viewpoint
Asian Food
Market
hear ye,
hear ye !!
Largest Selection of
Asian Groceries
LEGAL
NOTICES
Seaweed, rice, noodles, frozen
products, deli, snacks, drinks,
sauces, spices, produce,
housewares, and more.
We carry groceries from Holland,
India, Pakistan and Polynesia
Sushi & Asian deli take-out
29TH AVENUE
5
Sunrise
FAST, EFFICIENT
SERVICE
OAK STREET
SHOPPING CENTER
WILLAMETTE STREET
WoodÀ eld Station
place your legal notices
in the Eugene Weekly
call Jayme 541.484.0519 ext 10
e: legals@eugeneweekly.com
FAX: 541.484.4044
www.sunriseasianfood.com
M-Th 9am-7pm•F 9am-8pm•Sa 9am-7pm•Su 10am-6pm
70 W. 29th Ave. Eugene • 541-343-3295
Eugene Weekly qualifi es for
posting legal ads
Breezy & Beautiful
The Jacaranda by Earth is a cute peep toe slingback sandal with a well cushioned footbed.
W FOLLOW
IS THE TIME
FOR FEET
NEW TO SHOES
YOUR
COMFORT
6
MAY 3, 2012
EUGENE WEEKLY
Downtown Eugene
&#SPBEXBZt
'BDFCPPLDPNGPPUXJTFFVHFOF
.PO4BU4VO
Downtown Corvallis
48.BEJTPOt
'BDFCPPLDPNGPPUXJTFDPSWBMMJT
.PO4BU4VO
BY ART JOHNSON
False Accusations
Commissioner Sorenson has been
unjustly targeted
I
t is important for our community that we re-elect Pete Sorenson as Lane County
commissioner. There is no other candidate who has Pete’s experience or his knowledge
or will hold to those core values that are central to the long-term health and well being
of our community. As a member of the Lane Board of County Commissioners since 1997,
Pete has established a strong record of never backing away from tough issues.
Examples from this last term include that Pete has opposed a proposal to raise the pay
of the county commissioners and in fact, advocated a decrease in their pay; has supported
the establishment of a Lane County independent auditor; has opposed a $10,000 bonus for
the county administrator; has opposed mining of gravel too close to the Willamette River;
has opposed a proposal permitting private developers to extract water from the McKenzie
River; supported Faye Stewart as chairman of the board; and most recently, Pete has raised
concerns about a proposal to privatize 1.4 million acres of public land, to be clear-cut under
terms denying the protection of the National Environmental Policy Act, the Endangered
Species Act, and the Clean Water Act, for those lands and the streams that fl ow through them.
Pete’s continued work is even more impressive when one reviews the list of serious
but baseless charges that have been made against him and which he has been required to
deal with. It is important that we all know about those charges which make up an alarming
pattern of misconduct by his opponents on the right.
The fi rst was the charge that Pete (and other commissioners) violated the Oregon
Open Meeting Law raised in the action (reportedly fi nanced by Seneca Sawmill/ Aaron
Jones) fi led by Eleanor S. Dumdi and Edward M. Anderson against Rob Handy, Peter
Sorenson, Bill Fleenor and the Board of County Commissioners. The case was tried without
a jury by Judge Michael Gillespie of Coos County, who “made a fi nding” that Pete (and
other commissioners including Faye Stewart) violated the Oregon Open Meeting Law. The
decision was wrong. However, since the trial, that “fi nding” has been repeated over and
over, even by many who know better.
As a member of the Oregon State Bar since 1953 and continuing in active practice since
returning from the Air Force in 1956, I never make criticisms of a court’s decision casually.
But I am very familiar with the Oregon Open Meeting Law having prosecuted an action for
violation of its provisions as early as 1978. Judge Gillespie’s opinion is inconsistent with
the plain language of the statute. I am not alone in this view. The Oregon Legislature has
its own counsel, the Oregon legislative counsel. He has the statutory duty to perform legal
research for the Legislature and its members on issues of Oregon law. Upon request of a
legislator he reviewed the ruling of Judge Gillespie and concluded: “the reasoning of the
court [Judge Gillespie] does not support the conclusion that a public meeting law violation
occurred.” The Feb. 10 Register-Guard editorial restated that conclusion. Also, among the
many attorneys I have conferred with on that issue, all have agreed with Oregon legislative
counsel.
It is not a violation for one legislator or one commissioner to talk to another about a
matter being considered. One-on-one discussions are expected and often necessary. It is
only a violation of the Open Meeting Law if a “quorum” of the body deliberates together
in private.
It is unfortunate that Judge Gillespie’s opinion was not appealed. Apparently because
of costs and risks to all, rather than an appeal, a compromise was arrived at. The written
settlement agreement signed by plaintiffs, defendants and the county administrator states
among other things: “Non-admission: no party admits liability or wrongdoing.”
So to repeatedly accuse Pete as “guilty of violating the Open Meeting Law” is grossly
misleading and unfair to all.
The next claim made against Pete during this past term was a charge that he had, during
the trial of the Open Meeting case, given false testimony. This serious accusation was fully
investigated by the Washington County District Attorney’s offi ce. After their review of all
of the evidence, the Washington County DA and his staff concluded and advised that the
accusation against Sorenson was baseless.
Another charge made against Pete during this term was an “economic development
investigation,” later changed to an “audit.” Again, when the investigation was completed,
the fi nding was that there had been no wrongdoing.
To his amazement, Pete was then accused of “harassing the Lane County administrator.”
Once again there was an independent investigation, this time by a retired Oregon state
trooper. Upon completing his investigation he found that the charge was baseless.
All of us in Lane County should be concerned by this pattern of baseless charges made
against an honorable, long-serving public servant. It appears they have been made by the
accusers in the belief that even if baseless, they will have some cumulative effect and harm
Sorenson’s reputation and his future chances at the polls. A review of the charges suggest
they have been made against Pete for the simple reason that he is the longest serving and
perhaps most stalwart progressive in offi ce, and therefore chosen as the target.
Pete is proud of his record, is proud of his family and proud of the community in which
he lives and works. For all of these years he has served three times as chair of the Board
of County Commissioners. He has been chair of the LCC Board of Education, of the Lane
Regional Air Protection Agency, of the Metropolitan Policy Committee, of the Lane Council
of Governments, of the Housing and Community College Association, and Pete has often
volunteered to assist in other organizations including predictably, as a coach in Kidsports
and in YMCA programs.
The writer of the April 22 article in the R-G noted that: “Environmental groups and
unions largely are backing [Peter Sorenson].” It should also be noted that Pete is endorsed
by Eugene’s outstanding mayor, Kitty Piercy, the Democratic Party of Lane County, the
Independent Party of Oregon, our former congressman Jim Weaver, and a multitude of
other individuals and organizations.
We in Lane County deserve to have this remarkable neighbor continue to serve as a
member of the Lane Board of County Commissioners.
Attorney Art Johnson of Eugene is former president of the Oregon State Bar, former president of the
Oregon Trial Lawyers Association, and former Eugene city attorney. He is also a co-owner of Eugene
Weekly.
WWW.EUGENEWEEKLY.COM