Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Gift Rules topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Bill would remove court‑struck gift provisions from statute; local officials urge broader cleanup
Summary
House Bill 2928 would excise two statute sections the commission says the Oregon Supreme Court found unconstitutional; the League of Oregon Cities supported the removal but urged additional amendments to reduce confusing liabilities under the gift clause.
House Bill 2928, presented to the House Committee on Rules on Jan. 27, would remove two provisions of the gift clause the Oregon Government Ethics Commission said the state Supreme Court had ruled unconstitutional.
Susan Myers said the amendments delete subsections the court found to unconstitutionally restrict freedom of expression; the core gift prohibition—under which a public official or candidate may not solicit or accept gifts above $50 per calendar year from a source with a legislative or administrative interest—would remain unchanged, Myers said.
Myers told the committee the changes reflect existing legal reality: the commission cannot enforce provisions found unconstitutional and the bill simply removes language the court struck. She said the modification should not alter the practical prohibition on accepting disallowed gifts.
Scott Winkels of the League of Oregon Cities said the League would characterize its position as “amend.” Winkels said the broader gift limit language can create confusing liability for public officials based on third‑party conduct (for example, gifts to relatives) and urged a stakeholder work group to refine the statute so education and enforcement focus on the conduct that matters.
Why it matters: the bill would align statute with current constitutional law as interpreted by the courts; local government groups asked for additional statutory cleanup to reduce confusing secondary liabilities and to focus enforcement and training.
