensed; O.E.Training Center—heavy equipment operation: loader grade checking,road material production,crane operation. EDUCATIONAL BACKGROUND: ,„ ; PRIOR GOVERNMENTAL EXPERIENCE: 8th Grade '`'” Successful Lobbyist MIN PRIOR GOVERNMENTAL EXPERIENCE:none My only wish is to serve the community in which I live.A vote for me would insure a fair selection of road projects for all ranch << ' owners. s3. '.'`.E ' i < (This information furnished by Stephen Runion.) (This information furnished by Raymond Mai.) 9-39 Official Deschutes County 2000 General Election Voters' Pamphlet =xw VOTER REGISTRATION INFORMATION To be eligible to vote in the November 7th General Election, a completed voter registration card must be postmarked by October 17, 2000. TO REGISTER TO VOTE IN OREGON,YOU MUST BE: 1. A resident of Oregon. 2. A United States citizen. 3. At least 18 years old by election day, r3 YOU MUST UPDATE YOUR REGISTRATION IF: 1. Your residence or mailing address changes. 2. Your name changes. 3. You wish to change your party affiliation. IMPORTANT NOTE: If you have moved or your name has changed and you have not yet updated your registration, you are still eligible to vote.Contact the Deschutes County Clerk's office, 388-6546 for further information. .................. MADE MISTAKE ON BALLOT OR NEED A NEW BALLOT If your ballot is lost, destroyed, damaged or you make a mistake in marking your ballot, you may obtain a replacement ballot by contacting the Deschutes County Clerk's office at 388- 6546. VOTERS WITH DISABILITIES If you need assistance in voting, please contact the Deschutes County Clerk's office at 388- 6546. REMINDER: YOUR BALLOT WILL NOT BE COUNTED IF YOUR ENVELOPE IS NOT SIGNED! DESCHUTES COUNTY ELECTION RESULTS Election results are available after 8:00 PM on November 7th from the County Clerk's office or on the internet at (http://www.deschutes.org). The results will be updated throughout the night. 9-40 Official Deschutes County 2000 General Election Voters' Pamphlet VOTING INSTRUCTIONS At the General Election of 2000 the voters of Deschutes County will cast their votes on the ballot illustrated below.This page has been inserted into the Voters' Pamphlet as an aid for using this ballot. 1. TO VOTE YOU MUST BLACKEN THE OVAL( 4w) COMPLETELY WITH A PENCIL. 2. TO WRITE-IN A NAME— BLACKEN THE OVAL(oW)TO THE LEFT OF THE DOTTED LINE AND WRITE-IN THE NAME ON THE DOTTED LINE. EXAMPLE PRESIDENT(V TE FOR ONE) O JOHN ALLEN DOE �THOMAS JEFFERSON =J.Q.PUBLIC ; 3. DO NOT CROSS OUT— IF YOU CHANGE YOUR MIND, CONTACT THE COUNTY CLERK'S OFFICE AT 388-6546 FOR A REPLACEMENT BALLOT. �r f 4. REMEMBER TO VOTE BOTH SIDES OF BOTH BALLOTS SiEtAiS`sy>:. 'ii , M. et}"' 9-41 Official Deschutes County 2000 General Election Voters' Pamphlet a F 4$ _& OFFICIAL BALLOT DROP SITE LOCATIONS 3• ?>iif .2 �yrk DESCHUTES COUNTY CLERK'S OFFICE 1340 NW Wall, Bend Available seven days a week. On Election Day, Nov 7th, open until 8:00 p.m. E X53 N. Privacy Booths Provided ?ci MIDSTATE ELECTRIC CO-OP 51340 Highway 97, La Pine Open Monday, Nov 6th, 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. Election Day, Nov 7th open from 8:00 a.m.to 8:00 p.m. REDMOND CITY HALL < . ,i"' "' 716 SW Evergreen, Redmond _ - Open Monday through Friday from 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. Election Day, Nov 7th, open from 8:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. €< s ' SISTERS CITY HALL 150 N Fir Street, Sisters Open Monday through Friday from 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. z .. Election Day, Nov 7th, open from 8:00 a.m.to 8:00 p.m. ..1-: s °T SUNRIVER AREA PUBLIC LIBRARY (Please note new location) "IX 56855 Venture LN, Sunriver (Sunriver Business Park) Open Monday Nov 6th, from 10:00 a.m. until 6:00 p.m. Open Election Day Nov 7th, from 8:00 a.m. until 8:00 p.m. Privacy Booth Provided. :- WELCOME CENTER NINE 111.11, 1 i 63085 N. Highway 97, Bend � Open Monday, Nov 6th, 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. Election Day, Nov 7th open from 8:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. -' Privacy Booth Provided. y I i':y„R T -__- Remember! All ballots must be received at a drop site or the Deschutes County Clerk's Office by no later than 8:00 p.m., Nov 7, 2000. RIN . -frH W : 9-42 Official Deschutes County 2000 General Election Voters' Pamphlet ALPHA INDEX TO VOTERS' PAMPHLET MEASURES 9-86 City of La Pine Incorporation......................................................................................... 9-5 9-87 Redmond School District No. 2J General Obligation Bond Authorization .................... 9-8 9-88 City of Bend Five Year Transportation Local Option Tax ............................................ 9-11 9-89 Oregon Water Wonderland Unit II Sewer Improvement Revenue Bond Authorization 9-12 9-90 Administrative School District No. 1 Five-Year Operating Local Option Tax .............. 9-13 9-91 Cascade View Estates Tract #2 Special Road District Five Year Local Option Tax ... 9-15 9-92 Sisters School District #6 Four-Year Local Option Tax............................................... 9-16 9-93 Sisters School District#6 General Obligation Bond Authorization ............................. 9-18 16-31 Crooked River Ranch Rural Fire Protection District Bond Authorization ....................9-20 , CANDIDATES '3. Abernethy, Bruce ................................................................................................................... 9-25 MEN Allen Vicki ............ 9-31 Baker, Theresa (Teri) 9-31 Brown, Greg Corbin, Johnny....................................................................................................................... 9-34 Corrigan, Shawn W................................................................................................................ 9-25 Daly, Mike ......:3 ; 9-21 Eckman, Kathie.................................................................... .............. 9-26 v. .................................................. 9-26 ...3. Flores, Augustine ................................................................. Forte, Stephen P. ................................................................................................................... 9-24 uu Frost, Linda............................................................................................................................ 9-27 Gainsforth, Patricia M. ........................................................................................................... 9-38 Godsil, Harry E. .....................................................................................................................9-32 Gordon, Randy.................:..................................................................................................... 9-21 Green, Bob............................................................................................................................. 9-35 Hummel, John........................................................................................................................ 9-27 Kimball, Kate.......................................................................................................................... 9-37 Kimmel, Larry......................................................................................................................... 9-22 .............. 9-39 Mai, Ray y................................................................................................................... Mansfield, Joe...................... ...................... 9-35 Merwin, Kyla .......................................................................................................................... 9-28 Mulenex, Ken ......................................................................................................................... 9-32 Myers, Judy L......................................................................................................................... 9-33 Nygren, Iry ............................................................................................................................. 9-36 Poole, Ernie ........................................................................................................................... 9-33 Rhoads, Jon........................................................................................................................... 9-28 Roden, Patricia M. ........................................................................................ 9-29 .............. Runion Steve ' Scholer, Ted Sharp, Dirk D. ........................................................................................................................ 9-29 31 a .................................................. 9-23 Stiles, Les ............................................................................ ....................... 9-30 Teater, Oran „b�== ................................................................................................ ... Unger,Alan ............................................................................................................................ 9-36 =psi. Wagoner, Curt........................................................................................................................ 9-22 Walker, Kelly .......................................................................................................................... 9-38 � �€ Yee, Carlton ................................................................................ 9-37 :;......, ,;.. Young, Jim .................................................................:........................................................... 9-30 ..... LETTER FROM COUNTY CLERK ...................................................9-4 ,��.. .............................................. its OFFICIAL DROP SITE LOCATIONS VOTER REGISTRATION INFORMATION VOTING INSTRUCTIONS.........................................................................................................9-41 9-43 ..................... Official Deschutes County 2000 General Election Voters' Pamphlet REMEMBER! i�j 3x r; All ballots must be received at a drop site or the Deschutes County Clerk's Office by no later than 8:00 p.m., x November 7, 2000. 9-44