Crew/Garcia v. Myers

Summary

The Oregon Supreme Court reconsidered its earlier decision concerning the Attorney General's certified ballot title for Initiative Petition 128 (2004). The court held that it had improperly addressed the unpreserved “scope of license” issue, but that the “negotiation” issue had been properly raised, and referred the ballot title to the Attorney General for further consideration.

Holdings

1. Under ORS 250.085(6), the Supreme Court may not consider a ballot-title argument that was not presented in writing to the Secretary of State, unless the argument concerns language added to or removed from the draft title after the statutory comment period.
2. The scope-of-license issue was not preserved, and the court erred in addressing it and referring it to the Attorney General for modification.
3. The negotiation issue was properly before the court because Crew raised it in various forms during the Secretary of State's comment stage, even though Crew's position later changed substantially.
4. Because the court had improperly referred the scope-of-license issue to the Attorney General, the ballot title had to be referred again to the Attorney General for further consideration.

Questions Presented

1. Whether Garcia's objections to the Attorney General's modified ballot title were well taken.
2. Whether Crew preserved the scope-of-license and negotiation issues by presenting them during the Secretary of State's statutory comment period.
3. What remedy was appropriate after the court determined that it had improperly addressed the unpreserved scope-of-license issue.

Disposition

remanded