Timber giant Weyerhaeuser is threatening legal action against Community Rights Lane County, a nonprofit organization supporting Measure 20-373, aka the “Watersheds Bill of Rights,” for a brochure the nonprofit says it never wrote. CRLC says it believes the cease and desist may be an intimidation tactic to silence political speech.
The brochure, titled “Upcoming Logging Operation on Meyer Road,” begins by outlining the importance of forests to Oregon’s ecosystems, then speaks about herbicide sprays involved in logging operations and how they may expose people, wildlife, pets and crops to harm.
The back of the brochure lists the days and times logging operations may occur near Meyer Road, a rural roadway north of Cottage Grove. It provides a list of resources, including contact information for Weyerhaeuser South Valley Office and CRLC. Other contacts include the Oregon Department of Forestry, South Lane stewardship forester and the National Pesticide Info Center. CRLC is the only non-governmental agency besides Weyerhaeuser listed on the brochure.
In an April 22 cease-and-desist letter, Weyerhaeuser vice president and assistant general counsel Diane Meyers writes that CRLC made several “false and misleading statements” that have resulted in residents calling Weyerhaeuser personnel, believing the brochure was authorized or affiliated with the timber company.
The letter demands that CRLC “cease and desist from and further distribution of the brochure or any similar materials, refrain from making or disseminating false or misleading statements regarding Weyerhaeuser’s operations and immediately discontinue the use of Weyerhaeuser-associated phone numbers.”
In an email to Eugene Weekly, Weyerhaeuser spokesperson Kyleigh Gill writes, “The brochure that was shared listed products we do not use, such as glyphosate, along with incorrect contact information for our local office.” Gill adds that before beginning any logging operation, Weyerhaeuser notifies nearby landowners directly and supplies them with details on the project. “The brochure created unnecessary confusion among our neighbors.”
Michelle Holman, chief petitioner for Measure 20-373 and CRLC co-founder, says she had no knowledge of the brochure. “Apparently, it was put into mailboxes. We don’t touch other people’s mailboxes. You know, that’s a federal offense. We would never do something like that,” she says. “We’re running a very clean campaign trying to keep our noses clean. We don’t rely on fabrications, lies, listening statements or dark money.”
On the May 19 ballot, Measure 20-373 grants rights to Lane County watersheds similar to as if they were an individual, giving any Lane County resident the right to file a lawsuit under the measure if a watershed has been harmed by a business or government. Some common herbicide sprays have been shown in scientific studies to cause toxic effects, including elevated risk for cancer and nervous system disorders. Activists in Lane County, including the CRLC, have been fighting aerial spraying for decades.
CRLC is an outspoken supporter of Yes on Measure 20-373, the campaign that so far has raised $34,035 in contributions. In contrast, the main opposition committees, Protect Our County and the Oregon Business and Industry Issues PAC, have raised a combined $493,550 between September 2025 and 2026. Weyerhaeuser donated $2,000 to the Oregon Business and Industry Issues PAC in December 2025.
In a response to the cease-and-desist letter, Katie Geiser, CRLC secretary, denies any involvement with the brochure and questions if the cease and desist is an attempt to “intimidate supporters of Measure 20-373.”
Geiser writes, “These allegations and threats may be grounds for the campaign to file an election law violation complaint with the Secretary of State.”
Oregon Secretary of State spokesperson Connor Radnovich says in an email to the Weekly that the office is unable to provide comment or advisory opinions about disputes between parties. “Any elector involved or who has sufficient evidence of a potential violation is free to submit a complaint via our portal, which will be reviewed.”
Geiser says Meyers responded by asking to speak with CRLC’s attorneys. No further contact has been made since, according to Geiser. It is unclear who actually distributed the brochure.