House Bill 2460 would help protect people from what some say are frivolous lawsuits aimed at silencing opposition to issues such as political causes and new development.

The House passed a similar bill in 1999 but it died before it received a full Senate hearing. The current bill would allow judges to quickly dismiss suits lacking merit and force the person filing such a lawsuit to pay attorney fees for the defendant should the judge dismiss the case.

Called SLAPP suits, or Strategic Lawsuits Aimed at Public Participation, such legal actions are often
 accused of being without merit and aimed at individuals who have spoken out at public hearings, written letters to newspapers or circulated flyers against a particular proposal. Backers of the legislation say SLAPP suits result in silencing opposition by placing opponents in financial fear.

Although the issue of SLAPP suits has drawn some attention statewide and nationally, Corvallis provides its own examples for the need to protect free speech, according to Liz Frenkel. Frenkel serves as coordinator for the natural resource subcommittee of the League of Women Voters of Oregon and lobbies in Salem. Opponents of the Parkland Village Annexation in northwest Corvallis that voters will see on May's ballot say they were threatened with legal action after circulating a poster critical of the annexation. Members of the Citizens Against Parkland Village Annexation
received letters from the developer's attorney demanding a correction and retraction be printed in the
newspaper for five days or face a lawsuit.

Voters have rejected annexing the land slated for development several times before. In the past it's been known as the Frager Annexation. The property is north of Harrison Boulevard and west of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints. To Frenkel, developer Les Melville's action toward
 annexation opponents shows why the Legislature should approve HB2460.  "This has a chilling effect. Members drop off boards, people take down their lawn signs," she said. "This is a legal issue, and they're not prepared to deal with it."

Melville defends his legal actions and doesn't see them as a means to silence his opponents. "This is not a SLAPP suit," he said. "I'm just asking for them to tell the truth." Melville contends that a flier the group distributed presented defamatory and untruthful statements about the proposed development's traffic impact and storm water runoff. He also contends that because he's placed deed restrictions on the property that would limit the number of houses to 225 the group's claims that as many as 609 homes could be built on the site are false.

Not everyone shares Melville's view. Eugene attorney Bill Kloos challenged Melville's assumptions in a letter sent Tuesday to Melville's attorney. Deed restrictions can be revoked over time, he claimed, and the group's statements are accurate. Some of those opposed to Melville's annexation but not
involved with the organized efforts find themselves under pressures from people other than attorneys.

Steve Eccles and his wife, residents near the proposed Corvallis annexation, faced what he felt was an indirect threat.  After they placed a sign opposing the Parkland Village Annexation on their property, someone representing himself as a Realtor visited his wife. He left behind a copy of the letter from Melville's attorney to the annexation's opponents and said she should show it to
 her husband. "To read such a letter, you become alarmed," Eccles said. "I didn't know quite what to think about it."  Eccles had been to a couple of the group's meetings, but didn't feel he belonged to it. After contacting members and making sure they felt Melville's accusations were wrong, he chose to leave his lawn sign up.

"It felt odd being threatened," he said. "My reaction was, `Is this a bluff or was in fact the brochure
distributed with false information?' "  Thinking back on the incident, Eccles said it seemed like an odd tactic for someone to go around and visit homeowners with signs in their yards. It seemed to take away from deciding the annexation based on its merits, he added.

Despite concluding the brochure was acceptable, Eccles still wonders where the events will lead.
"I left my sign up but still have to admit to a slight sense of apprehension in regards to the threatened lawsuits," he said. "Something just doesn't feel right about it."

Other Corvallis residents say they've been on the business end of SLAPP suits before. According to a letter written in 1999 from a law firm in Eugene to Rep. Lane Shetterly, R-Dallas, and members
of the House Civil Judiciary Committee, Corvallis resident Jennifer Ayotte faced a lawsuit after testifying against a bill in the Oregon House Natural Resources Committee. The suit alleged that Ayotte acted maliciously in  presenting her arguments against a bill she believed
would weaken wetland protection laws. About 10 months later the case was dismissed.

Local allegations of SLAPPs aren't limited to Corvallis. Marv Durham, a former Philomath city councilor, wrote to Shetterly in 1999 that he and a group of neighbors who appealed to the Land Use Board of Appeals a proposed Philomath development were sued in 1992 by the developer. The developer claimed harassment and damage to his reputation.

The effect of the alleged SLAPP suit was emotionally and financially stressful to Durham and his wife,
Durham wrote to Shetterly. Not only did they feel they were treated unfairly by the developer, but they said they felt a lack of protection from the state under existing laws.

Philomath activist Jeff Lamb has stayed involved with the anti-SLAPP legislation because of situations such as those endured by Durham, Ayotte and opponents to Melville's annexation. As chairman of the statewide organization Oregon Communities for a Voice in Annexation, Lamb has lobbied for several years to get the anti-SLAPP legislation passed. "This is just another example of people being denied the right to speak and goes right to the big issue of the legislation," Lamb said of the letter from Melville's attorney. "The bigger issue is how to prevent this stuff."

John Butterworth covers environmental and rural Benton County issues and general assignments
 for the Gazette-Times. He can be reached at john.butterworth@gtconnect.com or 758-9530. Source:  Corvallis Gazette-Times, by John Butterworth.

A sustainable-earth economy provides for equitable prosperity among all residents, at the same time
preserving and restoring resources, the source of all economy. But an ever-growing economy results
in an ever-increasing drawdown of local natural capital, as well as decrease of our real community
wealth.

In already-overfilled Oregon, this is enabled not only by population increases but also by more
consumption of resources by that population. More new jobs, new houses and increased consumption means fewer farms and forests. It means more cars, concrete, roads, traffic congestion; more air, light, water and noise pollution; fewer salmon; more fossil-fuel burning; more bird-killing
windpower farms and continued river damming. It means more people crowding hot springs, wild
rivers and hiking trails. It means an ever-widening gulf between the rich and poor, and more real
numbers of the unemployed, homeless and hungry.

How can that be healthy? By not understanding the relationship between increased economic activity
and diminishing quality of life, Oregon leaders lust after more economic growth. With downtown's
parking cap lifted, we have added upwards of 10,000 new spaces for cars. To accommodate the
upswing in traffic this represents, we have widened the Sunset Highway and are redoing the Ross
Island Bridge. We are exhuming the idea of another bridge into Vancouver and are envisioning a
Sunrise Highway. We are eternally expanding the airport, along with rising decibels. We continue
to subsidize sprawl. Despite the environmental hazards, we are barreling forth with plans to deepen
the Columbia and to otherwise fork out taxpayer money on wooing big business and enhance
extraneous export/import.

Most economists consider such growth as salvation. Michael Kinsley of the Rocky Mountain
Institute, author of The Economic Renewal Guide, instead likens it to a leaking bucket: the more you
pour into it, the more that pours out in terms of real wealth, nature and livability. And to plug those
leaks he and others hold up viable nongrowth-dependent alternatives.

These alternatives take the form of retaining and multiplying wealth in our neighborhoods and
region; when the "water" of natural and community wealth is kept and recycled locally, the need is
gone for more people and more drawdown of local earth resources to replace what has been leaked
away.

Plugging the leaks entails concentrating economic development on small, locally owned,
neighborhood-based commerce. What cannot be grown and manufactured in the neighborhood is
next bought from somewhere else in the city, then region, then nation, respectively. International
trade should primarily involve knowledge and cultural goodwill.

People working, shopping, playing, generating their own energy and trading goods primarily
produced within their own walking communities would flourish equitable prosperity, conserve
energy, end global warming, restore local resources, keep our populations in check, make us
responsible international citizens and rebuild long-lost livability.

These things are, at heart, qualitative, not always easily measured. Yet they are what produce true
utility, the satisfaction that all economy shoots for. With recession looming in Oregon, the
opportunity is ours to pursue this genuinely healthy sustainable-Earth economy. Will we take it, or
will we chase after more destruction, in the form of more growth, to save us?  Source: Oregonian,
April 25, 2001, by M. Scott Jones.  M. Scott Jones of Southeast Portland is a member of Alternatives to Growth Oregon's advisory council.

Since 1996, the city's water rights to the Yachats River - a well-known habitat for the threatened coho salmon - have been a hotly contested issue, finally culminating in a 1998 agreement between the city and the state's water resources department. The agreement would give the city water rights to the Yachats River in times of emergency or when population exceeds current resources, and is being closely watched by WaterWatch of Oregon and the Yachats Area Watershed Council. Both groups are concerned with the environmental repercussions of taking water from the Yachats River.

Under the new ordinance, a Phase One water emergency in Yachats would be declared if the Yachats River were recorded to be 35 cubic feet per second, or when the combined flow of Reedy and Salmon Creek were less than 275 gallons per minute. Phase One calls for moderate water curtailment, including watering lawns and gardens on alternating days, turning off ornamental fountains,  and prohibiting the sale of water to persons who are not customers of the water system.

Phase Two steps up the curtailment and prohibits the watering of any vegetation, except trees and shrubs, with hand-watering devices; the use of water for washing buildings and pavements; and the serving of drinking water at restaurants unless it is requested by customers.

Phase Three is called in times of extreme drought conditions and can fine small meter customers using more than 27 cubic feet per day on average. The final phase also requires commercial, large meter customers to send linens outside the city for laundering; prohibits all watering of vegetation with city water supplies; and asks all users to reduce their normal usage by a certain percentage.

"Phase Three, when the creeks are really close to dry, this goes beyond anything that we've ever experienced before in this community," said Yachats attorney Mike Dowsett. The new ordinance was approved 5-0 by the council at Thursday night's regular council meeting. In a related matter, the council also voted to approve a Parks and Commons Commission recommendation that the Whale in the Park pressure pump be turned on from Memorial Day through Labor Day and be set at a 1 minute interval, for 5 second spouting cycles, for 12 hours each day.  Source: Newport News Times, April 18, 2001, by Kelly Moyer-Wade.

Unlike some other cities concerned about where to find water to meet the needs of a growing
population, Florence officials know exactly where to look.  The city and much of the surrounding
area north of the Siuslaw River sits atop an 18-square-mile dunal aquifer through which, according
to one study, 41 million gallons of water a day moves under the dunes and into the Siuslaw River
and the Pacific Ocean.  "Based on government studies, we have the water here to handle the
population growth we'll see for at least the next 50 years," Public Works Director Ken Lanfear says.

The problem is that the seven existing city wells pumping water from the aquifer at the east edge of
the city were producing only 1.5 million gallons per day - about 500,000 gallons short of the amount
needed to meet the city's needs during peak demand periods last summer. The shortfall was covered,
as it has been for years, by purchases from the Heceta Water District north of Florence, which draws
its water from Clear Lake.

Florence officials' goal is to be able to pump enough water from the dunes to meet Florence's needs
without relying on its neighbor. That could happen this summer, Lanfear said, after a $60,000
rehabilitation of the existing wells is completed and brings them to their collective design capacity
of 2 million gallons per day.  Even at peak capacity, however, the present wells won't produce
enough water to accommodate population increases that have been averaging 3 1/2 percent per year.  That's why the city plans to add five new wells to the existing well field and expand the capacity of its water treatment plant.  "We need to have this online and producing for the summer of 2002," Lanfear said.

The cost is $1.7 million to $1.9 million. Engineering work is under way now, Lanfear said, and the
city has applied for additional water rights. He expects drilling to begin in the fall.   "The new wells
will give the city an adequate water supply through 2008 with the growth we are experiencing," he
said.

Systems development charges - fees paid by developers of new projects - will cover the cost of the
well project, Lanfear said.  But residents can expect a modest water rate increase later this year to
cover inflation in the cost of water production, plus enough money for maintenance to keep the wells
at peak production. The average residential water bill is now $15 to $16 per month.

While other communities are worrying about drought and water shortages, Lanfear said, the Florence
area should be in good shape with the combined water supplies of Florence and the Heceta Water
District.  Past drought years haven't drawn down the dunal aquifer to a point of concern, he said. The
water not only feeds the city wells, it also provides water for Heceta's Clear Lake, he said.

As soon as the five new wells are in, Lanfear said, the city needs to begin developing a new well
field. Under consideration is some federal land in the dunes north of Heceta Beach Road, where as
many as 20 to 30 wells might be developed to provide an additional 4 1/2 million gallons per day,
he said. The cost of that project would be maybe $10 million, Lanfear said, but the wells wouldn't
have to be developed all at once.

Studies indicate that the city will need additional water production capacity between 2008 and 2010,
he said, and development of the new well field would take a lot of time for planning, environmental
studies and permit processing.

The city's well development project is a modification of previous plans for a joint water treatment
plant at Clear Lake to be operated by the city and the Heceta Water District. That plan had to be
changed, Lanfear said, because of legal constraints on the amount of water that can be drawn from
the lake.

The water expansion plans are moving ahead at the same time as two annexation proposals at the
north edge of the city totaling 93 acres and tentatively zoned for residential development. The
annexations have been approved by the Planning Commission and are awaiting City Council
Review. A local watchdog group, Citizens for Florence, opposes the annexations and has threatened
to force a referendum vote if they are approved.

One reason the group opposes the annexations is the city's inability to deliver water to the area. But Lanfear said if the two parcels are annexed, he expects they will continue to receive water from the Heceta Water District. A third 80-acre parcel proposed for annexation at the city's east edge would require city water if it's annexed, he said, but the owner has withdrawn the annexation application until the city is closer to completing its new wells.  Source: 4/2/01 Register Guard, by Larry Bacon.
 

FLORENCE WELL EXPANSION
Current number of wells:	Seven, in dunes at city's east edge.
Peak production capacity:	1.5 million gallons per day.
Expected capacity this summer:	2 million gallons per day after rehabilitation work.
Expansion project:	Add five new wells by summer 2002, increasing production capacity to 3 million gallons per day.
Project cost:	$1.7 million to $1.9 million.
Long-range project:	Develop new well field in dunes north of Florence after 2008, adding 4.5 million gallons per day capacity.  Estimated cost is $10 million.

Also see:  CFF's Questions to City of Florence, City's Response, CFF's Second Request for Information to City

House Bill 2460 would make it harder to intimidate citizens by filing what are called strategic
lawsuits against public participation, or SLAPPs. The targets of such lawsuits have included people
who testify at public hearings, circulate petitions or write letters to the editor. SLAPPs generally
claim that public comments have been slanderous or defamatory. The plaintiffs seldom prevail, but
defending against a lawsuit is so time-consuming and expensive that even the threat of a SLAPP can
discourage citizens from speaking out.

Legislators can easily judge the effects of HB 2460. People testifying before the Legislature are
shielded against lawsuits unless they knowingly make false statements for the purposes of
defamation. HB 2640 would extend the same protection to people who testify before local
government bodies - including city councils, school boards and planning commissions - or make
comments in other public forums. People who felt they had been defamed in public testimony could
have recourse to the courts, but the bill would allow frivolous lawsuits to be dismissed more quickly,
and would allow defendants to recover attorney's fees in advance if they could show they were likely
to prevail.

Examples of SLAPPs or threats of SLAPPs can be found all over Oregon. Usually, the person or
group being sued or threatened is trying to stop a local government from approving a land use change
or real estate development. SLAPPs undermine the spirit of Oregon's land use planning system,
which has public involvement as its No. 1 goal.

The state House of Representatives approved an anti-SLAPP bill in 1999, but it died in the Senate.
The Legislature should do better this year. Lawmakers need only think of their own work, and how
it would be harmed if some of the people most directly affected by the proposals being debated were
afraid to speak openly and candidly. HB 2460 deserves approval. Source: 4/2/01 Register Guard

Also see:  http://www.lcd.state.or.us/legislative/howtokeep/SLAPPhist.html
http://www.winfinity.com/cff/News/arch-0103.html