Bill Status:
HB 2460-B was signed into law by Governor Kitzhaber on June 26,2001!

This is a significant victory for land use advocates, made possible by hundreds of citizens around Oregon who have worked hard to pass this legislation in Oregon. Many thanks to all of you!

The bill took effect January 1, 2002 as ORS 30.142.

Photos of the bill signing ceremony

Two tireless advocates for anti-SLAPP legislation: Jeff Lamb, of Oregon Communities for a Voice in Annexations, and Liz Frenkel of the League of Women Voters of Oregon

Protect Citizen Involvement
Vote YES on HB 2460-B

"No obstacle is more chilling than the fear of personal liability ... The ripple effect of just one [law]suit on the willingness of people to serve as volunteers is great."
President George Bush, Sr.

House Bill 2460-B will protect Oregonians from frivolous lawsuits, and will improve the quality of public decisions. It would create a process for courts to quickly dismiss lawsuits designed to intimidate people into silence, so-called Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation (SLAPPs), before the cases become expensive legal nightmares.

1000 Friends of Oregon SUPPORTS HB 2460-B because:

Diverse, complete citizen input increases the quality of public decisions.
When Oregonians selected our statewide planning goals, we selected Citizen Involvement as Goal 1 for a reason: quality citizen discourse is critical to making decisions that best reflect the desires of the community. SLAPPs threaten good governance, and give those with the access to lawyers more power than those who cannot afford lawyers.

HB 2460 allows credible defamation cases to continue.
While almost all lawsuits brought against citizens are eventually rejected by the courts, a few valid claims for defamation or liable exist. HB 2460 allows lawsuits to go forward if the filer can show a probability of prevailing on the claim.

Read an example of a letter threatening a SLAPP suit here
Context of this letter

Detailed testimony

Testimony on HB 2460
March 19, 2001
from
Evan Manvel
Director of Education and Research
1000 Friends of Oregon

President George Bush, Sr. once said: "No obstacle is more chilling than the fear of personal liability ... The ripple effect of just one [law]suit on the willingness of people to serve as volunteers is great." That is why we're concerned about SLAPPs.

We support legislation to protect citizens from lawsuits brought to discourage public participation in local government decisions (so-called "Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation", or SLAPPs). Specifically, HB 2460 from Rep. Schrader and Rep. Shetterly would provide for quick dismissal of questionable lawsuits brought against people for statements made while exercising their first amendment rights about current public decisions. Keeping questionable lawsuits out of the courts will protect both citizens and taxpayers.

Effective Land Use Planning Depends on Citizen Involvement
SLAPPs threaten the effectiveness of Statewide Planning Goal 1, Citizen Involvement. Our statewide planning program's success depends on local citizens participating in a public dialogue about the planning process and permitting decisions. Back in 1973, the Land Conservation and Development Commission selected and designed our statewide planning goals based on conversations with citizens around the state. Today, the conversation continues on a more local level. Anti-SLAPP bills protect citizens engaged in this critical ongoing dialogue.

The Problem is Intimidation
A senator recently asked me, "Doesn't free speech protect everyone?" The answer is YES -- to an extent. Almost all the lawsuits detailed in the attachment were dismissed by the courts, as courts recognize the right to petition government as a core Constitutional right. The sad fact is, these lawsuits are not filed to be won, but to intimidate. Defending yourself against an 18.8 million-dollar lawsuit, as Terry Fleming was forced to do in Banks, is difficult and painful, and drains both your pocketbook and your willingness to participate in the civic process.

As President Bush, Sr. noted, the SLAPP -- or threat of SLAPP -- successfully silences not only the defendant, but many others of the community. When our citizens are afraid to participate in public processes, we lose the democratic ideal that makes America great. If those who own more resources control and dictate the community planning process, we are governed by money, not people. Anti-SLAPP legislation protects innocent citizens from bearing high legal defense costs, and allows courts to punish those parties whose strategy is to sue citizens into silence.

These Lawsuits are Prevalent in Oregon
Many people I talk to doubt these lawsuits exist here in Oregon. Yet the Citizen Involvement Advisory Committee of Department of Land Conservation and Development has documented a dozen cases of such lawsuits in recent years (more). Developers in Banks, Newberg, St. Paul, Yachats, and Tillamook County have filed suits against citizens and public boards who opposed their proposals. Some planners believe it has become standard practice in their counties for developers to threaten lawsuits against those who oppose development proposals.

Oregon Has Fallen Behind Other States in Protecting Citizens from SLAPPs
SLAPPs have been recognized nationally as a threat to democracy and effective governance, yet Oregon lags behind in addressing this problem. At least thirteen states currently have laws protecting citizens from SLAPPs: California, Delaware, Georgia, Maine, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Nebraska, Nevada, New York, Oklahoma, Rhode Island, Tennessee, and Washington. Several other states are currently considering such legislation.

The Salem Statesman Journal editorialized during the last session (5/14/99): "Oregon should limit lawsuits that undermine free speech … The latest threats to [free speech and the freedom to petition] come not from the government, but from people intent on protecting their interests by sacrificing our freedoms … Oregonians must keep their right to speak their minds."

A Note on Punitive Damages
A note on punitive damages: six of the ten state statutes we reviewed allow punitive damages. While courts are known to be reluctant to award such damages, we feel the court should have the option -- if not the obligation -- to award them. Punitive damages are meant to discourage actions counter to the public interest. Without such damages, 1000 Friends is uncertain if this legislation will adequately discourage those who choose to use lawsuits to strategically intimidate the public. Award of attorneys fees may simply be seen as a cost of doing business, and a worthwhile investment for developers if citizens are intimidated into silence.

HB 2460 Maintains Protections for Businesses
House Bill 2460 does nothing to undermine the ability of those who believe citizen testimony has harmed them to collect damages. Any business or citizen who can show a probability of prevailing on a claim can have their lawsuit go forward. HB 2460 simply gives those who cannot afford extended legal fights a process to throw out baseless cases at an early stage.

Conclusion
If indeed we wish to be a government of the people, by the people, and for the people, we need to protect those people who stand up to the civic challenge and get involved. I urge you, therefore, to support anti-SLAPP legislation, and support the efforts of all Oregonians who involve themselves in this treasured process of democracy.

Thank you for your attention; feel free to contact me with any questions.

Read the bill
More information from Oregon Communities for a Voice in Annexations
More information from the Department of Land Conservation and Development

return to legislative page