Kain v. Myers (S49090)

Filed: February 28, 2002

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF OREGON

KRIS KAIN
and TRICIA BOSAK,

v.

HARDY MYERS,
Attorney General,
State of Oregon,

(SC S49090)

En Banc

On petition to review ballot title.

Submitted on the record December 28, 2001.

Margaret S. Olney, Smith, Gamson, Diamond & Olney, Portland, filed the petition for petitioners.

Erika L. Hadlock, Assistant Attorney General, Salem, filed the answering memorandum for respondent. With her on the answering memorandum were Hardy Myers, Attorney General, and Michael D. Reynolds, Solicitor General.

PER CURIAM

Ballot title referred to the Attorney General for modification.

PER CURIAM

In this ballot title review proceeding, petitioners challenge the caption, the "yes" vote result statement, and the summary of the Attorney General's certified ballot title for a proposed initiative measure, which the Secretary of State has denominated as Initiative Petition 133 (2002). We review the Attorney General's certified ballot title to determine whether it substantially complies with the requirements of ORS 250.035(2). See ORS 250.085(5) (setting out standard of review).

Initiative Petition 133 (2002) is a variation of Initiative Petition 132 (2002). Both proposals would require rewriting and resubmission to the voters of certain judicially-invalidated ballot measures. See Kain/Bosak v. Myers ___ Or ___, ___ P3d ___ (decided this date) (discussing content of Initiative Petition 132 (2002); referring ballot title for initiative petition to Attorney General for modification.) The only substantive difference between the two proposed measures is that Initiative Petition 132 would place the responsibility for rewriting an invalidated measure on the chief petitioner, working in cooperation with the office of legislative counsel, while Initiative Petition 133 would place the responsibility for rewriting an invalidated measure on the legislature. The Attorney General's certified ballot titles for the two proposed measures are very similar. Petitioners' objections to the two ballot titles also are very similar. Most of those objections are well taken, as the Attorney General concedes. We refer the ballot title to the Attorney General for modification consistent with, and for the reasons stated in, Kain/Bosak, supra.

Ballot title referred to the Attorney General for modification.