Salem sued over third bridge petition handling

A local man is suing the city of Salem for refusing to certify a petition that would allow residents to vote on an ordinance adopted by city council regarding a prospective third bridge in Salem. 

City councilors deliberated on Monday, Dec. 5, where it made amendments Dec. 5 to the Salem River Crossing plan, which refers to the environmental planning process the city has been working on to identify a location for a third bridge crossing the Willamette River in the Salem-Keizer area. 

Greg Wasson, executive secretary of the Committee for Petition Rights, said city council's action to amend Ordinance Bill No. 14-16 strips the community from the opportunity to vote on the issue. 

He submitted a request for a referendum petition to visited the City Recorder's office Wednesday, Dec. 21. The petition would request the ordinance be referred to voters in the next election. but said the office refused to certify his petition 

"They told me they won't allow me to file that petition so I sued them," Wasson said. 

The next day, Wasson filed a suit against the City of Salem for failing to allow him to collect signatures for his petition. 

The City Recorder, however, said Wasson's petition was on file and the office had five business days to consider the petition upon receiving it. 

Now more than five business days later, City Attorney Dan Atchinson said Wasson's petition was denied, citing the Oregon Constitution does not allow petitions that tackle administrative decisions, and is limited to municipal legislation. 

Read more: 

Developers bet big on downtown Salem

Oregon rushes to approve recreational pot retailers by year's end

In the case of Ordinance 14-16, amendments were made to the city's Comprehensive Plan and Transportation Plan, and the Urban Growth boundary was modified, Atchinson said.  Those changes are land use decisions and are therefore considered to be administrative, not municipal decisions, according to a letter written in response to Wasson's petition by Ruth Ann Stellmacher, the City Recorder. 

For that reason, the petition was denied, Atchinson said. 

Stellmacher refers to Oregon's law regarding cities and counties planning responsibilities,  ORS 197.175, which states local governments can exercise their planning and zoning responsibilities, including land use decisions, in compliance with Oregon law. 

Wasson filed a lawsuit stating the City Recorder's actions to deny the petition were "reckless, willful, malicious, in bad faith or illegal and taken to deny to the citizens of Oregon – generally – and Salem – specifically – rights the various representative officials knew – or should have known – are guaranteed by the state and federal Constitutions." 

"The way the city operates is to say that 'you elected me, now go away and let me operate this place the way it should be run,'" Wasson said of the City Council's decision to amend the bill. "So that means that the city can decide what reforms I want to initiate."

Wasson plans to ask a judge to temporarily block the ordinance and will ask for a hearing to discuss the issue sometime after March 5, which is the 90 day cutoff period from when city council made the amendments. 

"My basic position is that the city had no choice but to certify that petition," Wasson said. "The first amendment protects my right to do that."