Deboard v. Owen

Court of Appeals of Oregon

Deboard v. Owen

662 P.2d 18, 62 Or. App. 673, 1983 Ore. App. LEXIS 2571

CourtCourt of Appeals of Oregon

DecidedApril 27, 1983

Docket82-696; A25705

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 662 P.2d 18 (Deboard v. Owen) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Oregon primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Deboard v. Owen, 662 P.2d 18, 62 Or. App. 673, 1983 Ore. App. LEXIS 2571 (Or. Ct. App. 1983).

Pincite

Opinion

JOSEPH, C. J.

Plaintiff is a registered voter, taxpayer, property owner and resident of Coquille School District #8. Defendant Becker was one of the sponsors of an initiative petition for a ballot measure to reduce the previously established 1982-1983 tax base for the district. Plaintiff sought declaratory and injunctive relief against placing the measure on the May 18, 1982, election ballot. Before the case was decided in circuit court, the election was held; and a majority of the votes favored the challenged reduction measure. After the election plaintiff filed an amended complaint, asking the court to set aside the election result. Plaintiff moved for summary judgment on the ground that the ballot measure was not a proper subject for the initiative and was void as a matter of law.

The trial court issued an opinion generally upholding plaintiffs position and entered a summary judgment. Although the trial court based the judgment on alternative grounds, we need only consider one.

A school district is not a “district” within the meaning of Article IV, section 1(5), of the Oregon Constitution. Accordingly the initiative and referendum powers are not reserved to the voters of a school district in respect to a tax base. Hansell v. Douglass, 234 Or 315, 380 P2d 977 (1963); Rose v. Port of Portland, 82 Or 541, 162 Pac 448 (1917).

Affirmed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

JOSEPH, C. J.

Plaintiff is a registered voter, taxpayer, property owner and resident of Coquille School District #8. Defendant Becker was one of the sponsors of an initiative petition for a ballot measure to reduce the previously established 1982-1983 tax base for the district. Plaintiff sought declaratory and injunctive relief against placing the measure on the May 18, 1982, election ballot. Before the case was decided in circuit court, the election was held; and a majority of the votes favored the challenged reduction measure. After the election plaintiff filed an amended complaint, asking the court to set aside the election result. Plaintiff moved for summary judgment on the ground that the ballot measure was not a proper subject for the initiative and was void as a matter of law.

The trial court issued an opinion generally upholding plaintiffs position and entered a summary judgment. Although the trial court based the judgment on alternative grounds, we need only consider one.

A school district is not a “district” within the meaning of Article IV, section 1(5), of the Oregon Constitution. Accordingly the initiative and referendum powers are not reserved to the voters of a school district in respect to a tax base. Hansell v. Douglass, 234 Or 315, 380 P2d 977 (1963); Rose v. Port of Portland, 82 Or 541, 162 Pac 448 (1917).

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

662 P.2d 18, 62 Or. App. 673, 1983 Ore. App. LEXIS 2571, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/deboard-v-owen-orctapp-1983.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack