Rasmussen v. Kroger
262 P.3d 777
| Or. | 2011Background
- Petitioners Rasmussen and Darby challenge the Attorney General's certified ballot title for Initiative Petition 15 (2012) before the Oregon Supreme Court.
- The measure would phase out estate and inheritance taxes and taxes on intra-family property transfers, superseding current Oregon law.
- AG-certified caption and yes/no vote statements are challenged by petitioners as not conforming to statutory standards.
- Court reviews caption under ORS 250.035(2)(a) and ORS 250.085(5), including the 15-word caption limit and identification of subject matter.
- Court distinguishes Rasmussen but concludes Initiative Petition 15 is a statutory change requiring disclosure of the scope of change in the caption.
- Court remands the ballot title to AG for modifications to the caption and yes/no vote statements (and possibly the summary) in light of HB 2541.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Caption accuracy and scope disclosure | Petitioners contend caption understates scope. | Kroger argues caption identifies subject matter within 15 words. | Caption must acknowledge scope; remanded for modification. |
| Yes/No statements convey current law | Yes/no statements do not inform that only $1M+ estates are taxed. | No and Yes statements, together, inform the current scheme and proposed change. | Statements must separately inform that current law taxes $1 million+ estates; remanded for modification. |
| Revenue impact in caption | Caption should reflect revenue reduction | Revenue effects are not central to caption and belong in the results. | Not required in caption; focus remains on scope; may be discussed if necessary in remand. |
| Summary accuracy in light of HB 2541 | Summary may become inaccurate due to statutory change. | AG may adjust summary to reflect updated law. | Remand to modify summary to address HB 2541; caption and yes/no statements also remanded. |
Key Cases Cited
- Rasmussen v. Kroger, 350 Or. 533 (Or. 2011) (caps on estate/inheritance taxes; informs scope when reviewing ballot captions)
- Whitsett v. Kroger, 348 Or. 243 (Or. 2010) (requires caption to inform substantive change in law)
- Kain/Waller v. Myers, 337 Or. 36 (Or. 2004) (caption must disclose major structural changes to law within limits)