• OREGON CRIME RATES

• PROBATION RATES

• LOTTERY GROWTH

• STATISTICS TO REMEMBER

• DESCRIPTION OF PUBLIC SAFETY BALLOT MEASURES SINCE 1994

OREGON CRIME RATES

These statistics are drawn from FBI Uniform Crime Reports, except where otherwise noted.

In 1995, when Measure 11 went into effect, Oregon’s violent crime rate per 100,000 population was 522.4. The only years between 1960 and 1995 when the Oregon rate was higher than 522.4 were 1979, 1985, 1986, 1987, and 1988.

Upon implementation of Measure 11’s mandatory minimum prison sentences for violent crime, violent crime in Oregon went down dramatically:

The 2005 violent crime rate of 286.8 crimes per 100,000 population is the lowest rate in Oregon in 35 years (since 1970).

The reduction of Oregon violent crime, in the 10 years after Measure 11 went into effect, was 45%. This was the largest reduction in violent crime of all 50 states during those 10 years.

During the same timeframe, the property crime rate in Oregon, which is based on burglary, larceny-theft, and vehicle theft, showed some improvement. This included spillover effects of Measure 11 (some violent criminals also commit property crimes). The Oregon property crime rates per 100,000 population were:

The 2005 rate is 27% lower than the 1995 rate. This is good news but not nearly as good as the 45% reduction in the violent crime rate during the same timeframe.

While progress has been made, Oregon’s property crime rate has compared unfavorably to the other 49 states. In 2003 and 2004, Oregon had the third worst property crime rate of all 50 states. In 2005, Oregon had the fourth worst property crime rate. Recent reports indicate that this improved substantially in 2006, when Oregon had the 18th worst property crime rate of the 50 states – but that is still a very disturbing ranking.

Drug crime is not covered in the “violent crime” or “property crime” categories. Here are the sobering figures as to reported drug crime in Oregon from 2000 to 2005 (taken from Oregon Annual Uniform Crime Reports):

Allowing for the fact that these are total crime figures, not rates per 100,000 population, and our population has continued to grow, the sheer volume is alarming. After all, drug crime is, along with prostitution, poorly reported.

As to motor vehicle theft, the volume of actual reported crimes in Oregon in recent years is very disturbing (based on Oregon Annual Uniform Crime Reports):

Event when indexed per 100,000 population, per FBI national reports, Oregon’s vehicle theft rate is disturbing:

In reviewing these figures, remember that Oregon does not separately track two critical crimes: mail theft and identity theft. These crimes are submerged within property crime figures but are, sadly, deeply personal. They can have a tremendously damaging effect.

Federal Trade Commission reports for 2006 indicate that Oregon’s Identity Theft rate per 100,000 population was 76, which is the 14th worst of the 50 states.

Our goal should be to improve Oregon’s public safety system, on a holistic basis, so that Oregon consistently ranks among the best five states in all crime categories.

BACK TO TOP

Actual PROBATION rates for these crimes (2007 figures). These numbers are from the Oregon Criminal Justice Commission.

This is a BLEND of first-time convictions and REPEAT offenders. The probation rate for first convictions is nearly 100%!

BACK TO TOP

How Much Has The Lottery Grown?

Here are the statistics for the growth in lottery profits.

Since 2001, the lottery has grown an average of 23.25% each biennium. If you include the initial drop in lottery revenues in 1999-2001, the lottery still has grown an average of 17.6% each biennium. (Source: Oregon Lottery, September 2007)

*Projected 2007-2009 transfers based on September 2007 economic forecast issued by the Oregon Department of Administrative Services.

BACK TO TOP

STATISTICS TO REMEMBER

In 1994, Measure 11, a citizen initiative to establish mandatory minimum prison sentences for violent crimes, passed with a “yes” vote of 788,695 and a “no” vote of 412,678.  (66% “yes”)

In 2000, a citizen initiative to repeal Measure 11 was defeated with a “no” vote of 1,073,275 and a “yes” vote of 387,068.  (74% “no”)

In 2008, Measure 57, a legislative referral to establish stronger sentences for certain crimes, passed with a “yes” vote of 1,058,955 and a “no” vote of 665,942.

BACK TO TOP

DESCRIPTION OF PUBLIC SAFETY BALLOT MEASURES SINCE 1994

Measure 10 (November 1994) amended the Oregon Constitution to provide that any criminal sentence established by a vote of the people cannot be reduced by the Legislature except with a two-thirds vote of the House and a two-thirds vote of the Senate.  It passed.             

65% Yes            35% No            Won

Measure 11 (November 1994) established mandatory minimum prison sentences for violent crimes, including murder, manslaughter, serious assault, kidnapping, rape, sodomy, unlawful sexual penetration, sexual abuse, and robbery.  It passed. 

66% Yes            34% No            Won

Measure 17 (November 1994) amended the Oregon Constitution to establish a new section which requires that state prison inmates work full time in useful work.  It passed.

71% Yes            29% No            Won

Measure 26 (November 1996) amended the Oregon Constitution to provide that laws for the punishment of crime shall be founded on principles of protection of society, personal responsibility, accountability for one’s actions, and reformation.  It passed.

67% Yes            33% No            Won

Measure 40 (November 1996) was a comprehensive amendment to the Oregon Constitution to establish crime victims’ rights.  It passed but was later set aside by the Oregon Supreme Court with a new interpretation of the initiative process, narrowing the subject matter of voter-initiated constitutional amendments.

59% Yes            41% No            Won

Measure 49 (May 1997) modified the prison work constitutional provisions to make it clear that no inmate has a legally enforceable right to a job or to otherwise bring litigation in regard to prison work programs, and made it clear that the Department of Corrections could take measures to comply with requirements of federal law to permit transportation in interstate commerce of prison goods.  It passed.

91% Yes            9% No              Won

Measure 68 (November 1999) adopted an amendment to the prison work provisions of the Oregon Constitution to make it clear that prison work could be done so as to benefit the community, not just save taxpayers money.  It also made it clear that for-profit prison work programs that produce goods or services offered for sale in the private sector need not be established if they would significantly reduce pre-existing private enterprise, but that the discretion remained in the hands of the Director of Corrections to make such determinations.  It passed. 

58% Yes            42% No            Won

Measure 69 (November 1999) amended the Oregon Constitution to provide crime victims the right to be present in criminal proceedings and to be heard at pre-trial release hearings as well as sentencing hearings; the right to obtain information about the criminal history of the offender; the right to refuse interviews, depositions, or discovery requests by the criminal defendant; the right to receive prompt restitution from the convicted criminal; the right to have a copy of the transcript of any court proceeding in open court, if one is otherwise prepared; the right to be consulted regarding plea negotiations involving any violent felony; and the right to be informed of these rights.  It passed.

58% Yes            42% No            Won

Measure 70 (November 1999) granted the state (not just the defendant) the right to demand a public trial by a jury in any criminal prosecution.  It failed.

42% Yes            58% No            Lost

Measure 71 (November 1999) provided that crime victims had the right to be reasonably protected from criminal defendants and convicted criminals and the right to have decisions regarding pre-trial release to be based upon the principles of reasonable protection of the victim and the public, as well as the likelihood that the criminal defendant will appear for trial.  This constitutional amendment also provided that murder, aggravated murder, and treason shall not be bailable when the proof is evident or the presumption strong that the person is guilty.  Other violent felonies shall not be bailable when the court has determined there is probable cause to believe the criminal defendant committed the crime, and the court finds, by clear and convincing evidence, that there is a danger of physical injury or sexual victimization to the victim or members of the public by the criminal defendant while on release.  It passed. 

58% Yes            42% No            Won

Measure 72 (November 1999) provided that eleven members of a twelve person jury may render a verdict of guilty for murder, but all twelve jurors must render a verdict of guilty for aggravated murder (death penalty cases).  It failed.

45% Yes            55% No            Lost

Measure 73 (November 1999) provided that a person may be compelled to testify concerning a criminal offense the person may have committed provided that in any prosecution of the person for that offense, neither that testimony nor any evidence derived from that testimony may be admitted against the person.  It failed.

46% Yes            54% No            Lost

Measure 74 (November 1999) was a Constitutional amendment which provided that no law shall limit a court’s authority to sentence a criminal defendant consecutively for crimes against different victims, and which provided that a term of imprisonment imposed by a judge in open court may not be set aside or otherwise not carried out, except as authorized by the sentencing court or through the subsequent exercise of the power of the governor to grant commutations and pardons, or judicial authority to grant appellate or post-conviction relief.  It passed.

53% Yes            47% No            Won

Measure 75 (November 1999) amended the Oregon Constitution to prohibit persons convicted of felonies from serving on grand jury panels or criminal jury panels for 15 years after conviction or release from custody, whichever came later.  It passed.

58% Yes           42% No             Won

Measure 94 (November 2000) was a statutory initiative which proposed to repeal our Measure 11.  We opposed it.  It was defeated. 

26% Yes            74% No            Won

Measure 51 (May 2008) amended the Oregon Constitution to grant crime victims remedies for violation of their constitutional rights.  These remedies include a right to assert a claim for a right in a pending case, by a mandamus proceeding if no case is pending, or as otherwise provided by legislation.  It also allows the prosecuting attorney, in the attorney’s discretion, to assert and enforce crime victims’ rights upon the request of a crime victim.  It passed. 

75% Yes            25% No            Won

Measure 52 (May 2008) amended another section of the Oregon Constitution relating to crime victims’ rights to again provide enforcement authority to crime victims by allowing the prosecuting attorney to assert the rights on behalf of the victim, when the victim so requests; by providing for remedy by due course of law for violation of any right established in this section of the Constitution; and by allowing a victim to assert a claim for the right in a pending case, by a mandamus proceeding, or as otherwise provided by law.  It passed. 

75% Yes            25% No            Won

Measure 57 (November 2008) was a statutory referral which increases sentences for drug trafficking, theft against the elderly, and specified repeat property and identity theft crimes; it requires addiction treatment for certain drug offenders (it was referred as a less-costly alternative to Measure 61, below).  It passed.

61% Yes            39% No            Won

Measure 61 (November 2008) was an initiative which creates mandatory minimum prison sentences for certain theft, identity theft, forgery, drug and burglary crimes.  It was defeated.

48.9% Yes        51.1% No          Lost

Measure 73 (November 2010) was an initiative which creates:  a.) mandatory minimum jail sentences of 90 days for the third (and subsequent) drunken driving conviction within 10 years; and b.) mandatory minimum prison sentences of 25 years for repeat convictions of the worst sex crimes.  It passed.

57% Yes            43% No            Won

Running tally, from the Oregon Anti-Crime Alliance perspective:

Won 16

Lost  4

BACK TO TOP