Auditors: Oregon forest institute disclosure policies undermines public good

(The Center Square) – The Oregon Forest Resource Institute is failing to inform the public about its work with the timber industry, putting it at odds with its mission, state auditors reported.

The OFRI, created in 1991, is a small state agency funded by taxes levied on the timber industry and dedicated to recommending best practices for forest businesses. Its forest education programs reach more than 100,000 students and more than 1,000 educators each year. It’s run by an 11-member board of timber industry representatives, which independent investigators found wielded undue influence over how OFRI works on behalf of the public.

A joint investigation in 2020 by Oregon Public Broadcasting and ProPublica found OFRI officials maintained a close relationship with timber industry lobbyists, going so far as attending political strategy sessions in which they viewed attack ads and campaign materials. It also found the institute spent considerable effort trying to suppress scientific literature conflicting with timber industry messaging in the public eye.

Operating with an annual budget of $4 million, the OFRI regulates an $18 billion industry and a pillar of Oregon’s economy. Oregon lawmakers tried and failed to redirect millions from the OFRI’s budget to climate research and small-time landowner aid earlier this spring.

The investigation raised questions about whether the OFRI’s messaging and use of public money in its work meetings with timber industry executives counted as lobbying, which the institute expressly bans. In Oregon, all lobbyists are required to register with the secretary of state’s office.

Gov. Kate Brown requested an audit of the OFRI after the investigation. The results of that audit, released Wednesday, found the research institute retains little to no oversight over its educational outreach efforts and interaction with the industry it represents.

“Prohibitions against influencing legislative decisions and a lack of formal internal guidance have created compliance risks for OFRI,” auditors wrote. “The agency has engaged in activities that may fall outside statutory authority and should develop guidance to reduce the risk of noncompliance in the future.”

According to state auditors, the OFRI employee handbook bans advocacy, which includes supporting of opposing litigation or attempting to influence legislation. Its executive director, they wrote, also is tasked with reminding board members of this directive during orientation meetings. Those rules did not help steer OFRI away from alleged conflicts of interest, auditors found.

Though OFRI is governed by the timber industry and bears some resemblance to a commodity commission, auditors wrote in their report it meets the definition of a state agency. That means, in the auditors’ view, it is subject to unbiased practices based on objective evidence and findings.

“OFRI presents itself as objective, but at times oversimplifies complex forestry topics to the point of being misleading,” auditors wrote. “The agency lacks quality standards and a documented and robust internal review process to ensure the production of complete and accurate public information.”

Other findings in the report concerned a range of public surveys issued by the OFRI. Auditors expressed concerns about what they called “opinion-based” questions more related to consumer habits and preferences rather than wider issues about forestry’s role in furthering the public good.

Auditors issued five recommendations – one for state lawmakers and four others for the OFRI – about how to reform practices and policies at the institute. The OFRI agreed with all five of them with the caveat that auditors mischaracterized the intent of its board members.

“OFRI is a state agency funded entirely by taxes levied on the forest industry,” OFRI Executive Director Erin Isselman wrote in a letter to auditors. “To deny the industry the right to determine how these funds should be spent in support of their industry is not only unfair, but would undermine faith in the ability for government to allocate resources impartially.”

At auditors’ recommendation, the OFRI will write up a written policy in cooperation with Oregon’s Ethics Commission and the state’s Department of Justice, detailing how its members can best avoid conflicts of interest.

The institute also plans to publish a clarified mission statement to its website and consider expanding its range of stakeholders to conservation and environmental groups. It also will work with the Oregon DOJ and Administrative Services to include it mandate to serve the timber industry in public advertisements and education materials by 2022.

Disclaimer: This content is distributed by The Center Square