HOUSE COMMITTEE ON STREAM RESTORATION

& SPECIES RECOVERY

 

May 11, 2001                                                                                                          Hearing Room E

1:00 P.M.                                                                                                                  Tapes 119 - 120

 

MEMBERS PRESENT:        

                                                Rep. Bob Jenson, Chair

Rep. Jan Lee, Vice-Chair

Rep. Randy Leonard Vice-Chair

Rep. Tim Knopp

Rep. Patti Smith

Rep. Al King

Rep. Carolyn Tomei

Rep. Kelley Wirth

 

MEMBER EXCUSED:          Rep. Jeff Kruse

 

MEMBER VISITING:                       Rep. Jackie Dingfelder

 

STAFF PRESENT:                 Sandy Thiele-Cirka, Committee Administrator

Linda K. Gatto, Committee Assistant

 

MEASURES HEARD:          

                                                HB 2184 – Work Session

HB 3522 – Work Session

                                                HB 3016 – Work Session

                                                HB 3002 – Work Session

 

These minutes are in compliance with Senate and House Rules.  Only text enclosed in quotation marks reports a speaker’s exact words.  For complete contents, please refer to the tapes.

 

TAPE/#

Speaker

Comments

Tape 119, A

004

Chair Jenson

Calls the meeting to order at 1:12 p.m. and opens a work session on  HB 2184.

HB 2184 – WORK SESSION

Staff submits (EXHIBIT A).

Written testimony submitted by Doug Myers, WaterWatch, regarding HB 2184 (EXHIBIT B).

022

Martha Pagel

City of Redmond. Explains and summarizes –5 amendments.

066

Tom Byler

Water Resource Department (WRD). Testifies in support of –5 amendments.

078

Rep. Lee

Questions who will be performing the monitoring.

080

Byler

Explains who will do the monitoring.

091

Rep. Dingfelder

Questions how it fits in with WRD plans to restore water to the Deschutes Basin.

098

Byler

Responds that the aim is to not injure existing water rights and utilize it as a tool in mitigation.

121

Rep. Dingfelder

Questions if the water generated by the project can be used for other purposes or if it is protected.

131

Byler

Responds that once the mitigation credits are awarded, the credits must go to the designated mitigation use.

153

Rep. Tomei

Refers to (EXHIBIT B) and asks if this is incorporated.

161

Pagel

Responds that WaterWatch has agreed to the –5 amendments, making them neutral to the bill.

172

Rep. Leonard

Questions if there is a relationship between the legislation and the Grizzly Power Generation Project.

175

Doug Riggs

Representing Central Oregon Cities. Responds no. States that it is the intention of neither the work group nor the legislation to allow all credits to be purchased by one particular user.

201

Pagel

States that the if the project requires a new water right developing groundwater in the Deschutes Basin, then they must obtain the water right with a condition of mitigation. States that the intent is to help the smaller users.

216

Rep. Leonard

Questions why under HB 2184 a user could not buy all credits to supply water for the generation project.

218

Pagel

Responds that HB 2184 is general in establishing the process for mitigation credits.

236

Rep. Leonard

Asks who was involved in the work group.

238

Riggs

Identifies workgroup members.

250

Rep. Leonard

Questions if any of the members in the work group have a relationship with Cogentrix.

254

Riggs

Responds that he was unaware of any group’s relationship to Cogentrix. Restates the intent of the work group and HB 2184.

289

Byler

Explains that WRD has worked with Cogentrix as they would any potential water user. Notes that HB 2184 does not make it easier or harder for them.

311

Rep. Leonard

Questions if HB 2184 allows a system of purchasing credits.

315

Byler

Responds affirmatively.

317

Rep. Leonard

Questions if such a project could avoid mitigation by purchasing credits.

319

Byler

Responds that they would be mitigating for use by purchasing credits.

333

Pagel

States for the record that to her knowledge there is no one at her firm that is representing Cogentrix.

343

Chair Jenson

Asks if the City of Redmond has a connection with Cogentrix.

347

Riggs

States that he is unaware of any connection.

352

Rep. Lee

Explains that there are other ways to undertake mitigation.

361

Chair Jenson

Inquires if Cogentrix has any water rights in the area.

364

Riggs

Responds no.

405

Dick Springer

Representing himself at the invitation to respond. Expresses the background on the question of Cogentrix (EXHIBIT C).

Tape 120, A

033

Rep. Knopp

Questions what information Mr. Springer has indicating that the Deschutes Basin aquifer is being depleted.

042

Springer

Clarifies his position on groundwater depletion.

050

Rep. Tomei

Requests clarification of article describing mitigation strategies.

056

Springer

Clarifies.

082

Rep. Dingfelder

Asks for clarification of language in HB 2184.

091

Byler

Provides clarification on awarding mitigation credits.

120

Rep. Dingfelder

Questions if a state or federal agency or non-profit organization can hold the credits.

121

Byler

Responds that “person” would be broadly defined to include various entities.

129

Rep. Tomei

Questions if there could be a bidding war for mitigation credits.

134

Byler

Responds that once one holds a mitigation credit, it is at their discretion how to use it.

146

Pagel

Notes that the requirement for mitigation applies to uses that require a water right and are exempt from groundwater uses.

177

Rep. Knopp

MOTION:  Moves to ADOPT HB 2184-5 amendments dated 5/11/01.

181

Rep. Leonard

States that he will support the –5 amendments, but will be a no vote on the bill.

185

Rep. Tomei

Expresses concern that there is not enough information to vote on the bill.

 

 

VOTE:  7-1

AYE:               7 - King, Knopp, Lee, Leonard, Smith P, Wirth, Jenson

NAY:               1 – Tomei

EXCUSED:     1 – Kruse

195

Chair Jenson

The motion CARRIES.

196

Rep. Knopp

MOTION:  Moves HB 2184 to the floor with a DO PASS AS AMENDED recommendation.

200

Rep. Knopp

Speaks in favor of HB 2184.

220

Rep. Leonard

Notes that he does not want to create a scheme where a working class water user must enter into bidding war with a large industrial water user over mitigation credits.

232

Rep. Knopp

Responds and comments that HB 2184 is site specific.

254

Rep. Leonard

Notes that WRD intends to allow the marketplace to determine the value of the credits. Restates that HB 2184 could potentially harm certain water users.

269

Chair Jenson

Addresses concern and explains potential remedies.

 

 

VOTE:  6-2

AYE:               6 - King, Knopp, Lee, Smith P, Wirth, Jenson

NAY:               2 - Leonard, Tomei

EXCUSED:     1 – Kruse

317

Chair Jenson

The motion CARRIES.

REP. JENSON will lead discussion on the floor.

323

Chair Jenson

Closes work session on HB 2184 and opens a work session on          HB 3522.

HB 3522 – WORK SESSION

331

Thiele-Cirka

Summarizes HB 3522.

368

Rep. Leonard

MOTION:  Moves to ADOPT HB 3522-1 and 2 amendments dated 3/14/01 and 4/9/01 (EXHIBIT D).

 

 

VOTE:  8-0

EXCUSED:  1 – Kruse

382

Chair Jenson

Hearing no objection, declares the motion CARRIED.

383

Rep. Leonard

MOTION:  Moves HB 3522 to the floor WITHOUT RECOMMENDATION as to passage and BE REFERRED to the committee on Ways and Means.

393

Rep. Wirth

States that she will be a no vote.

 

 

VOTE:  6-2

AYE:               6 - King, Knopp, Lee, Leonard, Tomei, Jenson

NAY:               2 - Smith P, Wirth

EXCUSED:     1 – Kruse

434

Chair Jenson

The motion CARRIES.

440

Chair Jenson

Closes work session on HB 3522 and opens a work session on          HB 3016.

HB 3016 – WORK SESSION

443

Rep. King

Explains intentions for HB 3016.

Tape 119, B

052

Roy Elicker

Legislative Coordinator, Oregon Department of Fish & Wildlife (ODFW).

057

Chair Jenson

Questions if ODFW could complete the Diamond Lake project during the current biennium.

061

Elicker

Responds that completion would take place during the next biennium at the soonest.

065

Chair Jenson

Asserts that a decision must be made if Oregon wants a trout fishery or a tui chub fishery at Diamond Lake.

094

Rep. Knopp

Questions why mechanical removal of tui chub would not work.

099

Dave Loomis

District Fisheries Biologist, ODFW, Roseburg. Explains that there are approximately 30 million tui chub in Diamond Lake, 27 million of which are one inch long or less, so it is not effective to implement mechanical removal.

110

Rep. King

Explains what result he would like to see from the Ways and Means committee.

124

Rep. Tomei

Speaks against the concept of destroying fish.

151

Rep. King

Questions if there are any other alternatives for bringing back the trout fishery at Diamond Lake.

158

Loomis

Responds that there are no other options that are known except to eradicate tui chub to restore trout. Explains the use and effects of the chemical rotenone to eradicate the tui chub.

195

Rep. Wirth

Questions if the timeline is three years before the environmental impact statement is completed and it will be known if the federal government will give permission to use rotenone.

199

Loomis

Responds affirmatively.

201

Rep. King

MOTION:  Moves HB 3016 to the floor with a DO PASS recommendation and BE REFERRED to the committee on Ways and Means.

210

Rep. Wirth

Speaks against HB 3016.

218

Rep. Tomei

Speaks against HB 3016.

 

 

VOTE:  5-2

AYE:               5 - King, Knopp, Lee, Smith P, Jenson

NAY:               2 - Tomei, Wirth

EXCUSED:     2 - Kruse, Leonard

231

Chair Jenson

The motion CARRIES.

236

Chair Jenson

Closes work session on HB 3016 and opens a work session on          HB 3002.

HB 3002 – WORK SESSION

248

Thiele-Cirka

Summarizes HB 3002 and –3 amendments (EXHIBIT F).

321

Terry Thompson

Former State Representative. Explains his work done with HB 3002.

333

Willie Tiffany

League of Oregon Cities. Explains his work done with HB 3002.

347

Kay Brown

ODFW. Submits and reads prepared testimony regarding HB 3002 (EXHIBIT E).

385

Chair Jenson

Explains the work that has been done and will be done with the issues addressed in HB 3002. Notes that HB 3002 has come to be through the recommendation made by the Independent Multidisciplinary Science Team (IMST).

Tape 120, B

008

Thompson

States that a formula needs to be developed to be a catalyst to achieve the goal of recovery.

022

Rep. Dingfelder

Questions if the work group will be making recommendations to the IMST or working with IMST to make the recommendations.

028

Chair Jenson

Explains the process is to work with the IMST.

040

Rep. Dingfelder

Questions if the task force will be developing recommendations for recovery.

045

Chair Jenson

Responds that the task force would work with the scientific community and try to reduce to statute any recommendations.

052

Rep. Dingfelder

Questions Oregon Watershed Enhancement Board (OWEB) involvement.

059

Thompson

Responds that if the groups represented are too diverse it is difficult to reach a consensus.

067

Rep. Dingfelder

Notes that OWEB administers the grants for implementing the Oregon Plan.

074

Chair Jenson

Responds that OWEB asked not to be involved in the task force.

084

Brown

Clarifies the nature of her testimony.

093

Rep. Tomei

Questions how state and federal recovery criteria can meet when federal recovery criteria can be determined.

098

Brown

Responds that work is being done to develop consistent criteria.

102

Thompson

Describes the significance of the issue and the difficulties that arise from attempting to arrive at a solution. Notes that the solution should reflect policy and science.

165

Chair Jenson

Responds and provides additional explanation on how to achieve a workable solution. Closes the work session on HB 3002 and adjourns the meeting at 2:45 p.m..

 

Submitted By,                                                                           Reviewed By,

 

 

 

Linda K. Gatto,                                                                        Sandy Thiele-Cirka,

Committee Assistant                                                                 Committee Administrator

 

Transcribed By,

 

 

Michael Reiley

Committee Assistant

 

EXHIBIT SUMMARY

 

A – HB 2184, -5 amendments dated 5/11/01, staff, 2 pp.

B – HB 2184, written testimony, Doug Myers, 17 pp.

C – HB 2184, Cogentrix Grizzly Power Generation Project, Dick Springer, 15 pp.

D – HB 3522, -1 amendments dated 3/14/01 and –2 amendments dated 4/9/01, staff, 3 pp.

E – HB 3002, written testimony, Kay Brown, 1 p.

F – HB 3002, -3 amendments dated 5/9/01, staff, 3 pp.