The Oregon Court of Appeals recently ruled that the use of statistical sampling to verify signatures on recall petitions is permissible. This decision affects the validity of recall elections in the state and clarifies how election officials can verify signatures. The ruling came in the case of John West v. Rhiannon Henkels, docket number A186686, which was filed on August 12, 2026.
The case originated when John West, a former commissioner in Josephine County, sought to invalidate the results of his recall election. He argued that Rhiannon Henkels, the Josephine County clerk, improperly used statistical sampling to verify the signatures on the recall petition. West contended that the law required each signature to be individually verified, and since only a fraction was verified, the recall election should be declared void.
This dispute began when a petition to recall West was initiated in August 2024. Supporters gathered signatures and submitted them to Henkels. She used a statistical sampling technique, as outlined by the Secretary of State, to determine that the petition had enough valid signatures to proceed. Henkels found that the petition had 6,476 valid signatures, surpassing the 6,445 needed for a recall in Josephine County. Following this, she scheduled the recall election for December 17, 2024.
West filed a complaint against Henkels, arguing that the use of statistical sampling violated Oregon law, specifically ORS 249.875, which he claimed required the verification of every signature. The trial court ruled in favor of Henkels, stating that she was authorized to use statistical sampling for signature verification, and dismissed West's complaint.
On appeal, the Oregon Court of Appeals examined whether ORS 249.875 allows for statistical sampling in verifying signatures on recall petitions. The court emphasized the importance of statutory text and context in understanding legislative intent. Judge S. J. Armstrong, writing for the court, stated, "We conclude that the statute governing the verification of signatures on recall petitions reflects a legislative intention to allow the use of statistical sampling to verify signatures."
The court found that while the statute requires 100 percent of the required number of signatures to be verified before a recall petition can be filed, it does not prohibit the use of statistical sampling as a method for verification. The court noted that ORS 249.875(2) specifically refers to the provisions in ORS 250.105, which allows for statistical sampling techniques designated by the Secretary of State.
In its ruling, the court agreed with the trial court that Henkels was authorized to use statistical sampling to verify the signatures on West's recall petition. However, the court also pointed out that the trial court erred in dismissing West's claim for declaratory relief. Instead of dismissal, the court stated that the proper action would be to declare the rights of the parties involved.
The Oregon Court of Appeals vacated the trial court's judgment and remanded the case for the entry of a new judgment that would declare the rights of both West and Henkels regarding the recall election.
This ruling has significant implications for future recall elections in Oregon. It establishes that election officials can use statistical sampling to verify signatures, which may streamline the process of validating recall petitions. This decision could potentially affect how recall elections are conducted across the state, as it clarifies the legal framework for signature verification.
Going forward, this ruling means that individuals seeking to challenge recall elections on the grounds of signature verification will need to consider the court's interpretation of the law. The use of statistical sampling may now be seen as a standard practice in verifying signatures for recall petitions.
As for what’s next, the case has been remanded to the trial court for further proceedings. West may have the opportunity to pursue additional claims or seek further clarification on the rights established by the court. It remains to be seen if either party will appeal the decision or if there are related cases pending that could also address the issue of signature verification in recall elections.