Earlier this year a contentious committee meeting occurred in the Oregon legislature. With allegations of bullying/intimidation and seemingly no real action, did a safeguard system — or their people — fail?
House Bill 4145
In 2022 Oregon Ballot Initiative 114 was voted on by the public. The measure restricts the exercise of the Second Amendment in the Beaver State. A number of legal challenges have kept the measure in a legal limbo. In Feb. 2026, House Bill 4145 was introduced to make changes to Ballot Initiative 114. It was after a Feb. 16 hearing on HB 4145 that allegations of intimidation, bullying, and/or coercion against House Judiciary Committee Chair Jason Kropf, D-54, surfaced. Kropf was a sponsor of the bill. To date, it appears that nothing has come from any of the allegations against Rep. Kropf.
Some of the provisions in HB 4145 — which were eventually enacted — include delaying the implementation of Ballot Initiative 114 until Jan. 1, 2028, an increase in firearm permitting fees, and doubling the amount of time issuing authorities have to issue firearms permits from 30 to 60 days.
The Session at the Heart of This Debate
The Feb. 16 House Judiciary Committee work session brought HB 4145 up for consideration. One of the amendments introduced to the bill was called into question by Rep. Thủy Trần, D-45. Trần asked for clarification on some of the provisions — the “-3 amendments.”
“It says that we need to first go through the state’s database, and then we will go through the FBI database for fingerprinting,” said Trần. “So … does that mean that the federal level will have our information as to whom owns gun (sic) in our state?”
Chairman Kropf said that it was his “basic understanding” that the measure would not relinquish the information to the federal government. “That is for purposes of the background check,” said Kropf.
“My concern is that even though we request the fingerprinting information to not be kept at the federal level, how can we assure that they won’t do something with it?” Rep. Trần queried. “Someone once said, ‘If you give somebody an ice cream, they’re not going to give it back.’ They might just enjoy it and and so I think we’re very contradictory in what our intent are to protect … the state of Oregon. And gun owners in Oregon comes (sic) in all different types, female, BIPOC, hardworking middle class, and I am skeptical that our information won’t be used at the federal level in a way that won’t harm Oregonians, so I just want to get that on the record.”
The Recess and Revote
Chairman Kropf asked if there were any other questions following Trần’s remarks and then called for a vote. When Trần voted “no,” Kropf could be heard inhaling deeply and put the work session on recess.
According to the work session records, Kropf called for a recess of the meeting at 12 minutes and six seconds into their recording. The log does not indicate how long the recess was; some accounts say it was between 10 and 20 minutes. It’s been repeated by witnesses that Kropf sidebarred with Trần in the hallway outside of the hearing room.
Upon Trần and Kropf’s return, multiple people reported that Trần appeared to be in some sort of distress. Kropf called for a revote.
Each member of the committee voted again and when Chairman Kropf got to Trần, she expressed confusion. “What? Excuse me,” said Trần.
“This is the vote on the -3 amendment,” Kropf said, cutting off Trần. “Do you need a minute?”
“Didn’t we just vote on it? Already?” Trần asked.
“I asked for a recall of the vote,” Kropf asserted.
“Okay,” Trần said, barely audibly. “Yes.”
After finishing the roll call, Kropf called it. “Motion passes,” said Kropf. “You got, oh, I vote ‘yes.’ Sorry. Great. Motion passes; that’s the adoption of the -3 amendment.”
Allegations Against Kropf
Derek LeBlanc, an advocate and activist who is the president and founder of the Oregon Gun Owners Action League, told Bearing Arms that when Trần came back to the committee work session, “she was shaking” and “was visibly distraught.” LeBlanc said that the recess lasted between 10 to 15 minutes.
“All of us in the room were in disbelief that this happened right in front of us,” LeBlanc recollected. “(Kropf) had an open vote on the floor. He didn’t get the outcome that he was looking for. And so then he called the timeout, went outside, changed the rules, and then got the vote in his favor.”
It turns out that LeBlanc ended up being one of many people who filed complaints against Kropf for his alleged actions. “I filed an official Rule 27 Complaint against Jason Kropf (for) his behavior and what I witnessed,” LeBlanc explained.
Freedom of Information Act Requests were filed with two different governing bodies in Oregon seeking information on any complaints and/or mention of the allegations. One was filed with the Office of Legislative Counsel and the other with the Oregon Government Ethics Commission.
Oregon Government Ethics Commission Complaints
There were two complaints (one and two) filed with the Oregon Government Ethics Commission as well as two additional emails (one and two) querying about the event and calling for an investigation.
Among the documents Bearing Arms obtained was an email sent from Jessica Foster of the Ethics Commission to Executive Director Susan Myers and Casey Fenstermaker, also with the Commission. Foster shared a complaint with her colleagues.
“I am urging you to support a full investigation into the reported conduct against Rep. Thủy Trần during the HB 4145 vote,” the complainant wrote. “Lawmakers must be able to serve without intimidation or retaliation. Please ensure the Oregon House Conduct Committee and relevant ethics bodies address this matter thoroughly and transparently.”
In her email to her colleagues, Foster wrote: “Does not look like us, but let me know if you want me to add it to CMS.” There’s no further record of that thread.
Another complaint highlighted some of the issues with both the allegations, as well as sunshine law related concerns. The complainant, Kelly Garcia, noted that the deliberations should have been public and it appeared that there was some form of coercion or bullying at play.
“Oregonians do not have a clear understanding of the deliberations that occurred during this period (the recess), including the source of the information regarding FBI data retention, the context in which it was presented, or any additional communications that may have contributed to the decision-making process for HB 4145,” Garcia wrote. “The fact that deliberations and decision-making continued without public awareness raises concerns about compliance with Oregon’s public meetings laws.
“There is also concern based on Representative Tran’s behavior that her vote was changed under duress or threat,” Garcia wrote. “If representatives can be bullied or threatened by other members away from the public meeting, the validity of the entire process comes into question. This was a public meeting, and Oregon law requires that the public be fully informed of the deliberations and decisions of governing bodies, as well as the information upon which those decisions are based.”
Another complainant queried the Commission: “I am looking for what is happening with this.” They included a hyperlink to a House GOP press release issued by Rep. Lucetta Elmer.
In the release, Rep. Elmer summarized the alleged events involving Rep. Kropf. “After a conduct complaint was filed, alleging Rep. Kropf appeared to ‘verbally abuse’ and ‘intimidate’ another lawmaker into changing her vote, Trần acknowledged it, saying Kropf ‘created a hostile working environment,’” the release stated.
“Good morning,” Executive Director Susan Myers wrote in response to the query. “The article you have linked to does not involve the Oregon Government Ethics Commission. Additionally, the events described in the article do not appear to involve any violations of the ethics laws in ORS Chapter 244. Thus, these matters would not fall within our jurisdiction.”
Compliance and enforcement coordinator for the Oregon Government Ethics Commission, Casey Fenstermaker, dismissed the two official complaints.
In one response, Fenstermaker wrote that “the Commission will take no further action at this time based upon the information you have submitted” and that the “ethics laws in ORS 244 do not address things such as bullying behavior.” The other response was similar with Fenstermaker asserting they’d “take no further action …”
Office of Legislative Counsel/Legislative Equity Office Complaints
The Office of Legislative Counsel received three official complaints (one, two, and three) citing a “Legislative Branch Personnel Rule 27” violation.
An email obtained by Bearing Arms between Legislative Equity Officer Bor Yang and Cristela Delgado‐Daniel, an attorney with Miller Nash LLP, discusses the facial review of a complaint. Yang was seeking an independent analysis of the alleged events.
In the email Yang states that “the allegations do not fall under Rule 27 because the complainant is not the impacted party and there is no nexus to a protected class status.” Yang explained that there could be a “perception of a conflict of interest” because “the elected officials involved both serve on the conduct committee …” and “oversees (Yang’s) work.” Rep. Kropf and Rep. Trần were those officials referenced.
Delgado-Daniel replied noting that the complaint “likely does not raise sufficient facts to implicate Rule 27.” In quoting the rule, Delgado-Daniel wrote that a complaint can come from someone who “observes behavior inconsistent with this rule …” and said that “it does not appear that the complainant observed (the) behavior …”
Yang sent out a similar/identical response to two of the complainants reiterating what Delgado-Daniel said in her correspondence (one and two):
Thank you for bringing this matter to our attention. Your complaint/report was received. The independent investigator previously determined that the allegations do not merit an investigation under Rule 27 because the complainant (you) must observe the alleged conduct that occurred outside the room and there must be a nexus to a protected class. For this reason, your specific complaint has been closed.
An email thread independently obtained by Bearing Arms shows that the Office of Legislative Counsel failed to provide all the relevant and requested information. The Counsel omitted responses to the LeBlanc complaint. The initial response from Yang to LeBlanc was consistent with the other response. However, there were more emails back and forth — none of which were provided via the FOIA process.
Deputy Attorney Erin Jansen of the Office of the Legislative Counsel — who fulfilled the initial request — did not respond to Bearing Arms’ request for comment about why the record(s) were omitted.
Legislative Equity Officer Bor Yang did not respond to Bearing Arms’ request for comment.
House Bill 4145 Passes and is Enacted
When being considered, there were 2,692 testimonies submitted to the legislative body concerning HB 4145. Of those testimonies over 2,000 were in opposition of the bill, nearly 75 percent.
HB 4145 passed the Oregon House with 33 “Ayes,” and 19 “Nays.” The measure passed the Oregon Senate with 30 “Ayes.” After amendments were made by the Senate, the House repassed the measure with 50 ”Ayes” and 3 “Nays.”
On March 10, 2026 the speaker of the house and the senate president signed the bill. On April 7, the bill was signed into law by Governor Tina Kotek.
A Call For an Investigation
As noted by one of the complainants cited, House Republican Leader Lucetta Elmer, R-24, issued a release concerning the allegations and called for a full and complete investigation. Rep. Elmer referenced a House session where lawmakers attempted to bring to light the allegations.
“House Republicans paused deliberations on the House floor, claiming Democrat leaders did not fully investigate a Rule 27 complaint against Representative Jason Kropf,” the release stated. It’s further alleged that “Democrats delayed the House floor session for more than two hours.”
“The allegation that a lawmaker created a hostile working environment by intimidating another lawmaker into changing their vote is a serious allegation that creates distrust in the democratic process,” Elmer said in a statement. “It must be properly addressed and thoroughly investigated through a transparent process that respects the victim and remedies the wrong committed against them. Instead, Democrats attempted to sweep this under the rug and move on, instead of supporting Rep. Tran during this process. I am requesting that the Legislative Equity Office conduct a full investigation into this matter that is both inclusive and transparent.”
Who’s Responsible?
After reviewing all the available records on these allegations, Oregon Attorney General Rayfield was contacted.
Rayfield was asked if the Office of Legislative Counsel and Oregon Government Ethics Commission are unable, unwilling, or not responsible for handling such complaints, who is? And further, the attorney general was asked if his office was currently involved in an investigation concerning any allegations against Kropf.
Attorney General Rayfield did not respond to Bearing Arms’ request for information/comment.
The Aftermath
Nothing seems to have come from the allegations against Kropf. However, Kropf did resign as the co-chair of the House Committee on Conduct — not the same committee from the work session in question.
“Earlier today, I submitted my resignation as co-chair of the Joint Committee on Conduct,” Kropf said in a statement to the Statesman Journal. “While I believe deeply in the purpose and work of the committee, it has become obvious in recent days that my presence on that body was serving as a distraction to the important business of the House of Representatives. I thank my colleagues for the opportunity to lead in this area and have utmost confidence that the current committee will continue its work with competence and integrity.”
Bearing Arms connected with Rep. Elmer to find out if anything further came from her call for action from the legislature. Elmer said that the scenario is disappointing and that it was handled poorly.
“I am not aware of any further investigation into the events,” said Elmer. “But, that is the way the Legislative Equity Officer position was set up. It is an independent role from the presiding officers and leaders in the building. The officer only reports to the conduct committee, of which Kropf was co-chair of.”
Elmer further explained that she’s not aware of any calls for censure or other form of punishment from the legislative body. Kropf’s resignation from the Joint Committee on Conduct was acknowledged however, Elmer observed that “Trần has been on both sides of the fence with what happened …” As for the Legislative Equity Office, Elmer said that there’s been nothing from Bor Yang to/regarding Kropf that she’s aware of.
“As far as how I feel about what took place — it was disheartening to see the lack of transparency,” Elmer confided. “Without my caucus pushing the issue, I don’t believe Kropf would have stepped off the Conduct Committee. I don’t believe anything would have ever even been addressed about the incident.”
Oregon House Majority Leader, Ben Bowman, D-25, did not respond to Bearing Arms’ request for comment.
It’s not known if there are any open and/or pending investigations concerning these allegations. There’s evidence that a legislator may have coerced a colleague and there are allegations that the coercion came in a less-than-professional manner. Did Rep. Kropf put his thumb on the scale to get his desired outcome? A vote was flipped after he sidebarred with a fellow lawmaker outside of public view and scrutiny.
Oregon lawmakers and the public at large should be asking: “Did the system fail?” Or, do Oregonians believe this is exactly how parliamentary proceedings are supposed to occur? Something happened. What exactly? The parties won’t say. And the officials from the Beaver State who were queried are mum too.
Representatives Kropf and Trần did not respond to Bearing Arms’ request(s) for comment.
FOIA and Independently Obtained Document Index
Editor’s Note: Do you enjoy Bearing Arms’s conservative reporting that takes on the radical left and their anti-2A agenda? Support our work so that we can continue to bring you the truth with in-depth reporting like this piece from John Petrolino.
Join Bearing Arms VIP and use promo code FIGHT to receive 60% off your membership.
Read the full article here
