WHAT’S HAPPENING AT
Indoor Soccer Manager’s Meeting - Monday, October 10th
at 4:00 pm in Multipurpose Room #4 located in the Student
Recreation Center.
Volleyball Managers Meeting - Tuesday, October 11th at 4:00 pm
in the Ulrich Room located in the SRC.
3-on-3 Basketball Manager’s Meeting Wednesday, October 1 2th
at 4:00 pm in the Ulrich Room located in the SRC.
Dr. Pepper 4 on 4 Flag Football Tournament - Friday,
October 14th. Entry deadline is Wednesday, October 12th, pick up an entry
form in the Rec Sports Office located in 102 Esslinger Hall.
This event is free! T- Shirts for all participants plus prizes and giveaways.
18-Hole Golf Scramble (2-person team) - Sunday, October 23r
at Emerald Valley Golf Course. Men's, Women’s and Coed Divisions
offered. The cost is $80 per team. Deadline for entries is Tuesday,
October 18th.
Group Cycling Classes: We still have room! Register for a
non-credit group cycling class in 102 Esslinger Hall.
m
CELEBRATE
INDIGENOUS
SOLIDARITY DAY
Conscious Unity for Our Common Survival
Wilma Mankiller
is an activist, former principal Chief of
the Cherokee Nation. Her books
include Mankiller. A Chief and Her
People, and Every Day Is A Good Day.
She is the Wayne Morse Center Chair
&. visiting scholar.
John Trudell
is an acclaimed activist, spoken word
poet, musician, film actor, co-founder
and former chairman of the American
Indian Movement; author of Stickman,
composer of Bone Days.
Monday, October 10, 2005
University of Oregon
EMU Amphitheater: EMU Ballroom:
10 a.m. - 12 noon: Music and Art
3 p.m. - 5:30 p.m.: Community Speakers
5:30 p.m. - Poetry by John Trudell
7:00 p.m. - 8:30 p.m.
Public leadership conversation between
John Trudell and Wilma Mankill^
All events presented by the Native American Student Union,
Wayne Morse Center for Law & Politics, Ethnic Studies
and the Multicultural Center
nRFfiON DAILY EMERALD
your independent student newspaper
Nicole Barker | Senior photographer
Oregon attorneys Susan Marmaduke, left, Ross Day, center, and Carrie McLaren discuss
the lawsuits related to Measure 37 at Friday’s symposium by the Journal of Environmental
Law and Litigation at the Knight Law Center.
Opposing groups
gather to debate
on Measure 37
Oregonians in Action and 1000 Friends of Oregon
met Friday to discuss the future of the law
BY CHRIS HAGAN
NEWS REPORTER
Foes in the battle over Oregon’s
controversial Measure 37 met in a
symposium at Knight Law Center
Friday. Much of the debate focused
on ambiguities of the law, such as
what is a valid claim, which govern
ment bodies have the right to give
waivers and whether Measure 37
rights are transferable or not.
Oregon voters approved Measure
37 last November, and the law went
into effect last December. The law al
lows property owners who file claims
to receive compensation when new
land-use laws restrict how they can
develop their land. Governments can
either pay the owners or waive the
new law, allowing owners to use
their property as the law allowed at
the time of acquisition.
“For government, we didn’t know
what the measure meant in terms of
what does it really take to have a
Measure 37 claim,” Eugene City At
torney Glenn Klein said.
Klein noted that the lack of a leg
islative answer this summer means
the city is “going to spend an awful
lot of money litigating over what the
measure means.”
Bill Moshofsky, vice president for
government affairs for Oregonians in
Action, the group that authored Mea
sure 37, said that while officials in the
Oregon ballot measure process en
couraged his group to craft a more
compact and readable measure, the
law is acceptable as written.
“We believe the measure is clear
enough to point the way in almost
every direction in order to carry it
out,” he said.
Moshofsky said the law’s critics
have exaggerated its ambiguities.
The Oregon Legislature attempt
ed to rewrite and clarify parts of the
law and the claims process in its
session this summer but was unable
to reach a compromise. Oral argu
ments were held in Marion County
on Sept. 13 in a lawsuit by 1000
Friends of Oregon that challenged
the constitutionality of the law.
Panelists and speakers at the
symposium discussed the effect
the law will have on land-use plan
ning. Many panelists are concerned
that cities would be less likely
to change land-use policy because
of possible Measure 37 claims and
the uncertainty about how they will
be handled.
“A new land-use law creates a
city full of claimants,” Klein said.
Carrie Richter of the law firm
Garvey Schubert Barer said she is
concerned that governments will be
paralyzed into inaction because of
the law.
“What I fear is the lack of plan
ning and the fear that will result
from Measure 37 and its ilk as it
evolves,” Richter said.
Others see Measure 37 as a deter
rent to land-use policies that have
already gone too far.
“To the extent that Measure 37 in
hibits some of that, more power to
it,” Moshofsky said. “Measure 37
provides a much-needed balance. ”
The future of the law is currently
up in the air, and while members of
Oregonians in Action are confident
they will win the constitutional
challenges, Carrie McClaren of 1000
Friends of Oregon believes the law
will eventually have to change.
“I don’t think, as written, the law
will be the same in 15-20 years,”
McClaren said.
While most of the proceedings
centered on the legal issues sur
rounding the law, the political flavor
of the debate was not lost.
The issue of whether or not Ore
gon voters understood the measure
when they approved it was brought
up frequently, and a discussion on
the death of the rewrite in the legis
lature offered the opportunity for
each side to point to the other as the
cause of the meltdown.
“I think most of the issues are po
litical issues disguised as legal is
sues,” Oregonians in Action Direc
tor of Legal Affairs Ross Day said
after the symposium.
Despite the strong feelings, the
symposium was more an academic
debate than an emotional confronta
tion; the panelists traded opinions on
different facets of the law instead of
shouting each other down.
The possible tension was made
light of in a panel on Measure 37 lit
igation. McClaren skipped a part of
her presentation and said if it hap
pened again to “just kick me.” The
crowd broke into laughter and Day
offered his assurance that he and
McClaren were friends and that he
wouldn’t “kick her now.”
“Just because we disagree with
each other doesn’t mean we want to
slit each other’s throats,” Day said
after the panel. “We can disagree
without being disagreeable.”
The symposium was sponsored
by the School of Law’s Journal of
Environmental Law and Litigation.
Contact the city, state politics reporter
at chagan@dailyemerald.com