SENATE COMMITTEE ON NATURAL RESOURCES, AGRICULTURE, SALMON AND WATER

January 29, 2001 Hearing Room B

8:00 AM Tapes 18 - Tape 20

MEMBERS PRESENT: Sen. Ken Messerle, Chair

Sen. Frank Shields, Vice-Chair

Sen. Jason Atkinson

Sen. Roger Beyer

Sen. Ginny Burdick

Sen. Ryan Deckert

Sen. Bill Fisher

MEMBER EXCUSED:

STAFF PRESENT: Jennifer Solomon, Committee Administrator

Cheryl Young, Committee Assistant

MEASURE/ISSUES HEARD: SB 311, Work Session

SB 310, Public Hearing

Informational Meeting, Secondary Lands

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 18, A
006	Chair Messerle	Opens the meeting at 8:08. Open Work Session for SB 311-1
SB 311 WORK SESSION
006	Staff	Summarizes SB 311-1
	Chair Messerle	Asks for Motion.
015	Sen. R. Beyer	MOTION: Moves SB 311 to the floor with a DO PASS AS AMENDED recommendation.
		VOTE: 5-0 EXCUSED: 2 – Sen. Burdick, Sen. Shields
	Chair Messerle	Hearing no objection, declares the motion CARRIED. SEN. ATKINSON will lead discussion on the floor.
025	Chair Messerle	Closes Work Session for SB 311. Opens Public Hearing for SB 310.
SB 310 – PUBLIC HEARING
027	Staff	Summarizes SB 310.
041	Chuck Craig	Deputy Director, Department of Agriculture. Gives testimony regarding the standardization of feed formula labeling, and supports the bill. Submits written testimony. (EXHIBIT A).
064	Chair Messerle	Asks if he is aware of anyone being in opposition to the bill.
076	Richard Ten Eyck	Seed Specialist, Oregon Department of Agriculture. Describes specific changes requested in the bill.
107	Craig	States they have received some suggestions from the American Feed Industry Association for some amendments. They are in agreement with the suggestions and propose that there may be amendments to the bill. Submits written testimony. (EXHIBIT B).
121	Dennis Hayes	Executive Secretary, Oregon Feed and Grain Association. Supports the changes in the bill.
129	Chair Messerle	Closes Public Hearing on SB 310.
SECONDARY LANDS – INFORMATIONAL MEETING
136	Ron Eber	Farm and Forest Land Specialist, Department of Land Conservation and Development. Updates the committee on the rural lands mapping project. Department was directed to put together a computer base to show rural lands using GIS mapping. Has worked with UO to get existing database going. States that each county will be on a CD disk at the end of the project, which will be by the end of the biennium. Submits written testimony. (EXHIBIT C).
196	Chair Messerle	Asked if the information is based on the NRCS maps. Also asks if this is the same information that was gathered 15 years ago by staff going around the countryside doing soil samples?
200	Eber	Agrees, and explains site specific situation inaccuracies.
234	Chair Messerle	States that there are other bills coming before us, and asks who is holding this information and the reason it’s being held where it is.
240	Eber	States that the information being assembled, is currently being held at UO where the work is being done under contract.
254	Chair Messerle	There are other areas we are concerned about, like slide areas, flood plains, etc., asks if they are trying to get it under one central location so a person can click onto one page to get all information.
263	Eber	Responds that they are attempting to get the major sets of information into a format that is compatible on the same scale.
294	Sen. Shields	Asks what is the time line for the information to be in a compatible digital format.
300	Eber	Unsure, several years away from completion.
311	Sen. Atkinson	How old is this Jackson County data?
316	Eber	Responds that the information on that particular map is from last month.
330	Sen. Atkinson	Is this map trying to demonstrate that the classifications might or might not be up to date?
337	Eber	Zoning classifications are fairly up to date in the past few months. Submits written testimony. (EXHIBITS D & E).
378	Dave Hunnicutt	Representing Oregonians in Action. Agrees with previous testimony. Supports the continuation of the mapping process. He hopes a work group can be organized to discuss bringing today’s legislation more in line with what was intended in legislation in 1973. Submits written testimony. (EXHIBIT F).
510	Sen. Burdick	Asks what are the goals in trying to open programs on these secondary lands and asks for clarification.
TAPE 19,A
039	Hunnicutt	Gives clarification and gives examples.
065	Sen. Burdick	Inquires if his vision is to allow hillsides to be split into five acres parcels.
067	Hunnicutt	Responds that to the extent that those areas are secondary and not prime farmlands and provide a level of services. Would support the creation of residential rural zones.
073	Sen. Burdick	Asks about the need for home dwelling sites outside the urban areas. Asks if he is aware of the hundreds of thousands of acres, currently zoned rural-residential around the state that are not inside urban growth boundaries in exception areas?
078	Hunnicutt	Gives explanation of rural development acreage within the state.
090	Sen. Burdick	Notes that he wants to have these nonproductive hillsides developed at some level of density; yet many of these occur within bigger farm/forest zones where farming and forestry practices take place. What accommodation should these areas have to make to the orderly conduct of forest and farming business, which are often times in conflict with residential usage?
103	Hunnicutt	States that the department supports the right to farm and forest practices laws, and gives some detailed answers.
117	Sen. Burdick	Asks if he doesn’t consider that the density itself could pose any conflict, inherently for example, through increases that may interfere with farm vehicles.
121	Hunnicutt	Admits to the possibility, but is not aware of any study demonstrating that kind of conflict.
141	Chair Messerle	Asks if he feels the maps shown earlier are accurate enough with the soil testing by the NRCS, and are they site specific enough to go to boundary lines.
152	Hunnicutt	Responds.
174	Chair Messerle	States that when they were mapping in Coos County it was done specifically with soil samples. This was done with the idea that it was for farm management, and not used with zoning purposes in the future. Sees a real value for planning purposes. Sees tremendous value in these maps.
180	Hunnicutt	Comments on Chairs statement.
187	Sen. Deckert	In the intent of SB 100, are you, in your efforts going to include the authors of the bill, to get at what the intent of the bill really was of that legislation?
198	Hunnicutt	Responds that the best way to determine intent is to listen to all 27 tapes of SB 100.
219	Sen. Deckert	Asks if OIA is on record for the expansion of the UGB onto prime farmland in the Portland Metro area, and if they are in opposition to that expansion.
224	Hunnicutt	States that they haven’t addressed the actual expansion of urban growth boundaries in the Portland Metro area.
240	Charlie Swindells	Staff Attorney, 1000 Friends of Oregon. Discusses legal concept of Legislative Intent in the law of preservation of agriculture in large blocks; preservation of all agricultural land and likewise the Forestry Practices Act, and soil conservation. Submits written testimony. (EXHIBIT G).
Tape 18, B
002	Carrie Kuerschner	Staff Attorney, 1000 Friends of Oregon. Discusses past and present proposal for secondary lands policies. Submits written testimony. (EXHIBIT H).
057	Sen. R. Beyer	Is the 1000 Friends view that SB 100 and SB 101 done, in your organization’s view, what they were intended to do?
061	Swindells	Responds that they graded SB 100 on its effectiveness four years ago. Feels the potential of SB 101 will be more effective.
067	Sen. R. Beyer	Comments that he would give the idea of SB 100 a –D. Refers to I-5 built down the Willamette Valley. The most predominant, most beneficial high value farmland in the world is now underneath pavement in may areas. Looking at the Willamette Valley points to the need to do something different because our growth is being pushed onto the most productive soils in the world and we are preserving the worst stuff.
088	Sen. Burdick	Asks that if the Notion of Intent is clear in the words of the statute itself, then the court does not go beyond that. States that she is concerned, that with 29 hours of tapes, if there is a question about intent, isn’t the remedy through the courts and not the legislature? .
097	Swindells	Agrees. States that it is called Intrinsic Evidence of the Legislative Intent. Expands on that statement.
110	Sen. Fisher	States that having sat through HB 3661, and various other parts, it was certainly not put together with Legislative Intent.
123	Harlan Levy	Staff Attorney for the Oregon Association of Realtors. Defines secondary lands as lands outside of urban growth boundaries that have been incorrectly zoned for resource uses. Presents further testimony on this issue. Submits written testimony. (EXHIBIT I).
211	Sen. Deckert	Follow-up regarding the nature of surveying other states. States that of all the questions asked by numerous groups of policy makers outside Oregon is as Oregon is a model, how did you revitalize your downtown, your metropolitan centers, and how did you protect farm and forest land? The most astonishing question I get when I go outside of Oregon is: how did Oregon do it, and what happened in 1970s?
236	Levy	Agrees that Oregon is held up as model and that there needs to be something about this situation.
252	Sen. Fisher	The simple answer is that to get where we are, we’ve taken away the constitutional rights of everyone who is a private property owner in the State of Oregon.
259	Chair Messerle	Asks what kind of pressure is there from the high-density areas from air pollution, water quality, to the habitant for some of our endangered species? Have you seen from other states how they are dealing with some of these problems?
275	Levy	States that Oregon is a very regulated state in terms of its land use. One of the most so in the country. Continues his comments.
298	Don Schellenberg	Associate Director of Governmental Affairs for the Oregon Farm Bureau Federation. States that Secondary Lands mean different things to different people. Continues testimony on land use policies. Submits written testimony. (EXHIBIT J).
468	Messerle	Comments that a great point was raised on the base of agriculture resources that pulls the entire infrastructure together. I am alarmed at the acreage being taken out of farming right now for mitigation sites, or lots of it just simply being bought by public agencies and bodies; and agriculture, as far as production goes, ceases. States that he doesn’t know if this problem is universal, but it’s becoming a huge issue in his district on the coast and in the Willamette Valley. Has the Farm Bureau been dealing with that issue?
492	Schellenberg	Responds that yes they are, and expands on explanation.
520	Chair Messerle	Comments in some of the cases where land is being bought for mitigation, it’s being bought for multiples of what its worth as farmland. It needs to be looked at and we need some advice and policy from some of the agencies and organizations.
Tape 19,B
070	Sen. R. Beyer	Inquires, in his opinion, if the land use laws have worked as envisioned almost 30 years ago.
073	Schellenberg	Responds by rephrasing the question to: “Have they protected the farmland in perpetuity?” No.
084	Sen. R. Beyer	States that this was not the vision he had for our farmland. Notes that one of the things the Farm Bureau supports in the report is “the principle of land use planning is for the purpose of protecting the resource... “in a profitable manner”. Asks what the Farm Bureau is going to do when there are farmers in his district going broke trying to farm, but cannot do that now because land use values are so high around them. It is known that the canneries are closing, the seed industry is going broke, and almost every agricultural commodity is down. The land values, which are the farmers highest assets, are such that they cannot afford to sell them to another farmer, because their land values are being driven up by the homes being built across the street on which is just as productable farm land. What are these people supposed to do?
104	Schellenberg	Responds to the questions.
129	Chair Messerle	Welcomes John Branchfield who is from the American Bankers Association, Director of the Center of Agricultural and Rural Banking.
136	Jim Welsh	Representing the Oregon Family Farms Association. Gives testimony on representation of private property rights to protect lands important to farmers, and supports SB 212 relating to Secondary Lands. Submits written testimony. Submits written testimony. (EXHIBIT K).
297	Chair Messerle	Notes that if this concept is going to move forward, he strongly urges people to form a coalition and get back to the committee with data. Asks how many members in the group.
305	Welsh	Responds that there are presently1200.
307	Chair Messerle	Comments that sometimes we like to think in terms of commercial farms, and it’s interesting that there are not a lot of commercial farms anymore that solely make their living off the farm. Gives example of own family farm, and states that less of their income comes from the cattle. Other income comes from contracted timber. Appears to becoming a real norm within the state, even in the valley.
326	Sen. R. Beyer	Points out that currently, the only Willamette Valley commodities that are profitable are not the ones in large commercial operations, but the ones on small parcel type farming operations. These are the only things the farmers are even supporting themselves with. There is a need to look to the smaller parcels, because that’s the only place where farmers are making any money.
342	Sen. Burdick.	Asks if the group is a non-profit or a political action committee?
348	Welsh	Responds that it is privately incorporated.
351	Sen. Burdick	Contribution Expenditure Report for the Oregon Family Farm Pack shows $197K in contributions received and of those contributions, only $559 came out of people who listed their occupation as farmer, rancher or logger. Are those figures correct?
372	Welsh	Responds that he cannot at present, answer the question.
381	Sen. Burdick	Referring to the 2000 Mailing Guide. The Association took positions on things you would expect. Wondering what the connection is to the issues listed in the Guide and what do they have to do with small family farming?
398	Welsh	Responds that he does not recall, as he was not involved in putting together the Guide.
413	Chair Messerle	Suggests that the Senator and Mr. Welsh continue this discussion at a later time.
414	Sen. Fisher	Comments that many people have no idea what bothers farmers and how many people are involved in farms. Wants to know why the federal government is paying thousands and thousands for acres to be taken out of production over in the eastern part of the country.
433	Sen. Shields	Asks if he and Farm Bureau have been in contact with each other along the way.
442	Welsh	Responds: not at this point
455	Sen. Shields	Asks if he has formulated an opinion on the Family Farm Association’s proposals?
456	Schellenberg	Requests clarification.
462	Sen. Shields	Dealing with secondary lands, SB 212, etc.
466	Schellenberg	States that they have not yet seen anything in writing to know what their positions were.
477	Art Schlack	Association of Oregon Counties. Refers to the question: Are there lands that are zoned exclusive land or forest in the state of Oregon that have been mis-zoned? Response, Yes. Are there existing processes or procedures to address some of these issues? Yes, there are. Are they adequate? I’m not sure.
Tape 20,A
020	Schlack	Continues with testimony.
095	Chair Messerle	Asks a question relating to standards. Much discussion on opening up for lotto sub divisions. States that he has always thought we should put more emphasis on requirements, if you do want to build, such as roadway, so you could get fire trucks in, water supplies, etc., that are required for a home site. Does the county have any thoughts or position on that?
109	Schlack	Responds that the question of adequacy of services is a local issue of which you’ll see different standards from county-to-county at this point. But the standards dealing with access, meeting sub-service sewage disposal requirements and the like are issues that are commonly addressed when someone is looking at dividing land.
118	Chair Messerle	Meeting adjourned 10:01.

Submitted By, Reviewed By,

Cheryl Young, Jennifer Solomon,

Committee Assistant Administrator

EXHIBIT SUMMARY

A – SB 310, written testimony, Chuck Craig, 1p

B – SB 310, written testimony, Richard Teneyck, 2pp

C – Secondary Lands Information Meeting, maps, Ron Eber, 6pp

D – Secondary Lands Information Meeting, written testimony, Ron Eber, 2pp

E – Secondary Lands Information Meeting, written testimony, Ron Eber, 3pp

F – Secondary Lands Information Meeting, written testimony, Dave Hunnicutt, 8pp

G - Secondary Lands Information Meeting, written testimony, Charles Swindells, 5pp

H –Secondary Lands Information Meeting, written testimony, Carrie Kuerschner, 2pp

I – Secondary Lands Information Meeting, written testimony, Harlan Levy, 2pp

J – Secondary Lands Information Meeting, written testimony, Don Schellenberg, 2pp

K – Secondary Lands Information Meeting, written testimony, Jim Welsh, 2pp