HOUSE COMMITTEE ON

ENVIRONMENT AND LAND USE

 

 

March 20, 2003   Hearing Room HR E

8:30 AM Tapes  39 - 40

 

MEMBERS PRESENT:            Rep. Bill Garrard, Chair

Rep. Dennis Richardson, Vice-Chair

Rep. Cliff Zauner, Vice-Chair

Rep. Robert Ackerman

Rep. Dan Doyle

Rep. Mitch Greenlick

Rep. Diane Rosenbaum

 

 

STAFF PRESENT:                  Ray Kelly, Committee Administrator

David Peffley, Committee Assistant

 

 

MEASUES HEARD:                     HB 2673 – Public Hearing

                                                HB 3176 – Public Hearing

HM 1 – Work Session

HB 2674 – Public Hearing

HB 2644 – Public Hearing

 

 

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 39, A

003

Chair Garrard

Calls the meeting to order at 8:38 and opens a public hearing on        HB 2673.

HB 2673 - PUBLIC HEARING

016

Rep. Hass

Submits (EXHIBIT A) and testifies in favor of HB 2673 in order to require public officials to disclose potential conflicts of interest and use the “reasonable person” test when making land use decisions.

052

Rep. Max Williams

One of the chief sponsors of HB 2673, affirms Rep. Hass’ support of HB 2673.  Submits (EXHIBIT B) – the staff measure summary of the related HB 3908 from last session - the 71st Legislative Assembly. 

087

Rep. Ackerman

Asks if the conflict of interest is defined in ORS 197.

093

Rep. Williams

Addresses conflict of interest as defined by the statute.

100

Rep. Zauner

Asks if those declaring a conflict of interest may vote.

103

Rep. Williams

Points out Section 4 of HB 2673 and notes the allowances provided for.

120

Chair Garrard

Asks about a potential conflict of interest and whether this bill addresses that situation. 

130

Rep. Williams

Points out Page 2, Section 4 and addresses Chair Garrard’s concern about what is covered by the bill.

138

Rep. Rosenbaum

Asks if this bill would lead people to declare conflicts of interest when there’s merely a grey area and bog down the process.

150

Rep. Williams

Replies with clarifying who must declare a conflict.

180

Rep. Rosenbaum

Asks about current law and what must be declared as a conflict.

191

Rep. Hass

Adds that this bill has evolved and simplified from it’s original form.

198

Rep. Greenlick

Asks about the legal definition of the reasonable person clause.

214

Rep. Williams

Addresses the reasonable person concept and admits to its vagueness.

244

Chair Garrard

Addresses fiscal impact and notes that it is not necessary to send this legislation to Ways and Means.

250

Randy Tucker

Legislative Affairs Director, 1000 Friends of Oregon.  Submits (EXHIBIT C) and testifies in favor of HB 2673, as it would improve public confidence in the fairness and impartiality of public officials.

315

Rep. Doyle

States concern with HB 2673 due to its narrow focus.

322

Tucker

Speaks to the focus and the intent of the bill.

348

Rep. Doyle

Reaffirms his concern and suggests that the focus of the bill should be broadened.

360

Tucker

States that 1000 Friends are not against widening the statute, but adds that they would then be encroaching on other areas that 1000 Friends do not deal with.

368

Rep. Ackerman

Returns to the issue of conflict of interests, and notes that actual or apparent conflict of interest is not defined.  Asks how this relates to ORS Chapter 244.

385

Tucker

States that 1000 Friends attempted to reconcile Chapter 244’s concern with this bill.

420

Rep. Ackerman

States concern with the lack of definition.

TAPE 40, A

001

Tucker

States that this is an attempt to clarify that area and addresses the reasonable person clause in the clarification process.

016

Rep. Ackerman

Asks if the bill is trying to accomplish too much and also asks about the fiscal impact.

025

Tucker

Restates the intent of HB 2673 and notes asserts that this bill will simplify the process. States inability to assess the fiscal impact at this time.

040

Rep. Richardson

States that he would like to see language which would define parameters in HB 2673. 

051

Tucker

States that Page 1 does address the business relationship.

060

Linda Ludwig

Submits (EXHIBIT D) the Oregon Government Standards and Practices Laws and testifies in opposition to HB 2673, and lists concerns with the legislation.  Adds that there is no pressing need for this bill and concludes that it is very confusing.

121

Rep. Greenlick

Refers to Exhibit D and notes that HB 2673 seems to contradict it.

129

Ludwig

Affirms that Chapter 244 is violated by this bill.

139

Chair Garrard

Recesses the public hearing on HB 2673 and opens a Public hearing on HB 3176.

HB 3176 – PUBLIC HEARING

142

Ray Kelly

Summarizes HB 3176.

151

Rep. Wayne Scott

Sponsor of HB 3176 introduces the bill and states its applicability to economic development.

191

Rep. Rosenbaum

Asks about the various bills on industrial lands and asks if Rep. Scott was involved in the previous work group.

199

Rep. Scott

States that he was not.

203

Rep. Ackerman

Asks why jurisdiction does not belong to cities and counties and why we’re imposing further bureaucracy on this process.

214

Rep. Scott

Replies to Rep. Ackerman’s concerns.

227

Rep. Ackerman

Asks if the mandate would bog down the system in bureaucracy and asks if there is a fiscal impact.

232

Rep. Scott

Asserts that HB 3176 would help expedite the process and adds that he doesn’t know about the fiscal impact.

240

Rep. Greenlick

Asks how this bill affects Metro.

245

Rep. Scott

States that this would not change much.

252

Chair Garrard

Recesses the public hearing on HB 3176 and opens a work session on HM 1.

HM 1 – WORK SESSION

261

Rep. Richardson

Submits (EXHIBIT E) and (EXHIBIT F) the -1 amendments to HM 1        Clarifies the effect of the amendments.

290

Rep. Zauner

MOTION:  Moves to ADOPT HM 1-1 amendments dated 3/14/03.

295

 

VOTE:  7-0

297

Chair Garrard

Hearing no objection, declares the motion CARRIED.

300

Rep. Zauner

MOTION:  Moves HM  1 be sent to the floor with a BE ADOPTED AS AMENDED recommendation.

305

Rep. Ackerman

States opposition to HM 1, not knowing the federal position on the measure.  Feels that he needs more information and to hear from adversarial opinions.

332

Rep. Richardson

States that he understands Rep. Ackerman’s position.

350

Rep. Ackerman

Addresses the adversarial process and restates his position.

380

Doug Myers

Waterwatch.  Submits (EXHIBIT G) and testifies in opposition to   HM 1 as unnecessary and costly to taxpayers.

TAPE 39, B

002

Rep. Richardson

Informs Myers of the hydroelectric and flood reduction properties of the dam.

017

 

VOTE:  5-2

AYE:               5 - Doyle, Greenlick, Richardson, Zauner, Garrard

NAY:               2 - Ackerman, Rosenbaum

026

Chair Garrard

The motion CARRIES.

REP. RICHARDSON will lead discussion on the floor.

017

Chair Garrard

Closes the work session on HM 1, and reopens a public hearing on   HB 2673

HB 2673 – PUBLIC HEARING

033

Jon Chandler

Oregon Building Industry Association.  Supplies neutral informational testimony and notes that the proponents have addressed their previous concerns.

057

Harlan Levy

Oregon Association of Realtors (OAR).  Agrees with Chandler and Ludwig.   Addresses his concern with Page 5, Subsection C and asks for an amendment dealing with Subsection C regarding LUBA.

083

Jim Nass

Legal Counsel for Appellate Courts. Clarifies legal and technical issues contained in HB 2673 for the committee.

120

Rep. Greenlick

Asks for a clarification regarding the conflict of interest.

127

Nass

Claims that the question exceeds his expertise.

130

Dave Hunnicutt

Oregonians In Action.  States neutrality on this bill. Explains LUBA’s jurisdiction in the process. States concerns that we might need to broaden the scope. 

172

Chair Garrard

Calls for a work group to hone this bill.  Asks Randy Tucker to chair the group and report back in two weeks.

180

Tucker

Agrees to chair the work group.

191

Chair Garrard

Closes the public hearing on HB 2673 and opens a public hearing on HB 2674.

HB 2674 - PUBLIC HEARING

200

Randy Tucker

Testifies in opposition to HB 2674. States concern with guest ranches which would be greatly expanded by this legislation.  Expresses concern that changing population requirements would expand guest ranches east of Bend.  States that we need to study the effect of these ranches before taking action.

277

Rep. Greenlick

Asks what is presently restricted in regard to the guest ranches.

280

Tucker

Defers to Ron Eber, DLCD. 

300

Ron Eber

Department of Land Conservation and Development (DLCD).  Testifies to the population of cities in Eastern Oregon which would be affected.  Confirms Tucker’s suspicions about the effect.

320

Chair Garrard

Asks about the number 5000 in the SMS and it’s relation to the bill.

325

Rep. Greenlick

Confirms that the number would be decreased from 50,000 in the present statute.

398

Eber

 Expresses concern that this legislation might bring too much development outside the urban growth boundaries.  States neutrality on the bill, however.

410

Rep. Greenlick

Asks if it’s typical for livestock operations inside of the 10 mile radius.

421

Eber

States that it may vary from city to city.

425

Rep. Greenlick

Asks how one gets within ten miles of Bend.

430

Eber

Notes that it’s just outside of the 10-mile radius.

432

Tucker

Adds the technical change made a session or two ago.

TAPE 40, B

002

Kelly

Confirms the change.

003

Chair Garrard

Asks Tucker’s position.

004

Tucker

Reaffirms that  they oppose this legislation, citing the need to have more information.  Adds that it’s not 1000 Friends’ most critical issue.

015

Rep. Rosenbaum

Asks Eber what would happen if there ceased to be a livestock separation.

021

Eber

Addresses Rep. Rosenbaum’s concern.

039

Rep. Greenlick

Notes that this extends the sunset.

052

Don Schellenberg

Oregon Farm Bureau (OFB).  Supports HB 2674, but expresses concern  about violation of the 10-mile and conflicts with the farming community. 

069

Rep. Greenlick

Asks Schellenberg to clarify OFB’s position.

071

Schellenberg

States OFB’s official neutrality.

075

Chair Garrard

Closes the public hearing on HB 2674 and opens a public hearing on HB 2644.

HB 2644 - PUBLIC HEARING

084

Ray Kelly

Summarizes HB 2644.

091

Dave Barrows

Chemical Waste Management (CWM). Gives historical background and testifies in favor of HB 2644.  Recommends that we look at what Idaho is doing. Asks the committee to hang onto the bill until Idaho finishes their legislative session, then CWM will bring forth an amendment.

136

Rep. Zauner

Asks what Idaho’s rate is.

138

Barrows

States that it fluctuates and talks about comparison between the two states and the need to stay within the range of them.

171

Bob Danko

Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ).  Reaffirms how critical this bill is.  Reaffirms Barrows’ testimony.

184

Chair Garrard

Closes the public hearing on HB 2644 and adjourns the meeting at 10:22.

 

 

EXHIBIT SUMMARY

 

A – HB 2673, written testimony, Rep. Mark Hass, 1 p.

B – HB 2673, written information, Rep Max Williams, 1 p.

C – HB 2673, written testimony, Randy Tucker, 4 pp.

D – HB 2673, written testimony, Linda Ludwig, 60 pp.

E – HM 1, written testimony, Rep. Dennis Richardson, 1 p.

F – HM 1, -1 amendment, Rep. Dennis Richardson, 1 p.

G – HM 1, written testimony, Doug Myers, 5 pp.