Initiative Petition

On July 11, 2018, the Elections Division received Initiative Petition
2020-006, proposed for the November 3, 2020, General Election.




Subject Provided by Chief Petitioners
School Gun Safety Act


Chief Petitioners
Jerrad Robison 311 SW Antler Ridge Court, Redmond, OR 97756
Ston McDaniel 7401 SE Gentian Way, Prineville, OR 97754








To begin the ballot title drafting process, chief petitioners must submit 1,000 sponsorship signatures. If submitted, the Elections Division will process sponsorship signatures in accordance with the Statistical Sampling Procedures for State Petitions adopted under administrative rule
OAR 165-014-0030.


More information, including the text of the petition, is contained under
2020 Initiatives, Referendums and Referrals link available at www.oregonvotes.gov.

 Secretary of StateElections Division
oregonvotes.gov
Contact: irrlistnotifier.sos@oregon.gov | 503-986-1518 | Toll Free 1-866-673-VOTE


Initiative Petition



On July 2, 2018 the chief petitioners withdrew Initiative Petition 2018-043.




Subject Provided by Chief Petitioners
Promote Public Safety for All Through the Reduction of Assault Weapons and Large Capacity Magazines


Chief Petitioners
Walter John Knutson 4526 NE 27th Ave Portland, OR 97211
Michael Z. Cahana 3139 SW Fairmount Blvd. Portland, OR 97239
Alcena E. Boozer 5256 NE 48th Ave. Portland, OR 97218




More information, including the text of the initiative, is contained in the IRR Database available at www.oregonvotes.gov.

The Second Amendment Preservation Ordinance initiative was challenged in Grant County for bundling four subjects when an initiative can only cover one subject according to the Oregon state constitution.  Those reasons include four subjects: 1) redefining the constitutional definition of firearms to include ammunition and accessories; 2) making any gun-restricting law in Grant County unconstitutional; 3) expanding the sheriff’s statutory duties; and 4) prohibiting the sheriff from enforcing any law that restricts the right of people to possess firearms.

The County certified the initiative, so they will have to defend the challenge in court.  The challenge and the county's response is included in the following post.  It makes good reading for anyone interested in learning the legislative process at the local level....Rob T.

Initiative Petition

The Elections Division received a certified ballot title from the
Attorney General on May 31, 2018, for Initiative Petition 2018-044, proposed for the November 6, 2018, General Election.

Caption
Requires firearms be locked during storage/transfer, loss reported, minors' use supervised; imposes penalties/liabilities

Chief Petitioners
Henry Wessinger 1000 SW Vista Ave #1105 Portland, OR 97205
Vincenza Passalacqua 1704 19th St. NW #9 Washington, DC 20009
Paul Kemp 8710 SE 137th Avenue Happy Valley, OR 97086


Appeal Period
Any registered voter, who submitted timely written comments on the draft ballot title and is dissatisfied with the certified ballot title issued by the Attorney General, may petition the Oregon Supreme Court to review the ballot title.


If a registered voter petitions the Supreme Court to review the ballot title,
the voter must notify the Elections Division by completing and filing form
SEL 324 Notice of Ballot Title Challenge. If this notice is not timely filed, the petition to the Supreme Court may be dismissed.


Appeal Due
June 14, 2018


How to Submit Appeal
Refer to Oregon Rules of Appellate Procedure, Rule 11.30 or contact the Oregon Supreme Court for more information at 503.986.5555.


Notice Due
1st business day after appeal filed with Supreme Court, 5 pm


How to Submit Notice
Scan and Email to irrlistnotifier.sos@oregon.gov
Fax to 503.373.7414
Mail to 255 Capitol St NE Ste 501, Salem OR 97310    


More information, including the certified ballot title and the Secretary of State's determination that the proposed initiative petition is in compliance with the procedural requirements established in the Oregon Constitution for initiative petitions, is contained in the IRR Database available at www.oregonvotes.gov.

Note from the Editor: 
Most people may not know that the Committee to Preserve the Second Amendment has been working since 2016 to convince the Douglas County commissioners to enact the SAPO measure, but like most politicians, they were hesitant to take that risk for the people of their county.     

Like many OR county commissioners, they tried to appease their constituents by enacting a symbolic resolution, which was a compromise and did very little to create a legitimate local law that would preserve the Right to Bear Arms. 

​The commissioners had one problem that was moving into their county, and that would be the Southern Regional Coordinator of our group, Mr. Tom McKirgan.  After battling politicians from both parties for three years on this issue, he was going to make sure the commissioners heard his argument, and he was not going to let them off easy.  Tom is a former lawman and full-time patriot.    

Almost upon arriving in Douglas County, Mr. McKirgan constantly reminded the commissioners of their duty to do something more significant in their county.  In March of 2018 when IP43 & IP44 appeared, the commissioners realized they were facing a new threat to the second amendment rights of their county’s residents, so the board decided to hear out the Committee to Preserve the Second Amendment. 
​
Thanks to Mr. Tom McKirgan, the Douglas County BOC will be referring the SAPO to the ballot box in the General Election.  The people of Douglas County owe a debt of appreciation for his diligence.   
Loyal friends are the most indispensable necessity in the fight against tyranny….Rob Taylor

On June 6th and June 20th, the Douglas County Board of Commissioners will hold public hearings on the recently proposed Second Amendment Preservation Ordinance, or SAPO. 
 
It is the same ordinance that has been sweeping Oregon in response to state measures IP-43 which bans “assault-style” firearms, large capacity magazines and requires gun registration with the state police, and IP-44, which requires unacceptable trigger locking mechanisms for storage and transport, effectively making home and self-defense nearly impossible.
 
How do you like the state telling you not to protect yourself, your family, and others with legally owned firearms while turning you into a felon overnight?
 
I am the Southern Oregon Coordinator for the Committee to Preserve the Second Amendment and had the honor to present the SAPO to the Board of Commissioners for their consideration in placing it on the November 2018 ballot. Oregonians are fed up with the continued relentless assaults on our inherent right to keep and bear arms, and we are not taking it sitting down. We are telling the entire state that our county WILL NOT COMPLY with any law that violates the Supreme Law of the Land; the U.S. and Oregon Constitutions.   
 
Any legislation not made in pursuance of the Constitution cannot exist and is invalid from inception.
 
Laws coming out of Salem and Portland are based solely on feel-good emotions, not rights.  When was the last time you heard of criminals obeying gun laws?   The law-abiding will follow these orders, but only to the point of government becoming destructive to their liberty.  
 
There are over 20,000 “common sense” gun laws on the books and not one of them has prevented or will ever prevent a single gun-related death. How will two more liberal gun laws solve the problems they cite? Then there will be three more proposed laws behind them and five more behind those. It will never end until We the People take control of our destiny with the ballot box.
 
Americans cannot callously ignore that too many have lost their tomorrows to preserve our liberty today.  It is now our fundamental responsibility to ensure the same freedoms for our children and beyond just as it was with the founders of this great nation.  The Second Amendment holds the same level of protection as every one of the other nine amendments in the Bill of Rights.  The attacks on it stop here in Douglas, a Second Amendment Sanctuary County.
 
Tom McKirgan
Douglas County

The word “county” is from the Middle English word conte, meaning the office of a count. However, a county within the United States, defined by Merriam-Webster’s dictionary as “the largest territorial division for local government within a state,” is based on the Anglo-Saxon shire, which corresponds to the modern county. Counties were brought to the United States by the English colonists and were established in the central and western parts of the United States by the pioneers as they moved westward.

Early county governments in Oregon were very limited in the services they provided. Their primary responsibilities were forest and farm-to-market roads, law enforcement, courts, care for the needy and tax collections. In response to demands of a growing population and a more complex society, today’s counties provide a wide range of important public services, including, public health, mental health, community corrections, juvenile services, criminal prosecution, hospitals, nursing homes, airports, parks, libraries, land-use planning, building regulations, refuse disposal, elections, air pollution control, veterans services, economic development, urban renewal, public housing, vector control, county fairs, museums, dog control, civil defense and senior services.

Originally, counties functioned almost exclusively as agents of the state government. Their every activity had to be either authorized or mandated by state law. However, in 1958, an amendment to the Oregon Constitution authorized counties to adopt “home rule” charters, and a 1973 state law granted all counties power to exercise broad “home rule” authority. As a result, the national Advisory Commission on Intergovernmental Relations has identified county government in Oregon as having the highest degree of local discretionary authority of any state in the nation.
Nine counties have adopted “home rule” charters, wherein voters have the power to adopt and amend their own county government organization. Lane and Washington were the first to adopt “home rule” in 1962, followed by Hood River (1964), Multnomah (1967), Benton (1972), Jackson (1978), Josephine (1980), Clatsop (1988) and Umatilla (1993).

Twenty-eight of Oregon’s 36 counties, including the nine with charters, are governed by a board of commissioners comprised of three to five elected members. The remaining eight less populated counties are governed by a “county court” consisting of a county judge and two commissioners.

Oregonians for Fair Elections has put forward a petition for the ballot in 2018. Rep Mike Nearman and Attorney James L. Buchal are the Chief Petitioners.

 The petition requires every voter in Oregon to prove citizenship. We think this is necessary because our laws have so many loopholes in them. There are non-citizens on the voter rolls.


Our website is www.oregoniansforfairelections.com There, any Oregonian can print, sign and mail the single singer petition to require all voters prove citizenship. I also attached our single signer page and the text of the petition language. 
The petition text gives all the ways a person can prove they are a citizen for purposes of this petition.
We also have another URL that goes to the same website: www.ORfive.com .

Here are the reasons we need Petition #5.
Oregon Voter paper application SEL 500 allows a person to register without any ID.

First, I want to remind everyone that it is a federal crime to lie on a registration form. The punishment is 5 years in prison and $125,000 fine.
Even so, Anyone can register to vote using a paper SEL500 registration card. You must attest that you are a citizen. Your word is good enough. You can skip the driver ID, the social security last 4 numbers or any other id. Oregon Revised Statutes (ORS) state that if you only provide your name, address, date of birth and signature you will still be registered. We ask the question: How do you know the information is accurate if you don’t ask for proof? 

247.012 "(4)(a) Except as provided in ORS 247.125, if a registration card is legible, accurate and contains, at a minimum, the registrant’s name, residence address, date of birth and signature, the county clerk shall register the person.”

Non-HAVA voters are voters who have not met the federal qualification for ID. They can not vote on a federal race. Oregon has over 10,000 non-HAVA voters (Active and Inactive, Inactive voters can update their registration address as late as election day and still vote). 

Federal Voter Postcard Application allows people all over the world to register in Oregon without any ID.

The federal voter postcard application allows folks around the world to register without producing an ID, let alone proof of citizenship. To register the applicant only need to attest that they are a US Citizen and pick an Oregon residential address for registration (That puts you in a specific precinct for voting purposes). No one will check if you ever lived there. We asked the elections office and they do not check. In Oregon, you can pick any street corner as your residential address. A homeless shelter will work, even if it is out of business. You only need a working mailing address, anywhere in the world, to successfully register and get an Oregon ballot.

Federal Voter Postcard Application (FVAP) says you need some ID. But if you read the instructions it says you can just say you don't have the documents and you will be registered anyway.

“FVAP Application Section 1
"You must provide a State issued ID number. If you do not have a State issued ID number, provide the last four digits of your Social Security Number. If you do not have either of these numbers, you must enter in Section 6: "I do not have a State issued ID or Social Security Number". 

From Anywhere in the world, anyone will get an Oregon ballot as long as they have a working mailing address and say they are a US citizen. Who will put you in jail if you lie about being a US Citizen when you are located outside the US? NO ONE. The worst that happens is you are taken off the voter rolls.
Here are the instructions: https://www.fvap.gov/guide/chapter2/oregon#fpca
Here is the FVAP application: https://www.fvap.gov/uploads/FVAP/Forms/fpca.pdf


New in 2018. DACA and TPS get Driver Licenses, Oregon ID, and permits without verification of their documents or proving legal presence.
Measure 88 was a referendum over a law passed that gave driver cards, permits and licenses to illegal aliens in 2014, but was defeated by 66% of the vote. Still, the DMV administrative rules set up rules to allow DACA and TPS enrollees to get Oregon ID,  Licenses and Permits. 

The Real ID bill was passed in 2017 to meet the federal requirements of the DHS for air travel. This legislative session, HB4111 was submitted to meet funding requirements that surfaced over the implementation of the Real ID bill.

Subsequently, HB4111 was hijacked with an amendment that made the DACA and TPS enrollees rules set by DMV administrative rules part of the Oregon Revised Statutes. This amended bill passed the Legislature through contorted means but ended up passing.

HB4111 stipulated that DACA and TPS enrollees do not have to prove legal presence and that their documentation could NOT be verified by DMV. 

“SECTION 3. (1) Notwithstanding ORS 807.021 and 807.730, a person is not required to
provide proof of legal presence in the United States when applying for a limited term identification card, a limited term driver license or a limited term driver permit…”

“(2) Notwithstanding ORS 807.022, the department may not verify the documents described in this section.”

JURY DUTY RECORDS SHOW THAT NON-CITIZENS ARE GETTING ON OUR VOTER ROLLS
Our records request after the Automatic Voter Registration passed, found there are still non-citizens getting on the voter rolls. They were caught when they self-admitted they were not citizens when they answered jury duty call. This records request shows that some non-citizens are slipping through the cracks and corrupting our voter rolls. 

Oregon needs to make sure all voters are citizens. Please help us gather the 117, 578 signatures before July 2018 to get this on the ballot. It is simple to do. Go to our website: http://www.oregoniansforfairelections.com Print, sign, and mail the single signer sheet. Then share it with your friends and family.

Blessings,
Janice Dysinger
President
Oregonians for Fair Elections
503 757 0670

Initiative Petition

To:              All Interested Parties
From:          Lydia Plukchi, Compliance Specialist
Date:           March 22, 2018
Subject:        Initiative Petition 2018-043
On March 22, 2018, the Elections Division received Initiative Petition 2018-043, proposed for the November 6, 2018, General Election. Petition 2018-043 was filed with updated text as a replacement for withdrawn petition 2018-042.
Subject Provided by Chief Petitioners

Promote Public Safety for All Through the Reduction of Assault Weapons and Large Capacity Magazines

Chief Petitioners
Walter John Knutson
4526 NE 27th Ave Portland, OR 97211

Michael Z. Cahana
3139 SW Fairmount Blvd Portland, OR 97239

Alcena E. Boozer
5256 NE 48th Ave Portland, OR 97218

To begin the ballot title drafting process, chief petitioners must submit 1,000 sponsorship signatures. If submitted, the Elections Division will process sponsorship signatures in accordance with the Statistical Sampling Procedures for State Petitions adopted under administrative rule OAR 165-014-0030.

More information, including the text of the petition, is contained in the IRR Database available at http://egov.sos.state.or.us/elec/web_irr_search.search_form. ​

______________ ACTION ALERT _____________
 Click Tittle to view Bill
2018R1 HB 4145

Public Hearing   
2/7/2018 1:00 PM, HR 50

Please send Testimony to the
  House Committee On Judiciary

Join the Oregon Citizens Lobby for Limited Government:
http://oregoncitizenslobby.org/

Email: Email:  hjud.exhibits@oregonlegislature.gov
This bill expands the number of people who are prohibited from possessing firearms and ammunition, adds reporting requirements on OR Dept of State Police (OSP), adds reporting requirements on the attorneys' offices and other law enforcement agencies receiving the additional reporting from OSP.

Personal Choice and Responsibility
Expands the list of prohibited persons under ORS 166.255 from those who have had a hearing to now include those who were served but did not request a hearing, expands the number of people who can be the target from 'intimate partner' to 'household member' which includes Spouses, Former spouses, Adult persons related by blood or marriage, Persons cohabiting with each other, Persons who have cohabited with each other or who have been involved in a sexually intimate relationship, Unmarried parents of a minor child.

Fiscal Responsibility
The reporting requirements on OR Dept of State Police including notifying attorneys' offices and other law enforcement agencies and publishing written reports, will require increased expenditure. If these measures were effective in making it impossible for prohibited persons to be armed, the expense might be justified. But law enforcement cautions against overconfidence that making something illegal makes it impossible: felons are found to be illegally in possession of weapons all the time. So while well-intentioned, the additional expenditure here is unlikely to be justified.

Limited Government
The reporting requirements on OR Dept of State Police including notifying attorneys' offices and other law enforcement agencies and publishing written reports, will require increase in staff to perform. This bill contains a 24-hour deadline to perform the additional reporting.
______________________
https://olis.leg.state.or.us/liz/2018R1/Downloads/MeasureDocument/HB4145/

Related Posts:
OFF ~ The Oregon Firearms Federation urges a "NO" vote on Measure 101
Oregon Firearms Federation ~ Protect Your Rights For Free!
OFF ~ NRA CAVES AGAIN ~ 719 REPEAL EFFORT FALLS SHORT
Information on Several Petitions Currently in Circulation in the State of Oregon
OFF ~ The Gun Confiscation Battle Begins
Teri Grier ~ Bill Post ~ Mike Nearman ~ File Referendum on SB719 Gun Confiscation
The Differences Between SB719A & Connecticut's Gun Confiscation Law
LTE ~ SB719 Into the Oven, Out of the Stack
Oregon Firearms Federation Responds to Senator Brian Boquist on SB 719
OFF Late Session Omnibus Anti-Gun Bill Introduced
Senator Arnie Roblan Votes for SB917A The Gun Confiscation Bill ~ Now in House
OFF ~ CALL TO ACTION ~ Contact Senator Prozanski ~ Time to Fix SB941 
OFF ~ Bad Idea Becomes Bad Bill SB 868

New Oregon Laws for 2018 ~ Oregon lawmakers passed nearly 750 bills during their session this year.
 
PUBLIC RECORDS
Senate Bill 481 aims to increase government transparency. The bill, introduced at the request of Attorney General Ellen Rosenblum, sets deadlines by which public officials must evaluate and respond to the public's requests for government documents.
 
GUN CONFISCATION
Senate Bill 719 will allow Oregon judges to issue so-called "extreme risk protection orders" to take firearms away from people determined to pose an immediate threat to themselves or family members. A judge would make the call whether to issue the order.
 
TRANSPORTATION
Oregon drivers will begin paying a slew of tax increases come January 1 as part of the Legislature's $5.3 billion transportation funding plan.
 
The statewide gas tax will increase 4 cents, to 34 cents.
 
Car registration fees will increase $13 to $43 and title fees go up $16 to $93 for a regular title.  There will be higher fees for registration of trailers, motorcycles, mopeds and heavy trucks. The tax and fee revenue will fund highway and infrastructure upgrades statewide for at least a decade.
 
There is a new increase in the surcharge for Crater Lake license plates, from $10 to $15 per plate.
 
Beginning Jan. 1, Oregon drivers are allowed to black out addresses on their registration card and proof of insurance.
 
People will no longer need to take a driving test to get an endorsement on their license for driving three-wheeled motorcycles, known as “autocycles”.
 
Senate Bill 357, the Legislature reduced the punishment for people caught riding public transportation without paying a fare. The new law ratchets down fare evasion from a Class A to a Class C misdemeanor, but penalties are higher for anyone caught evading fares three times or more.
 
 
VICE LAWS
Oregon will join a handful of states that have increased the tobacco age to 21. The law requires anyone buying tobacco or vape products to be 21-years-old or older and creates stiff penalties for convenience store clerks who sell to the underage.

 
EMPLOYMENT
Starting July 2018, employers will be required to give their employees at least one week notice of their work schedule. The law applies to employers with more than 500 employees. In 2020, the law will increase the time frame to two weeks advanced notice. This law makes Oregon the first state in the country to mandate when employee schedules are released.
 
Employers in the mill, factory or manufacturing industries will be required to pay their employees daily or weekly overtime (whichever is greater) starting Jan. 1. The law also prohibits employees from working more than 55 hours unless they agree to more hours.
 
Employers will be banned from asking employees to falsifying documents in relation to hours worked or compensation received. Any employer that violates this law may face a penalty of up to $1,000. For employees forced to violate this law, they may receive up to $1,000 in damages.
 
Companies may adopt policies limiting the accrual of paid sick leave to 80 hours per year. Companies can also adopt a policy prohibiting employees from taking no more than 40 hours of paid sick leave a year. Employers with 10 or more employees are required to offer 40 hours of paid sick leave annually. Any companies with less than 10 employees must offer up to 40 hours of unpaid sick leave a year.
 

 
CONSERVATION & RECYCLING
Oregon's famous bottle bill, which allows people to turn in empty bottles to redeem a 10 cent deposit, will expand to apply to beverages beyond beer, water and soft drinks. Beginning in 2018, nearly all beverage bottles will require a deposit. That means bottles that contained coffee, tea, hard cider, fruit juice, coconut water, kombucha and other drinks can be redeemed for the deposit.

2015 ORS 254.431¹
Special procedure for ballots challenged due to failure to sign return envelope or nonmatching signature

• Text
  
• 
  
• (1) If a ballot is challenged because it is returned in an unsigned return identification envelope or because the signature of an elector on a return identification envelope does not match the signature in the voter registration record for the elector, the county clerk shall mail to the elector a notice that describes the nature of the challenge. The Secretary of State shall design a standard form to be used in all notifications sent by county clerks under this subsection.
  

(2)(a) In order for the vote of the elector to be counted, the elector must provide evidence sufficient to disprove the challenge not later than the 14th calendar day after the date of the election.
(b) If the elector does not provide evidence sufficient to disprove a challenge alleging that the signature of the elector on a return identification envelope does not match the signature in the voter registration record for the elector by the 14th calendar day after the date of the election, the registration of the elector shall be considered inactive.

(3)(a) The filing officer may not release as a public record any information that could be used to identify an elector whose ballot has been challenged under this section until the eighth calendar day after the date of an election.
(b) Following the seventh calendar day after the date of an election, the filing officer may disclose as a public record under ORS 192.410 (Definitions for ORS 192.410 to 192.505) to 192.505 (Exempt and nonexempt public record to be separated) the following information about each elector whose ballot was challenged under this section:
(A) The name of the elector;
(B) The residence addresses of the elector; and
(C) The reason the elector’s ballot is being challenged.

(4) As used in this section, "filing officer" means:
(a) The Secretary of State, for federal or statewide elections and for elections to the office of state Senator or Representative; or
(b) The county clerk, for county, city or district elections. [2013 c.695 §3; 2014 c.67 §3; 2014 c.112 §3; 2015 c.169 §5]

City Council Meeting
Calendar Date:Monday, November 6, 2017 - 7:00pm
BANDON CITY COUNCIL 
REGULAR MEETING
November 6, 2017, 7:00 P.M.
CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS, 555 HIGHWAY 101, BANDON 97411


AGENDA
1.   CALL TO ORDER - INVOCATION - PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
     Pastor Ron Harris, Pacific Community Church
2.   PUBLIC REQUEST(S)
3.   PRESENTATIONS
3.1 Volunteer of the Month
3.2 Recognition for Bandon being named #2 Safest City in Oregon
3.3 Introduction of New City Staff
4.   HEARINGS
4.1 Marijuana - Recreational
5.  PROCEEDINGS
5.1   ACTION & DISCUSSION
5.1.1 PERS Update
5.2   RESOLUTION
5.2.1 Res 17-09 Establishing a Policy for Serving Alcohol at City Facilities
5.2.2 Res 17-10 Adopting a New Electric Rate Schedule Effective Dec. 1, 2017
5.3   ORDINANCE
5.3.1 Ord #1621 Propose Amendments to BMC Title 9 Drinking in Public Places
5.3.2 Ord #1623 Propose Amendments to BMC Title 16 & 17 Providing for Recreational Marijuana
6.  CONSENT AGENDA
6.1   APPROVAL OF COUNCIL MINUTES
6.1.1 City Council Regular Meeting – October 3, 2017
6.1.2 City Council Study Session – October 3, 2017
6.2   REVIEWING OF COMMISSION & COMMITTEE MINUTES
(These have not necessarily been approved by the commission or committee they belong to)
6.2.1 Planning Commission Meeting –

• August 24, 2017- Work Session

• August 24, 2017 – Regular Meeting

• September 28, 2017 – Regular Meeting

6.2.2 Parks & Recreation Commission

• October 12, 2017- Regular Meeting

6.3   INFORMATION ONLY: DEPARTMENT REPORTS
6.3.1 A/P Report for September 2017
6.3.2 Library Report for September 2017
6.3.3 Public Works Report for October 2017
6.3.4 The Barn Report for September 2017
6.3.5 Planning Department Report for October 2017
6.3.6 Police Department Report for September 2017
6.3.7 Consolidated Municipal Utility Report
6.4   INFORMATION ONLY: OTHER ITEMS
        6.4.1 Appointment to Committees & Commission    

• Parks & Recreation Commission – Christine Hall

7.  PUBLIC COMMENT - The City of Bandon offers this time for citizens to comment on municipal issues not already on the agenda. After the Mayor asks for comments, rise or raise your hand for the Mayor to acknowledge you. Come to the podium and state your name and address. Please be sure to speak into the microphone. Comments should be limited to 3 minutes. Please supply 16 copies of the material brought to the meeting for distribution.
8.  OTHER: COUNCIL/MAYOR/STAFF REMARKS
9.  ADJOURN TO JOINT URBAN RENEWAL AGENCY REGULAR MEETING


JOINT CITY COUNCIL /URBAN RENEWAL AGENCY REGULAR MEETING
1.  CALL TO ORDER
2.  APPROVAL OF JOINT CITY COUNCIL AND U.R. MINUTES
2.1 August 7, 2017 Joint City Council and U.R. Meeting
3.  ADJOURN TO EXECUTIVE SESSION RE: 192.660(2)(e), To conduct deliberations with persons designated to negotiate real property transactions.
4.  ADJOURN EXECUTIVE SESSION
5.  ANY ACTION, IF NECESSARY FROM EXECUTIVE SESSION
5.1 Potential direction to staff regarding real property.
6.  ADJOURN


******************************************************************
Council Chambers is accessible to the disabled. 
For special services contact City Hall 48 hours in advance at
347-2437, Voice ˜ 711 TTR ˜
e-mail: citymanager@cityofbandon.org ˜
web: www.cityofbandon.org ******************************************************************

Supporting Documents
3.2 Recognition for Bandon being Named #2 Safest City in Oregon (55 KB)
3.3 Introduction of New City Staff (47 KB)
4.1 Public Hearing Proposed Amendments to BMC 16 & 17 - Recreation Marijuana (1 MB)
5.1.1 Oregon PERS Update (957 KB)
5.2.1 Resolution # 17-09 Establishing a Policy for Serving Alcohol at City Facilities (99 KB)
5.2.2 Resolution # 17-10 Adopting a New Electric Rate Schedule Effective December 1, 2017 (949 KB)
5.3.1 Ordinance #1621 Propose Amendments to BMC Title 9 Drinking in Public Places (288 KB)
5.3.2 Ordinance #1623 Propose Amendments to BMC Title 16 & 17 - Providing for Recreational Marijuana (226 KB)
6.1.1 City Council Regular Meeting Minutes - October 3, 2017 (244 KB)
6.1.2 City Council Study Session Minutes - October 3, 2017 (94 KB)
6.2.1 Planning Commission Meeting Minutes - August 24, 2017 Work Session (91 KB)
6.2.1 Planning Commission Meeting Minutes - August 24, 2017 Regular Meeting (83 KB)
6.2.1 Planning Commission Meeting Minutes - September 28, 2017 Regular Meeting (194 KB)
6.2.2 Parks and Recreation Commission Meeting Minutes - October 12, 2017 (176 KB)
6.3.1 Accounts Payable Report for September 2017 (366 KB)
6.3.2 Library Report for September 2017 (147 KB)
6.3.3 Public Works Report for October 2017 (35 KB)
6.3.4 The Barn / Community Center Report for September 2017 (348 KB)
6.3.5 Planning Department Report for October 20174 (82 KB)
6.3.6 Police Department Report for September 2017 (161 KB)
6.4.1 Parks and Recreation Commission Appointment - Christine Hall (167 KB)
2.1 Joint City Council and Urban Renewal Meeting Minutes - August 7, 2017 (81 KB)

Remember that the NRA endorsed State Representative Caddy Mckeown and she voted for the Gun Confiscation Bill, SB719, while her opponent, Teri Grier was one of the Chief Petitioners for the referendum of the new law. 
 
Please consider giving a donation to the Oregon Firearms Association.  The founder, Kevin Starret is an unwavering champion of the Right to Keep and Bear Arms.  In addition, please give a huge THANK YOU to Mike Nearman and Bill Post for their effort to destroy a very bad piece of legislation…..Rob T.   

Related Posts:
Information on Several Petitions Currently in Circulation in the State of Oregon
OFF ~ The Gun Confiscation Battle Begins
Teri Grier ~ Bill Post ~ Mike Nearman ~ File Referendum on SB719 Gun Confiscation
The Differences Between SB719A & Connecticut's Gun Confiscation Law
LTE ~ SB719 Into the Oven, Out of the Stack
Oregon Firearms Federation Responds to Senator Brian Boquist on SB 719
OFF Late Session Omnibus Anti-Gun Bill Introduced
Senator Arnie Roblan Votes for SB917A The Gun Confiscation Bill ~ Now in House
OFF ~ CALL TO ACTION ~ Contact Senator Prozanski ~ Time to Fix SB941 
OFF ~ Bad Idea Becomes Bad Bill SB 868
Second Amendment Legislation Repeals Parts of Background Checks HB 2973
OFF ~ Legislative Update
Lake County BOC  Public Meeting for Legal Update on SAPO February 15, 2017 10am
OFF ~ Multnomah Declares War On Gun Owners
Columbia County Voters ~ Download & Sign Second Amendment Petition
Action Alert:  County Commissioners Need to Hear Second Amendment Supporters
Coos County Watchdog Public Meeting on New Initiatives March 3, 2017 @ 6:00 pm
Second Amendment Preservation Ordinance “SAPO” Update: January 26, 2017
Coos County Sheriff Office Fingerprinting Machine Down NO CHL Until Feb 17, 2017
US Department of Justice ~ ATF ~ Firearms Transaction Record
SB548~ Relating to Residency Requirements for Concealed Handgun Licenses
Sheriff Office Fingerprinting Machine Down NO CHL Until January 25, 2017
OFF ~ The Gun Bills Are Coming, and Some Are Just Weird
OFF ~ First Anti-Gun Bill Proposed

Universal Citation: CT Gen Stat § 29-38c (2013)
(a) Upon complaint on oath by any state’s attorney or assistant state’s attorney or by any two police officers, to any judge of the Superior Court, that such state’s attorney or police officers have probable cause to believe that (1) a person poses a risk of imminent personal injury to himself or herself or to other individuals, (2) such person possesses one or more firearms, and (3) such firearm or firearms are within or upon any place, thing or person, such judge may issue a warrant commanding a proper officer to enter into or upon such place or thing, search the same or the person and take into such officer’s custody any and all firearms and ammunition. Such state’s attorney or police officers shall not make such complaint unless such state’s attorney or police officers have conducted an independent investigation and have determined that such probable cause exists and that there is no reasonable alternative available to prevent such person from causing imminent personal injury to himself or herself or to others with such firearm.

(b) A warrant may issue only on affidavit sworn to by the complainant or complainants before the judge and establishing the grounds for issuing the warrant, which affidavit shall be part of the seizure file. In determining whether grounds for the application exist or whether there is probable cause to believe they exist, the judge shall consider: (1) Recent threats or acts of violence by such person directed toward other persons; (2) recent threats or acts of violence by such person directed toward himself or herself; and (3) recent acts of cruelty to animals as provided in subsection (b) of section 53-247 by such person. In evaluating whether such recent threats or acts of violence constitute probable cause to believe that such person poses a risk of imminent personal injury to himself or herself or to others, the judge may consider other factors including, but not limited to (A) the reckless use, display or brandishing of a firearm by such person, (B) a history of the use, attempted use or threatened use of physical force by such person against other persons, (C) prior involuntary confinement of such person in a hospital for persons with psychiatric disabilities, and (D) the illegal use of controlled substances or abuse of alcohol by such person. If the judge is satisfied that the grounds for the application exist or that there is probable cause to believe that they exist, such judge shall issue a warrant naming or describing the person, place or thing to be searched. The warrant shall be directed to any police officer of a regularly organized police department or any state police officer. It shall state the grounds or probable cause for its issuance and it shall command the officer to search within a reasonable time the person, place or thing named for any and all firearms and ammunition. A copy of the warrant shall be given to the person named therein together with a notice informing the person that such person has the right to a hearing under this section and the right to be represented by counsel at such hearing.

(c) The applicant for the warrant shall file a copy of the application for the warrant and all affidavits upon which the warrant is based with the clerk of the court for the geographical area within which the search will be conducted no later than the next business day following the execution of the warrant. Prior to the execution and return of the warrant, the clerk of the court shall not disclose any information pertaining to the application for the warrant or any affidavits upon which the warrant is based. The warrant shall be executed and returned with reasonable promptness consistent with due process of law and shall be accompanied by a written inventory of all firearms and ammunition seized.

(d) Not later than fourteen days after the execution of a warrant under this section, the court for the geographical area where the person named in the warrant resides shall hold a hearing to determine whether the firearm or firearms and any ammunition seized should be returned to the person named in the warrant or should continue to be held by the state.  At such hearing the state shall have the burden of proving all material facts by clear and convincing evidence. If, after such hearing, the court finds by clear and convincing evidence that the person poses a risk of imminent personal injury to himself or herself or to other individuals, the court may order that the firearm or firearms and any ammunition seized pursuant to the warrant issued under subsection (a) of this section continue to be held by the state for a period not to exceed one year, otherwise the court shall order the firearm or firearms and any ammunition seized to be returned to the person named in the warrant. If the court finds that the person poses a risk of imminent personal injury to himself or herself or to other individuals, the court shall give notice to the Department of Mental Health and Addiction Services which may take such action pursuant to chapter 319i as it deems appropriate.

(e) Any person whose firearm or firearms and ammunition have been ordered seized pursuant to subsection (d) of this section, or such person’s legal representative, may transfer such firearm or firearms and ammunition in accordance with the provisions of section 29-33 or other applicable state or federal law, to any person eligible to possess such firearm or firearms and ammunition. Upon notification in writing by such person, or such person’s legal representative, and the transferee, the head of the state agency holding such seized firearm or firearms and ammunition shall within ten days deliver such firearm or firearms and ammunition to the transferee.

(f) For the purposes of this section, “ammunition” means a loaded cartridge, consisting of a primed case, propellant or projectile, designed for use in any firearm.

(P.A. 99-212, S. 18; P.A. 13-3, S. 33.)

History: P.A. 13-3 made provisions re seizure and transfer of firearms applicable to ammunition, added Subsec. (f) defining “ammunition” and made technical changes.

Related Posts:
LTE ~ SB719 Into the Oven, Out of the Stack
Oregon Firearms Federation Responds to Senator Brian Boquist on SB 719
OFF Late Session Omnibus Anti-Gun Bill Introduced
Senator Arnie Roblan Votes for SB917A The Gun Confiscation Bill ~ Now in House
OFF ~ CALL TO ACTION ~ Contact Senator Prozanski ~ Time to Fix SB941 
OFF ~ Bad Idea Becomes Bad Bill SB 868
Second Amendment Legislation Repeals Parts of Background Checks HB 2973
OFF ~ Legislative Update
Lake County BOC  Public Meeting for Legal Update on SAPO February 15, 2017 10am
OFF ~ Multnomah Declares War On Gun Owners
Columbia County Voters ~ Download & Sign Second Amendment Petition
Action Alert:  County Commissioners Need to Hear Second Amendment Supporters
Coos County Watchdog Public Meeting on New Initiatives March 3, 2017 @ 6:00 pm
Second Amendment Preservation Ordinance “SAPO” Update: January 26, 2017
Coos County Sheriff Office Fingerprinting Machine Down NO CHL Until Feb 17, 2017
US Department of Justice ~ ATF ~ Firearms Transaction Record
SB548~ Relating to Residency Requirements for Concealed Handgun Licenses
Sheriff Office Fingerprinting Machine Down NO CHL Until January 25, 2017
OFF ~ The Gun Bills Are Coming, and Some Are Just Weird
OFF ~ First Anti-Gun Bill Proposed

League Testifies on Lodging Tax Bill
The House Revenue Committee, chaired by Representative Phil Barnhart (D-Eugene), held a hearing Thursday on an important lodging tax bill for cities and counties. The League testified in support of HB 2064 with a dash-1 amendment that revises state preemptions on the use of local lodging tax revenues in order to increase flexibility for addressing tourist-related costs.  The flexibility would allow restricted revenues to be used for maintenance of tourist-related facilities as well as the costs of tourism activities, tourist events and festivals, sporting events,
tourist attractions, and beautification projects that enhance tourist attractions, tourism facilities and tourist events.

In addition, the amendment would revise the definition for transient lodging intermediary to ensure all business model types that facilitate the retail sale of rooms or homes are required
to collect lodging taxes as well as file a tax return and pay the taxes. Presently, some entities are not paying the tax or require an agreement with a local government to pay the tax. Another amendment may be necessary to clarify that no double taxation is intended by the revisions.  The intent is that either the transient lodging provider is responsible for the tax, or if an intermediary is used by the provider, that intermediary will be responsible for paying the tax.

The committee’s discussion of the amendment was lengthy and very lively as there is great interest this session in providing local governments more flexibility as long as the changes are narrowly tailored to maintain a nexus to tourism. Oregon’s local lodging tax revenues have more than doubled since the 2003 preemptions went into effect, but increased tourism costs are also hamstringing the budgets of some cities and counties. Public safety costs for tourist events and activities are a particular need that legislators seem receptive to addressing this session.

The League will continue to work with the committee to advance the bill.
Contact: Wendy Johnson, Intergovernmental Relations Associate – wjohnson@orcities.org

Hey Folks,

The Jury Nullification Bill, SB924, died in committee. 

However, we plan to resurrect it next year.  It will be brought back in the short session in 2018. 

Thank you all for the support. 

The Sustainable Energy Ordinance
Violates the Right to Commerce
 
Since the first time cavemen traded bones for beads humans have participated in the most basic ritual of shopping the marketplace commonly referred to as the Right to Commerce.  Preceding any government or religion, the market is an organic element existing because we exist surviving on the unique trait of adaptability, not the artificial illusion of sustainability.        
 
Currently, there is an effort by a group of rabid environmentalist to deny people this right by democratizing trade and allowing voters the power to dictate over who can and cannot buy and sell products to willing consumers.  It is a threat to liberty looming over Coos County in the form of an ordinance titled, Establishing a Community Bill of Rights Providing for a Sustainable Energy Future, or Measure 6-162, which will be on the May ballot in a countywide election.
 
Measure 6-162 is supposed to be the silver bullet that will kill the LNG project in Coos Bay, but the people promoting this tyranny by the majority have stated that their end goal is to eliminate all use of fossil fuels and replace those affordable, dependable energy sources with more costly and unproven experimental alternatives.  The bill will also impose new draconian regulations that will limit growth potential through the hindrance of private ownership to the point of crippling the economy.  In an effort to find fuel smugglers or to detect illegal infractions, the local government will have to establish checkpoints on its borders, stifling traffic and free travel.  The process will make it more difficult and more expensive to heat houses and businesses or simply fill-up a car, effectively closing down the county.   
 
The nihilistic sponsors of the bill have even stated that, “if a town goes bankrupt trying to defend one of our ordinances, well, perhaps that’s exactly what is needed to trigger a national movement,” which shows a cruel indifference towards the very people they claim to be helping.   It also demonstrates the group’s blind faith adherence to a radical ideology even when those beliefs are detrimental to their fellow citizens.   It is the height of irrationality. 
 
The people of Coos have a chance to retain sanity by rejecting the idea that a vote can eliminate a right.  More importantly, its defeat will send a message to the anticapitalistic crowd who may use this same initiative to try to destroy the economy of other Oregon counties.  Oppose the regression of society and Vote NO on Measure 6-162 before the extremists relegate the community back to the Stone Age.
 
About the author:
Rob Taylor is the founder of a virtual network of local activist at CoosCountyWatchdog.com, and a chief petitioner for the Second Amendment Preservation Ordinance. 

05.01.17

On the communist holiday of "May Day" the Oregon Senate passed, on an almost party line vote, the Boquist/Burdick gun grab SB 719A. Senator Betsy Johnson was the only Democrat voting "no."  Boquist was the only Republican voting "yes." The Democrats immediately issued a press release calling the vote "non-partisan." 

Senator Boquist's floor speech revealed a very different interpretation of what "due process" is than what we believe.
 
Under this bill you get an opportunity to prove your innocence only after you have been punished with the confiscation of your property and the elimination of your rights.
 
Boquist claimed that "there is a process" for confiscating legally owned Class III items under this bill but neglected to say what it was. When we contacted ATF several weeks ago they said they knew of no such process and one Police Chief told us he had no idea how this could be done legally.
 
We want to thank Senators Kim Thatcher, Dennis Linthicum and Alan Olsen for their testimony in opposition to this dangerous bill. We also want to thank Senators Girod and Kruse who, along with Thatcher, Linthicum, and Olsen approved and distributed a floor letter OFF wrote in opposition.
 
The bill now moves to the House where will do all we can to derail it. It's not clear at this point what committee it will be assigned to so please contact all Oregon House members to express your opposition to this assault on your rights.

TAKE ACTION HERE.