Malheur Enterprise | May 31, 2023
SALEM – Democratic leaders in the Legislature have announced they’d allocate $110 million to confront Oregon’s drought and water security issues for the next two years.
It’s less than half of what the budget’s authors, Reps. Ken Helm, D-Beaverton, and Mark Owens, R-Crane, had initially proposed in March. The two wanted $250 million for at least 25 proposals that would tackle dwindling groundwater supplies for agriculture, address drinking water contamination and ensure the health of critical fish and other aquatic species around the state.
The bipartisan duo are chair and vice chair of the House Committee On Agriculture, Land Use, Natural Resources, and Water. Helm told the Capital Chronicle $110 million is about one-third of what the state actually needs to spend on drought and water issues in the next biennium to address water emergencies and prepare for the future.
“What we really need is a fund that stretches from beyond the current biennium and bridges multiple, with a funding stream that is relatively safe,” Helm said.
The announcement of state funding for drought and water issues arrived just a day before Gov. Tina Kotek’s seventh and eighth emergency drought declarations of the year. On Friday, Kotek added Lake and Sherman counties in southern and central Oregon to a list that includes Crook, Deschutes, Grant, Harney, Jefferson and Wasco counties. Such declarations unlock additional financial and technical resources from state agencies for local water systems and for industrial and agricultural water users. Oregon has been in a “megadrought” since 2000, the state’s longest drought in 1,200 years, according to the Oregon Water Resources Department.
If approved, the $110 million investment would cover at least nine proposals to assist in local water planning strategies, fund Oregon State University to offer technical assistance to farmers to use water more efficiently and pay for studies and planning to store water in underground aquifers, according to a news release from House Speaker Dan Rayfield, D-Corvallis and Senate President Rob Wagner, D-Lake Oswego.
Many of the investments are targeted at projects where state funds can be used to bring in matching federal dollars from the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act passed by Congress in 2021.
Owens’ water policy adviser, Harmony Burright, said specifics about what all the $110 million would fund are with the Democratic leaders.
“They’re working on rolling out the details of the package,” Burright said. “Unfortunately our office likely won’t have it in advance of what is shared publicly.”
In a news release, Owens said the investment was a “critical down payment” from the state to help communities adapt to a future of increasing water scarcity.
“We live in a water-constrained environment and the water-related challenges we face will only get more intense,” he said.
For Immediate Release
December 2, 2021
Representative Owens announces he will seek re-election to House District 60 in 2022
CRANE—Representative Mark Owens (R-Crane) announced today he will seek re-election to Oregon’s House District 60 in 2022. House District 60 encompasses all of Baker, Grant, Harney and Malheur counties and a majority of Lake County.
“My priorities are to be the voice of my constituents and to build relationships with my colleagues so we can get good work done for all Oregonians. We deserve to have a voice at the table and to be heard, and I am going to make sure that happens,” said Rep Owens. “There’s more work to be done to make sure eastern Oregon does not get left out, left behind, or overruled by the supermajority powers-that-be in Salem.”
During the 2021 legislative session, Rep. Owens served as Vice-Chair of the House Committee on Water, and on the House Education, Energy and Environment, and Human Services Committees.
“We need to create opportunities for our small businesses to thrive, implement smarter ag and natural resource policies, prioritize our kids’ future by expanding educational choice, and invest our state’s financial resources more wisely and effectively so we aren’t raising taxes on hardworking Oregonians every turn of the dime.”
Rep Owens, an alfalfa farmer, small business owners and former Harney County Commissioner, was appointed to the House seat in January 2020 and was sworn in three days before the February short legislative session. He was elected to the position in November 2020.
For more information, Oregonians are encouraged to visit markowensfororegon.com.
I support the current social distancing measures in the effort to slow and eventually stop the spread of the Coronavirus. We must pay special attention to our senior, disabled, and vulnerable members of our communities to ensure their safety, as well as the safety of all Oregonians.
With that being said, I support these measures for short-term use for which they are intended for the next several weeks. We cannot continue these types of restrictions for the long run if we hope to avoid a full-blown depression in Oregon. Our small businesses and those that are currently out of work must be helped in any way we can.
The best way to end these restrictions is to abide by them. If we each, right now, take responsibility for our role in stopping the spread and practicing the necessary social distancing behaviors, soon the disease will have faded, and we can get back to work.
The question has been posed by several of my constituents about whether Governor Brown has the authority to issue an Executive Order mandating that Oregon residents “shelter-in-place” and stay home. I had my staff reach out to the Legislative Counsel, a group of attorneys who work for the Oregon Legislature, to get an opinion on where the Governor’s authority is outlined in the Oregon statutes. Below is the response we received from the Legislative Counsel:
“On March 8, 2020, the Governor declared a statewide state of emergency pursuant to ORS 401.165. A copy of the executive order declaring the state of emergency can be found here. The declaration provides the Governor with additional powers which, in pertinent part, can be found in ORS 401.168, 401.175 and 401.188. The powers described in these statutes are quite broad. For example, ORS 401.168 (1) states that during a state of emergency, the Governor has “the right to exercise…all police powers vested in the state by the Oregon Constitution in order to effectuate the purposes of this chapter.” ORS 401.188 authorizes the Governor to “[p]rescribe and direct activities in connection with use, conservation, salvage and prevention of waste of materials, services and facilities, including, but not limited to, production, transportation, power and communication facilities training, and supply of labor, utilization of industrial plants, health and medical care, nutrition, housing, rehabilitation, education, welfare, child care, recreation, consumer protection and other essential civil needs.”
In addition, ORS 433.441 (4) authorizes the Governor, after declaring a state of emergency, to take any action authorized during a state of public health emergency (ORS 433.441 to 433.452), which includes the power to “[c]lose, order the evacuation of or the decontamination of any facility the Governor has reasonable cause to believe may endanger the public health,” “[r]egulate or restrict by any means necessary the use, sale or distribution of food, fuel, medical supplies, medicines or other goods and services,” and “[t]ake any other action that may be necessary for the management of resources, or to protect the public during a public health emergency.” See ORS 433.441 (3)(a), (b) and (f).
On March 12, 2020, the Governor issued an executive order prohibiting gatherings of 250 or more persons (copy of the order here), and on March 16, 2020, the Governor issued an executive order further restricting gatherings to under 25 persons and prohibiting dine-in food service (copy of the order here). Your constituent has asked how this executive order can have the force of law with a criminal penalty. ORS 401.192 (1) provides that “[a]ll rules and orders issued under authority conferred by ORS 401.165 to 401.236 shall have the full force and effect of law both during and after the declaration of a state of emergency.” The penalty for violating a state of emergency executive order is described in ORS 401.990, which states that “[a]ny person knowingly violating any provision of this chapter, or any of the rules, regulations or orders adopted and promulgated under this chapter, shall, upon conviction thereof, be guilty of a Class C misdemeanor.”
Although the Governor cited ORS 433.441 as one of the statutes authorizing her executive orders, which would not be included in the reference to ORS 401.165 to 401.236 in ORS 401.192, or the reference to chapter 401 in ORS 401.990, we think a court would find that the broad powers described in ORS 401.165 to 401.236 also authorize these executive orders. The orders therefore have the force of law and are subject to the penalties described in ORS 401.990. We also should note that we are in somewhat unchartered territory here, since the current circumstances in this state are quite unusual, there is no case law on any of these statutes and it is unclear if they have ever been challenged.
Finally, a Class C misdemeanor is in fact a crime since a jail sentence may be imposed. See ORS 161.515. A Class C misdemeanor carries a maximum penalty of 30 days’ jail and a $1,250 fine. See ORS 161.615 and 161.635.”
If you have specific questions about your business, the Executive Orders, or anything regarding these measures, please contact my office so that we can help find you answers. My office can be reached at 541-889-8866 or via email.
I ask again that we each do our part to slow the spread of this virus. Stay home, stay healthy and be safe.
ONTARIO — With Democrats and Republicans at loggerheads over Senate Bill 1530, the cap and trade bill to reduce greenhouse gases, the Oregon Legislature’s short session ground to a halt Thursday afternoon as Republicans continued to deny both houses a quorum.
As the Senate neared a vote on the bill, Senate Republicans — with the exception of one — walked out to prevent the vote, followed by the House Republicans.
Democratic leaders hounded the Republicans for “not showing up for work,” with Senate President Peter Courtney calling the walkout “anarchy,” and saying if they are not going to serve, they should not run.
Republicans offered to return Sunday to help pass bills of their choosing, mainly budget bills, to conclude the session. However, Courtney and House Speaker Tina Kotek rejected that, with Kotek saying that all bills passed out of committee deserved to be voted on.
“This session is over,” Courtney said, as he adjourned Thursday’s afternoon session, saying the Senate will reconvene at the “call of the chair.”
“This session is functionally over,” Kotek said, as she adjourned the House, adding the House would reconvene at 11:59 p.m. Sunday, the scheduled time for adjournment for the short session.
‘Tactics used on our side are not long-term strategies’
“I am shocked at the Speaker’s decision to end the session prematurely, said House Republican Leader Christine Drazan, in statement. “We still had time to pass necessary funding, time to address the needs of Oregonians across the state, but Democratic leaders chose to sacrifice these budget bills and shared priorities in the name of their no-compromise approach to cap-and-trade.”
District 60 Rep. Mark Owens, along with Drazan, and their Republican colleagues decided to join the Senate GOP in a walkout on Feb. 25 over the cap and trade initiative. Both State Representatives and Senators expressed a hope to get back to the session before it adjourned, however wanted Democrats — the supermajority — to refer the carbon reduction bill to voters. But that promise never came.
“I am very disappointed in the outcome of the short session,” Owens said in a phone interview this morning. “The Democrats took one bill and made all Oregonians lose in pushing that forward.”
The session was always about one bill for the supermajority he said, but there were several budgetary items to be addressed. The hope was to get back in the Capital on the final day of session on Sunday.
“We were willing to come in but once again, they decided to hold Oregon hostage and all of Oregon will suffer as a result of that action,” Owens said.
“Gov. [Kate] Brown made it evident yesterday that she plans to take executive action to combat her climate change crisis,” he said, adding that while she has the authority to take such action, he didn’t know how implementable it was.
The partisan politics struck a chord with Owens this session, increasing his desire to focus on them.
“My strong desire is to rebuild relationships,” he said. “The tactics used on our side are not long-term strategies with which to govern Oregon. We have to make sure our constituent base knows that the walkout is a very serious position. I hope never to have to do it again.”
District 30 State Sen. Lynn Findley defended the Senate Republicans, saying he has been working, not just at the Capital, keeping in contact with his constituents.
“About 90 percent of e-mails I have received are in support of what the Republicans are doing,” he said.
Thursday, before the Legislature was adjourned, Findley said he was hopeful the Legislature would back into session on Sunday.
Republicans lobbied to have a bill put on the ballot for a vote of the people, but that was also rejected by the majority Democrats.
The House Rules Committee met Thursday afternoon to hear from Republicans who had been subpoenaed to explain their absences. When no Republican lawmaker showed up the committee adjourned after hearing from legislative council.
Owens said the Democrats are planning a “three-prong approach” to keep a walkout from being effective again: They will refer the matter to Oregon voters to change the constitution reducing the two-thirds needed to pass bills to a simple majority; they will change the terminology so that in a long session only days when a quorum is present count as a session day so that no party can “run the clock out”; and, Owens said, the other approach will be to assess fines on any lawmakers that have unexcused absences, with a certain number of those absences leading to a lawmaker’s release from office.
The Senate Rules Committee approved Senate Joint Resolution 201 which would end the two-thirds majority requirement for a quorum in either house and go to a simple majority with an amendment to the Oregon Constitution, which would require a vote of the people.
Oregon is only one of our states that requires a two-thirds majority of lawmakers to be present for a quorum, according to comments made the during the committees ‘ work session by Senate Majority Leader Ginny Burdick, who chairs the committee.
Courtney and Kotek said they will convene a meeting the Emergency Board to deal major budget items such as flood relief for Umatilla County.
NRA-ILA Oregon | February 28, 2020
A group of pro-Second Amendment lawmakers have taken the step of refusing to attend floor sessions. Their action prevents a chamber of the Oregon Legislature from reaching a quorum and stops House Bill 4005A and other bills from advancing.
If your state Representative appears in the list below, please take the time to thank them for taking a stand in defense of your Second Amendment rights.
District 1: Rep. David Brock Smith
District 2: Rep. Gary Leif
District 3: Rep. Carl Wilson
District 4: Rep. Duane Stark
District 6: Rep. Kim Wallan
District 7: Rep. Cedric Hayden
District 15: Rep. Shelly Boshart Davis
District 17: Rep. Sherrie Sprenger
District 18: Rep. Rick Lewis
District 19: Rep. Raquel Moore-Green
District 23: Rep. Mike Nearman
District 24: Rep. Ron Noble
District 25: Rep. Bill Post
District 39: Rep. Christine Drazan
District 53: Rep. Jack Zika
District 55: Rep. Vikki Breese-Iverson
District 56: Rep. E. Werner Reschke
District 57: Rep. Greg Smith
District 58: Rep. Greg Barreto
District 59: Rep. Daniel Bonham
District 60: Rep. Mark Owens
House Bill 4005A is a firearm storage bill that mandates the same egregious provisions from SB 978, which failed to pass last year. HB 4005A requires all firearms to be locked with a trigger-locking device or kept in a locked container, unless carried, with each firearm not secured constituting a separate violation. Anyone who has their firearms lost or stolen would be strictly liable for any injury to persons or property if the firearms were not stored in compliance with the law. Gun safety and storage is a matter of personal responsibility and every person’s situation is different. It is unreasonable for the law to impose a one-size-fits-all solution. In short, this measure invades people’s homes and forces them to render their firearms useless for self-defense or become criminals.