Update 10: The Fight To Reinstate Ballot Measure 8

As reported in Update 9, on October 20, 2011 the Oregon Supreme Court denied my request to disqualify judges on the Oregon Court of Appeals who are PERS members from deciding my case, Re v PERS, Court of Appeals Case No A148575.   In doing so, the Supreme Court told me that PERS judges must decide my case, even though those PERS judges have a direct financial interest in the outcome of the case.  If I win, those judges lose retirement benefits.   Since it will be the judges who decide whether I win, the deck has been stacked against me.  Without a doubt, that is not fair.

I will now proceed with the Court of Appeals case by filing with the court my argument as to why certain PERS regulations that are based on the 1996 Oregon Supreme Court decision which threw out Ballot Measure 8 are unconstitutional. This argument should be filed not later than December 1, 2011.  At that point, PERS will have the opportunity to file its argument with the Court as to why I am wrong.  If PERS does so, it will be the first time that any Oregon agency will have responded to my argument.

I expect that the Court of Appeals will deny my petition, whether PERS files a response or not.  If that happens, I will ask the Oregon Supreme Court to review the Court of Appeals decision.  The Supreme Court does not have to grant a request for review and if it does not, the case will be finished in state court.  But, the case will not really be finished because I will then file an action in federal court, arguing that Oregon has denied me my federal constitutional right to due process.

In two separate case, I have asked the Oregon courts for non-PERS judges to decide the validity of certain PERS laws and in each case my requests were denied.  I will not stop in my efforts to have this issue decided by judges who do not have a direct, substantial interest in the outcome of the case.  That is a basic fundamental right that we all have when the state attempts to take our life, liberty or property.  In 1983, the majority of Oregon legislators took that right of fundamental fairness from the people of Oregon when PERS cases are decided.  I will not let them get away it.

For more information, review my blog posts of August 26, 2011, My Problem With PERS, and October 21, 2011, the Editorial in the Grants Pass Daily Courier.

Advertisements

About Dan Re

I am an attorney who has lived in Bend and practiced law since 1981. In educating myself about the Oregon Public Employees Retirement System (PERS), I was shocked at how the PERS laws were changed by the legislature, once legislators were allowed to join PERS in 1971, 26 years after PERS was first created. Those changes personally benefitted the legislators who made them at the direct financial expense of the people they were elected to represent. That is wrong and I intend to change it. In 2009, I started a non-profit 501(c)(4) corporation, In RE The People, Inc., for the purpose of informing concerned citizens of what happened regarding PERS and other issues of social and civic importance. I then created this blog to further that objective.
This entry was posted in Ballot Measure 8, fundamental fairness, Oregon judges, Oregon PERS and tagged , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

One Response to Update 10: The Fight To Reinstate Ballot Measure 8

  1. Pingback: Oregon’s supreme pigs at the trough | The Oregon Catalyst

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s