Opinion ID: 1378445
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 5

Heading: The referendum question.

Text: It is stated by Justice Linde (at p. 108) that:    if a city's own `municipal legislation' is superseded by an otherwise valid state law, even a special or local law, this clause has no further application. This statement begs the question whether, under the provisions of Article IV, section 1(5), municipal legislation adopted by a city can be superseded by an otherwise valid state law. As stated above, in the discussion of this question in response to the majority opinion, it has been previously recognized by this court that Article IV, Section 1 was submitted to Oregon voters as a proposed constitutional amendment with the representation by the framers of that proposed amendment that its adoption would give the people power to control salaries of county and district officers. [31] Such a promised purpose would be frustrated if a city ordinance adopted pursuant to Article IV, Section 1(5) prescribing salaries for city officers could be superseded by a state statute, as would be the result of the concurring opinion by Linde, J.