The Oregonian
by Bill Graves
March 02, 2009

The seventh-grade girls in Mark Leichty’s science class at North Albany Middle School said he knelt by their desks, put his arm around their shoulders and let his hand slip down near or on their breasts.

Leichty said he knelt beside the girls to talk to them privately and rested his arm on the back of their seats. He may have inadvertently touched their shoulders, he said, but he didn’t touch their breasts.

During a five-day hearing two years ago, the case boiled down to the teacher’s word against his students. A wrong decision would either unfairly ruin a man’s career or expose teenage girls to a sex offender at school.

Leichty’s case illustrates what’s at stake as legislators craft new laws to try to improve school defenses against educators who sexually abuse children. Lawmakers have drafted seven bills to try to resolve the same questions that confront administrators: What teacher conduct constitutes a boundary violation? What is necessary to prove misconduct? Should unproven allegations be included in personnel files?

Lobbyists for teachers, administrators and school boards are meeting with lawmakers to try to resolve those questions.

"Yes, we want to protect the school kids of Oregon, but we also want to remember the teachers have rights too," said Rep. John Huffman, R-The Dalles, member of the House Education Committee.

One measure under consideration is House Bill 2062, which would bar administrators from making deals to conceal an educator’s misconduct in exchange for his or her resignation. The Oregonian documented 47 secret agreements and described the practice, known among educators as passing the trash, in a two-part series last year.

Administrators sometimes resorted to confidential agreements in cases clouded by doubt. A teacher, for example, would be charged with improperly touching students without solid evidence. Or teachers would violate student boundaries with personal comments, suggestive notes or inappropriate invitations, yet commit no crime.

The simplest way to get such teachers away from students is to persuade them to resign. So administrators sometimes offered to keep the accusations against educators secret, even write recommendation letters, if they would leave quietly.

Salem-Keizer School District in 2004, for example, cut a secret deal with Kenneth John Cushing, then 44. Administrators wanted to get him away from middle school students while the Teacher Standards and Practices Commission, the agency that licenses and disciplines teachers, investigated allegations that he inappropriately touched at least eight girls. Officials promised not to reveal his behavior if potential employers called looking for references.

Legislators want to ban such deals without violating the rights of teachers

Sexual misconduct "is a career ender for educators," said Chuck Bennett, Lobbyist for the Confederation of Oregon School Administrators.

Mark Leichty can testify to that.

On Feb. 11, 2004, his 43rd birthday, he was called into the vice principal’s office and told he was being charged with touching the breast of a girl in his science class.

"That absolutely devastated me," he said. "I didn’t even know who it was."

His problems started in the previous year, when three female students complained that he touched their breasts. One would later say he rubbed her back and shoulder but did not touch her breast.

Leichty denied touching any girl improperly. His vice principal, however, warned him in a letter that "touching of any kind that makes a child or staff member feel uncomfortable is inappropriate."

The letter gave weight to the charge he faced a year later on his birthday from a female student who, with several misspellings, wrote:

"He lend over me and put his left arm on my shoulder. Next he slid his hand closer to my brest. Slides hand down to brest above nibl."

Leichty said he did not touch the girl’s breast, but he did try to befriend her in class as part of a mentoring program for which he volunteered.

In March 2004, Leichty was arrested and charged with eight counts of first-degree sexual abuse based on accusations of improperly touching the girl and other female students during the previous school year.

His teaching days were over.

More than a year passed before the Benton County district attorney’s office dismissed criminal charges against Leichty. By then, parents of two of the girls he was accused of touching had filed a civil suit against him and the district. All parties settled out of court for undisclosed terms.

Then in 2006, the Teacher Standards and Practices Commission charged Leichty with gross misconduct and prepared to yank his license. He exercised his right to an administrative hearing.

During the five-day hearing in October 2006 in Salem, detectives, school administrators and three middle school girls testified against Leichty. Sixteen people, including many fellow teachers, parents and several students, defended him.

The judge noted that during depositions for the civil case, the girls’ accounts of "when and how often the touching occurred differed from their initial statements and complaints."

After hearing the arguments, the judge recommended Leichty be reprimanded and put on probation for two years, which would have allowed him to return to the classroom. He had a clean record after 17 years of teaching, with consistently positive evaluations and praise from many students who admired him, the judge said.

But the teacher standards commission concluded there was a preponderance of evidence showing Leichty improperly touched students "on or near their breasts," warranting the revocation of his license.

Leichty now runs a plant nursery that he started on the Albany farm where he grew up. He could apply to renew his license. He’s even had job offers from other schools.

But Leichty said he isn’t ready to go back into a classroom. False allegations, he said, have cost him his career, his reputation and tens of thousands of dollars in earnings.

"How do we protect people in my position?" he asked. "Because the reality is there are mistakes that get made."

That question has complicated several bills the Legislature is wrestling with. Senate Bill 48 would make it a felony crime, rape in the third degree, for any school employee to engage in sex with a student, even if the student is 18, the age of consent, or older.

Legislators are amending that bill so that teachers would lose their licenses for having sex with an older student, as most do now, but not go to jail, said Sen. Floyd Prozanski, D-Eugene, chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee where the bill is expected to be introduced.

Senate Bill 45 mandates that an educator suspected of a boundary violation could not work directly with children in a school, community college, university or child care facility until the charge is investigated. Now it is possible for suspected educators to keep teaching while they are being investigated, said Vickie Chamberlain, executive director of the teacher commission.

That bill will be merged with House Bill 2062, which would not only ban secret deals but also allow parents to sue any district that concealed the misconduct of an educator who abused their child, said Rep. Sara Gelser, D-Corvallis, chairwoman of the House Education Committee. The House bill also will be broadened to apply to all school employees, not just licensed educators, she said.

"My commitment is that we are going to pass a bill out," Gelser said. "The primary thing is it is going to keep kids safe. And we are going to do it in a way that doesn’t end the career of educators who actually didn’t do anything wrong."

Bill Graves: billgraves@news.oregonian.com

SALEM-Rep. John Huffman (R-The Dalles) has been appointed Assistant Republican Whip by House Republican Leader Bruce Hanna (R-Roseburg). The appointment enables Rep. Huffman to advance the caucus’ legislative agenda in the Oregon House of Representatives.
 
"It is an honor to be appointed to this leadership position in the House Republican caucus," Rep. Huffman said. "This appointment enables me to play an important role in the caucus’ efforts to improve the economy, promote fiscal responsibility and ensure government accountability."
 
Rep. Huffman will work closely with Rep. Hanna, Deputy Leader Kevin Cameron (R-Salem) and Republican Whip Ron Maurer (R-Grants Pass) on major legislative issues. Rep. Hanna said he chose Rep. Huffman because of his strong work ethic and ability to work effectively with fellow caucus members.
 
"Since he came to the House in mid-2007, Rep. Huffman has become a respected and valued member of our caucus," Rep. Hanna said. "I am pleased to have him on our leadership team. We will count on Rep. Huffman over the coming months to help us achieve our shared goal of building a better Oregon."

###

Public meetings set this week in Madras and Sisters

By Nick Budnick
The Bend Bulletin

February 8, 2009

SALEM — Hasina Squires, a lobbyist for a proposal to build a destination resort inside the Metolius River Basin, says that at a Jan. 9 meeting in Sisters, top aides to Gov. Ted Kulongoski informed her they had the necessary votes in the Legislature to pass a protection plan blocking her client’s project.

“I would disagree with that,” she says was her response.

One month later, Squires is all smiles as she works the halls of the Capitol, and it appears Kulongoski may have more of a fight on his hands than he bargained for.

Amid heavy lobbying, battle lines are taking shape in Salem over the two destination resorts proposed for the Metolius River Basin as well as on a push to tighten the rules on such resorts statewide.

“The halls are filled with lobbyists for the resorts,” said Rep. Gene Whisnant, R-Sunriver.

Two efforts to settle the Metolius issue have gathered momentum in Salem. Each proposal, one by Kulongoski and one by House Democrats, favors a different resort.

In December, Kulongoski touched off the current fracas. He asked his Department of Land Conservation and Development to designate the Metolius for special protection. On Friday, the DLCD issued a draft management plan that would affect the two proposed Metolius resorts in different ways.

Under the DLCD proposal, about 10,000 acres on the edge of the basin owned by the Ponderosa Land and Cattle Co. would be allowed to become a resort, although roughly half of its area would be barred from being developed with houses or golf courses.

The other proposal, a 675-acre resort by Dutch Pacific LLC called the Metolian — the one represented by Squires — would be barred from its current location inside the river basin. State officials are encouraging its developers to move it elsewhere, suggesting that other land previously off-limits to destination resorts could be opened up for that purpose, according to lobbyists, lawmakers and Jefferson County officials.

The Kulongoski-inspired proposal is now the subject of public hearings that start this week and of closed-door talks with county officials and developers — talks that have already begun.

In the background is similar legislation that Kulongoski has suggested for the Metolius basin but is holding in reserve to encourage compromise.

“I’ve fished and camped over there with my kids for 40 years,” Kulongoski said in an interview Thursday. “I just think that’s one of the most pristine areas in the state.”

Efforts to block development

It’s easy to see why the governor might have thought this two-pronged approach had good odds. In 2007, Metolius protection legislation cleared the Senate and appeared likely to become law before Kulongoski requested it be halted pending further review.

However, in the current session, Kulongoski’s new vision for protecting the Metolius is raising concerns among fellow Democrats. A very different approach is forming among them.

That push, spearheaded by Rep. Brian Clem, D-Salem, would block the Ponderosa resort but potentially allow the Metolian proposal to go forward. As head of the Agriculture and Natural Resources Committee, Clem is considered something of a point person among Democrats on land use issues. He said he doubts Kulongoski’s bill would even be passed out of his committee in its current form.

Clem applauds the governor’s concern for the Metolius but questions some of its details. For one thing, he feels that destination resorts should be barred not only from the basin but also from the three-mile area around it — the area in which the Ponderosa project lies.

If Kulongoski’s plan would allow the Ponderosa resort to go forward, Clem said, “that’s going to be a problem for me.”

For another thing, the Salem lawmaker says that if the Metolian’s proponents, who bill their plan as an “eco-resort,” can prove it will have no impact on the environment, then perhaps it could be allowed to proceed within the Metolius basin.

Squires, the Metolian lobbyist, has submitted draft “eco-resort” legislation with the assistance of Whisnant. Its details remain unclear. “I’ll look at it and see if I can support it” when it’s finalized, Whisnant said.

Clem said he is joined by Rep. Ben Cannon, D-Portland, in his ideas, and the two are drafting legislation along these lines. Their bill blocks traditional golf-and-subdivision destination resorts, Clem said, but “leaves the door open for things that are not destination resorts, read ‘eco-resorts.’”

While Clem is considered an important voice among moderate House Democrats, Cannon is viewed as an up-and-coming member of the more liberal wing of the party.

Clem said their joint legislation likely “represents a good idea of where the (Democratic) caucus will go on this.”

His position is echoed by House Speaker Dave Hunt, D-Gladstone, who called it “ironic” that Kulongoski’s bill on the Metolius could halt an ecologically sound proposal like the Metolian.

“My sense is that the bill, in its current form, doesn’t have much of a life,” he said.

Central Oregon lawmakers

The Metolius discussions so far have not been public, leaving Central Oregon lawmakers grasping for information.

The basin lies in the district of Rep. John Huffman, R-The Dalles. He said Friday that he is feverishly gathering information about the dueling approaches forming among the Democrats, noting that “meetings are happening as we speak.”

He said he opposes any solution that disregards local control, noting that Jefferson County has already approved destination resorts in the basin.

Whisnant, for his part, said that while he wants to protect the natural beauty of the Metolius, he also believes in property rights and is suspicious of protection efforts that he views as originating with environmentalists in Portland. “People in Portland shouldn’t dictate what happens in Central Oregon,” he said.

Rep. Judy Stiegler, D-Bend, said she is hopeful the ongoing compromise efforts she’s heard about bear fruit. In the meantime, “I’m gathering information and looking hard at the whole thing,” she said.

Other wild cards are at play in the discussion.

Environmentalists continue to push for stronger protections for the Metolius, and for stronger rules regarding destination resorts around the state.

“We’re hearing a lot of support (among lawmakers) for acting to protect the Metolius,” said Jeremiah Baumann, program director of the group Environment Oregon.

Moreover, property rights advocates are mobilizing. The Kulongoski bill included a provision that would have overruled the Measure 49 requirement that landowners be compensated if their property value was hurt by the new protection plan. Dave Hunnicutt of the group Oregonians in Action calls it “a shining example of hypocrisy.”

Clem agrees that it would be unfair to overrule Measure 49, noting that he and other Democrats campaigned for it.

If the Salem lawmaker speaks for a majority in the House, it potentially puts a major price tag on efforts to regulate destination resorts in the Metolius basin.

For the state to block the Ponderosa’s plans, the cost of compensating the firm “would be in the millions,” said the firm’s lobbyist, Rick Allen, a former Madras mayor.

Other observers think the cost could be in the tens or even hundreds of millions, depending on what plan is adopted.

Richard Whitman, the director of the Department of Land Conservation and Development, said his agency is looking at alternatives to grant relief to landowners, alternatives that don’t cost money. And he cautioned that his agency’s efforts to compromise are just beginning.

“We’re just starting the public process to get ideas for possible compromises,” he said.

The recommendation by his agency, expected to be issued in late March, must be approved by the Legislature.

Informed that his Metolius plan could face an uphill battle, Kulongoski said the various bargaining positions mean little this early in the session, which is scheduled to close at the end of June.

“None of this stuff means anything right now,” he said. “I don’t think that anything here matters until they adjourn.”

Nick Budnick can be reached at 503-566-2839 or at nbudnick@bendbulletin.com.

By Nick Budnick

The Bulletin

Pete Erickson / The Bulletin file photo

A river guide at Big Eddy on the Upper Deschutes in 2007. A bill would require life jackets on this and other Class III rapids.

 

Between May 2001 and August 2008, 10 people died on Oregon rivers in rapids rated Class III or greater. Seven occurred on the Deschutes River, one on the McKenzie River and two on the Rogue River.
Of those:
• Five were wearing their life jackets properly.
• Four were not wearing life jackets.
• One was wearing the life jacket improperly.
Currently, state law requires all people floating Class III rapids on a guided trip to wear life jackets.
A bill introduced Thursday by state Rep. John Huffman, R-The Dalles, would extend that stricture to all floaters in Class III rapids, whether or not they are on a guided trip.
Source: Oregon State Marine Board

SALEM — A group of Deschutes River safety advocates on Thursday told state lawmakers that everyone who floats rivers in Oregon should have to wear a life jacket in dangerous whitewater.

“You will never know how many lives you have saved when you pass this bill — but I will,” said Mark Angel, a Redmond-based whitewater salvage diver who estimates he’s pulled eight corpses from the waters of Oregon and California in the last decade.

The Dalles Republican Rep. John Huffman, whose district includes Jefferson County and the northwest corner of Deschutes County, has introduced a bill that would require all floaters to wear life jackets while they are traversing rapids of Class III or greater.

Since 2006, rafting companies in Bend, Maupin and elsewhere in Oregon have been required to make sure their customers wear life jackets. Guides face a $10 fine if anyone in their vessels is caught violating the law. But people who are not part of a guided trip have no requirement other than that they have life jackets somewhere in their boats.

Huffman’s bill received an informational hearing Thursday before the House Emergency Services and Veterans Affairs Committee, and is expected to receive another hearing before the committee votes on it.

Class III, or intermediate, rapids are defined as requiring complex maneuvering in tight spaces in strong currents, possibly featuring large waves and obstructions such as “strainers” — logs hiding beneath the waves that can snag a person’s body underwater and keep it there. American Whitewater, a nonprofit organization, classifies as Class III the stretch of Deschutes River between Dillon Falls and Lava Island Falls.

Class III “is where whitewater begins,” said a longtime Deschutes River patrol officer, Wasco County Marine Deputy Roger Pearce.

That level of rapids can be found on 16 rivers in Oregon, but it’s on the Deschutes River in the last decade where they’ve been the most dangerous.

From May 2001 through August, seven of the 10 whitewater fatalities in Oregon have occurred on the Deschutes. Of those, four were either not wearing life jackets or not wearing them properly.

Brandishing a cheap red life jacket in his left hand, Pearce, the river patrol officer who spearheaded the bill, told lawmakers that currently anyone can buy a $20 “rubber ducky” inflatable boat and — as long as they don’t have a guide — take on the toughest rapids in the state.

“All you have to do is take this and throw it in the bottom of your boat,” he said. “You’re legal.”

After the hearing, he said that while he sometimes goes days without spotting a rafter braving rapids without a life jacket, some days he’ll see entire boatloads. And river photographers who work for rafting companies often share their photos of rafts coming through rapids, where he sees “picture after picture” of people not wearing life jackets.

Beyond the effect on parents who lose their children, there’s also his agency’s cost of responding to river emergencies, which he said typically costs taxpayers from $1,000 to $5,000 each.

Sherry Holiday, a Wasco County commissioner who operates the county’s volunteer ambulance company, says whitewater fatalities have other costs as well. In 2006, a year when the Deschutes had six fatalities alone, “the phone stopped ringing in the middle of July” at Maupin rafting companies — which are key to the former logging town’s economy, she said.

Huffman said that just as with motorcycle helmets and seat belts, he thinks the infringement on individual rights represented by mandatory life jackets is outweighed by the benefit to society.

“There are certain things where it’s in the greater good, and you have to say, ‘We need to do this,’” he said.

No one spoke in opposition to the bill. It must be approved by both the House and the Senate in Salem before it can be signed into law by Gov. Ted Kulongoski.

Nick Budnick can be reached at 503-566-2830 or nbudnick@bendbulletin.com.

Governor pushing to block resort development in area

By Lauren Dake / The Bulletin

 

Gov. Ted Kulongoski has launched two separate approaches to stop development of destination resorts in the Metolius River Basin.

Last week, the Department of Land Conservation and Development, acting on a request from the governor, started the process to designate the Metolius basin as an Area of Critical Concern.

The governor asked officials to work with local residents and Jefferson County officials to develop a management plan that “should not allow destination resorts within the Metolius basin.”

Kulongoski’s staff described the critical concern designation as Plan A.

If it doesn’t work, the backup plan is through legislation. A bill was recently introduced on behalf of the governor that would ban planned resorts within the basin.

Proposed projects

Unlike Crook and Deschutes counties, Jefferson County doesn’t have any destination resorts, but two proposed resorts have spurred concern about protecting the Metolius River Basin.

The larger one, which is being proposed by the Ponderosa Land and Cattle Co., would be a 2,500-unit development with a golf course.

The other, proposed by Dutch Pacific Resources LLC, would be built on 640 acres, without a golf course, and resort officials said it is more of an eco-resort than a destination resort.

During the Legislature’s 2007 session, the governor opposed a Senate bill that would have banned resorts in the Metolius basin. He said a region-specific ban was a piecemeal approach to statewide land use policies.

“The governor has always believed this area deserves special protection,” said Jillian Schoene, spokeswoman with the governor’s office. “He didn’t support Senate Bill 30 but directed state agencies to explore ways we could protect this area through existing law.

“He heard back and reviewed existing law, and there is only one mechanism to protect this area, and that is the designation of the area as one of critical concern.”

Area of Critical Concern

Michael Morrissey, a policy analyst with the Department of Land Conservation and Development, said the only other time the commission considered using the critical concern designation was in 1977.

“Informally, a critical concern area is an area that is somehow unique,” Morrissey said. “It has unique resource values in terms of natural resources. … It’s an area that presumably needs some special management and designation to not degrade it.”

The Metolius basin would be the first place in the state to receive the designation.

Last week, the agency decided to start the process, which will include a series of public hearings held in Jefferson County in February.

Morrissey said the first step will be to look at the area itself. “What do we want to have happen or not happen in the basin?” he said. “On the radar screen is of course, destination resorts. Do we allow or not allow destination resorts?”

Morrissey said everything from natural resource protection issues to impacts on other jurisdictions, such as transportation, will be considered.

The management plan would include the boundaries for the designation, how big resorts can be, how dense and what kind of protections for the water supply and wildlife would be necessary.

“There is more feedback allowed in this process,” Morrissey said, as opposed to the governor’s proposed legislation.

The governor has asked the agency to complete the process by the mid-March, so there is enough time for the 2009 Legislature to consider the issue. The designation needs legislative approval to be enacted.

The backup plan

In his request to the Department of Land Conservation and Development, via a letter in December, the governor stated he prefers the designation of critical concern. It is a more “collaborative process with Jefferson County and other interested parties and citizens,” the letter said.

But, if that doesn’t work, his proposed bill would both ban planned resorts within the area of the basin and add more requirements for the resorts existing within 10 miles of the basin. The bill also adds that property owners cannot seek compensation because of the state’s decision to not allow them to develop.

That legislation, however, could face some challenges.

“When a local government has made a ruling on the issue like the Metolius, that should be the ruling that stands,” said Michael Gay, communications director for Sen. Ted Ferrioli, R-John Day, whose district includes the Metolius River Basin. “It’s a bad precedent for the state Legislature to become the land use board for individual communities around the state.”

Rep. John Huffman, R-The Dalles, agreed. “I’m disappointed that the governor has chosen to get involved in this matter. I was under the impression he was going to let the process work,” said Huffman, whose House district includes Jefferson County and the northwest corner of Deschutes County.

“We have a process, we have rules; let’s let them do their job,” he said.

Rick Allen, lobbyist for the Ponderosa Land and Cattle Co. destination resort, said he will participate in the critical concern designation process, but when it comes to the governor’s bill, he said, he’s not in favor of changing the rules in the middle of the game.

“We oppose any legislation,” Allen said. “The county has followed the process that was set out by the state of Oregon.

“To change the rules, after the county and developers have spent money based on the laws that were on the books that were well established and well used throughout Central Oregon … we don’t think it’s fair or right.”

Jefferson County approved its destination resort overlay map in 2006. It was appealed to the state Land Use Board of Appeals and into the state courts. The county is waiting for an Oregon Supreme Court decision, which is expected in June.

Allen said the proposed Ponderosa destination resort has approximately 60 percent of its land inside the basin, but about 40 percent, or 4,300 acres, exists outside the basin.

But the other proposed resort’s 640 acres are inside the basin.

Hasina Squires, a lobbyist for the project, said she doesn’t think the eco-resort should even fall under the destination resort statute.

“We’re this kind of odd creature that isn’t really a destination resort, and we’re doing something completely different from a destination resort, but this is the statute that exists today,” she said.

Squires said project officials are expected to seek legislation that would show the project to be something different from a destination resort and proceed in a different matter.

Erik Kancler, the executive director of Central Oregon Landwatch, which supports protecting the Metolius, said he expects the whole process will take many more turns before a decision is made, and he expects more legislation to come.

“If you look anywhere in Oregon that deserves special protection from the threat of development, it’s the Metolius River Basin,” Kancler said.

Lauren Dake can be reached at 541-419-8074 or at ldake@bendbulletin.com.

With money tight, there’s no lack of ideas on the best path through the downturn

By Erin Golden
Bend Bulletin
Monday, January 12, 2009

Oregon lawmakers will report to the Capitol today to begin a session filled with tough choices.

After a year that brought budget cuts, inflation and dropping employment levels across the state, lawmakers said they want to move forward on issues ranging from transportation to education, but they all agree the budget will be at the heart of most discussions during the 2009 session.

Democrats again hold a majority of the seats in both the House and the Senate. Leaders of the party have already unveiled plans for new transportation, health care, public safety and other programs that would be at least partially funded by tax and fee increases — plans that have some Republicans speaking out in opposition.

Legislators on both sides of the aisle, however, said there will be no shortage of work as they try to keep state services running, at a time when a slowing economy is forcing more Oregonians to look to the state for help.

“It is going to be a tough decision-making session, and it’s going to be a busy session,” said Rep. John Huffman, R-The Dalles, whose district includes Jefferson County and part of Deschutes County. “I haven’t heard anybody talking about a lack of bills being introduced.”

(more…)

Legislator says Oregon has the money it needs without cutting vital state programs

By Kathy Gray
of The Dalles Chronicle
Monday, December 29th, 2008

John Huffman shakes his head.

“I expect to be doing this a lot,” said Huffman of his expectations for the 2009 Oregon legislative session. Huffman, a Republican from The Dalles, represents House District 59, which includes Wasco County. Huffman worries that the Democrats have the three-fifths majority they need to “pass any tax bill they want,” which he says are numerous.

“Every one of their 90 proposals — health care, renewable energy, all of them, have got their own little set of invisible fees and tax increases,” Huffman said. They range from a 60-cent tax hike on cigarettes to a doubling of the vehicle registration fee, to variations on the theme. “There are two other tax proposals targeting cigarettes,” Huffman said, not to mention a 2-cent fuel tax and a $100 first-time vehicle registration fee.

The Republican minority take a different view of budget prospects.

“We feel we have enough revenue to do what we’ve been doing without cutting necessary programs,” Huffman said.
Huffman is concerned about some of the things Gov. Ted Kulongoski is proposing to cut from his budget, in light of the reduced revenues predicted because of the economic downturn.

Oregon Project Independence and Small Business Development Center funding are two examples. “A lot of those programs leverage federal money and you don’t want to cut them,” Huffman said. “Those are cheaper dollars. You invest one and get two back.” Oregon Project Independence helps keep senior citizens in their homes through assistance, rather than force them into nursing homes, often at a higher public cost.

The Small Business Development Center helps create small-business jobs and generate tax revenue with help of funding from the Small Business Administration. “To me, it doesn’t make sense to create a bunch of new programs you can’t sustain, and not be able to fund these programs,” Huffman said. At the same time, he says he doesn’t want to see cuts in programs that are investments — that save money or create revenue.

Kindergarten through 12th grade education is another area of concern in Kulongoski’s budget, Huffman noted.
Funding at the 2007-09 biennium level will see the schools come up short once cost of living increases and other cost hikes are factored in.

“Some programs should not be cut, and should be fully funded. Other programs probably can have a stay put on hiring,” Huffman said, adding that he is not a proponent of across-the-board cuts. “It would be nice to be able to just look into the different programs with an efficiency eye from outside and be able to help the agencies. I don’t think real cuts can be made from inside. They have to be done from the outside.”

Huffman supports some form of legislative audit review office “to step in and have a little more say in managing growth. Because once you start a program, how many programs really go away?” While Huffman says he opposes new programs at this point, he says he does support some small increases in taxes and fees when they support necessary, existing programs.

“Transportation, for example, is not a new program,” he said. “The projects have to be done.” The governor is proposing transportation projects for economic stimulus. Huffman says he wants to make sure the stimulus jobs go to private industry, rather than creating additional government bureaucracy. Huffman also says his constituents are supportive of education and community colleges link education to the economy.

“Do you realize that every roughly 50 wind turbines represents six or seven full-time, family-wage, ongoing jobs,” Huffman said, noting that Columbia Gorge Community College provides training the help full those jobs. Huffman says he will continue to promote development of a workforce training center at the college, which he says is supportive the governor’s green agenda.

He was critical of Kulongoski’s budget plans, which include a $15 million shortfall for community college funding, saying those cuts are inconsistent with the sustainable energy message he is delivering on the national and global stage.

Huffman has several bills he is forwarding in the legislative agenda. One is to stiffen the penalties for the crime invasion of personal privacy. The bill was prompted by a local criminal case in which a man spied on people in dressing rooms using surveillance equipment.

Included in the bill is a provision to include spying on prepubescent children as part of the crime. At present, the law excludes such actions from prosecution. “There should be no exclusions,” Huffman said. He is also working with the state locksmith association to to mandate licensure training. A third bill would allow remote and rural schools to operate as charter schools.

None of the bills would increase taxes, Huffman noted.

By State Rep. Dave Hunt
Oregon Speaker of the House
Wednesday, December 24th, 2008
Wallowa County Chieftan

As we prepare for the 2009 Legislative session, Oregon has a host of problems to solve. Like the rest of the country, we’ve been hammered by the national recession and face an uncertain economic future. To get out of this mess, it’s going to take all of us working together – urban and rural, Democrat and Republican; young and old, and even business and labor leaders.

That’s why it was so disappointing to see the Wallowa County Chieftain’s editorial last week, accusing me and House Democrats of being in the pocket of special interest groups and engaging in the same tired, old rhetoric that seeks to divide instead of unite our state.

As the incoming speaker of the Oregon House of Representatives, I’ve worked hard to make myself accessible to editorial writers and reporters across our state. But the Chieftain never even tried to get my side of the story before labeling me as a "too" liberal Democrat in the pocket of unions.

It’s a label that doesn’t stick if you look at my record as a legislator, and at the accomplishments of the 2007 and 2008 legislative sessions that benefit Eastern Oregon.

When voters put Democrats in control of the Oregon House in 2007, we reversed years of serious declines in areas we believe are important to all Oregonians.

• We invested in Head Start and K-12 schools at the highest level ever, and gave new opportunities for young Oregonians to attend all of our community colleges and universities.

• We helped family farmers and ranchers by cutting the estate tax on their property when it is time to pass their land and operations on to their children.

• We passed a water storage plan that will ensure farmers and ranchers have more adequate water supplies for decades to come.

• We approved a plan to finally allow some use of hounds to hunt cougars.

• We added 139 state troopers back to our highways all over Oregon, reversing years of cuts to the Oregon State Police.

• We created Oregon’s first-ever Rainy Day Fund and we set aside almost one million dollars in reserves to protect critical services during future recessions, reversing the prior pattern of spending every dime every session.

It’s easy to play the blame game; to accuse the governor, myself or someone else of causing all of our woes. But there is simply too much at stake for our state to engage in the same kind of divisive politics that got us into this mess in the first place.

All of us in Oregon are going to have to share in the sacrifices necessary to get through this recession. And all of us should strive to avoid the name calling and political rhetoric that characterized the campaign season in Oregon and across the nation.

I have appointed Eastern Oregon’s Republican Representatives – Cliff Bentz, John Huffman, Bob Jenson, and Greg Smith – to key positions on House committees. In fact, I appointed Rep. Jenson to chair the Ways and Means Natural Resources Subcommittee, a key post for rural Oregon. Our two new Democratic representatives from east of the Cascades – Judy Stiegler and Suzanne VanOrman – are already capably representing the interests of rural Oregon within the House Democratic Caucus.

And I, as speaker, will pledge to you fairness, openness and the willingness to listen to your concerns. All I ask in return is the same fairness, and the same opportunity to make my case to the Chieftain and the citizens of Wallowa County.

We may disagree on issues, but you will never know how I stand just from listening only to political opponents with a vested interest in making us look bad … or from reading an isolated quote in a newspaper … or from holding on to old and tired notions that don’t move us toward solving our budget crisis and the policy challenges that face Oregon.

Disagree with me all you like, but if you want to know where I stand on the issues, all you have to do is ask.

Huffman for Representative

The Dalles Chronicle
October 19th, 2008

      District 59 voters have the happiest — and rarest — dilemma in politics: Two excellent candidates for the same office.
     It is indicative of their quality that both agreed early to run a principled campaign, devoid of mudslinging, and have kept to it.
     District 59 is a monster, encompassing all or part of nine counties. It’s tough to get known widely throughout the district.
     Mike Ahern is from Madras. He’s a Realtor and small businessman who owns Ahern’s Grocery and Black Butte General Store.
     He brings lots of government experience as a member of the Madras city council and as a Jefferson County commissioner. He’s also served on the Deschutes River Management Commission, the 509-J School District budget committee, the Madras planning commission and others
     John Huffman is a familiar local figure in The Dalles. For 22 years he was the manager and part owner of Q-104 radio station. He also managed orchards in Parkdale.
     Huffman served on the Oregon Investment Board and on The Dalles Area Chamber of Commerce economic development committee.
     But his strongest government experience is as the incumbent State Representative for District 59.
     He was appointed to fill the position after the resignation of Rep. John Dallum last August, so has had 14 months in the office, including service in the special 2008 session earlier this year.
     Either candidate would serve the voters of District 59 well, but Huffman has clearly demonstrated not only an aptitude for the job, but a willingness to listen carefully and consider all aspects of a position.
     In his tenure so far, Huffman has shown a commendable ability to find consensus and practical solutions.
     We believe John Huffman is right for the job and will best represent the people of District 59.

The Madras Pioneer
October 18th, 2008

In contrast with other state and national races, congeniality ruled when the candidates for state representative met at a forum in Madras Oct. 10. Jefferson County Commissioner Mike Ahern, of Madras, and Rep. John Huffman, of The Dalles, answered more than a dozen questions at the Chamber of Commerce’s second candidate forum.

Both Ahern, 52, a Democrat, and Huffman, 51, a Republican, agreed that it was unfortunate that the Office of Rural Policy closed its doors in Salem earlier this year. The office addressed the unique challenges facing rural counties, such as those in District 59.

"We’ve got to advocate for higher grants for rural counties," Ahern said, noting that he was very disappointed with the change. Huffman said he has been working with others on a plan to divide the state into zones which could be exempted from certain pieces of legislation. "We need to get our unfair share," he said.

Legislative audits also drew support from both candidates. Huffman said he would like to have an "outside force look at things and make some right decisions." Calling himself a conservative fiscal leader, Ahern said he favors the Rainy Day Fund, but disagrees with Huffman about cutting state income tax. Because of "tough times," he said, "I don’t think we can do that."

Both men ranked education and economic development as among their top priorities. “You can’t separate those; if we’re going to build our economy, you have to put education first," said Huffman, noting that when companies consider locating in an area, "they look at the education system first."

The recent lack of emphasis on arts, music and vocational-agricultural classes in schools concerns both candidates. "The country needs to make a giant change," said Ahern. "We need to invest in public education and economic development." The two candidates have similar stances on illegal immigration and work programs for those entering the U.S. legally for employment purposes. "We need to have a guest worker program," said Huffman, who also supports a pathway to citizenship for longtime residents.

Ahern agreed, commenting that there are thousands of migrant workers in the area. "We absolutely have to have a guest worker program," he said, noting that the current situation has caused animosity. "We need to get them documented and legal."

"I agree with Mike, and I’m ashamed of the majority of the (Republican) party," Huffman said. "We need to remember we should be a God-loving, God-fearing country." On the subject of a sales tax, Ahern said it’s a dead issue. "I’m not going to spend my time on it. I think we’re stuck with what we have unless someone shows me something better."

Huffman pointed out that Oregon voters have turned sales tax proposals down nine times. "I think the only plan voters would support would be a limit on property tax, income tax and sales tax," he said. "It would have to go to voters."

For low-income families, Huffman would like to strengthen rural health clinics and add more school-based health centers. With federal revenue likely to decline, Ahern is concerned about the future of the Oregon Health Plan, which receives about 60 cents from the federal government for every 40 cents the state puts in.

"I do think the Oregon Health Plan is a good thing," he said, "but I’m worried that the federal government isn’t going to be a good partner in the future." Asked about tribal sovereignty, and the practice of states withholding money from tribes if they don’t follow rules, such as the no-smoking law, Huffman said he sees both sides.

"Every situation is different," he said. In the case of no-smoking law, however, Huffman said, "I’m not a regulatory guy. I’m not in favor of the no-smoking law in bars." Ahern said tribes "shouldn’t have to abide by our rules."

Opinions were short and sweet about same-sex marriages. "I have no trouble with it," said Ahern, but, "I wouldn’t want the government forcing churches to abide by it." As his grandfather would have said, "I’m agin’ it," Huffman said. Ahern and Huffman were both strongly in favor of the Central Oregon Community College bond measure, which would fund a Madras facility. "We need to get behind higher education," said Ahern, "and take care of our youth." Huffman agreed, "Community colleges based in your community are phenomenal."

Candidate backgrounds
A second-term county commissioner, Ahern is also employed as a realtor with Coldwell Banker, Dick Dodson Realty. He graduated from Madras High School, and has a bachelor’s degree in political science from the University of Oregon.

Ahern has three sons, Aaron, 25, Jared, 23, and Carson, 19, and he and his wife Jane are expecting a fourth son in November.

Besides serving as state representative since his appointment in August of 2007, Huffman is a commercial property owner and manager. He serves on several Oregon House of Representative committees, especially those dealing with education, workforce and economic development. A high school graduate, Huffman said he attended "some college." Huffman and his wife Korina have eight grown children and 10 grandchildren.