Oregon Governor Tina Kotek directed the Oregon Department of Forestry (ODF) to continue to accept all appeals of the Oregon Statewide Wildfire Hazard Map up to the March 10 deadline, but to pause on referring these appeals to the Office of Administrative Hearings until after the legislative session concludes. The session must end no later than June 29.

The Governor’s decision allows the Legislature to carry out a public process for deliberating changes to the map requirements absent potential conflicts driven by a concurrent appeals process through the Office of Administrative Hearings. In addition, the pause will prevent Oregonians who elect to appeal their wildfire hazard zone designation from incurring potentially unnecessary legal fees between March and June of this year, if the Legislature makes changes to the Oregon Statewide Wildfire Hazard Map.

“Oregonians have raised concerns over the current Oregon Statewide Wildfire Hazard Map, and this issue runs parallel to our urgent need for long term, sustainable funding for wildfire response and mitigation,” Governor Kotek said. “The Legislature is rising to the occasion on these challenges. This pause will allow for the transparent, public process required to address both. Lives and lands depend on it.”

Those who wish to appeal the assignment of wildfire hazard zones or designation as wildland-urban interface still must submit the appeal to ODF by March 10, 2025. No attorney is required for this first step in the appeal process. This step simply ensures that those who wish to appeal are in the queue.

If the Legislature does not change the map or appeals process this session, ODF will refer the list of received appeals to the Office of Administrative Hearings following the session and continue the appeals process outlined in existing law.

Senate Minority Leader Daniel Bonham (R-Hood River) said he and Senator Noah Robinson (R-Cave Junction) introduced SB 678 to put an end to this broken system once and for all. Oregonians deserve real solutions, not bureaucratic mismanagement. SB 678, undoes changes in law by Senate Bill 762 (2021) and changes how to class wildfire risk, effective July 1, 2025.

“This is not just a bad policy—it’s a failure of leadership to push through a deeply flawed policy (SB 762 from 2021) championed by Senator Jeff Golden and then-Speaker Tina Kotek. Now, we are calling on Democrats in the Legislature and Governor Kotek to join us in fixing it,” Bonham said.

A D V E R T I S E M E N T

A D V E R T I S E M E N T

Over 100,000 homeowners have been left in limbo, facing rising insurance costs, government overreach, and uncertainty about the future of their own property.

Jeff Golden (D-Ashland), credited for the wildfire mapping fiasco, chairs the Committee on Natural Resource and Wildfire, which is now sponsoring SB 78, making it harder for those affected by his mapping to rebuild. This bill restricts what kind and how big a replacement dwelling may be built on the land as a result of destruction or demolition of the dwelling. The law has already caused problems limiting the timeline of when the dwelling must be finished, and how soon after rebuilding the demolished building’s debris must be removed. Also proposed are prohibitions on new building structures. SB 79 prohibits homes not for farm or forest uses in sensitive or unsuitable areas within resource lands.

SB 75 defines "high wildfire hazard area" for purposes of developing an accessory dwelling unit on lands zoned for rural residential uses or a replacement dwelling.

See these bills and more at Oregon Citizens Lobby Alerts for ways to respond.


--Donna Bleiler

Post Date: 2025-02-19 11:52:51

Last Update: 2025-02-19 19:37:34

Senate Republicans are stepping up to fix what Democrats have ignored for years: accountability at the Oregon Department of Transportation. Senate President Rob Wagner (D-Lake Oswego) and House Speaker Julie Fahey (D-Eugene) have tapped Senator Bruce Starr (R-Dundee), a veteran transportation policy leader, to lead the development of accountability recommendations, which he will present to the Joint Committee on Transportation in March.

For years, ODOT has faced ballooning costs, project delays, and budget shortfalls—not just because of fuel efficiency improvements or increased electric vehicle use, as Democrats claim, but because of mismanagement and a lack of oversight. The Statesman Journal recently exposed troubling questions about how funds from the 2017 transportation package were spent, underscoring the need for serious reforms before lawmakers ask taxpayers to foot the bill for another round of funding.

A Statesman Journal investigation found inconsistencies in ODOT reports, incomplete project information on the agency's website, and a lack of required cost-benefit analyses for certain projects. Accountability measures in the legislation included the Continuous Improvement Advisory Committee and mandatory reports to ensure transparency and project oversight. An audit revealed ODOT overestimated revenue, couldn't track some funds and experienced project delays and cost increases.

Senate Republican Leader Daniel Bonham (R-The Dalles) said, “Turning to Republicans for help fixing this problem is the ultimate admission that Democrats lack the vision, creativity, and resolve to reform an agency riddled with mismanagement and misplaced priorities. But if Democrats are only looking for cover to justify another tax hike, we won't be their scapegoat. Governor Kotek’s default response to every problem is to raise taxes, but Oregonians shouldn’t be forced to pay more just to subsidize this agency’s failures, especially when they’ve made it clear they can’t afford more taxes.”

A D V E R T I S E M E N T

A D V E R T I S E M E N T

"Tapping a Republican with decades of transportation policy experience is a wise move, but only if Democrats are serious about solving this problem,” Bonham continued. “A real solution will require a conservative approach: rooting out waste and corruption at ODOT and making a complete 180-degree turn from the status quo. By asking Republicans to step in, Democrats have accepted the reality that ODOT is in a state of abject failure. Now, they have a choice: work with us to implement real reforms or prove they were never serious about accountability in the first place.”

“The recommendations we make will require difficult decisions, but if we don’t get this right, Oregonians will be stuck with mismanaged projects, deteriorating roads, and higher costs—again,” said Senator Starr. “It’s time for real change and the accountability taxpayers deserve.”


--Donna Bleiler

Post Date: 2025-02-17 05:03:37

Last Update: 2025-02-16 21:47:09

Senator James Manning Jr. (D-Eugene) proposes to do a word swap in SB 947. This isn’t as straight forward as it appears. It changes references to the “militia” in Oregon law to…”national guard.”

It is unclear what Manning’s intensions are since, unlike the 2nd Amendment in the United States Constitution, Oregon's constitution makes no reference to "militias." Article 1, Section 27 of the Oregon Constitution states: “The people shall have the right to bear arms for the defence [sic] of themselves, and the State, but the Military shall be kept in strict subordination to the civil power[.]” Even if the Oregon Constitution did use the term "militia," passing SB 947 would have no bearing on the interpretation of the Constitution.

Oregon statue distinguishes between “organized (state)” and “unorganized” and “reserve (federal)” militia. SB 947 changes militia to national guard for all three groups.

There are issues when changing the “unorganized militia” defined as “… all able-bodied residents of the state between the ages of 18 and 45 who are not serving in any force of the organized militia or who are not on the state retired list and who are or who have declared their intention to become citizens of the United States; subject, however, to such exemptions from military duty as are created by the laws of the United States.”

The ‘militia” are ordinary citizens. This bill is one more attempt to remind Oregonians that they are subjects and not citizens. Kevin Starrett of OFF writes, ”SB 947 is another step towards the goal of crushing individual liberty and responsibility and a massive waste of money in a state that frees dangerous criminals because it has no public defenders.”

Only under the “unorganized” militia does it include those “who have declared their intention to become citizens of the United States.” What constitutes “intent”? So basically, every adult in the state under age 45 would be a part of the unorganized national guard and eligible to be called to active duty.

To change the defined term to “unorganized national guard” seems like an insult to the “National Guard,” words that actually mean something. The bill doesn’t empower the National Guard, but strips them of status. Does renaming unorganized militia strip citizens of individual rights to bear arms or will it require registration including any firearms? Whatever the bill is trying to accomplish, it's not an attempt to expand or protect your right to bear arms.

In the organized groups, there is a distinction between the state National Guard and the National Guard of the United States, which is a reserve component of the U.S. military. The National Guard of the United States is a federal reserve force that is activated for federal missions. This federal component can be deployed overseas and is under the command of the federal government.

The State National Guard consists of the Army National Guard and Air National Guard units in each state, territory, and the District of Columbia. These units are primarily under the control of state governments and are responsible for civil support, law enforcement, and other duties as determined by the governor. They are funded through the state's budget and are organized to respond to emergencies and disasters within the state.

Both components are part of the broader National Guard system, which is officially created under Congress's Article I, Section 8 power to "raise and support Armies." Is the "unorganized national guard" intended to be included? Members of the National Guard serve part-time while holding civilian jobs full-time, and they participate in training drills one weekend a month and two weeks per year.

Manning has teamed up with Senator Floyd Prozanski (D-Springfield & Eugene) to introduce several anti-Second Amendment bills that threaten Oregonians' Constitutional rights, contrary to the Democrat caucus priorities:

• Senate Bill 429- Mandatory 72-hour waiting period to transfer a firearm
• Senate Bill 697- Raises legal age of firearm ownership to 21
• Senate Bill 698- Allows local governments to limit Oregonians' right to carry a firearm with a CHL
• House Bill 3075-Sponsored by Representative Jason Kropf (D-Bend) amends Ballot Measure 114 in the midst of constitutional lawsuits on the measure.

These bills can all be found on Oregon Citizens Lobby Alerts, which gives options for writing testimony or committee members.

A D V E R T I S E M E N T

A D V E R T I S E M E N T

SB 947 is scheduled for a public hearing on Thursday, February 20th, at 1 pm in Hearing Room B in the Senate Committee On Veterans, Emergency Management, Federal and World Affairs. Submit written testimony here or sign up to testify live here. Oregon Citizens Lobby War Room is open every Thursday from 8:30am to 3pm at Ike Box, 299 Cottage St, NE, a block from the capitol.

President Trump's executive order directing his Attorney General to investigate ongoing infringements on America's Second Amendment rights could impact some or all of these bills.


--Donna Bleiler

Post Date: 2025-02-17 04:35:57

Last Update: 2025-02-16 21:46:13

February is Black History Month. Director of the Oregon Department of Education, Dr. Charlene Williams says, “This month offers us a valuable opportunity to celebrate and deepen our understanding of the rich contributions of Black Americans throughout our history…to honor the achievements and legacies of Black leaders, artists, educators, and community members.”

It is said that repeating what you want eventually wears down the opposition to get what you want. This is not the first time Senator James Manning, Jr. (D-Eugene) has sponsored a reparation bill. HB 2995 sets up a task force to study and develop proposals for financial and nonfinancial reparations for Oregonians of African-American descent.

This is not just reparation to correct history, it is aimed at centuries including the present. Among the task force duties, they are to develop methods for educating the public, and to identify governmental actions that have resulted in harm to Oregonians of African-American descent from systemic discrimination in areas such as enslavement, racial terror, political disenfranchisement, housing segregation, separate and unequal education, racism related to the environment and infrastructure, pathologizing the Black family, control over creative cultural and intellectual life, stolen labor and hindered opportunity, an unjust legal system, mental and physical harm and neglect, the wealth gap and racial bias in employment and advancement. The bill applies it to the present: “especially for Oregonians of African-American descent who seek public employment or promotion to higher paying positions in government… Identify methods for eliminating anti-Black discrimination policies in artistic, cultural, creative, athletic and intellectual life.” One might think Oregon has no discrimination laws. However Oregon's discrimination laws are considered among the more progressive in the United States even including discrimination against hairstyles.

Reparation is the worst type of segregation adhering to socialism. African-Americans are not the only people that endured slavery. It was African nations that allowed capturing their own and putting them on ships to be marketed. Why not sue the African government for wrongfully enslaving them? America was not the instigators, and some say they rescued them, gave them jobs and housing and kept them from starving.

Former Oregon Senator Chuck Riley said slavery was right in the day, but then he apologized for being caught on video. However, he said the same thing on the Senate floor a few days later. Upon being asked, he said it is true "slavery was right at the time".

Paying a class of people that didn’t experience slavery by taxpayers that had nothing to do with slavery is another form of slavery. How will enslaving the descendants of the enslavers correct anything but widen the gap of disunity between the races.

Mark Cosby, frequently seen around the capitol asks: “should todays citizens pay for a study casting blame on their family without a trial? Should they be forced to pay reparations without the right of trial? It seems very flawed. And who would the witnesses be at this late point? Don’t we need living victims and witnesses?”

Manning must have seen Cosby coming, so he added the present-day victims to the prior bill. The current application of reparations is a form of penalty on everyone to benefit one race – redistribution of wealth. Receiving distribution in a discriminatory fashion is a “color of law” move that degrades the very people it is aimed at helping. The 2024 Measure 118 to redistribute wealth was voted down by 77% of voters.

Cosby adds, “The only victims that meet the true criteria just might be coming here labeled 'illegals'. People are coming from 170 countries at the hands of cartels. Cartels who have been aided and abetted by Sanctuary States like Oregon. Many are being held in slave camps today in Oregon.”

Cosby expresses his anger, “it infuriates me that we do not fund sheriffs to eradicate these slave camps. Camps that the Oregon Legislature calls "illegal grows". In 2021 Oregon legislature funded a $21 million grant to clear out slave camps, which closed eight camps in two years. Now that money is gone and it should have been replenished in 2023. Instead, the cartels moved back in greater numbers. Why not free these slaves? Does the Democrat super-majority endorse slavery when it’s to their benefit?”

In 1987 Oregon Legislature passed a bill prohibiting profiling for police to justify stopping a vehicle. Later it was referred to as a Sanctuary State Act and amended in 2017 doubling down on sanctuary type legislation. Cosby says, “by 2019 it was common knowledge there were slave camps in Oregon. K-D Ranch in Kerby, Oregon, was raided by 200 officers from 11 agencies and rescued 250 slaves. It took two years for the legislature to fund $21 million. That next year (2022), the legislature passed SB 1510, crippling police to effectively deal with riots and slave camps.”

A D V E R T I S E M E N T

A D V E R T I S E M E N T

In Cosby research, he discovered that in 2023, "many elected Democrats in Oregon were found to have taken brown bags of money from LaMota. Former Secretary of State Shamia Fagan was forced from her office and landed in a Federal Court Room, later followed by Val Hoyle. It is my understanding that Governor Kotek took some $67,000, and Sen Wagner admitted he got money he didn't report to OrStar along with 20 others. This is willful misconduct for career politicians who certainly know reporting laws.”

Since 2021, Oregon has given billions of tax dollars to NGO's, and the homelessness has increased. Oregon is one of three states with the highest homeless population. DOGE has uncovered billions going to NGO's that fund "illegals" to be trafficked over our borders. The Trump administration has drastically slowed the number of missing children that was at 320,000 in 2024.

“But, Fentanyl is the main money maker for cartels,” says Cosby, “and in 2024 Democrat Legislators attempted a backwards fix to Measure 110. These drugs are destroying lives, creating a environment of human abuse while cartels profit.”

Oregon’s majority leadership and caucus want to reward past and current performance with reparations, while committing the same but more serious crimes against humanity by defending the Sanctuary State status, refusing to stop slavery and trafficking, defrauding taxpayers, and crippling police.

Cosby concludes, “until the Oregon Legislature can clean house, it appears we have to rely on Federal Laws regarding illegal border crossings. Is not Oregon's 1987 Sanctuary Law in direct conflict of Federal law? Is not the using of tax dollars to fund illegals to be held in slavery a total abuse of the taxpayer funds?” To make his connection, Cosby asks, “If HB 2995 is to then be funded by taxpayers, would that not in its self be slavery of our citizens, also?”


--Donna Bleiler

Post Date: 2025-02-15 17:01:10

Last Update: 2025-02-16 19:04:00

The House Committee on Rules held a public hearing this week on House Bill 2727, which strengthens the integrity of our legislative process by expanding the limits of post-legislative lobbying by former legislators.

Current law prohibits a member of the Legislature from becoming a lobbyist for private sector interests for one-year after the member ceases to hold office, but doesn’t apply the same standard for former members seeking to influence the legislature on behalf of a state agency or public body.

In other words, Oregon law forbids private sector interests from using private funds to employ former members to lobby, but the State of Oregon can freely use taxpayer dollars to hire former members into positions where they then lobby their former colleagues.

The hearing brought up the question of constitutionality. Representative Anna Sharf (R-Amity), submitted the Legislative Counsel Opinion and after applying court case decision, it concludes: "The basis of the quid pro quo corruption or the appearance of quid pro quo corruption that the courts have recognized as the only valid governmental interest to justify constraint on political speech otherwise at the core of First Amendment protections. If the advocacy that the HB 2727 change proposes is limited to advocacy before the Legislative Assembly, the government objective of limiting the appearance of quid pro quo corruption remains the same and therefore HB 2727 does not violate First Amendment principles." Only if the restraint applied to entities other than the Legislative Assembly, would it be an impermissible constraint on speech protected by the First Amendment.

A D V E R T I S E M E N T

A D V E R T I S E M E N T

“HB 2727 is a good government bill that simply levels the playing field by applying the revolving door provision to both private and public entities for one-year after leaving office,” said Rep. Scharf. “By updating the current statute, we can ensure that the same level of accountability and transparency, that was intended for private sector lobbying interests, also applies to public sector interests,” Rep. Scharf concluded.

To submit testimony or comment, go to Oregon Citizens Lobby.


--Donna Bleiler

Post Date: 2025-02-10 18:00:37

Last Update: 2025-02-10 19:09:22

In a swift move, President Trump signed an executive order, his first day in office, protecting women and girls in sports. The President affirmed that his Administration will protect female athletes from the danger of competing against and the indignity of sharing private spaces with someone of the opposite sex. This Executive Order is both a demonstration of common sense and a restoration of our country’s promise to give women equal opportunities.

"This isn't about exclusion—it's about preserving opportunities for women and girls to excel on a level playing field. I urge Oregon and the OSAA to follow this commonsense approach and will continue to advocate for that," says Oregon State Representative Shelly Boshart Davis (R, Albany).

A recent statewide poll commissioned by House Republicans revealed that 69% of Oregonians oppose OSAA's current policy of allowing biological males to compete in women's sports.

Republicans have introduced several pieces of legislation to protect women’s sports and are united in protecting women.

• House Bill 2037 ensures that only biological women can enter women’s intimate spaces and participate in women’s sports in school.
• LC 3895 seeks to restore safety and fairness in women’s sports by prohibiting biological males, in Oregon's K-12 schools, from competing in extracurricular sports designed for biological females.
• SB 618 is similar to LC 3895 focused on prohibiting biological males, in Oregon's K-12 schools, from competing in extracurricular sports designed for biological females.

Boshart Davis praised President Donald Trump's executive order titled "Keeping Men Out of Women's Sports," which reinforces federal protections for female athletes under Title IX. The order mandates that schools and athletic organizations uphold single-sex sports categories based on biological sex, ensuring fairness and safety in women's competitions.

Boshart Davis said. "For decades, women fought for equal opportunities in athletics. Allowing biological males to compete in female categories undermines these hard-won rights and puts female athletes at an unfair disadvantage."

The executive order directs federal agencies to interpret Title IX—the 1972 law prohibiting sex-based discrimination in education—as barring biological males from participating in female sports. Institutions violating these guidelines risk losing federal funding and facing legal action.

The Oregon School Activities Association (OSAA) makes policies for sports teams in schools. They are figuring out what changes are necessary and how to apply them locally. The association’s current policy is to allow transgender girls on girls' sports teams, because Oregon law prohibits discrimination based on sexual orientation, which includes gender identity. Oregon law also allows changing gender according to ones current feelings.

A D V E R T I S E M E N T

A D V E R T I S E M E N T

House Minority Leader Christine Drazan (R-Canby), told KGW, it’s not all or nothing. “I think that there is absolutely an important path here where transgender athletes have the opportunity to compete that they deserve, that this does not have to be an either or moment. We don't have to sacrifice safety and the opportunity to compete and win for women and for people that are biological females.” It appears she isn't leaving out developing a league for transgenders.

HB 3041 passed in 2021 clarified existing anti-discrimination protections by adding “gender identity” to all Oregon laws that use “sexual orientation” in the text of the law. Oregon statutes provide comprehensive protections against discrimination for protected groups in employment, housing, public accommodations, education, health care and law enforcement profiling laws that have discriminatory motivation. However, the President's executive order is based on safety and equal body development for fairness in sports. Now the Oregon legislators are being challenged to stand for minority rights in fairness for women and do their job to keep them safe.


--Donna Bleiler

Post Date: 2025-02-09 11:30:12

Last Update: 2025-02-10 01:30:20

In an act of sudden legal effort, the Oregon Department of State Lands (DSL) is seeking comments on administrative rules to legalize the Elliott State Research Forest, Forest Management Plan by reference into Administrative Rules 141-079. At the October 2024 meeting of the State Land Board, the Board approved the 2024 Forest Management Plan with the intent to then incorporate the plan into Oregon’s Administrative Rules. The comment period is open from February 3 - March 5, 2025 at 5 p.m.

The Forest Management Plan claims to guide how the lands will be managed to sustain its diverse values, address fundamental research questions regarding working forests in the context of climate change, and achieve the specific ecosystem goods and service outcomes envisioned for the Elliott.

The question is, what is “envisioned for the Elliott.” The Forest Management Plan adopted is top heavy in preserving the Elliott through carbon credits, which doesn’t reduce carbon but allows polluters to continue polluting for a price under Oregon’s cap-and-trade system. To be eligible for carbon offset crediting, forest projects must demonstrate that they will store more carbon than their business-as-usual approach. Additionally, these projects must show permanence, typically defined as the ability to store carbon for 100 years or longer, says Laura Dee, a CU Boulder assistant professor of ecology and evolutionary biology.

Not everyone’s vision for the Elliott is to lock it up in carbon credits. Bob Zybach Ph.D, Environmental Scientist, has been promoting the “Oregon Giesy Plan” since 2014. He says, “A course correction is long past due, and the public deserves to know what is taking place, and what alternatives might be possible. More time is needed to consider this costly Forest Management Plan and its focus on a few investors profiting from carbon credits, rather than our schools and rural counties profiting once again from a functional working forest with untapped educational and research opportunities.”

Zybach is proposing a Resolution to the Oregon Logging Conference (OCL), meeting in Eugene on February 20, regarding the carbon credit scheme that has been taking place on the Elliott Forest under Huntington’s direction, and calling for an immediate financial audit of taxpayer investments, including Secretary of State Tobias Read’s role as State Treasurer:

OLC calls for the immediate suspension of all plans and expenditures regarding possible carbon credit sales on the Elliot State Forest; that all 550 miles of historic Elliott roads be maintained for public, recreational, research, educational, and forest management access; that Elliott forest management return immediately to 1989 harvest levels of a minimum 50 mmbf in sales per year until updated plans can be developed, and that net proceeds go directly to Oregon public K-12 schools, as intended in 1859, in 1930, and continued until 2017.

How did carbon credits take over the Elliott Forest management plan? Dr. Dave Sullivan documented the behind-the-scenes transformation of the Elliott State Forest to a carbon credit plan. Sullivan was concerned at the cost of hundreds of logging jobs and hundreds of millions of dollars to school funds. He says that history follows that secrets deliberately attempting to avoid oversight, retain power and force for a desired political outcome.

Sullivan’s research ran into many roadblocks trying to find hidden information on basic financial statements, management plans, timber levels, meeting notes and he found no data models for the proposal. The vast majority of basic information needed to make informed decisions was being hidden from public view. One of these secret meetings of the College of Forestry spent $660,000 of Department of State Lands funds to create an Elliott State Research Forest Proposal, which slowly leaked information through the Science Advisory Panel.

Even though there was a lack of transparency, Sullivan found one consistent thread. Starting in 2018, Geoff Huntington, under contract with OSU, did a behind-the-scenes transformation of the Elliott State Forest to a carbon credit scheme at the cost of hundreds of logging jobs and hundreds of millions of dollars to our schools. Although he is a UO environmental law graduate and founder of the Journal of Environmental Law and Litigation, he was somehow representing OSU College of Forestry by himself without oversight. Using information shared with him by Wayne Giesy and Zybach regarding the proposed "Elliott State Education Forest," he developed a carbon credit plan that locked down timber harvests even though OSU became steadfast in opposition to monetizing the carbon within the Elliott as an interference to research to study sustainable management questions.

When Tom DeLuca was hired as the new OSU Dean of Forestry, Huntington left for a taxpayer-paid position with DSL, under now Director Vicki Walker, who was the only DSL signer on Huntington’s original carbon credit plan. He continued working closely with State Land Board member, State Treasurer Tobias Read, to further his plan. Read completely backed this arrangement and openly referenced Huntington’s influence at public meetings rather than auditing the DSL and OSU books to see how taxpayer funds were being redirected. Now Read is next in line for the governorship, which will most likely continue the 2024 Elliott Forest Management Plan leaving rural Oregon, the State’s forest industry, and schools underfunded.

"When Governor Kotek was elected, Huntington advanced to become her personal advisor on natural resources. This move helped further codify the mismanagement of the Elliott for the benefit of a handful of elite government officials and wealthy investors at the expense of hundreds of rural workers and all Oregon school children and should be brought before the public before any more backroom politics take place," says Zybach.

A D V E R T I S E M E N T

A D V E R T I S E M E N T

Zybach also wants, “an audit of costs and losses related to government mismanagement of the Elliott since 2018 before going any further down this costly and counter-productive road. The principal conclusion of reviewing the Elliott State Research Forest Plan proposal is that it is fundamentally misdirected and likely to fail on both economic and scientific fronts if it is adopted in its present form. The analysis suggests the misdirection of management will continue to cost Oregon schools hundreds of millions of dollars, cost local communities hundreds of needed blue-collar jobs, significantly increase the risk of catastrophic wildfire to local communities and wildlife, and will be unlikely to produce scientific information of particular value to Oregon landowners, resource managers, students, and taxpayers.”

Eight Republican legislators have sponsored HB 3103, which directs the State Forester to establish sustainable harvest levels for harvesting timber on state forestland and develop a timber inventory model to inform sustainable harvest levels to prevent wildfires. Your support is needed for the bill to receive a hearing.

Representative Boomer Wright (R-Coos Bay) is sponsoring HB 3508 for the State Forest Department to study methods for improving active forest management.


--Donna Bleiler

Post Date: 2025-02-07 20:04:02

Last Update: 2025-02-08 17:28:28

Oregon Senate Republican Leader Daniel Bonham (R-The Dalles) responded to comments from Rep. Mark Gamba (D-Milwaukie), who suggested that voters are acting like “petulant children” for opposing tax increases needed to fund infrastructure projects.

OPB reports on Senate Bill 687, which would roll back a state law – created when lawmakers took up transportation funding in 2009 – that requires cities to seek voter approval before passing local fuel taxes. It would also allow every county in Oregon to implement or hike vehicle registration fees without a vote, an option currently only available to the four counties with more than 350,000 residents.

“Every year, cities and counties get poorer and poorer and their infrastructure gets older and older,” said Rep. Mark Gamba, a Democratic sponsor of the bill and the former mayor of Milwaukie. Gamba said voters too often act like “petulant children” standing in the way of taxes that are necessary to replace vital infrastructure like roads, sewage plants and libraries.

Former Governor Brown championed a transportation package for $5.3 billion in 2017 in additional taxes spread over 10 years. This funding was intended to address congestion, public transportation, road repairs, and bridge maintenance among other transportation needs.

Now here we are again with ODOT claiming they are broke needing $3.5 billion to cover counties and cities, even though the 2017 10- year package is still supposed to be funding transportation needs. Where has the $5.3 billion gone?

A D V E R T I S E M E N T

A D V E R T I S E M E N T

Leader Bonham said, “Fresh off the campaign trail, one thing was clear—Oregonians, regardless of party, are struggling with the rising cost of living. Instead of addressing these concerns, Democrat lawmakers are signaling their intent to raise taxes, proving just how out of touch they are with working families. Oregonians shouldn’t be ridiculed for rejecting tax hikes—especially when the real problem is Democrats’ failure to run government efficiently.”

Oregon’s state budget has more than doubled in the past 10 years, yet we face a cost of living 31% higher than the national average, the worst housing shortage of all 50 states, failing schools, and a homelessness and addiction crisis on our streets.

“Democrats may have a supermajority, but if their plan is to dismiss voters and push through tax hikes, we will oppose them every step of the way,” concluded Bonham.


--Donna Bleiler

Post Date: 2025-02-04 23:30:09

Last Update: 2025-02-04 23:59:58

Oregon’s new Attorney General, Dan Rayfield, wasted no time distributing information on the Civil Rights Unit (CRU) Sanctuary Promise Community Toolkit.

The CRU Sanctuary Promise Community Toolkit is a free, online resource for those seeking to understand Oregon’s sanctuary laws and help ensure that our communities are safe for all. This toolkit covers information needed to understand, report, and combat violations of Oregon’s Sanctuary Promise Laws. Some of the information covers:

• Family preparation packets
• Where to report ICE or other federal immigration authorities active in their community.
• What information to collect when encountered by ICE to show a violation.
• Legal recourse when sanctuary laws are violated.

Promoting the CRU Sanctuary Promise Community Toolkit, Senator Deb Patterson (D-Salem) said “Oregon’s Sanctuary Promise laws mean that everyone can live, work, go to school, and access government services without fear that the state or local government will report you to ICE. The Oregon Department of Justice has created a guide to help Oregonians understand, report, and combat violations of these sanctuary laws.”

The House and Senate Committee on Judiciary are sponsoring HB 2466 and SB 277, which amends the statue ORS 181A.823. The statue prohibits enforcement agency or public body from sharing or collecting immigration or citizenship status. HB 2466 and SB 277 adds an exception allowing for the sharing of data as needed to effect an international extradition and return of a person charged with or convicted of a crime in this state and for whom a warrant of arrest has been issued.

This will counter extradition of criminals by ICE and use Oregon taxpayer funds to bring back criminals for trial. If convicted, we have to pay for their incarceration and when freed there is no provision to deport them. According to a Hoover Institute report, it depends on the country whether deported criminals will be incarcerated. Why should Oregon bring back criminals, especially if they are already incarcerated in the country of origin.

ORS 181A.823 is a statute that deals with prohibitions related to immigration enforcement. It outlines restrictions on the enforcement of federal immigration laws by state and local entities. Here are some key points:

• Prohibitions: The statute prohibits the use of public resources for immigration enforcement purposes, ensuring that local law enforcement does not engage in activities that would interfere with federal immigration enforcement.
• Public Resources: It defines public resources as including public funds, personnel, property, and facilities, thus limiting the extent to which these can be used for immigration enforcement.
• Sanctuary Policies: The statute supports sanctuary policies by preventing local entities from entering into agreements that would facilitate immigration enforcement, thereby protecting individuals from being targeted based on their immigration status.
• Civil Arrests: It also prohibits civil arrests without a warrant or court order in certain facilities and during court proceedings, further safeguarding individuals from unwarranted detention.
• Reporting Mechanism: The statute includes provisions for reporting violations of sanctuary policies, allowing for oversight and accountability in the enforcement of these prohibitions.

A D V E R T I S E M E N T

A D V E R T I S E M E N T

The toolkit follows 22 Democrats sponsoring HB 2543 requesting $15 million to lawyer up “illegals” and fight against the Federal Government deporting “illegal” criminals. Appropriation includes $10.5 million to Oregon Department of Administrative Services to disbursement to Oregon Worker Relief as the fiscal agent under ORS 9.85. Appropriates $4.5 million to the Judicial Department for transfer to the Oregon State Bar for use by the Legal Services Program to provide legal services to individuals on immigration matters.

Representative E. Werner Reschke (R-Crater Lake) in contrast is sponsoring HB 2192, which requires a public body that gets and keeps a person's data to get and keep the person's status as an immigrant or citizen.

The bill requires each public body that collects and maintains personal information about individuals residing in this state to collect and maintain, along with the personal information of each individual, information on the individual’s immigration or citizenship status when applying for benefits. Deletes the prohibition against collecting “Information concerning a person’s citizenship or immigration status.” It includes information about whether a person is a citizen of the United States or has lawful authority to be present in the United States, either through a visa, a green card or another official documentation. The term does not include information consisting of a person’s address, location, contact information, relatives, associates or other information that could lead to the detection or apprehension of the person.

Go to Oregon Citizens Lobby Legislative Bill Alerts to respond on these bills.


--Donna Bleiler

Post Date: 2025-02-02 12:54:37

Last Update: 2025-02-02 01:09:26

Oregon Democrat Caucus laid out their 2025 “Oregon Forward” agenda focusing on increasing prosperity, making Oregon safer and healthier, and protecting our rights and freedoms.

Senate Majority Leader Kayse Jama (D - E Portland & N Clackamas County) thinks “Oregonians want their elected officials to work together to make our state the best place to live, work, and raise a family.” However, what has happened is behind closed doors, which provides no evidence that leadership is willing to be bipartisan.

House Majority Leader Ben Bowman (D-Tigard, Metzger, & S. Beaverton) said, “The legislature’s job is to improve Oregonians’ lives. Solving Oregon’s most important problems means our government has to work effectively. We believe that every Oregonian should feel safe and at home in our state, and the values-driven leaders in our caucus will work hard to deliver results for working people.”

How does their proposed legislation stand up to their priorities so far?

1. Keeping more money in Oregonians’ pockets and growing opportunity/Delivering a Roadmap Forward

• Keep watching for a return bill to establish a statewide property tax and raising other taxes while promising to make Oregon more affordable.
• SJR 15 abolishes Kicker Refund (Senator Lew Frederick, D-Portland)
• SB 682 retroactively taxes fossil fuel entities for 30 years for releasing greenhouse gas emissions. ORS 250.105, and the Oregon Constitution, Article IV, Section 1, laws are not allowed to be retroactive. It is also double taxation after these entities have already purchased credits in compliance with “cap-and-trade.” (Sponsored by 14 Democrats)
• HB 2370 increases the maximum annual fee that the PUC may assess on the gross operating revenues of regulated utilities from the current cap of 0.45% to 0.55%. (At request of Governor Kotek)
• HB 2977 increases hotel tax from 1% to 2.5% to pay for wildlife program. (Sponsored by 7 Democrats)

2. Prioritizing affordable housing and the homelessness crisis

• SB 78 restricts rebuilding after a disaster making it more difficult for property owners to rebuild and provide adequately for their growing family or their livelihood. (Committee chair Senator Jeff Golden, D-Ashland)

3. Promoting community safety and improving the justice system

•HB 2640 legalizes more crimes including theft, protecting criminals and doing all they can to make you less safe by crushing what’s left of your Second Amendment rights. There will be no negotiating, no bargaining in good faith to meet their goal to end the future sales of firearms and restrict and punish gun owners who play by the rules. (Committee bill)
• HB 2543 Appropriates $15 million from the General Fund to the Universal Representation Fund to defend illegal criminals. (Sponsored by 22 Democrats)
• SB 599 Prohibits landlords from inquiring or rejecting an applicant due to immigration status, or disclosing immigration status, includes “prove lawful presence”, which extends to illegal criminal activities. (Sponsored by 17 Democrats)
• HB 3075 bypasses courts to implement Measure 114 making changes to the gun permit and transfer processes. (Sponsored by Rep. Jason Kropf)
• SB 429 mandates a 3-day wait when purchasing a firearm. SB 696 creating crime for possessing a rapid fire activator. SB 698 extends concealed handgun ban areas. (5-8-8 Democrat sponsors)
• SB 697 restricts firearms possession to age 21 with exceptions. Named the Russell Paul Evans Act. (Sponsored by 7 Democrats)

4. Maintaining Oregon’s transportation system/Making Oregon work

• HB 2931 Interstate 5 bridge replacement project allowing other tolling, outside of the bridge, to pay for the project. (Sponsored at request of the Governor)
• SB 569 grants minority businessowners priority in violation of the U.S. Supreme Court decision in Chevron. (Sponsored by Sen. Aaron Woods)

5. Increasing access to care for all Oregonians/Protecting Basic Rights and Freedoms

• HB 2010 Extends the assessment on earnings from health plan premiums, the assessment on payments by the Oregon Health Authority to managed care organizations, the assessment on hospitals and the Oregon Reinsurance Program. (Rep. Julie Fahey, D-Eugene)
• SB 697 makes it illegal to sell a firearm to adults under 21, but they still want them to die for our country. (Sponsored by 7 Democrats)
• Multiple restrictions on firearms: SB 698 extends concealed handgun ban areas, SB 697 restricts firearms possession to age 21, SB 696 creates crime for rapid fire activators, SB 429 mandates 3-day wait when purchasing a firearm.

A D V E R T I S E M E N T

A D V E R T I S E M E N T

6. Protecting our environment and our future – climate change reducing greenhouse gas

• SJR 28 mandates a healthy environment, determined by court making laws without representation. (Sponsored by 22 Democrats)
• HB 2961 increases the percentage of electric vehicle charging stations that must be installed to 50% for main level parking spaces and 20% in upper levels in garages or parking areas of newly constructed commercial buildings, multifamily buildings with five or more units and mixed-use buildings consisting of privately owned commercial space and five or more residential dwelling units. (Sponsored by 3 Democrats)

7. Improving outcomes for students, teachers, and families/Making Oregon Work

• SB 867 prevents religious schools from school choice funding violating the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment to the United States Constitution or Article I, section 5, of the Oregon Constitution. When, in fact, the bill violates the constitution by restricting religious freedom. It is the religious schools that have helped make public schools look better by taking in difficult students that public schools refuse. (At request of Governor Kotek)

8. Safeguarding our freedoms and holding government accountable

• HB 2640 Reduces to equivalent of a traffic violations changing crimes to offenses the failure to appear in a violation proceeding, failure to appear in the second degree, criminal trespass in the second degree, criminal mischief in the third degree, failure to carry a license or to present a license to a police officer and, under specified circumstances, failure to appear on a criminal citation, theft in the third degree, failure to report as a sex offender, driving while suspended and failure to perform the duties of a driver when property is damaged. (Sponsored by Committee)
• SB 599 prohibits landlords from asking immigration status. (Sponsored by 17 Democrats)
• HB 2200 directs the Oregon Investment Council and the State Treasurer to reduce the carbon intensity of state investments and address certain investment risks relating to climate change by 2050. (Ar request of Secretary of State Tobas Reed)
• HB 2525 Expand the Oregon Political Tax Credit from $100 (joint filers) to $500 and from $50 individuals to $250 (single tax filers). (Sponsored Rep. Paul Evans)

Most of the above bills can be found on Oregon Citizens Lobby including response options.


--Donna Bleiler

Post Date: 2025-01-30 22:10:13

Last Update: 2025-01-31 00:40:39