Skip to main content
Secretary of State Tobias Read sent a letter to the Portland City Auditor on Tuesday demanding greater rigor, after the backers of a controversial initiative petition leveled a bevy of allegations against the city over its signature-verification process.
“What I have seen in recent days regarding the 1PDX2026 initiative signature verification process reflects poorly on our state’s entire election system,” Read wrote to City Auditor Simone Rede. “I have seen complaints about a lack of transparency with stakeholders and the public, which especially concerns me. It is clear there has been a breakdown somewhere in this process.”
The backers of a ballot initiative that would re-route city climate tax revenues to hiring police officers had asked state elections officials to assume control of the signature verification process, citing a number of irregularities. Read stopped short of that, or of threatening any action.
Instead, Read reflected on the impact of a debacle that had unfolded rapidly in the previous 24 hours.
The petitioners alleged on Monday that elections officials at the City of Portland and Multnomah County were bungling the verification of the 63,000 signatures the initiative had turned in earlier this month. (At least 40,437 of those signatures must be verified in order for the initiative to qualify for the November ballot.) The backers, including the Portland Police Association, alleged that elections officials were erroneously throwing out entire signature sheets and not clearly communicating the reasons why. They also alleged elections officials were tampering with the process because of political bias, but they provided little evidence to back up that allegation.
The allegations from Safer Portland, the campaign behind the initiative, came as preliminary sampling results from the county’s Elections Division, obtained by WW, suggested that the initiative would not clear the bar for the ballot. And according to results obtained by WW on Monday night, the initiative’s chances to pass the first sampling test of around 5,500 signatures appeared even smaller than they had over the weekend.
(Notably, Safer Portland has also been the subject of dozens of elections complaints filed with the Secretary of State, which allege that signature-gatherers misrepresented the measure and failed to provide a full text of the ballot language, among other allegations.)
Of the 5,067 signatures counted by Monday night in the first sample, 3,206 were accepted and 1,861 were rejected. That’s a 63% acceptance rate, which does not meet what the initiative will need to secure a spot on the ballot. Should the first sample fail, a second sample will be tested. (Safer Portland Elise Haas on Tuesday said the sample results were “flawed and inaccurate” for “all the reasons we stated in our release.”)
The county’s Elections Division and the city’s Elections Division on Monday afternoon denied Safer Portland’s allegations, saying they were following all state laws and procedures around signature verification.
Now Read, the state’s highest elections official, is weighing in. And though it wasn’t entirely clear what exactly he was telling the City Auditor to do, he seemed displeased.
“It is the responsibility of the election administrator to manage a transparent and accountable signature verification process that is fair to all sides,” Read wrote. “The public should be able to understand the decisions that are made and have faith in the outcomes. You have all the tools and experience needed to manage these responsibilities, make decisions, and ensure your process is documented and transparent. Accountability is a responsibility, not a burden.”
Read wrote that he was concerned the matter could provide fuel for backers of the Trump Administration, which has systemically attempted to erode trust in vote-by-mail systems, including Oregon’s.
“This is a tenuous moment for our democracy,” Read wrote. “I am concerned that if this episode is allowed to fester, it will be used by bad actors as a cudgel to sow doubt in our elections this November.”
Neither the City Auditor nor the city’s Elections Division immediately responded to a request for comment.
