A tax-related ballot initiative from the state teachers union was thrown out Tuesday after Oregon Secretary of State Dennis Richardson ruled it unconstitutional.

Oregon's Constitution requires initiatives to pertain to a single topic. Richardson said the union's involved two.

C. John Larson, president of the Oregon Education Association, issued a statement disagreeing with Richardson's ruling. He said the labor union will push other ballot initiatives instead.

"They have to start over again," said Richardson, a Republican. "It's kind of unfortunate, but that's the law."

Initiative Petition 26 would have brought a sea change in how Oregon funds its schools by lowering the proportion of votes required to raise corporate taxes in the Legislature and empowering judges to intervene in school funding disputes.

It would have changed the state constitution to allow the Legislature to raise corporate taxes for schools with a majority vote. Under the state constitution, tax increases require a three-fifths majority in the House and Senate. The vote-requirement change would have allowed Democrats in the Legislature – who hold strong majorities but not the coveted three-fifths vote – to increase corporate taxes without Republican support.

The initiative also would have allowed judges to order the Legislature to boost school funding.

Richardson's office issued a notice that the proposed initiative does not comply with the state constitution's "separate-vote requirement." That section mandates separate issues to be considered in separate ballot measures. For example, corporate and personal income tax hikes were voted on in separate measures in 2010: Measure 66 and Measure 67.

Steven Wolf, chief counsel at the state Justice Department, advised Richardson in a letter Friday that Initiative Petition 26 "cannot lawfully be adopted" because it makes substantive changes to two issues "not closely related."

Larson, the union chief, said his members "strongly disagree" with the Justice Department's stance.

"The need to sufficiently fund public education and the mechanisms for doing so are inextricably linked, and so they should be considered together by voters," he said.

Larson added: "This ruling will not stop us from pursuing options for the 2018 ballot because our students cannot afford to wait."

In an interview, Richardson stood by his ruling.

"These things are close," he said. "You can argue both sides, but there have to be certain principles that you follow. And one is: What does the constitution say?"

This is the second time Richardson, a Republican, has thrown out a ballot proposal on procedural grounds. The first, in May, was over a measure that would have limited campaign finance contributions.

-- Gordon R. Friedman

503-221-8209; @GordonRFriedman