A3
THE ASTORIAN • SATURDAY, JULY 24, 2021
State forest institute misled public, audit fi nds
By ROB DAVIS and TONY SCHICK
The Oregonian and Oregon Public
Broadcasting
Oregon’s tax-funded forest education
institute misled the public by presenting a
biased view of forestry and might have bro-
ken the law by trying to infl uence policy, a
state audit found.
The Oregon Forest Resources Institute,
established by lawmakers in 1991 to provide
credible public education based on facts and
reliable science, operates with broad author-
ity and almost no oversight, undermining its
public benefi t and credibility, according to
the audit released Wednesday by the secre-
tary of state.
Auditors found that the agency “has long
engaged in activities that may fall outside
of its statutory authority.” They wrote that
their fi ndings “reasonably raise the ques-
tion” of whether the institute broke the law,
which bars the agency from attempting to
infl uence the actions of any other state body.
But lawmakers would have to seek a formal
legal opinion, the auditors said.
“Clearly there is a disconnect between
the statutory mandate of OFRI and what
the evidence shows about how they’ve been
conducting themselves,” Secretary of State
Shemia Fagan, a Democrat, said.
Gov. Kate Brown requested the audit last
year in response to an investigation by The
Oregonian, Oregon Public Broadcasting and
ProPublica. The news organizations, which
obtained thousands of records that included
emails from the institute’s leaders, found
that the agency sought to discredit climate
scientists and operated as a de facto lobby-
ing and public relations arm for the timber
industry.
The investigation revealed that the insti-
tute for years advertised Oregon’s log-
ging laws as strong, even as many became
weaker than those in neighboring states.
Its executive directors sat through private
industry deliberations about political attack
ads. The investigation also showed how the
agency worked to discredit university sci-
entists, including Oregon State University
professor Beverly Law, who in 2018 pub-
lished research that showed signifi cant car-
bon emissions from logging.
State auditors called the agency’s
“fraught relationship” with scientists “an
ongoing concern.”
While the agency presents itself as objec-
tive, the auditors said, its $1 million annual
television advertising campaign and survey
eff orts to track Oregonians’ opinions of log-
ging “suggest the agency may be working to
shift public attitudes and opinions to favor
the industry, rather than providing objective
information.”
Brooke Herbert/The Oregonian
Clearcut forests are shown in western Oregon.
“The agency cannot reasonably claim
that all its messages and publications are
objective or fairly represent the impacts
of forest management practices,” auditors
wrote.
Auditors recommended that the Oregon
Legislature rewrite the agency’s govern-
ing statutes to clarify prohibitions on infl u-
encing legislation, add board members who
aren’t affi liated with timber companies and
create oversight that will ensure the distri-
bution of accurate and reliable information.
“The audit makes clear that action is
needed from the Legislature and the agency
itself to address the shortcomings and con-
fl icts of interest inherent in OFRI’s struc-
ture,” said Charles Boyle, a spokesperson
for the governor. “State agencies should
provide objective information to the public,
and we expect the agency and legislators to
put measures in place to ensure OFRI does
not engage in political advocacy.”
Boyle said Brown will work with law-
makers during February’s short session to
determine necessary changes to the law that
governs the institute. Brown has little direct
power over the agency’s board, which by
law is controlled by medium and large pro-
ducers of wood.
In a written response to the audit, the
agency’s director, Erin Isselmann, agreed to
implement auditors’ recommendations by
late 2022. Isselmann said the institute would
adopt a clear mission statement, engage with
environmental groups and develop policies
to ensure the agency’s employees don’t run
afoul of laws prohibiting lobbying.
Isselmann pushed back on some of the
audit’s key fi ndings, including that the insti-
tute lacked transparency and that the law
that created the agency undermined its pub-
lic benefi t.
“Supporting and enhancing the Oregon
forest products industry through forest edu-
cation programs and educational materials
for the general public, K-12 teachers and
students, and forest landowners is important
to Oregonians because of the many social,
environmental and economic benefi ts that
forests provide to the state and all Orego-
nians,” she wrote.
Isselmann was out of the offi ce and did
not respond to questions from reporters.
Inka Bajandas, a spokesperson for the insti-
tute, said in a statement that the agency has
started implementing recommendations
from the audit. She did not address ques-
tions about why the agency told auditors the
work will take more than a year.
Kip Memmott, audits director for the
secretary of state, said in an interview that
the institute was created with so few con-
trols that tax dollars and the state govern-
ment’s reputation had been put at risk.
“These are public monies. This is a
state agency,” Memmott said. “With a state
seal putting out information to the public
domain, there’s a higher responsibility to
make sure that’s objective.”
Over the years, lawmakers have whittled
down taxes on the timber industry that used
to help fund local governments and schools.
The tax cuts have cost Oregon towns an esti-
mated $3 billion in the past three decades,
an investigation by the news organizations
found. Isselmann said the industry should
be allowed to decide how one of the few
remaining taxes it pays should be used.
“To deny the industry the right to deter-
mine how these funds should be spent in
support of their industry is not only unfair,
but would undermine faith in the ability for
government to allocate resources impar-
tially,” Isselmann wrote.
While the Oregon Legislature sets the
budget for most state agencies every two
years, the institute determines its own bud-
get. Under state law, timber representatives
make up the institute’s board. A lone non-
voting public member is prohibited from
having ties to any group or business “known
to support or promote environmental or con-
servation issues.” Auditors fl agged the pro-
hibition as a credibility risk for the agency
and recommended expanding the board’s
representation.
Industry lobbyists have likened the insti-
tute to Oregon’s agricultural commod-
ity commissions that collect money from
farmers to promote wheat, grass, berries
and other state-grown crops. Such commis-
sions are not state agencies but receive more
oversight than the institute because they
are overseen by the Oregon Department of
Agriculture, according to the state audit.
During the legislative session that ended
in June, the Oregon House of Represen-
tatives passed a bill that would have redi-
rected part of the institute’s budget to the
Oregon Department of Forestry for projects
including climate research in forests and
educating smaller family forestland owners
about the state’s logging laws. The measure
failed in the Senate.
Timber industry lobbyists and other
agency supporters urged the Legislature to
wait for the audit before taking action. The
Oregon Forest & Industries Council told
lawmakers in May that “jumping ahead of
the conclusions from the audit and radi-
cally dismantling OFRI would be incredi-
bly irresponsible.”
After the audit’s release, council spokes-
person Sara Duncan said her group had
“serious concerns” about the audit’s moti-
vations and disagreed with many of its
fi ndings.
“Much of the report appears entirely out-
side the scope of the stated goals for the
audit and includes unrelated, biased and
politically motivated opinions about the
contributions of our sector,” Duncan said.
Asked to provide examples, Duncan did
not respond.
State Sen. Michael Dembrow, a Dem-
ocrat from Portland who was involved
in failed negotiations over the institute’s
future during the legislative session, said he
expects a hearing on the audit’s results in
the fall.
Lawmakers will have to choose whether
to turn the institute into an agency that pro-
vides a credible, balanced view of logging
in Oregon or eliminate it altogether, Dem-
brow said.
“I’m not sure, to be candid, that in the
form I would want it to be that the industry
would want it to continue,” Dembrow said.
July 27th-31st, 2021
$ 5 Admission
10 AM - 10 PM
WWW.CLATSOPCOFAIREXPO.COM
92937 Walluski Loop
Astoria, Oregon • 503-325-4600