Proponents of eliminating of Ballot Measure 11 uniformly claim, without presenting any evidence whatsoever, that the measure has increased racial disparities in the justice system. Not only is this claim categorically false, but the exact opposite is true. Ballot Measure 11 has significantly improved racial disparities in felony sentencing and imprisonment in Oregon, and among some minority groups, has totally eliminated those disparities. Any assertion to the contrary is simply false.

Academics utilize a data tool called the Relative Rate Index to quantify disparities among demographic groups. The RRI measures the rate at which a demographic group appears in the particular category under study against the rate at which that demographic group appears in the general population. For instance, if a particular racial group constitutes 10% of the general population, but 20% of infant mortality deaths, an obvious disparity exists. That RRI ratio of 1:2 represents a significant issue for policy makers to address.

To analyze over-representation by race in the criminal justice system, data analysts use the Relative Rate Index to compare the general population percentage of a particular race or ethnic group to the percentage of the prison population by race. Since the advent of Ballot Measure 11 in 1995, racial disparities in the prison system have improved dramatically. Disparities for Blacks have been cut in half, and disparities among Hispanics have disappeared completely in Oregon. Whites, on the other hand, have been incarcerated in prison at increasing rates since Measure 11 was instituted.

The obvious conclusion is that a sentencing system that encourages a fixed sentence (contrary to what opponents claim, Measure 11 is not a completely mandatory sentencing law) removes the hidden biases that come into play in a subjective sentencing process. The Relative Rate Index data is clear. Because of Ballot Measure 11, racial disparities in violent felony sentencing have improved as follows:

Hispanic disparities. In 1994, Hispanics made up 3.97% of Oregon’s general population, but 10.41% of its prison population. Today, Hispanics constitute 13.4% of Oregon general population, but 13.2% of Oregon prison population. Not only have all Hispanic racial disparities been eliminated among prison inmates in Oregon, but Hispanics now represent a lower percentage of Oregon prison population than they do in Oregon’s general population. Justice system incarceration disparities for Hispanics in Oregon have been eliminated since the advent of Ballot Measure 11.

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

African-American disparities. In 1994, African-Americans made up 1.62% of Oregon’s general population, and today that figure is 2.20%. Using the RRI analysis for African-Americans in Oregon’s prison system, the RRI ratio in 1994 was 8.2:1. The ratio today is 4.2:1, meaning that justice system racial disparities among African-Americans have been cut in half since BM11 came into effect.

Native-American/Alaskan disparities. In 1994, Native-American/Alaska natives made up 1.35% of state general population, and today that figure is 1.80%. In 1994, justice system disparities for this group were 1.72:1. Today, that figure is 1.77:1, essentially unchanged.

White disparities. The white RRI ratio has increased from .787:1 in 1994 to .861:1 today. RRI data makes it clear that Measure 11 has increased the share of Oregon prison inmates who are white.


--Staff Reports

Post Date: 2021-04-10 18:40:32

Last Update: 2021-04-10 21:40:13

The Clackamas County Board of Commissioners has sent the following letter to Governor Kate Brown in response to the governor moving the county to the high-risk level under the state’s public health framework for COVID-19, which is effective Friday.

Dear Governor Brown:

Oregonians have sacrificed and lost much over the past year as they have fought through the COVID-19 pandemic. We are proud of our Clackamas County residents and businesses who have complied with your orders and who take protective measures every day, such as masking up and changing business operations.

It brings us great delight to see children back at school and the hum of school buses traveling down our streets. Thank you for allowing a return to in-person instruction and activities. We know this will help the mental health of our youth. This disease has greatly harmed our children and it is time for us to help them recover and thrive.

Our businesses have been safely operating in Moderate Risk since Feb. 26, while continuing to abide by OHA’s guidelines. They have continued to make every effort to work in a way that will help slow the spread of the virus, often at a cost to them. We were frustrated to learn on Tuesday that, by tomorrow, Clackamas County businesses will be mandated to cut back on capacity as we are moved to the High Risk category. Our understanding was that we would receive a two-week caution period before having our risk category changed. Three days’ notice to our businesses to prepare to cut capacity does not afford them the time necessary to plan for inventory reduction, staffing changes, and every day operation modifications. As an example, many of our restaurants have spent $10,000 - $20,000 in purchasing supplies and retraining and hiring employees that will be lost by this sudden change.

We know that reopening schools to in-person instruction, coupled with businesses bringing employees and customers back, results in COVID-19 cases rising. This is not new information and it is not surprising.

However, reopening then closing businesses, and moving kids from hybrid in-person to only virtual learning, would cause harm in addition to rising COVID-19 cases. The economic hardships will be felt by our communities for years.

We believe there is an opportunity to consider other factors when determining community risk level.

For example, in Clackamas County, we have identified many of our positive COVID-19 cases are generally contained to outbreaks connected to school activities outside of in-person instruction, such as small social gatherings. We have also found that very few are related to workplaces. Holding back the entire community and demanding that hundreds of businesses reduce capacity – and place more people back in the unemployment line – is not sustainable and causes additional harm.

We understand that hospital capacity was a factor in your recent decision to move us back to High Risk, but we must point out that our hospital capacity remains stable in the region. We fully understand the need to keep cases low to ensure we have enough hospital capacity, ICU beds and ventilators. Although cases are going up, as expected, we have successfully maintained capacity and been able to provide the needed services for our most severe cases. Hospital capacity cannot be understated. Please consider a region’s hospital capacity and outbreak sources before deciding to move a county into a higher risk level. Reducing business capacity due to case counts alone, when other public health metrics should be considered, is another setback to our entire community.

As more and more have access and receive the vaccine every day, we ask that the risk levels determined by the state include other factors. Please consider elements beyond how many cases per 100,000 people. For example, if the cases are contained to outbreaks, an entire community should not be punished. Outbreaks were once a metric for reopening Oregon in the past and can be again.

We are also concerned about the accelerated timeline for vaccine eligibility that does not match available vaccine supplies. We want to continue to uplift the need for vaccine allocations to be redistributed to the most populated areas in the state, including Clackamas County, that are still behind in providing access to community members that have been eligible for weeks and frustrated, especially our local frontline workers and small businesses.

Our residents have been through much – three declared disasters in 11 months. While our communities are resilient, many businesses and their employees are on precipice of collapse. We must also consider the impact to our lower socioeconomic groups. This is about economic justice for people. Please allow us the two week caution period and focus the efforts of education and enforcement on the populations where the spikes are occurring.

Clackamas County is committed to work collaboratively with the State to fight the spread of the virus. We ask you to take our feedback and recommendations to heart. We work closest with our most affected communities and can provide insight in what is working and what is not. We are available to further discuss these considerations further.

--Staff Reports

Post Date: 2021-04-10 18:32:52

Last Update: 2021-04-10 18:40:32

A man who threatened a driver with a hatchet is facing charges. He was charged in a similar crime nearly one year ago in the same city. Crime rates in Portland have been climbing since District Attorney Mike Schmidt's announcement to not prosecute some crimes in Multnomah County.

On Thursday, April 8, 2021 at 3:21p.m., Portland Central Precinct officers were called to a threat with weapon call near Northwest 20th Avenue and Northwest Northrop Street. As officers were responding, they learned that several callers were reporting someone swinging around a hatchet and hitting a car with it.

When officers arrived, a witness pointed out the suspect. They arrested Christopher L. James, 41, and seized the involved hatchet.

Investigating officers learned that James fixated on a subject sitting in a vehicle nearby. James, with hatchet in hand, ran towards the driver's side of the vehicle. As James approached, he raised the hatchet as if he was going to hit the caller who was seated in the vehicle. Fearing for his life, the caller started to drive off. As he did so, James struck the vehicle with the hatchet causing damage.

James was booked into the Multnomah County Detention Center on charges of Attempted Assault in the Second Degree, Unlawful Use of a Weapon, and Menacing.

Officers used no force taking this armed suspect into custody.

Christopher L. James had also been arrested about one year prior, on Saturday, March 7, 2020 at 3:42a.m in the morning he robbed a donut shop with a hatchet.


--Bruce Armstrong

Post Date: 2021-04-10 16:15:10

Last Update: 2021-04-10 16:54:08

A new movement across the state is budding called Tore Says Oregon Peeps. Inspired by a Cleveland radio host of Tore Says, Tore Says Oregon Peeps. Inspired by a Cleveland radio host of Tore Says, Tore Maras is exposing deep state activities. What is getting a lot of attention with the Tore Says Oregon Peeps is “vaccine passports,” which mimics travel passports but requires citizens to show proof they have received a vaccination for COVID-19 in order to be allowed to enter an area or establishment.

New York is the first state to formally launch a “vaccine passport” program called “Excelsior Pass.” It allows residents to pull up a code on their phones to prove they have been vaccinated or have tested negative. Hawaii has adopted a “Safe Travels” passport. Amazon is also discussing using this as a platform to handle financial transactions and tracking people. After Tore Maras sent letters in Ohio, legislation was introduced to not allow entities to require disclosure of vaccination status or anything similar to vaccine passports.

Tore Says Oregon Peeps is trying to keep this issue out of Oregon. They sent two rounds of letters that layout case law and federal law for Oregonians that do not want to get the vaccine and prohibits discriminating against. The letters to the Attorney General with a copy to Governor Brown and legislators were sent alerting them that Oregon businesses, schools and other organizations are receiving misinformation on mandating vaccinations, having no authority to mandate use of vaccines, which are not yet fully approved by the FDA. Moreover, any form of discrimination against those choosing not to be vaccinated is in direct violation of state and federal law. Code 28 CFR § 36.105(b)(2) specifically lists human Immunodeficiency Virus infection (whether symptomatic or asymptomatic).

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 letters demonstrate federal law prohibits private places of accommodation from discrimination against any person on the basis of their “physiological condition” which, by law, includes the present status of their immune system. In addition, employers are expressly prohibited from discriminating against employees on the basis of genetic information.

It is clear that the purpose for these passports is more about stealing freedoms than about COVID-19 protection. Otherwise, a certificate from a physician could establish whether you have had COVID-19 or a vaccine, so there is no need for the passport if that was truly the only intention, to say nothing of the fact that vaccination status is a personal healthcare decision, and should be covered by privacy laws.

Tore Says Oregon Peeps’ campaign is available for participation and have provided a draft letter to copy into an email and email addresses for those wishing to participate. You can also use their letter with the documentation, or use them for guidance.

“America will never be destroyed from the outside. If we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves.” Abe Lincoln

--Donna Bleiler

Post Date: 2021-04-10 09:34:14

Last Update: 2021-04-14 11:23:10

Yet another unnecessary burden may be placed on Oregonians if a new law is passed that has been proposed by an Oregon Democrat. The proposed legislation is related to vehicle headlight use.

Sponsored by Senator Lee Beyer (D-Eugene) SB 166 would require the use of motor vehicle headlights at all times when vehicle is being driven on highway.

Violations would be punished by maximum fine of $1,000.

The bill does provide exceptions for vehicles equipped with daytime running lights.

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 issue of visibility seems to be the driving force behind the proposed law, but proponents may be overlooking the bigger issue of drivers just not paying attention.

Roman historian Publius Cornelius Tacitus once famously said: "The more corrupt the state, the more numerous the laws." Observers have noted this may be one of those instances where that saying again rings true.

Much documented testimony on record with the state legislature seems to indicate strong opposition to this legislation from Oregonians, and it's passage doesn't seem likely. However, the legislature is still operating with the public not allowed to participate in person at the Salem capitol building.


--Bruce Armstrong

Post Date: 2021-04-09 11:14:36

Last Update: 2021-04-09 12:42:53

The Oregon Supreme Court has issued a decision that granted the bipartisan legislative request to extend the timeline to finish the redistricting process to September 27. The Constitution gives the Legislature authority to redraw legislative and congressional boundaries but that authority was put in jeopardy by delays in U.S. Census data.

The opinion, issued by Chief Justice Walters, would keep the process from the partisan Secretary of State and keep the process in the legislature. The Secretary of State, Shemia Fagan, opposed the Legislature, hoping to take control of the redistricting process. The Oregon Supreme Court rejected her partisan attempt, calling her legal arguments flawed.

“We have had a good working relationship among the Senate members of the committee,” Senator Tim Knopp (R-Bend), vice-chair of the Redistricting Committee, said. “Election integrity and fair districts live to fight another day because of this decision. It ensures that we can continue to work together to ensure that Oregonians can pick their representatives fairly.”

The Supreme Court will issue a writ of mandamus allowing the Legislature to have the first chance to come up with a redistricting plan. The revised deadlines would require an emergency special session. It would give the Legislature until September 27 to enact a redistricting plan, ensuring it becomes effective by February 1, 2022.

The High Court said, in a summary document:

If it were possible for the State of Oregon to comply with all the requirements of Article IV, section 6, the Court explained, it would require that it do so. But here, where it is not possible for the state to create a reapportionment plan based on federal census data and still comply with the constitutionally prescribed deadlines, and where it is possible for the state to fulfill its paramount duties in compliance with modified deadlines, the Court concluded that it had authority to direct the state to comply with modified deadlines.

“Oregonians expect their district to be fairly drawn,” Senate Republican Leader, Fred Girod said. “The most important principles for Republicans are ‘One-Person-One-Vote’ and upholding the Voting Rights Act. Gerrymandering is unacceptable and by keeping this process in the Legislature, we have a chance to come to a bipartisan agreement to draw fair lines.”

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 High Court restated the revised plan, with dates:

REAPPORTIONMENT PLAN BY LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY

• 1. If the Legislative Assembly enacts a plan, the following revised deadlines apply:
  • a. The Legislative Assembly will enact a plan on or before Monday, September 27, 2021, and may do so in an emergency session rather than its regular session.
  • b. Objections by electors are due by Monday, October 25, 2021.
    • i. Responses by the Legislative Assembly, Secretary of State, or others, as well as amicus briefs (discouraged) are due by Monday, November 8, 2021.
    • ii. Any reply briefs, though discouraged, are due by Monday, November 15, 2021.
  • c. If the Supreme Court determines that the initial plan complies with applicable law:
    • i. A Supreme Court opinion approving the plan will be filed by Monday, November 22, 2021, and
    • ii. The reapportionment plan will become effective January 1, 2022, for purposes of Or Const, Art IV, § 6(6)(b), only.
  • d. If the Supreme Court determines that the initial plan requires corrections, a Supreme Court opinion to that effect will be filed by Monday, December 6, 2021, and the plan will be sent to the Secretary of State for changes.
    • i. The revisions by the Secretary of State are due by Monday, January 17, 2022.
    • ii. The Supreme Court will approve the revisions or make any necessary additional corrections by Monday, January 31, 2022.
      

REAPPORTIONMENT PLAN BY SECRETARY OF STATE

• 2. If the Legislative Assembly does not enact a plan by September 27, 2021, the following revised deadlines apply:
  • a. If the Legislative Assembly fails to enact a plan by September 27, 2021, the Secretary of State’s plan is due by Monday, October 18, 2021.
  • b. Objections by electors are due by Monday, November 15, 2021.
    • i. Responses by the Legislative Assembly, Secretary of State, or others, as well as amicus briefs (discouraged) are due by Monday, November 29, 2021.
    • ii. Any reply briefs, though discouraged, are due by Monday, December 6, 2021.
  • c. If the Supreme Court determines that the initial plan complies with applicable law:
    • i. A Supreme Court opinion approving the plan will be filed by Monday, December 13, 2021.
    • ii. The reapportionment plan will become effective January 1, 2022, for purposes of Or Const, Art IV, § 6(6)(b), only.
  • d. If the Supreme Court determines that the initial plan requires corrections, a Supreme Court opinion to that effect will be filed by Monday, December 27, 2021, and the plan will be returned to the Secretary of State for changes.
    • i. The revisions by the Secretary of State are due by Monday, January 24, 2022.
    • ii. The Supreme Court will approve the revisions or make any necessary additional corrections by Monday, February 7, 2022.
  
  --Staff Reports
  
  

  Post Date: 2021-04-09 09:21:16

  Last Update: 2021-04-09 09:57:42

  
  

The Oregon House of Representatives passed a bipartisan bill to help Oregonians who own property that was damaged or completely destroyed by wildfires.

The new law will authorize tax collectors in a county covered by a state of emergency declared by the Governor, due to wildfire or other act of God, to prorate taxes imposed on a property that was destroyed or damaged, putting more cash into the pockets of Oregonians who need it to recover from devastating losses.

Republicans also expedited the passage of the bill by waiving the requirement to read it in full on the floor before voting. Republicans have not been granting this waiver of the constitutional requirement during this session. Work on wildfire relief measures began during a special session in the fall of 2020 to immediately respond to historic wildfires that ignited during Labor Day weekend.

“I have met with people in my community that literally lost everything to these fires,” said House Republican Leader Christine Drazan (R-Canby.) “The current process for relief is not working for those who lost their homes and so much more. We have to do everything we can to focus on supporting these Oregonians who are in this position to help them rebuild their lives. I know that this bill can make a big difference, and I hope it is just the beginning.”

At the end of March, House Republican Leader Christine Drazan (R-Canby) issued a call for the Legislature to refocus its priorities on issues like wildfire relief that continue to be an immediate need for Oregonians.

HB 2341 was passed with unanimous support in the House.


--Staff Reports

Post Date: 2021-04-08 20:10:19

Last Update: 2021-04-08 20:19:21

SB 289 was introduced as a study of laws relating to environmental equity. But, Senator Lee Beyer’s Committee On Energy and Environment saw fit to replace it. Not all committee members agreed with this move, but not the ones you would think. Thus far the session has produced bill after bill expanding the rights of inmates, early release, and benefits for rehabilitation. Along comes the amended version of SB 289 prohibiting a person convicted of a first or second degree bias crime committed on water or public land used for outdoor recreation from entering or remaining in any building, land or water of the state used for outdoor recreation for a period of at least six months, but not longer than five-years in addition to any other penalty.

When a bill is replaced, known as “gut and stuff,” the content being "stuffed" has to fall within the "relating to" clause. Finding the connection to “environmental equity” seems absent. Since it is claimed that the majority of convictions are people of color, isn't this a racist concept that goes against the equity agenda?

Digging deeper into the “bias crime,” it becomes clear the penalties are particularly aimed at white people.

In ORS 166.155 to 166.165, a person commits a bias crime in the second degree if the person intentionally subjects another person to offensive physical contact because of the person’s perception, perceived threatening alarm, or tampers or interferes with property, having no right to do so with the intent to cause substantial inconvenience to another person because the person’s perception of the other person is race, color, religion, gender identity, sexual orientation, disability or national origin; and it is a first degree crime if intentionally, knowingly or recklessly causes these actions.

SB 289 not only seems discriminatory, but. ORS 166.155 should be of concern to every person when perceptions are used for conviction of a crime. What does it say about our liberties when you can’t read Huck Finn or Little House on the Prairie or the Bible in the open by the camp fire?

The bill heads to the Senate Floor for a vote.


--Donna Bleiler

Post Date: 2021-04-08 18:19:33

Last Update: 2021-04-08 18:50:27

The Oregon Health Authority has finally identified and released the count of 168 COVID-19 vaccine breakthrough cases, including 3 deaths, as of April 2, 2021.

Breakthrough cases are when vaccinated individuals test positive for the virus.

OHA public health officials say it’s a reminder that no vaccine is 100% effective, and vaccine breakthrough cases will occur.

These cases have been reported in 25 counties and all health care preparedness regions.

• Region 1: 76
• Region 2: 29
• Region 3: 27
• Region 5: 9
• Region 6: 4
• Region 7: 17
• Region 9: 6

OHA is not reporting the regions in which the deaths took place.

Vaccine breakthrough cases are defined as instances in which an individual received a positive COVID-19 test result at least 14 days after the final dose of any COVID-19 vaccine series.

Many of the vaccine breakthrough cases identified experienced asymptomatic infection and were tested for other reasons. Eleven percent of the vaccine breakthrough cases were hospitalized within the 30 days following their positive test, and most occurred in people older than 65 or with underlying health conditions. The three deaths represent fewer than 2% of the vaccine breakthrough cases, and none of the vaccine breakthrough cases were associated with a COVID-19 variant.




--Bruce Armstrong

Post Date: 2021-04-08 17:32:59

Last Update: 2021-04-08 18:58:02

The House Committee on Early Childhood yesterday passed four bills with bipartisan support to make childcare more affordable and accessible for families, provide broader and more immediate access to paid family leave and address a safety concern to protect infant lives.

Three of the bills were sponsored by Representative Jack Zika (R-Redmond) as either a chief or regular sponsor.

“2020 caused so many disruptions for families because of the pandemic and government-mandated stay-at-home orders,” said Rep. Zika. “Families need more options for affordable and accessible childcare as they continue to cope with working from home or dealing with prolonged closures of their previous childcare facilities. The additional access to paid family leave will also provide peace of mind that can be a big help as people continue facing many unknowns.”

Representative Boomer Wright (R-Coos Bay) and Representative Suzanne Weber (R-Tillamook) also voted to pass all four proposals out of the committee.

“I’m pleased to join my colleagues in passing these important bills,” added Rep. Wright. “Our job this session should be helping Oregonians who are still facing severe hardship brought on by a year of the pandemic, natural disasters and more. These proposals represent the kind of work we should be doing to make things easier for them.”

“Accessible childcare and paid family leave are so important for providing stability in family life,” said Rep. Weber. “Whatever we can do as legislators to make life easier for Oregonians should be our top priorities.”

• HB 3109: Reduces restrictions to allow for additional childcare locations.
• HB 2484: Allows more dwellings to be used as family childcare homes.
• HB 2474: Includes closure of childcare providers or schools due to a public health emergency as a qualifying purpose to take paid family leave. Reduces the amount of time before an employee can take family leave from 180 days to 30 days.
• HB 3379: Bans the sale of crib bumper pads in Oregon that have caused infant deaths.

At the end of March, House Republican Leader Christine Drazan (R-Canby) issued a call for the Legislature to refocus its priorities to help Oregonians recover from negative effects brought on by the pandemic. Issues such as lack of adequate childcare continues to be an immediate need.


--Staff Reports

Post Date: 2021-04-08 12:26:49

Last Update: 2021-04-08 12:42:50

In a House Committee On Economic Recovery and Prosperity meeting on April 6, 2021, Oregon legislators discussed the ramifications of passing HB 2266, a bill which would provide economic recovery loans for Oregonians, but only if their skin is a certain color.

Representative John Lively (D-Springfield) is the sponsor of the legislation which allegedly would direct the Oregon Business Development Department to study the use of economic development methods for purpose of assisting businesses, but is done with targeted outreach so that only a minority owned business would see the advantage.

While discussing the implications of such a unconstitutional law, Representative Kim Wallan (R-Medford) asked the committee if these unconstitutional race-based requirements might be removed in the spirit of reaching as many struggling businesses as possible.



The answer that the Republican legislator eventually receives comes from Leah Horner from the Office of Governor Kate Brown, and may seem disappointing to observers noting the regressive nature of racial segregation.

She simply states that Kate Brown's Racial Justice Council decided that the bill is intended to be written exactly as it is, including the unconstitutional racial elements, and they intend it to be passed as is.


--Bruce Armstrong

Post Date: 2021-04-07 20:25:47

Last Update: 2021-04-08 11:29:38

A proposal that would replicate a portion of one of the most contentious issues in recent years was finalized with special interests without ever publishing the language for the public.

A bill amendment to replicate part of cap-and-trade, one of the most contentious legislative issues in recent years, was drafted and then discussed during a committee hearing without ever providing the language to the public beforehand or knowledge that it would be discussed during the committee.

The House Energy and Environment Committee allowed public testimony on an unpublished amendment to HB 2021, introduced by Pam Marsh (D-Ashland) who also chairs the committee. The amendment introduces sweeping legislation that seeks to impose costly regulations on the state’s supply of electricity. Special interest groups testified at length in support of a “-5 amendment” that was not made publicly available to everyday Oregonians. Republican lawmakers on the committee received the draft language at 11am during session before the 1pm hearing, leaving them little time to read the amendment. Republicans criticized the move as the antithesis of transparency and the exact opposite of how the legislative process should be conducted.

Despite an hour and a half of prepared testimonies from special interests, the amendment will only receive a half hour of testimony on Wednesday now that it is public knowledge.

Prior to the start of the 2021 Legislative Session, the majority insisted that it would be the most transparent session despite keeping the public out of the building. This recent move by Democrats to quietly replicate a portion of cap-and-trade with an amendment behind closed doors calls that claim into question.

“The last thing we should do during this precarious pandemic session is conceive, draft and finalize legislation behind closed doors,” said House Republican Leader Christine Drazan. “Discussing a contentious proposal in a committee without ever providing it to the public beforehand is not transparent. It’s a false formality with the intention of passing laws that have zero public input. That’s breaking a promise we made to Oregonians ahead of this virtual session.”

While representatives from environmental justice organizations, investor-owned utility companies and even Democratic members of the committee repeatedly expressed support for an unpublished -5 amendment, members of the public were left in the dark.


--Staff Reports

Post Date: 2021-04-07 19:42:03

Last Update: 2021-04-07 20:07:50