Petition to Grants Pass City Manager Aaron Cubic, leaflet

Petition to Grants Pass City Manager Aaron Cubic

Leave marijuana growers alone; target litter and weeds

On July 1, the day that marijuana became legal to possess and grow in Oregon, I planted seeds in my greenhouse.  That evening, the Grants Pass City Council started to pass a nuisance code to ban outdoor marijuana in the city, and defining a greenhouse such that a greenhouse or sunroom would be out of compliance.  We would have to grow pot under lights, with fans and filters, or not at all.

They would force us to grow it only in our primary residence, in a highly secure grow room, not allowing any sight, sign or scent of marijuana growing, processing or storage outside of  that room—outside or inside our homes. 

They did this in the name of protecting thieves from their own worst impulses, under the theory that growing marijuana is an “attractive nuisance” to thieves.  Attractive nuisance statutes are usually written to protect children and idiots, who might get hurt by property such as swimming pools and junk refrigerators and cars.  This is the first one that I’ve seen written to protect thieves.

The smell of pot plants matters in this ordinance only as a sign of cultivation.  If anyone complains about the scent of skunk or cat urine, (in a city where skunks and cats run widely and stink often) undue traffic, excessive parking, excessive light, or excessive noise, cops can get a search warrant and snoop around our yard and inside our house to see if we are growing and if they can find any sign of it outside that grow room.  If they find such signs, they can eventually declare our property a nuisance and abate the nuisance, presumably by taking our plants, and fine us up to $720 per day of continuing violation.

They would never do this to themselves, their recreation, or their medicine, to protect thieves, idiots or children.  What business do they have, specifying our security measures, telling us how to protect our crops from thieves, in a manner which makes it impractical to grow the crop at all?  Do they do this against any other legal activity or product? 

We have real nuisances and proper nuisance codes against them, which are not enforced. Litter and seeding weeds bring down neighborhood property values; attract thieves, vagrants and vandals; make it harder to garden and maintain property; pop bike tires; make our town unattractive to orderly, respectable people; and make our people look lazy.  

You were told by your performance auditor that you need to enforce our landscape maintenance codes; that enforcement by complaint is not enforcement, is not fair to people who pay you to enforce the law, and does not work.  The city takes and ignores complaints until a property becomes a fire safety hazard, and then abates the nuisance at 20% over cost, profiting off of growing safety hazards while making us put up with continual nuisances.  It would be kinder to everyone and far safer to warn the residents and owners when the mess is small and easy to clean up and stop growing hazards to be harvested.

Please stay enforcement of the “Homegrownand Medical Marijuana” nuisance code Chapter 5.72 until its validity is fully litigated, and to actively enforce our litter and weed codes to start cleaning up this city and make it safer and easier to live in.

September 18, 2015 advisory petition, circulated at 6^th and G on Saturdays, 11:00-1:00.  Longer version online at Change.org, https://t.co/l7oJgGKeGc 

Follow @AnRycke on Twitter and GP Gardener on Facebook.  Support the lawsuit at GoFundMe.com/HomegrownDefense

Rycke Brown, Natural Gardener          541-955-9040        rycke@gardener.com

CHAPTER 5.72: HOMEGROWN AND MEDICAL MARIJUANA

CHAPTER 5.72

HOMEGROWN AND MEDICAL MARIJUANA

Sections:

        5.72.010    Intent and Purpose

        5.72.020    Definitions

        5.72.030    Homegrown and Medical Marijuana Subject to Regulation

        5.72.040    Public Nuisance Remedy

        5.72.050    Violation

        5.72.060    Conflict of Laws

5.72.010 Intent and Purpose

The City Council of the City of Grants Pass recognizes that citizens of the state of Oregon may engage in both recreational and medical use of marijuana in accordance with State law.  However, the City Council also recognizes that cultivating, drying, producing, processing, keeping, or storage of marijuana, without appropriate safeguards in place, can have a detrimental effect on public safety and neighboring citizens.  The City Council finds and declares that the health, safety, and welfare of its citizens are promoted by requiring marijuana cultivators engaged in recreational and medicinal cultivation, drying, producing, processing, keeping, or storage of marijuana to ensure that said marijuana is not accessible, visible, or odorous to other persons or property, or otherwise illegal under Oregon state law.

5.72.020 Definitions:

“Homegrown Marijuana” means any marijuana cultivated, dried, produced, processed, kept, or stored for personal recreational use by a person 21 years of age or older in accordance with State law.

       

“Household” means a housing unit, and includes any indoors structure or accessory dwelling unit in or around the housing unit at which the occupants of the housing unit are cultivating, drying, producing, processing, keeping or storing homegrown marijuana.

       

“Housing Unit” means a house; a mobile home; a manufactured home; and/or a group of rooms that is occupied as separate living quarters, in which the occupants live and eat separately from any other persons in the building and which have direct access from the outside of the building or through a common hall, including an individual residential unit in an apartment, duplex, townhome, condominium, or senior living facility.

       

“Indoors/Indoor Structure” means within a fully enclosed and secure structure that complies with the Oregon Residential Specialty Code (ORSC) or Oregon Structural Specialty Code (OSSC) as adopted by the City of Grants Pass, which has a complete roof enclosure supported by connecting walls extending from the foundation/slab to the roof.  The structure must be secure against unauthorized entry, accessible only through one or more lockable doors, and constructed of solid materials that cannot easily be broken through, such as 2X4 or larger wood studs covered with 3/8” or thicker weather-resistant siding or equivalent materials.  Plastic sheeting, regardless of gauge, or similar products, do not satisfy this requirement.

       

“Marijuana” means all parts of the plant Cannabis Moraceae, including, but not limited to, its dried leaves and flowers, any marijuana products derived therefrom. (sic) The term includes any and all homegrown marijuana, medical marijuana, non-medical marijuana, and marijuana products defined in this section.

       

“Marijuana Cultivator” means a medical marijuana grower, recreational marijuana homegrower, patient, and any landlord or property owner allowing marijuana to be cultivated, dried, produced, processed, kept or stored at a premises. (sic)

       

“Medical Marijuana Grower” means any person engaged in the cultivation, drying, production, processing, keeping, or storage of medical marijuana in accordance with state law, and includes but is not limited to the meaning set out at OAR 333-008-0010(11)&(21).

       

“Patient” means a person who has been diagnosed by an attending physician with a debilitating medical condition and for whom the use of medical marijuana may mitigate the symptoms or effects of the person’s debilitating medical condition, and who has been issued a registry card by the Oregon Health Authority.

       

“Premises” means a household, medical marijuana grow site, homegrown marijuana grow site, and/or primary residence of a patient. 

       

“Property” means any home, business, or public right-of-way.

5.72.030 Homegrown and Medical Marijuana Subject to Regulation:

A.   Marijuana cultivators shall be allowed to cultivate, produce, or process homegrown marijuana and medical marijuana subject to the following conditions:

1.   Cultivation, production, processing or storage of marijuana must be in full compliance with all applicable provisions of OMMA and Measure 91.

2.   All cultivation, curing, drying, storage, production, or processing of marijuana shall be conducted indoors….

3.   Cultivation, production, processing or storage of marijuana shall not be perceptible from the exterior of the household, housing unit, and/or indoor structure including but not limited to:

a. Common visual observation, which would prohibit any form of signage;

b. Odors, smells, fragrances, or other olfactory stimulus;

c. Light pollution, glare or brightness that disturbs the repose of another;

d. Undue vehicular or foot traffic, including excess parking within a residential zone; and

e. Excessive noise that disturbs the repose of another in violation of GPMC

5.12.110.

4.  Cultivation, production, or processing of marijuana plants shall be within a secure, defined area;

5.  Cultivation, production, processing or possession of marijuana shall be within the requirements of all adopted building and life safety codes;

6.  Cultivation, production, or processing of marijuana shall meet the requirements of all adopted water and sewer regulations promulgated by the city and any special district having jurisdiction;

7.  Disposal of any excess or unused marijuana, marijuana products or any of the byproducts thereof shall meet any and all local and state requirements for disposal, and shall be disposed of in a secure fashion so as to avoid access by children, visitors and casual passersby, vandals, or anyone not licensed or authorized to possess medical or homegrown marijuana.

8.  Such cultivation, production, or processing of marijuana in a commercial or industrial structure, located in a commercial or industrial zone shall meet the following requirements:

a.   The use must be conducted indoors;

b.  The premises must not be vacant and there shall be an actual daily presence, use, and occupancy of the premises by an owner, tenant, employee or agent thereof.

9.  Such cultivation, production, or processing of marijuana in residential zones or in a housing unit shall meet the following requirements:

a.   Such cultivation, production, or processing of marijuana shall only be conducted within the primary residence of the marijuana cultivator;

b.  Marijuana plants shall not be cultivated, processed, or possessed in the common areas of a multi-family or attached residential development such as townhomes, apartments or condominiums.

c.   For purposes of this ordinance, “primary residence” means the place that a person, by custom and practice, makes his or her principle domicile, and address and (sic) to which the person intends to return, following any temporary absence, such as vacation.  Residence is evidenced by actual daily physical presence, use, and occupancy of the primary residence and the use of the residential address for domestic purposes, such as, but not limited to, slumber, preparation of and partaking of meals, regular mail delivery, vehicle and voter registration, or credit, water, and utility billing.  A person shall have only one primary residence, which may include an indoor structure or accessory dwelling unit, provided that the indoor structure or accessory dwelling unit is located on the same tax lot as the primary residence.

10.  For purposes of this ordinance, “a secure” area means an area within the primary residence or indoor structure accessible only to the patient or primary caregiver or marijuana cultivator.  Secure premises shall be locked or partitioned off to prevent access by minors, visitors, casual passersby, vandals, or anyone not licensed and authorized to possess medical or homegrown marijuana.

       

     B.  Licensed commercial grows, as defined in Measure 91, are prohibited in all residential zones.

5.72.040 Public Nuisance Remedy

     A.  Any household, housing unit, premises, property, building, structure, or place of any kind where medical or homegrown marijuana is grown, processed, manufactured, bartered, distributed, or given away in violation of state law or this chapter, or any place where medical or homegrown marijuana is kept or possessed for sale, barter, distribution, or gift in violation of state law or this chapter, is a public nuisance per Chapter 8.04.

B.   In addition to the foregoing, two or more violations in a 30-day period may be deemed a Chronic Nuisance Property subject to provisions of Chapter 5.12.

     C. In addition to any remedies provided in Chapter 5.12, the City may institute an action in municipal or circuit court in the name of the City to abate, and to temporarily and permanently enjoin such nuisance.  The court has the right to make temporary and final orders as in other injunction proceedings.  The City shall not be required to give bond for such action.

5.72.050 Violation

In addition to treatment as a nuisance, all violations of this title are subject to punishment under the general penalty provisions in Chapter 1.16. (sic--Actually Chapter 1.36)  Each day in which a violation continues shall constitute a separate violation.

5.72.060 Conflict of laws

In the event of any conflict between this ordinance and the provisions of any applicable state or local law, the more restrictive provision shall control.

5.72.060 Severability

The sections, subsections, paragraphs, and clauses of this Ordinance are severable.  The validity of one section, subsection, paragraph, or clauses shall not affect the validity of the remaining sections, subsections, paragraphs, and clauses.

Breaking 4 laws with 1 code

8 weeks old, from seed that sprouted July 9th

Councilors, Mayor and Manager:

          You each took an oath to obey the laws of the State of Oregon.  You have managed to break 4 Oregon laws in passing one code and failing to stay its enforcement when you were told that it is illegal.  This may be a new record in breaking state laws with a local code.  

Don’t tell us that you were obeying federal law in banning outdoor marijuana, because federal law completely bans it, and you are allowing indoor growing under lights.  You have allowed outdoor medical cultivation for the last 17 years without any interference until now.  It’s not your job to enforce federal law.  The feds are not enforcing it because the Supreme Court told them they can’t, back in the Bush era.

          The first of three Oregon laws, Measure 91, you broke twice, the first time in passing a 5% sales tax on marijuana in clear violation of  M 91’s ban on local pot taxes and long before the legislature allowed you only 3% sales tax in House Bill 3400, revenue which you plan to spurn by banning sales in the city.

You broke Measure 91 again when you banned all outdoor growing of marijuana without authority from the state.  You need state permission because our legislature had already banned local governments and voters from inhibiting or preventing the production, sales and use of agricultural items in Senate Bill 863 in 2013.   Carl Wilson wrote you an email about that before you began to pass it.  Some of you had read it.

SB 863 applies to marijuana and other crops, except where the legislature allows local regulation and/or taxes.  HB 3400 allows reasonable restrictions on time, place and manner of growing commercial and medical marijuana, separately amending licensing rules in Measure 91 and the Oregon Medical Marijuana Act.  Forcing everyone to grow indoors under the code’s definition of “indoors” is not reasonable, so you broke HB 3400, Measure 91, and the Oregon Medical Marijuana Act.

But we don’t need a license for four homegrown plants, so SB 863 protects our right to be free of local restrictions on homegrown marijuana as long as we stay within the state’s rules.

You have managed to break 4 Oregon laws with your code.  You will be hearing from my attorney.

December 2nd update: I had to fire my first attorney and have retained new counsel, Andrew Deweese of Portland.  I am raising funds to pay him at www.GoFundMe.com/HomegrownDefense.  A trial date is set for June; hearing on the City’s motion for summary judgment is set for February 8^th.

                   

September 2nd speech and protest issue, published at GardenGrantsPass.blogspot.com, revised 12/12/15

Sign the petition at https://t.co/l7oJgGKeGc

Read the ordinance at http://gardengrantspass.blogspot.com/2015/09/chapter-572-homegrown-and-medical.html

Support the lawsuit at www.GoFundMe.com/HomegrownDefense 

Rycke Brown, Natural Gardener          541-955-9040        rycke@gardener.com

Rogue Governments

The NO MORE DRUG WAR protest returns to Grants Pass

The spirit of the Rogue River Indians haunts this valley, in their name on the Rogue River; the Rogue Valley; Valley of the Rogue State Park; and numerous business names.  French-Canadian fur buyers called them “coquins,” which translates to “rogues.”  They also named La Riviere aux Coquins, later called the Rogue River, as were the various related tribes that lived along it.  Some tribes were killed off; others were put on reservations outside the Rogue River Valley, except for Indian Mary, whose father betrayed his people. 

People grow up here thinking that “rogue” is a good thing, though they know the meaning of the word.  But as the name of their home, they identify with it.  Our city councils seem to take a roguish pleasure in thumbing their noses at the state and people, especially poor people, and ignoring any law that they find inconvenient, even their own.

For instance, in Grants Pass we have longstanding property maintenance “nuisance” codes that the city council and manager find inconvenient to enforce, despite the provision in our charter that our city manager must enforce all city codes.  Noxious and nuisance weeds grow mostly unchecked and trash litters many properties, but it would be an expensive bother for big property owners to clean up their properties, so they don’t make them do it.  Some might have to sell their vacant lots rather than wait for the price that they think that they are worth, if they had to maintain them.  They target an occasional residential property when people complain enough, but refuse to enforce property maintenance codes generally.

And yet, the Council passed a new nuisance code targeting marijuana, banning it outdoors in all its forms including possession of dried product, and calling greenhouses outdoors, despite 4 state laws to the contrary: Measure 91; the Oregon Medical Marijuana Act; House Bill 3400, which modified both; and Senate Bill 863 (2013), which forbids local governments and voters from enacting or enforcing any local measure or ordinance that inhibits or prevents production, marketing, or distribution of agricultural products. 

People have called them Good Old Boys for taking care of their rich friends and oppressing the poor, but they are really rogues, taking care of people as roguish as they are, those who do not love their neighbors, only themselves and their friends.

                   

August 21, 2015 protest issue, published at GardenGrantsPass.blogspot.com

Follow @AnRycke on Twitter; GP Gardener on Facebook; see GPgardener.com for links to my blogs

Rycke Brown, Natural Gardener          541-955-9040        rycke@gardener.com

Legislate in haste, repent at leisure

Honorable Mayor and Council,

            “Marry in haste, repent at leisure.”  The same could be said for legislating. 

It pays to give people time to think about a proposal, and inform you about its consequences.  It pays for you to take time to think on what they said and search out more information.  That’s why our county charter requires two readings of an ordinance, two weeks apart, with public comment at each, before the Board of County Commissioners votes on it.

            July 15^th, you passed an illegal ordinance banning marijuana outdoors with no public comment allowed, because you had voted for it two weeks before, after only one reading when you were tired and irritated with the people telling you not to do it.  On the 15^th, I wanted to tell you that Representative Carl Wilson had told you by email that it was illegal before the first reading and point out exactly why it was illegal, but I was not allowed to; your ears were stopped by your previous vote.  I will tell you at your next meeting; I’ll be talking about this as long as it takes to fix it.

            Sometime before I started attending City Council meetings, some Council lost the point of having a second reading of an ordinance.  They started your present routine of: vote to read; vote on the ordinance; immediately vote to read it again; and vote again if the vote for the second reading is unanimous, which it usually is.  Otherwise, the 2nd reading is held off until the next meeting.   And you are supposed to talk to no one about it in the meantime.  Really?

            What is the point of this ritual?  It’s just a rigmarole, which makes no sense and ticks people off.  It is an avoidance of information from the public, a rush to judgment, thinly disguised as procedure.  I’ve never seen the Board of County Commissioners reconsider an ordinance.  It is common with the City Council.

            Please reconsider your outdoor pot ban, which, your Recorder read in the second reading, includes possession.  I do not want to sue you over it.  I do want you to pass a city sales tax.  This ordinance and that tax campaign are not compatible. 

You can’t offend the poor, pot smokers, and shop owners and expect to keep your seats, much less pass a sales tax.  You can, however, reconsider and repent your illegal ordinance, and adopt the County’s procedure for passing ordinances.  A little repentance and reform can soothe a lot of hurt feelings.

P.S. Their unknowing prohibition of outdoor possession got an immediate response from one councilor.  She explained that it is too late to reconsider the ordinance; it cannot now be changed or repealed for 6 months.  I said that the Manager must stay enforcement of it; publicize it, so we need not fear to call the cops; and the Council must repeal it in 6 months.  I repeated this in an email to the Council, Mayor, and Staff, and gave them two weeks to do it or I will retain an attorney and sue.

                   

August 5^th speech and protest issue, published in GardenGrantsPass.blogspot.com

Follow @AnRycke on Twitter; GP Gardener on Facebook; check out GPgardener.com for blogs

Rycke Brown, Natural Gardener          541-955-9040        rycke@gardener.com

The ordinance was amended September 16, 2016, to remove any references to possession.  The rest of it is still quite illegal.

“GP nixes outdoor pot plants”? Let’s sue!

A pot plant, legally planted after July 1, 2015

The Grants Pass City Council banned outdoor growing of marijuana, even in a greenhouse, on July 15^th, in an emergency nuisance ordinance, after having been told by our state Rep. Carl Wilson, that it would violate Senate Bill 863 (2013), now ORS 633.738, which reserves the regulation of agricultural items to the state.  Let’s sue them.

SB 863 was passed in 2013 in response to the anti-GMO initiative being petitioned in Jackson County, but it applies to all seed-bearing farmed plants.  SB 863 became ORS 633.738 and is printed below.  It exempted only Jackson County’s GMO ban.  But it can be overridden where the state specifically allows it in other laws.

Attorney Paul Loney briefed the Oregon Sungrowers (OregonSungrown.org) on the implementation of Measure 91 and the changes to the Oregon Medical Marijuana program in House Bill 3400 (2015).  M 91 allows local governments to impose “reasonable time, place, and manner restrictions” on licensed recreational growers.  “Reasonable” is the operative word here.

HB 3400 also brought new Oregon Health Authority rules to medical growers, with a list of various limits on plant numbers, depending on how many patients a grower was supplying as of December 31, 2014; whether they are located in or out of a city; and whether patients stay with the grower.  None may grow more than 96 plants, and if they co-license with OLCC to grow recreational pot, they are still held to medical plant limits.  OHA rules allow only specific types of local “reasonable regulations” on medical growers and dispensaries.  Medical cardholders growing 12 plants or less at their own residences are free of inspections.

But the OLCC licensing rules do not apply to those who stay within the homegrown limits: 4 plants; 8 ounces of dried bud or leaf; 1 pound of edibles; and 72 ounces of liquid product, all kept out of sight of public places.  OHA limits apply only to medical cardholders.  SB 863 protects homegrowers from local restrictions.

Even if it is found to be reasonable to force commercial and medical growers to grow only indoors in the city, SB 863 does not allow any local restrictions on those not subject to licensing rules.

This homegrower wants to sue Grants Pass and request an injunction to stop enforcement of their illegal blanket ban on outdoor growing of pot.  I am raising money on GoFundMe.com to retain an attorney.  See the “Homegrown Defense Fund” at http://www.gofundme.com/zb38423u.

P.S.  I borrowed $5000 to get this lawsuit started.  I would do so if I was cited; it is better to sue.  It will not be added to the fund, but will be repaid if it is not used, and repaid from the city if it is.

 GoFundMe campaigns have no limit or end date.  The Homegrown Defense Fund will be held in a special account to be available if the city again threatens our homegrown rights.  In 5 years, it will become the Keep The Rogues Honest Fund, for general defense of poor people’s rights against Rogue government.  It will be used only for legal fees.

The Grants Pass ordinance has not been codified yet; it can be found in the July 15th meeting packet at  //www.grantspassoregon.gov/AgendaCenter/ViewFile/Agenda/07152015-1253

                   

July 2015 protest issue, published in GardenGrantsPass.blogspot.com

Follow @AnRycke on Twitter; GP Gardener on Facebook; check out GPgardener.com for blogs

Rycke Brown, Natural Gardener          541-955-9040        rycke@gardener.com

SB 863 (2013) is ORS 633.738

Courtesy of Paul Loney, Attorney at Law:

633.738 Prohibition of local laws to inhibit or prevent production or use of seeds or products of seeds.

(1) As used in this section:
(a) “Local government” has the meaning given that term in ORS 174.116.
(b) “Nursery seed” means any propagant of nursery stock as defined
in ORS 571.005.

(2) Except as provided in subsection (3) of this section, a local government may not enact or enforce a local law or measure, including but not limited to an ordinance, regulation, control area or quarantine, to inhibit or prevent the production or use of agricultural seed, flower seed, nursery seed or vegetable seed or products of agricultural seed, flower seed, nursery seed or vegetable seed. The prohibition imposed by this subsection includes, but is not limited to, any local laws or measures for regulating the display, distribution, growing, harvesting, labeling, marketing, mixing, notification of use, planting, possession, processing, registration, storage, transportation or use of agricultural seed, flower seed, nursery seed or vegetable seed or products of agricultural seed, flower seed, nursery seed or vegetable seed.

(3) Subsection (2) of this section does not prohibit a local government from enacting or enforcing a local law or measure to inhibit or prevent the production or use of agricultural seed, flower seed, nursery seed or vegetable seed or products of agricultural seed, flower seed, nursery seed or vegetable seed on property owned by the local government. [2013 s.s.1 c.4 §3]

Note: Section 4, chapter 4, Oregon Laws 2013 (first special session), provides:
Sec. 4. Section 3 (sic?) of this 2013 special session Act [633.738] does not apply to any local measure that was:
(1) Proposed by initiative petition and, on or before January 31, 2013, qualified for placement on the ballot in a county; and (2) Approved by the electors of the county at an election held on May 20, 2014. [2013 s.s.1 c.4 §4]

SB 863 (2013) is ORS 633.738

Courtesy of Paul Loney, Attorney at Law:

633.738 Prohibition of local laws to inhibit or prevent production or use of seeds or products of seeds.

(1) As used in this section:

(a) “Local government” has the meaning given that term in ORS 174.116.

(b) “Nursery seed” means any propagant of nursery stock as defined
in ORS 571.005.

(2) Except as provided in subsection (3) of this section, a local government may not enact or enforce a local law or measure, including but not limited to an ordinance, regulation, control area or quarantine, to inhibit or prevent the production or use of agricultural seed, flower seed, nursery seed or vegetable seed or products of agricultural seed, flower seed, nursery seed or vegetable seed. The prohibition imposed by this subsection includes, but is not limited to, any local laws or measures for regulating the display, distribution, growing, harvesting, labeling, marketing, mixing, notification of use, planting, possession, processing, registration, storage, transportation or use of agricultural seed, flower seed, nursery seed or vegetable seed or products of agricultural seed, flower seed, nursery seed or vegetable seed.

(3) Subsection (2) of this section does not prohibit a local government from enacting or enforcing a local law or measure to inhibit or prevent the production or use of agricultural seed, flower seed, nursery seed or vegetable seed or products of agricultural seed, flower seed, nursery seed or vegetable seed on property owned by the local government. [2013 s.s.1 c.4 §3]

Note: Section 4, chapter 4, Oregon Laws 2013 (first special session), provides:

Sec. 4. Section 3 of this 2013 special session Act [633.738] does not apply to any local measure that was:
(1) Proposed by initiative petition and, on or before January 31, 2013, qualified for placement on the ballot in a county; and (2) Approved by the electors of the county at an election held on May 20, 2014. [2013 s.s.1 c.4 §4]

Follow @AnRycke on Twitter; GP Gardener on Facebook; check out GPgardener.com for blogs

Rycke Brown, Natural Gardener          541-955-9040        rycke@gardener.com

I suspect that Section 4 has a typo in referring to section 3 when it actually is supposed to apply to Section 2.  I found the same typo online at OregonLaws.org.