2015 ORS § 260.432¹

Solicitation of public employees
  • activities of public employees during working hours

(1) No person shall attempt to, or actually, coerce, command or require a public employee to influence or give money, service or other thing of value to promote or oppose any political committee or to promote or oppose the nomination or election of a candidate, the gathering of signatures on an initiative, referendum or recall petition, the adoption of a measure or the recall of a public office holder.

(2) No public employee shall solicit any money, influence, service or other thing of value or otherwise promote or oppose any political committee or promote or oppose the nomination or election of a candidate, the gathering of signatures on an initiative, referendum or recall petition, the adoption of a measure or the recall of a public office holder while on the job during working hours. However, this section does not restrict the right of a public employee to express personal political views.

(3) Each public employer shall have posted in a conspicuous place likely to be seen by its employees the following notice in printed or typewritten form:

______________________________________________________________________________

ATTENTION ALL PUBLIC EMPLOYEES:

The restrictions imposed by the law of the State of Oregon on your political activities are that No public employee shall solicit any money, influence, service or other thing of value or otherwise promote or oppose any political committee or promote or oppose the nomination or election of a candidate, the gathering of signatures on an initiative, referendum or recall petition, the adoption of a measure or the recall of a public office holder while on the job during working hours. However, this section does not restrict the right of a public employee to express personal political views.

It is therefore the policy of the state and of your public employer that you may engage in political activity except to the extent prohibited by state law when on the job during working hours.

______________________________________________________________________________

(4) Nothing in this section prohibits an employee of the legislative branch from explaining the vote of a member of the Legislative Assembly on:

(a) An Act that has been referred to the people by law or petition under section 1 (3), Article IV of the Oregon Constitution;

(b) An Act for which a prospective referendum petition has been filed under ORS 250.045 (Prospective petition); or

(c) A constitutional amendment or revision proposed under section 1 or 2, Article XVII of the Oregon Constitution.

(5) As used in this section:

(a) Public employee does not include an elected official or a person appointed as a director to the board of a pilot education service district under ORS 334.108 (Number of board members).

(b) Public employer includes any board, commission, committee, department, division or institution in the executive, administrative, legislative or judicial branch of state government, and any county, city, district or other municipal corporation or public corporation organized for a public purpose, including a cooperative body formed between municipal or public corporations. [Formerly 260.231; 1973 c.53 §1; 1973 c.744 §27a; 1979 c.190 §372; 1979 c.519 §35a; 1983 c.71 §9; 1983 c.392 §1; 1985 c.565 §39; 1985 c.808 §62; 1987 c.718 §3; 1993 c.493 §106; 2007 c.589 §§7,8; 2010 c.9 §§15,16; 2013 c.13 §2]

Notes of Decisions

City charter and ordinance pro­vi­sions which subjected municipal po­lit­i­cal activities of city employes during nonworking hours to virtually complete restric­tions were preempted by this sec­tion, which is general law es­tab­lishing permissible de­gree of regula­tion of public employes po­lit­i­cal freedom. Williams v. City of Astoria, 43 Or App 745, 604 P2d 411 (1979), Sup Ct review denied

Prohibi­tion against requiring public employee to support po­lit­i­cal cause does not supersede right of exclusive representative of employees to collect pay­ment-in-lieu-of-dues to support po­lit­i­cal posi­tion affecting rights of represented employees. Carlson v. AFSCME, 73 Or App 755, 700 P2d 260 (1985), Sup Ct review denied

Atty. Gen. Opinions

Applica­tion of federal Hatch Political Activities Act to employes who run for partisan elective office, (1978) Vol 38, p 1826; because ORS 352.105 (Mandatory incidental fees) does not require that programs funded with mandatory incidental fees be under supervision or control of boards that collect them, this sec­tion does not prohibit State Board of Higher Educa­tion from providing mandatory incidental fees to student organiza­tion that would use incidental fees to advocate for or against ballot measure, (2015) No. 8289

Chapter 260

Atty. Gen. Opinions

Applica­tion to committee collecting contribu­tions to es­tab­lish fund to defray elected officials expenses incurred in performing po­lit­i­cal func­tions of office, (1980) Vol 40, p 11; preemp­tion by federal law of campaign financing with respect to federal candidates, (1981) Vol 41, p 420

Law Review Cita­tions

50 OLR 299-321 (1971); 55 OLR 253-266 (1976)

  • Mail Tribune / Damian Mann, Oct 31, 2010
    “The law en­force­­ment officials are alleged to have violated Oregon Revised Statute 260.432, which excludes public officials from promoting or opposing any measure or candidate as part of their official duties.”
  • Illinois Valley News / Scott Jorgensen, Apr 7, 2010
    “... might have been in viola­tion of Oregon Revised Statute 260.432. It states that a public employee “may not promote or oppose a candidate while on the job ...”

1 Legislative Counsel Committee, CHAPTER 260—Campaign Finance Regulation; Election Offenses, https://­www.­oregonlegislature.­gov/­bills_laws/­ors/­ors260.­html (2015) (last ac­cessed Jul. 16, 2016).
 
2 Legislative Counsel Committee, Annotations to the Oregon Revised Stat­utes, Cumulative Supplement - 2015, Chapter 260, https://­www.­oregonlegislature.­gov/­bills_laws/­ors/­ano260.­html (2015) (last ac­cessed Jul. 16, 2016).
 
3 OregonLaws.org assembles these lists by analyzing references between Sections. Each listed item refers back to the current Section in its own text. The result reveals relationships in the code that may not have otherwise been apparent.