Dear Secretary Richardson,

We are electors in Oregon. Mary Nolan is the Executive Director of Planned Parenthood
Advocates of Oregon and Grayson Dempsey is the Executive Director of NARAL Pro-Choice
Oregon. This letter is a formal complaint of elections law violations and potential violations,
made pursuant to ORS 260.345. The complaint is against the Oregon Family Council (OFC)
and Jack Louman, the Executive Director of OFC. This complaint arises out of a mailing Mr.
Louman and OFC sent on or about July 20, 2017 (the Mailing). The Mailing involves
Referendum Petition 301. Referendum Petition 301 is a voter-initiated referendum of five
sections of House Bill 2391. The pages of the Mailing relevant to this complaint are enclosed.

The Mailing Violates 250.045(11) and OAR 165-014-0005

Oregon law requires any person circulating a referendum petition to carry a copy of the text of
the statute or portions of the statute being referred. ORS 250.045(11) provides: The person
obtaining signatures on the petition shall carry at least one full and correct copy of the measure
to be initiated or referred and shall allow any person to review a copy upon request of the
person. The Secretary of States Circulator Training Manual similarly provides that any person
circulating a referendum must allow any person to read the text of an initiative or referendum
petition and that a complete copy of the text must be available for signers if not printed on the
cover sheet. Circulator Training Manual at 9. The Circulator Training Manual has been
adopted as an administrative rule by OAR 165-014-0005(5).

The Mailing asks its recipients to sign and return signature sheets for Referendum 301.
Included with the Mailing is a blank Referendum 301 signature sheet and Important
Instructions regarding how to complete and return the signature sheet. The instructions direct
voters to fill out completely an individual signature line and to complete and sign the circulator
certification as well. The instructions advise that a person can sign, certify and return the
signature sheet even if you are the only signer or circulate the petition sheet to obtain more
signatures. See, e.g., Instructions (Sign and date this section only after circulating.). The
Mailing does not advise that any person who seeks to circulate the petition sheet must carry a
copy the text of the statutory provisions being referred when circulating.

To the extent recipients of the Mailing circulate the petition sheets provided by OFC and
Louman to obtain signatures from others, the ORC and Louman appear to be inviting violations
of ORS 250.045(11) and OAR 165-014-0005. Nothing in the Mailing advises recipients that
they must carry that text (and provide to anyone who requests it) when they circulate petition
sheets. OFC and Loumans invitation for violations of Oregon law are particularly egregious, in
the light of the fact that the front side of the petition sheets included with the Mailing imply that
circulators (including OFC and Louman) need not carry a copy of text of the provisions being
referred when obtaining signatures. Specifically, the front side of the signature sheets provides:
This petition seeks to refer parts of House Bill 2391 (2017). A full and correct copy, of
the parts being referred, is available from chief petitioners and is also available online at
www.oregonvotes.gov. Telling potential petition signers that they can request a copy of the
parts of HB 2391 that are being referred, or find them online, does not meet the unambiguous
requirements of ORS 250.045(11). The circulator must have their own copy when circulating.
Indeed, the bolded language on the front side of the petition sheets will most likely lead
circulators and petition signers erroneously to conclude to that the circulators need not carry a
copy of text being referred. In this context, that bolded language on the front side of the
signature sheets is misleading; and the letter and Important Instructions from OFC and
Louman do nothing to account for that. In no way does the mailing from OFC and Louman
inform the Mailings recipients that, when circulating the referendum petition, the circulators
must carry at least one full and correct copy of the measure to be . . . referred. ORS
250.045(11)

The Mailing does advise its recipients, as potential circulators,as to how to meet the basic
requirements for circulating an initiative petition. We ask that the Secretary of State (and, if
appropriate, the Attorney General) take all reasonable and necessary actions to prevent OFC
and Louman from engaging in any further potentially illegal activity. In the very least, any
signature sheets distributed (or collected) by Louman and OFC should not be counted towards
qualification of the referendum. To the extent that the Secretary of State cannot (or the Chief
Petitioners of Referendum 301 do not) segregate out the OFC/Louman signature sheets from
other signature sheets collected for Referendum 301, no signature sheets should be counted.

The Mailing Violates ORS 260.555 and OAR 165-014-0005

Oregon law prohibits any person from making a demonstrably false statement of fact to obtain
signatures on a referendum petition. ORS 260.555(1) provides: No person attempting to
obtain signatures on, or causing to be circulated, an initiative, referendum or recall petition, shall
knowingly make any false statement regarding the contents, meaning or effect of the petition to
any person who signs it, attempts to sign it, is requested to sign it or requests information
concerning it. The Circulator Training Manual similarly provides: It is against the law for
circulators to: . . . make false statements to any person who signs the petition or requests
information about it. Circulator Training Manual at 9. Violation of ORS 260.555 is a felony.
ORS 260.933.

The Mailing from OFC and Mr. Louman is, unequivocally, an attempt to obtain signatures on a
referendum petition. The cover letter with the mailing contains a bold-faced heading that
provides: Please Sign the Enclosed Petition. The Mailing contains an unsigned, blank
referendum signature sheet, one-page text of the referendum, instructions on how to complete
the signature sheet, and a postage pre-paid return envelope. The letter with the mailing also
contains a demonstrably false statement of fact. Specifically, regarding the assessments
contained in HB 2391, Mr. Louman writes:

And in typical Salem fashion, the tax only applies to individual plans, businesses
under 50 employees, schools, colleges, public employees (because those are paid by our taxes,
and even Medicaid providers, putting the reimbursements of hard working doctors and nurses
who serve Oregons most needy citizens.

Whos NOT paying the health insurance sales tax? Unions, large corporations
and insurance companies.

(Emphasis added). Notwithstanding the multiple inaccuracies in both of the quoted paragraphs,
the representation that insurance companies are not subject to the assessments set forth in
HB 2391 is demonstrably false. Section 5 of HB 2391 specifically provides, in relevant part, that
an insurer shall pay an assessment at the rate of 1.5 percent of the gross amount of premiums
earned by the insurer during that calendar quarter that were derived from health benefit plans
delivered or issued for delivery in Oregon. Ironically, that is one of the five provisions of HB
2391 that is part of Referendum 301. Had Mr. Louman actually read the text of the measure to
be . . . referred, perhaps he would have realized the error of his ways (James 5:30) by
erroneously claiming that insurers are not subject to assessment under HB 2391.

We request that the Secretary of State investigate this potential felony committed by OFC and
Mr. Louman, or refer the matter to the Attorney General for investigation.

Sincerely,

Mary Nolan
Planned Parenthood Advocates of Oregon

Grayson Dempsey
NARAL Pro-Choice Oregon