Oregon Public Land Timber to be Processed in State, Measure 2 (June 1989)

From Ballotpedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Voting on
Business Regulation
Business regulation.jpg
Ballot Measures
By state
By year
Not on ballot
Oregon Constitution
Flag of Oregon.png
Articles
PreambleIIIIIIIVVVIVIIVIIIIXXX-AXIXI-AXI-BXI-CXI-DXI-EXI-F(1)XI-F(2)XI-GXI-HXI-I(1)XI-I(2)XI-JXI-KXI-LXI-MXI-NXI-OXI-PXIIXIIIXIVXVXVIXVIIXVIII

The Oregon Public Land Timber to be Processed in State Amendment, also known as Measure 2, was on the June 27, 1989 ballot in Oregon as a legislatively-referred constitutional amendment, where it was approved. The measure prohibited the sale or export of timber from state-owned lands unless that timber is processed in Oregon.[1]

Election results

Oregon Measure 2 (June 1989)
ResultVotesPercentage
Approveda Yes 446,151 90.18%
No48,5589.82%

Election results via: Oregon Blue Book

Text of measure

The language appeared on the ballot as:[1]

This text is quoted verbatim from the original source. Any inconsistencies are attributed to the original source.

2. PROHIBITS SELLING/EXPORTING TIMBER FROM STATE LANDS UNLESS OREGON PROCESSED
QUESTION: Shall Oregon Constitution be amended to prohibit sale or export of timber from state lands unless processed in Oregon?

EXPLANATION: Legislative referral. Amends Oregon Constitution, Article VIII, by adding new language. Prohibits State Land Board from authorizing sale or export of timber from state-owned lands unless that timber is processed in Oregon. Prohibits Legislative Assembly from authorizing timber sale or export from other state lands not under State Land Board jurisdiction notwithstanding prior agreements or statutes unless processed in Oregon. Permits exception for timber declared surplus. This measure effective when Congress, a court, or Oregon’s Attorney General affirms state’s right to exercise authority.

ESTIMATE OF FINANCIAL EFFECT: In the 1988 calendar year, sales from state managed timber land generated $12.5 million for the Common School Fund, $10.9 million to help fund the State Department of Forestry, and $18.3 million for local governments. Should an export ban be effectively enforced, these revenue flows could be reduced. This is due to an apparent price premium on currently high grade exportable logs. Recently, though, this price premium has been narrowing due to tight timber supplies. Increased jobs that result from retaining the logs for processing within the state could offset the revenue loss.

The amount of revenue affected is unknown because it is difficult with confidence to separate the “exportability” price component from other market forces acting on the price of logs. Further, it is unknown to what extent processing the logs within the state will result in offsetting the potential revenue lost due to lower prices.

YES □

NO □

Support

Supporters

Officials

  • Governor Neil Goldschmidt (D)[1]
  • Secretary of State Barbara Roberts (D)
  • Treasurer Anthony Meeker (R)
  • State Senator Bill Bradbury (D)
  • State Representative Ray Baum (R)
  • State Representative Bill Dwyer (D)

Organizations

  • Citizens to Save Oregon Jobs[1]
  • Oregon Federation of Teachers
  • Sierra Club, Oregon Chapter
  • Oregon League of Conservation Voters
  • Eugene Area Chamber of Commerce
  • International Workers’ Association 3-246
  • North West Timber Association
  • Southern Oregon Timber Association
  • Siuslaw Timber Operators
  • Western Forest Industries Association
  • Douglas Timber Operators
  • Ochoco Lumber Company
  • Daniel L. Gold Inc. Consulting Economists
  • Astoria Plywood Corporation

Opposition

Opponents

  • Association of Oregon Stevedores[1]
  • Pacific Rim Trade Association
  • Portland Steamship Operators Association, Inc.
  • International Longshoreman’s & Warehousemen’s Union
  • Caffall Brothers Forest Products
  • Menasha Corporation

See also

BallotpediaAvatar bigger.png
Suggest a link

External links

References