Case ID: or_333/html/0557-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "\n      PER CURIAM", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Submitted on the record February 28,
    ballot title certified March 14, 2002
    David J. HUNNICUTT and Lawrence B. George, Petitioners, v. Hardy MYERS, Attorney General, State of Oregon, Respondent.
    
    (SC S49221)
    41 P3d 1086
    David J. Hunnicutt, Tigard, filed the petition for himself and petitioner George.
    Erica L. Hadlock, Assistant Attorney General, Salem, filed the answering memorandum for respondent. With her on the answering memorandum were Hardy Myers, Attorney General, and Michael D. Reynolds, Solicitor General.
    PER CURIAM
   PER CURIAM

In this ballot title review proceeding, petitioners challenge the caption of the Attorney General’s certified ballot title for a proposed initiative measure, which the Secretary of State has denominated as Initiative Petition 156 (2002). We review the Attorney General’s certified ballot title to determine whether it substantially complies with the requirements of ORS 250.035(2)(a). See ORS 250.085(5) (setting out standard of review).

We have considered petitioners’ arguments and conclude that none is well taken. Accordingly, we certify to the Secretary of State the following ballot title for the proposed measure:

ALLOWS VOTERS TO ADOPT LOCAL PLANS, REGULATIONS CONTRARY TO STATEWIDE LAND USE PLANNING GOALS, RULES
RESULT OF ‘YES” VOTE: ‘Yes” vote allows voters in cities, counties, metropolitan service districts to adopt land use plans and regulations that are inconsistent with state goals or rules.
RESULT OF “NO” VOTE: “No” vote retains current system of statewide comprehensive land use planning; rejects adoption of local land use plans, regulations not consistent with state law.
SUMMARY: Under current law, cities, counties, and metropolitan service districts, through their elected officials, adopt or amend comprehensive land use plans and land use regulations. Currently, local land use plans and regulations must be consistent with statewide land use goals, with administrative rules adopted by the state Land Conservation and Development Commission, and with statutes adopted by the Legislature. Currently, new or amended local plans and regulations may be reviewed for consistency with state goals, rules, statutes. Measure allows local voters to directly adopt or amend comprehensive plans and land use regulations. Voter adopted plans, regulations need not be consistent with state land use goals, rules. Subsequent local land use decisions must comply with local plans and regulations, but not with statewide goals, rules. Other provisions.

Ballot title certified.