FRIDAY, MARCH 13, 2015
THE BAKER COUNTY PRESS — 5
Local
Transfer of public lands
Continued from Page 1
House Bill 3444,
co-sponsored by Repre-
sentatives Jim Weidner,
Jodi Hack and Bill Post,
“Requires United States to
extinguish title to public
lands and transfer title to
public lands to state on or
before December 13, 2018.
Directs Department of
State Lands to study issues
related to land transfer
required by Act and to
report on study to Legisla-
tive Assembly on or before
February 1, 2017. Sunsets
report requirement on
January 2, 2018.”
On March 2, the bill
received its first reading
and made its way to the
Speaker’s desk.
On March 9, HB 3444
was referred to Rural
Communities, Land Use,
and Water. No committee
meetings have been sched-
uled to date.
Should HB3444 even
receive a hearing given the
frantic pace of the current
legislative session, the bill
likely wouldn’t have the
support on the Democratic
side of the aisle to pass.
Co-sponsor Bill Post
said, “I firmly believe that
it is past time for federally
owned lands to be returned
to our state. Hopefully this
bill will be a step toward
more responsible manage-
ment of our public land.”
State Senator Ted Fer-
rioli issued a document to
complement and support
the three-page bill that is
3444; his statement is titled
Senate Joint Memorial 5.
In the document, Fer-
rioli writes, “That we, the
members of the Seventy-
eighth Legislative As-
sembly, urge the President
and the Congress of the
United States of America
to transfer title to all of
federal public lands within
Oregon’s borders directly
to the State of Oregon; and
be it further Resolved, That
we strongly urge the mem-
bers of Oregon’s congres-
sional delegation to do all
in their power to secure the
passage of legislation that
transfers all public lands
directly to the State of
Oregon; and be it further
Resolved, That a copy of
this resolution shall be
sent to the President of
the United States, to the
Senate Majority Leader, to
the Speaker of the House
of Representatives, to the
United States Secretary of
the Interior, to the United
States Secretary of Agri-
culture, to each member of
the Oregon Congressional
Delegation and to the Gov-
ernors and the presiding
officers of the legislatures
of the 49 other states.”
Ivory claims the Fed-
eral government, includ-
ing the BLM and USFS,
have stopped honoring
the terms of the states’
original enabling acts—the
agreements under which
statehoods were formed,
and that have since been
declared and upheld as
“solemn compacts” by the
U.S. Supreme Court.
Ignoring these enabling
acts, Ivory says, has been
particularly prevalent in
the Western U.S. (See map
on front page.)
Ivory says the Federal
government was always
only intended to act as a
“trustee” to transfer title to
currently controlled prop-
erty at statehood to each
state per their enabling
acts.
“Let those whose lives
and livelihoods depend on
these lands manage them,”
Ivory said.
As recently as the 1990s,
the Supreme Court ruled
unanimously that Congress
did not have the author-
ity to override the states’
original enabling acts.
At one point, several
states east of Colorado
were up to 90% federally
controlled. However, those
states exercised their rights
as states, and reclaimed
their lands and jurisdiction.
In 1976, Congress had
enacted a policy allow-
ing Federal control to
remain over lands they
had not disposed of per the
enabling acts. Along with
that 1976 policy, Congress
implemented Payment in
Lieu of Taxes (PILT), a
promise to compensate the
states for the taxes they
weren’t able to collect on
the lost lands in order to
help local fund education,
road maintenance, and so
on. Some communities
have retained less than
Law enforcement
agreement
Continued from Page 1
Kerry McQuisten / The Baker County Press
Ivory gave a breakdown of the layout and structure
of the Constitution, article by article, regarding
transfer of public lands in Baker City last fall.
10% of local lands as a tax
base.
Ferrioli also points out
these facts in his Joint
Memorial, and therein lies
the crux of the legal argu-
ment between those for
and against the Transfer of
Public Lands.
When faced with the
question as to if local
management of local
lands is affordable or pos-
sible, Ivory cited tables of
statistics showing profi -
ability per acre hundreds of
times higher when under
state control than when
previously under federal
control.
This is where HB3444
comes in—demanding
the transfer of those titles
back.
Ivory states in each
seminar he holds that cur-
rent failed Federal policy
is locking up $150 trillion
in rare earth minerals,
preventing local taxation
to support local schools,
turning natural fires into
catastrophic wildfires
that leave forests with
completely sterilized dirt,
threatening watersheds,
and closing of recreation
and grazing access.
Aided by citations from
court cases, Supreme Court
rulings, and dozens of
miscellaneous documents
penned as far back as the
1700s even prior to the
Revolutionary War, and
statements from the Found-
ing Fathers, Ivory has
established a legal timeline
to support the premise
that a failed federal lands
policy—think the United
States Forest Service, Bu-
reau of Land Management,
etc.—is not only respon-
sible for turning public
lands from “an asset to a
liability,” but is in violation
of the Constitution.
Suzan Ellis Jones, Chair
of the Baker County Re-
publican Party, says that in
2014, a Natural Resources-
focused committee was
formed within the Baker
County Republicans after
Ken Ivory’s seminar.
“We formed a committee
within the group, headed
by Chuck Chase who is a
PCP and also a member of
the Eastern Oregon Mining
Association; that commit-
tee has drafted a resolu-
tion of our own in support
of the Transfer of Public
Lands. When and if we
work the details out in our
resolution to the satisfac-
tion of our general group,
and if that vote passes,
we’d then present it to the
Baker County Board of
Commissioners in hopes
that they will adopt it as
other Oregon counties
have.”
Most recently, Klam-
ath County’s Board of
Commissioners adopted
a similar resolution in
support of the movement,
and other Oregon counties
are reportedly considering
drafting resolutions of their
own. Counties across other
states, such as Montana,
have acted as well.
Those interested in up-
dates on Transfer of Public
Lands in Oregon can visit
www.americanlandscoun-
cil.org/oregon.
“This is a small county and that money could be sig-
nificant. I see it as significant,” Southwick answers when
asked about the significance of the additional $6,500 in a
$1.2 million dollar patrol budget.
“It gives us money we don’t get otherwise for work
we’re doing anyway,” Southwick responded when asked
about the practical advantages to signing such an agree-
ment.
Harvey agrees with Southwick’s assessment of the
practical advantages to the cooperative agreement and
states, “It pays to the County the cost they’re incurring
anyway.”
At the basis of the agreement are the requirements that
Sheriff’s Department personnel advise the USFS of any
suspected criminal activities in connection with activi-
ties on National Forest System lands; for the County
to provide additional deputies during extraordinary
situations; and, for the County to provide the USFS with
case reports and timely information relating to incidents/
crimes in connection with activities on National Forest
System lands.
The cooperative agreement specifies several situa-
tions where “the U.S. Forest Service may request to
provide additional special enforcement activities. During
extraordinary situations such as, but not limited to: fire
emergency, drug enforcement activities, or certain group
gatherings.”
In return for the Sheriff Department’s cooperation,
the USFS agrees to reimburse the Sheriff’s Department
for actual expenses incurred within what has in the past
been the $6,500 limit.
Southwick described several situations where the
County may be called in to assist the USFS law enforce-
ment including traffic control and road closure during
forest fire fighting activities and during group gatherings
where there is a likelihood of law violations, using group
gathering such as those held by the Rainbow Coalition as
an example.
Harvey has held off on the signing of the agreement
listing several reasons in a recent interview.
First, Harvey wants to negotiate within the agreement
that Baker County residents are issued County citations
rather than Federal citations in the National Forest Sys-
tem Lands within the county. Harvey would like to see
these cases heard in County court rather than the Federal
court in Pendleton.
Southwick voices disagreement with Harvey’s idea of
a County citation and the desire to see local residents’
cases heard in local court rather than in the Federal
court. Southwick argues that Harvey’s desire to have
these cases heard in local court would require the Sheriff
to deputize Federal law enforcement agents under the
local Sheriff’s Department, an extension of federal law
enforcement of which Southwick doesn’t approve.
Before signing the agreement, Harvey also asks for
the USFS to provide further explanation of some of the
content within the agreement. Harvey wants a more
detailed explanation from the USFS of the scope of work
the county is being asked to provide.
“This is the beginning stages of a long process. I see
this law enforcement agreement in conjunction with
everything else the Forest Service does in Baker County,
like the Blue Mountain Forest Plan and road closure is-
sues—to dovetail these agreements together—it’s a long
process,” Harvey said.
USFS Region 6 Patrol Captain Robert Fields in the
Pendleton office was at a training session in Portland this
wee and therefore unavailable for questions and com-
ments on this article.
City Council: marijuana dispensary ban ordinance
Continued from Page 1
Ordinance #3336 ac-
complishes the same goal
but is more straightforward
and at the consensus of the
Council does not have the
repercussions that a busi-
ness license may have on
the community businesses
in the future.
Councilors Abell,
Augenfeld, Langrell and
Thomas all expressed
concern over a City Busi-
ness License with Abell
and Langrell specifically
stating that they had been
in contact with several
city business owners who
had serious concerns over
the possibility of the new
Business License require-
ment and what that re-
quirement may mean later
on down the road. Ordi-
nance #3336 is entitled
“An Ordinance Regulat-
ing Marijuana Within
The City Limits of Baker
City, Oregon; Declaring
An Emergency” and will
prohibit both medical and
recreational marijuana
dispensaries in our City.
The ordinance must be
read three times in order
to be voted into law by the
Council.
The third and final rea -
ing will to take place at
the next regularly sched-
uled meeting on March 25,
2015.
Should the council pass
the ordinance, since an
emergency is declared,
the new ordinance would
become an immediately ef-
fective law. The Ordinance
reads as follows:
SECTION 1: The City
of Baker City has deter-
mined that the commercial
production and distribution
of Marijuana within the
city limits of Baker City
would negatively affect the
health, safety and welfare
of the citizens and visitors
to our community; and in
addition be in violation of
Federal Law.
SECTION 2: Therefore,
the City of Baker City
hereby places a prohibition
on the establishment and
location of Medical Mari-
juana Facilities/Dispensa-
ries within Baker City, as
described in House Bill
3460, which was approved
by the Oregon Legislature
in the 2013 Special Ses-
sion.
SECTION 3: Further-
more, the City of Baker
City places a prohibition
on the establishment and
location of Recreational
Marijuana Producers,
Processors, Wholesalers
and Retailers within Baker
City as described in Ballot
Measure 91, which was
approved by the Oregon
voters In November 2014.
SECTION 4: It shall also
be unlawful within Baker
City to cultivate, process
or consume Marijuana,
or Marijuana products, in
public places or within
public view.
SECTION 5: In addi-
tion, the City of Baker City
places a prohibition on all
sales and deliveries of rec-
reational Marijuana within
Baker City.
SECTION 6: If any pro-
vision, or portion thereof,
contained in this ordinance
is held unconstitutional, in-
valid or unenforceable, the
remainder of this ordinance
shall be deemed severable,
shall not be affected, and
shall remain in full force
and effect.
SECTION 7: Any
person, agent, or repre-
sentative of a person who
violates any provision of
this Ordinance commits a
civil infraction and shall
be subject to forfeiture in
an amount not exceeding
$500. For each day that a
person engages in the vio-
lation, a separate offense is
committed.
SECTION 8: Declara-
tion of Emergency: It is
hereby determined and
found that this ordinance is
necessary for the immedi-
ate preservation of the pub-
lic health, peace and safety
of the people of the City of
Baker City, and by reason
of the foregoing, an emer-
gency is hereby declared
to exist and this ordinance
shall be in full force and
effect immediately upon
and after its passage by the
City Council and signed by
the Mayor of the City of
Baker City.
The Ordinance then
includes the first and
second dates it was read
aloud to the Council, and is
followed by the necessary
spaces for signatures.
The City still runs a risk
of a lawsuit with the pass-
ing of this ordinance. The
outcome of other pending
lawsuit cases such as the
Cave Junction case may
have future bearing on this
issue.
City Manager Mike
Kee along with planning
director Holly Kerns are
still pursuing land use
and development codes
as an alternative way to
keep dispensaries at bay
by either prohibiting them
completely or using Time,
Place and Manner regula-
tions.
Recently, La Grande,
which allows dispensaries
regulated by Time, Place
and Manner rules reversed
their decision that required
Eagle Cap Dispensary to
close between 3:00 p.m.
and 4:30 p.m. each day
during the school year.
Mayor Steve Clements
said, “The facility is a
legitimate business per
Oregon law. I don’t believe
we should be restricting
the hours of operation of
any legitimate business.”
The second reading of or-
dinance #3337 addressing
the City Business License
was tabled.
In other business,
YMCA CEO Heidi Dalton
and Aquatics Director Pau-
la Moe addressed Council
as to the positive state of
the YMCA in a slideshow
presentation.
The City Council meet-
ing was proceeded by
an executive session to
discuss real estate transac-
tions.
In the open regular ses-
sion of the City Council
meeting City Manager
Mike Kee asked for per-
mission to begin the pro-
cess of accepting bids for a
realtor to represent the City
and advise Council on the
sale of City real estate.
Council was advised on
grant money received to
replace windows at City
Hall and told some of the
grant money would be
awarded to local business
for the same purpose.
Fire Chief Mark John
advised the council on
plans to begin a new in-
spection program.
All City Councilors with
the exception of Ben Mer-
rill were present for the
meeting.