Summary
The Oregon Supreme Court reviewed consolidated challenges to the Attorney General’s certified ballot title for Initiative Petition 171 (2002), which proposed increases in cigarette and other tobacco-product taxes and funded new programs. The court rejected the petitioners’ challenges to the caption, result statements, and summary, and held that it could not consider an unraised error concerning the stated current cigarette tax because ORS 250.085(6) limits review to arguments previously presented to the Secretary of State. The court certified the ballot title to the Secretary of State.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether the Attorney General's caption, result statements, and summary for Initiative Petition 171 substantially complied with the ballot-title requirements of ORS 250.035(2).
- Whether the Supreme Court could correct an error in the certified ballot-title summary that petitioners had not presented in writing to the Secretary of State.
Holdings
- The petitioners' challenges to the caption, result statements, and summary were not well taken; the certified ballot title substantially complied with ORS 250.035(2).
- The court could not consider or correct the Attorney General's identified error because petitioners had not presented that argument in writing to the Secretary of State.
Key quotations
“Because petitioners did not raise that error, the authority, if any, to correct the certified ballot title does not rest with this court.” (334 Or. at 117)
Factual background
The Secretary of State designated Initiative Petition 171 (2002), which proposed increases in cigarette and other tobacco-product taxes and funded several new government programs. The Attorney General certified a ballot title describing the proposed tax increases, revenue allocations, and programs. Petitioners Girard and Edelman challenged portions of the caption, result statements, and summary, while the Attorney General separately advised the court of an unraised error in the stated current per-cigarette tax.
Procedural history
Girard and Edelman timely submitted written comments concerning the Secretary of State's draft ballot title and filed consolidated proceedings challenging the Attorney General's certified ballot title. The Attorney General identified an additional numerical error in the summary that petitioners had not raised. The Supreme Court rejected petitioners' challenges, declined to consider the unpreserved error, and certified the ballot title to the Secretary of State.