Proposed Environmental Legislation Granted Second Chance
The Oregon Court of Appeals ruled Wednesday that Secretary of State Bev Clarno acted improperly and misinterpreted state law by rejecting three proposed ballot measures dealing with environmental regulations in September of last year. The three-judge panel concluded that a Marion County judge erred in a decision affirming Clarno’s dismissal of the measures. The appeals court remanded the case back to Marion County and instructed the judge to rule in favor of the petitioners. It is unclear whether Clarno’s office will seek to appeal the decision.
Clarno rejected the initiative petitions on the basis of their failure to meet the “single subject” constitutional requirement for proposed legislation. The appeals court found her reasoning to be implausible, claiming that “it is relatively easy to identify a logical, unifying principle connecting the provisions of each measure: the regulation and protection of forestlands.”
The ballot measures put forth by Oregon Wild do cover a wide range of issues, including regulations on clear cutting and limitations on the use of pesticides. However, as the appeals court pointed out, an overly strict reading of the “single subject” rule would risk defying legal precedent because the Supreme Court has a history of being lenient toward initiative petitions on this matter.
Wednesday’s ruling could indicate the end of an ongoing dispute concerning how Clarno has exercised her authority in dismissing potential ballot measures in recent months. She has faced criticism from Attorney General Ellen Rosenblum and accusations of partisanship from local interest groups for using a tight reading of the “single-subject” rule to block progressive environmental legislation.
By JD Brookbank
Do you have a story for The Advocate? Email editor@corvallisadvocate.com