FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Priorities for a Healthy Oregon Unveiled

Oregon’s most influential conservation organizations are ready for the next legislative session. The “Priorities for a Healthy Oregon” include expanding Oregon’s electronic recycling program, investing in renewable energy, decreasing dependence on foreign oil through the promotion of biofuels, and addressing the issue of toxics in our waterways.  The coalition also remains committed to retaining Oregon’s landmark environmental safeguards – including the protection of forests, farmland, rivers, fish and wildlife.  The Oregon Conservation Network (OCN), a coalition of over forty leading environmental organizations, helped to decide the Priorities.

“The 2007 Legislature needs to take action to promote a better future for our children,” says Sybil Ackerman, Legislative Affairs Director for the Oregon League of Conservation Voters, “The Priorities focus the political power of the conservation community on specific goals.” Ackerman coordinates the OCN and is responsible for promoting the Priorities for a Healthy Oregon to the 2007 Legislature.

This is only the second time an undertaking of this magnitude has taken place.  Historically environmental organizations worked their own issues separately with minimal coordination.  “Our new framework allows the conservation community to pool resources and have a central place to work on passing legislation,” says Ackerman.  A new coalition web site is launched today to illustrate the united effort.  The link is www.OregonPriorities.Org.  

The Priorities for a Healthy Oregon match up with what Oregonians most care about. “A robust local biofuels industry means less dependence on foreign oil, a cleaner environment, greater rural economic development and more jobs for Oregonians,” says Lindsey Capps of the Oregon Environmental Council. “That’s a win-win for Oregon.”    Governor Kulongoski already supports a renewable fuel standard and also a goal of reaching 25% of Oregon’s electric energy sources by 2025.  “It is critical that the Legislature passes laws to take charge of our energy independence and foster jobs and a healthy environment,” says Jeff Bissonnette from the Citizens’ Utility Board.  Jeremiah Bauman from the Oregon State Public Interest Research Group agrees, “Now more then ever, people are demanding their elected leaders do something in Oregon to limit the threat of global warming.”

Oregonians also care about cleaning up our rivers and streams.  In a recent poll, a majority of Oregonians said legislators should close the loophole that allows dangerous levels of toxics to be dumped into our rivers.  “When people go to fish, boat, or swim in Oregon’s rivers, they don’t want to worry about whether it’s making them sick,” says Ivan Maluski from the Oregon Chapter of the Sierra Club, “we need to do something now to decrease toxics in our rivers.”

Oregonians also care about recycling and the rising number of old computers is cause for alarm.  Computers contain toxic chemicals such as lead and mercury that pose serious problems if not properly disposed.  “Hundreds of thousands of Oregonians have computers in their basements that they want to get rid of but don’t have the means,” says Katy Daily of Recycling Advocates. “The key is to give all Oregonians easy access to recycling programs for televisions, personal computers, printers, and scanners.”

In addition to passing these four Priorities, the Oregon Conservation Network is also committed to maintaining existing environmental safeguards.  Each of the last six Legislatures passed rollbacks that aimed to reverse or weaken environmental safeguards.  The problem was most pronounced in 1999 when nineteen bills that harmed Oregon’s environment were passed by the Legislature, with fourteen vetoed by the Governor. Rollbacks continue to be a threat to Oregon’s quality of life and environmental safeguards. 

Many anti-environmental legislative proposals are poised for introduction during the 2007 legislative session.  “When special interests ask the Legislature to exempt them from safeguards, we need a Legislature who’ll just say no,” says John DeVoe of WaterWatch Oregon. Susan Ash of Portland Audubon agrees, "We have a responsibility to better protect our environment for future generations. We
can not afford to weaken existing safeguards for the short term profit of a few commercial businesses."

###