'Political'
Remedies
City
attorney threatens action against EW.
It is important for our readers to know that both
the city staff and elected officials of Eugene have used secrecy in
inappropriate ways. Further, it appears that the policy of secrecy
has led to an attempt to intimidate the press in dealing with what
is perhaps the most important decision this City Council is likely
to make. That decision is the selection of Eugene's new city manager,
a process, incidentally, that has cost at least $25,000 of the public's
money in consulting fees alone.
We don't argue with the council's final choice of
Dennis Taylor. He appears to be solid and we wish him well. But the
process is troubling, especially in this period of mistrust of government,
cynicism and deep divisions within our community.
We are often alone in our criticism of how the city
conducts business, but this time a Register-Guard editorial
has confirmed our view, writing on Feb. 7, "But there really are no
convincing reasons for choosing the city manger behind closed doors."
After EW reporter Alan Pittman attempted in
"The Next King of Eugene" Jan. 30 to inform the public on the secrecy
of the process by writing about two "possible" candidates he fleshed
out from investigative methods, EW Editor Ted Taylor received
a hand-delivered letter dated Jan. 31 from the city attorney, copies
of which were circulated to all city councilors.
The letter charged that Pittman's story "violated
Oregon's Public Meetings Law by disclosing confidential information
obtained at the Jan. 15, 2003 executive session of the Eugene City
Council." Executive sessions are closed to the public, but open to
the press.
The letter concluded that, if Pittman is not willing
to comply with the law in good faith, "we ask that you assign a new
reporter who will live up to his responsibilities. If Eugene Weekly
violates ORS 192.660(3) again, the city will avail itself of all legal
and political remedies."
EW has consulted with a lawyer expert in both
the press and constitutional law and he advises that Pittman did not
violate the public meetings law. The city attorney formed conclusions
based on assumptions that are not true. While Pittman attended one
of the closed meetings of the City Council, the facts in Pittman's
article were based on his own investigative reporting. EW's
lawyer stated "unambiguously ... that the city may neither bring any
form of legal action nor exclude Pittman or EW from its meetings."
The Attorney General's Public Records and Meetings Manual states,
"A reporter is under no obligation to keep confidential any information
the reporter independently gathers as the result of leads obtained
in an executive session."
The city attorney's charge against Pittman and EW
perhaps indicates that the city is now sensitive to the inappropriate
secrecy of the process. It appears to be an unfortunate effort to
intimidate the press by threatening "all legal and political remedies."
Just what did the city mean by that extraordinary threat?
EW's attorney suggests that "political remedies"
consist only of remedies available to any citizen who objects to the
policies of a news medium: private and public criticism. Any attempt
to use the city's enforcement powers in this circumstance would be
a violation of the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, and Article
1, Section 8 of the Oregon Constitution. — EW
Turn
and COF
Educating
voters about tax policy is always a good idea.
By
Tony Corcoran
The Secret-Plan-That-Never-Existed is down in Ways
and Means now, sent there by the Senate president and president pro
tem. There are five programs in the Plan: The mental health beds will
be funded somehow, the three Medicaid programs so desperately needed
are being looked at — we haven't given up hope yet — but
the state police will probably not be saved. And the other 95 percent
of the Measure 28/HB5100 cuts remain in place.
Welcome to Ways and Means. Meet your hosts —
Rep. Randy Miller and Sen. Kurt Schrader — and sit down for
a little orientation. So far, since we left the Capitol after the
last regular session in the summer of 2001, we have cut about $600
million from the current biennium. Measure 28 just added another $310
million. Then last Monday we got the word from the state economist
that we may be down an additional $180 million to $300 million as
we head into the last quarter of this biennium. We literally couldn't
cut programs quick enough to stem the flow for this biennium.
And on top of that, Miller and Schrader think the
governor's budget assumption of 13 percent growth in the next biennium
is a little on the optimistic side. They're going with 10 percent
(which I think is optimistic as well), and that means we have to take
another $300 million more out of the next 2003-05 budget.
Citizens for Oregon's Future
(www.fororegon.org). There
is a glimmer of hope for the future. COF, now there's an acronym!
Reminds me of the most uncomfortable part of a medical exam ... but,
I digress. This large umbrella coalition of groups — from business,
labor, K-12, universities and community colleges, students, human
service advocates, public safety, the religious community —
is making a run through the state with a presentation that's the first
step in facing our revenue crisis: educating the public about Oregon
tax policy.
I was invited by Beth Gerot, who has done such great
work for the School Funding Now folks, to attend part of the presentation
last Saturday. There was a room full of heroes too numerous to name,
many dedicated school board members and students, business folks,
administrators and teachers, giving up four hours on a Saturday morning
to learn more about Oregon tax policy. COF feels that you can't talk
to people about tax reform until they're clear on current tax policy.
It's important to understand how we got where we are today:
Our inability to provide fundamental government services
like schools, human services, and public safety.
Our over-dependence on personal and small business
income tax to fund these services.
Add COF's website to your favorites and stay tuned.
At the training, I was asked what the prospects were of the Legislature
actually dealing with this crisis and producing some additional revenue.
I told the group that, even with the horrible nature of the cuts we're
facing now, I don't hold out a lot of faith in the House R's to do
the right thing. But I still believe there are enough reasonable people
in that damn building to put something in place of these unconscionable
cuts. I swear, without the committee meetings, it feels like we're
in Steven King movie of endless special sessions.
Speaking of committees, our Senate
Rules Committee took up SB102, intended to clean up the "ballot shopping"
that is so prevalent in initiative petition signature-gathering. Under
current law only 25 signatures are required to trigger the ballot
title drafting process in the attorney general's office. In the 2002
cycle there were 183 initiative measures submitted, 70 were almost
identical duplicates, but the AG's office was required to draft 180
ballot titles. Only 43 got approval for circulation and only seven
got on the ballot. SB102 would require filing at least 10 percent
of the required signatures before you could get the title. The anti-choice
group hates the bill, so do the other conservatives like Oregonians
in Action and Don McIntire. The unions and the League of Women Voters
liked the bill.
This week's the deadline for dropping bills into the
hopper for consideration. After that each legislator gets only two
priority bills for the rest of the session. These deadlines are the
only thing that prevents us from going on forever! That would be a
bad thing.
Sen. Tony Corcoran of Cottage Grove
represents portions of Lane and Douglas counties in Senate District
4, which includes the UO area. He can be reached at sen.tonycorcoran@state.or.us
|