HOUSE COMMITTEE ON RULES AND PUBLIC AFFAIRS
July 24, 2003 Hearing Room E
1:30 PM Tapes 101 – 102
MEMBERS PRESENT: Rep. Dan Doyle, Chair
Rep. Linda Flores, Vice-Chair
Rep. Laurie Monnes Anderson, Vice Chair
Rep. Vic Backlund
Rep. Phil Barnhart
Rep. Betsy L. Close
Rep. Joanne Verger
STAFF PRESENT: Cara
Filsinger, Administrator
Janet Adkins, Administrator
Annetta Mullins, Committee Assistant
MEASURE/ISSUES HEARD: HCR 13 – Public Hearing and Work Session
SB 751 A – 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 101,
A |
||
|
004 |
Chair Doyle |
Calls meeting to order at 1:34 p.m., reviews agenda
items, and opens a public hearing on HCR 13. |
|
HCR 13
– PUBLIC HEARING |
||
|
013 |
Rep. Max Williams |
District 35.
Testifies in support of HCR 13.
Comments on the professional services by Former Judge Joseph, his community
service, and accomplishments. |
|
031 |
Rep. Lane Shetterly |
District 23. Testifies in support of HCR 13.
Commends wording in the memorial to the committee. Comments on administrative abilities of
the Judge Joseph and the inspiration he gave to other judges on the court. |
|
074 |
Rep. Diane Rosenbaum |
District 42.
Testifies in support of HCR 13.
Comments on her relationship with Judge Joseph and his wife, and the
humor and dedication of Judge Joseph.
|
|
119 |
Rep. Verger |
Comments on having served with Judge Joseph on the
Easter Seal Society Board and endorses the statements on Judge Joseph. |
|
|
Chair Doyle |
Closes the public hearing and opens a work session
on HCR 13. |
|
HCR 13
– WORK SESSION |
||
|
122 |
Rep.
Flores |
MOTION: Moves HCR 13 be sent to the floor with a
BE ADOPTED recommendation. |
|
125 |
|
VOTE:
7-0-0 AYE: In a roll call vote, all members present vote Aye. |
|
|
Chair Doyle |
The motion CARRIES. REP. ROSENBAUM will lead discussion on
the floor. |
|
138 |
Chair Doyle |
Closes the work session on HCR 13 and opens a public
hearing on SB 751-A. |
|
SB 751
A – PUBLIC HEARING |
||
|
144 |
Sen. Rick Metsger |
District 26.
Testifies in support of SB 751 A.
Explains history of problems in the Portland harbor and efforts to get
it cleaned up under the Federal Superfund Law. Stresses the importance of the harbor and the Willamette River
to the economy of the area. SB 751 A establishes
the clean up authority to be chaired by the Governor. Explains the purpose of the
authority. The bill has a lot of
support, and the remedies are in the SB 751–A9 amendments (EXHIBIT A). There are four
major changes that the opponents are happy with. Explains the SB 751-A9 amendments. |
|
213 |
Rep. Gary Hansen |
District 44.
Speaks in support of the SB 751 A.
States that he supports some of the changes that Sen. Metzger has
indicated. This cleanup is critical
for the state and the Portland area.
The economic impacts are more important. It is a multi-modal transportation center for the state. The river and uplands must be clean. If this elevates the problem by evolving a
state authority, we will have improved the situation. Submits and explains the SB 751-A10
amendments (EXHIBIT B) and states
that he believes the amendments are included in other amendments. |
|
276 |
Rep. Monnes Anderson |
Asks how many legislative districts there are in the
affected area. |
|
|
Rep. Hansen |
Responds there are at least two House and two Senate
districts. Adds there is a great deal
of community interest and business interest in doing what we can to clean the
river and the sites. Thinks having local
representation on the authority would help facilitate the problem
solving. |
|
300 |
Keith Leavitt |
Port of Portland.
Testifies in support of SB 751 A.
Submits testimony prepared by Sebastian Degens’ that he presented to
the Senate Committee on the economic impacts (EXHIBIT C). Believes everyone
understands this is an economic artery for the state; there are 940
businesses and 40,000 jobs. The
products that come through the harbor are from all over the state of Oregon.
It is the number one wheat export gateway in the United States, and it is
also number one for exports of grain and minerals. There are a lot of auto imports that create employment. The stigma attached to Superfund and the
uncertainty of liability attached to it is the chill on any investment. Businesses are not making investments now,
land is not being redeveloped; the only major investment over the last
several years is Toyota America’s decision to come back to Terminal 4. Everything is pretty much on hold because
there is a lot of uncertainty about their level of liability in the cleanup
project. About three to five years
remains of the remedial investigation and feasibility study. The Port of Portland with the Willamette
Group has stepped up to fund the process and are working with the Department
of Environmental (DEQ) and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). |
|
350 |
Leavitt |
SB 751 A speaks to the end of the process. When the remedial actions need to take
place, they will have an idea of the amount of pollution that cannot be
traced to a known responsible party.
It will be a major policy issue for the State. If the State chooses to have an expedited
cleanup, there will need to be a robust orphan program. SB 751 would begin the process of
developing that program and that is why the Port of Portland supports the
bill. It does not erode the
polluter-pays principle. There will
be some pollution that can not be identified with the polluter. Questions whether there will be enough
funding available at the State or federal level to be able to use as a tool
to provide incentives to responsible parties to do clean ups, and if not, the
State can step in and do the clean up and then go after the polluters for
much more than it would cost for the polluter to have stepped up. The other situation is where the polluter
cannot be found. Some of the
pollution is from 50 to 70 or 100 years ago.
|
|
399 |
Leavitt |
States the bill makes sure policy makers have their
eyes on the cleanup project and they will be informed and be able to make
recommendations to the legislature next session or session after that. |
|
417 |
Chair Doyle |
Asks Sen. Metsger to comment on the authority of the
Governor to appoint a designee in his place and whether it would water down
the authority. |
|
426 |
Sen. Metsger |
Responds that the amendment was a request from the
Governor’s office. Believes the
Governor wanted to make it clear that if he was going to be absent from a
meeting he could designate someone else to be there. Believes that the Governor believes this
is a very critical situation. |
|
442 |
Chair Doyle |
Asks if it would be a problem to have designees of
the legislators, and what would be the difference. |
|
447 |
Sen. Metsger |
Responds that if the committee should choose to
conceptually amend the SB 751-A9 amendments by deleting the change, he would
not object. |
|
TAPE 102,
A |
||
|
004 |
Rep. Close |
Asks if the SB 751-A has a fiscal impact. |
|
|
Sen. Metsger |
States there is no fiscal impact. Comments that the bill was drafted to
avoid any fiscal impact. |
|
019 |
Rep. Close |
Asks if there is a cost for the authority to
operate. |
|
|
Sen. Metsger |
Notes language in the bill that says there will be
no remuneration. |
|
020 |
Rep. Monnes Anderson |
Asks if DEQ
has the authority to issue bonds, and whether this would exceed the role they
have. |
|
031 |
Sen. Metsger |
States that DEQ has authority for the Pollution
Control Fund and would have no authority for anything other that listed under
the fund. The legislature could issue
general obligation if approved by the electors. By adding this as an acceptable use of the bonds, the
legislation itself could simply be permissive. Suggests that DEQ can clarify the issue. |
|
|
|
|
|
046 |
Dick Peterson |
Land Quality Administrator, Department of Environmental
Quality (DEQ). Explains DEQ has been
given authority to sell bonds for orphan site cleanups. States they have sold bonds to help pay
for orphan sites around the state where the responsible parties are unknown
or unwilling or unable to pay. |
|
068 |
Jon Christenson |
Senior Legislative Staff to Sen. Margaret
Carter. States that the Portland harbor
is within Sen. Carter’s district.
Introduces Robin Plance of the St. John’s neighborhood. |
|
073 |
Robin Plance |
Chair, St. Johns Neighborhood Association, and
Chair, Advisory Committee for the Portland Harbor Cleanup. Testifies in opposition to SB 751-A. The bill duplicates some existing state
actions regarding the bonding of orphan sites. The bill will not accelerate the process. Comments on on-going activities to clean
up the harbor. Comments on community
outreach to make sure the cleanup is done right the first time. Suggests if the legislature is interested
in engaging DEQ more forthrightly in the cleanup, expanding the ability of
the Pollution Control Fund would probably be better. If orphan sites are identified, then they
would like to see the state step forward.
The EPA will oversee and cleanup the inland water. Over 60 potentially responsible persons
have been identified. |
|
105 |
Plance |
States they need to go forward and EPA has the
authority to bring action against the polluters for triple damages if they do
not pay for the cleanup. Submits
report “Portland Harbor Superfund Site, Remedial Investigation/Feasibility
Study Programmatic Work Plan Overview” (EXHIBIT
D). Offers to provide a CD that
contains data collected by the Lower Willamette Group. |
|
121 |
Christenson |
States that Sen. Carter has a number of concerns
that parallel some of the questions that Rep. Close has, that is, the fiscal
impact and the pay-back strategies that would be used for the bonds. Comments that the bill has DEQ listed as
the lead agency for cleanup; the EPA is the lead agency. Submits the SB 751-A8 amendments (EXHIBIT E) should the committee wish
to move forward. Explains the SB
751-A8 amendments to address issues they have identified. |
|
182 |
Rep. Close |
Asks why the federal government is not providing
money for the cleanup. |
|
|
Plance |
Responds that he does not know. Adds that the DEQ has chosen not to, and
as a state we should be putting pressure on the state representatives and
senators to reinstate the tax collection and get the tax back into the
Superfund. |
|
197 |
Rep. Close |
Asks if there is no money for cleanup from the
federal government. |
|
|
Plance |
Responds that the fund is winding down; the last
figure he heard was $30 million, which is not enough to do a cleanup. Once there is a record decision, they will
come up with a process for cleanup.
If needed, the EPA will go into litigation to make the potentially
responsible persons pay their fair share, and if they don’t they can bill
those who did not pay for triple damages. |
|
208 |
Rep. Verger |
Comments that the Lower Willamette Group includes
the Port of Portland and they support the bill. Asks which group Plance is with. |
|
|
Plance |
Explains the different groups and memberships and
their activities. |
|
|
Rep. Verger |
Asks if the other groups’ members live close to the
harbor. |
|
|
Plance |
Responds that some are close and some are not. Comments further on makeup of the
community groups. |
|
254 |
Rep. Verger |
Asks if the SB 751–A8 amendments address all of Sen.
Carter’s concerns. |
|
278 |
Christenson |
Responds he believes they do. States that they would still be concerned
with the State Land Board involvement because eventually the State Land Board
will have to deal with this as a constitutional action. |
|
|
Rep. Verger |
Asks if they are comfortable with the authority
membership. |
|
307 |
Christenson |
Responds that their original suggestion was in the SB
751-6 amendments, which the committee does not have, to keep it under the
Environmental Quality Commission (EQC) and the DEQ, and keep it within an
executive line of operation. |
|
334 |
Rep. Close |
Comments that in the SB 751-A8 amendments they are
repealing the January 2008 date and other amendments do not do that. |
|
338 |
Christenson |
Responds that they found there was no reporting date
in Sen. Metsger’s amendments. Comments
on need to have a limiting end. |
|
372 |
Louie Pitts, Jr. |
Director, Government Affairs and Planning, Confederated
Tribes of Warm Springs. Comments that
they have been involved in cleanups all around the state that are negative to
their treaty rights. Comments on
tribal ownership and treaty rights. |
|
448 |
Pitts |
States that the structure imposed on the tribes is U.
S. v. Oregon is a co-management authority. States it is up to the tribes to judge how
the process or any structure impacts their sovereignty so they are closely
watching SB 751 A. Believes the bill
is okay and they will let the legislature know if there any problems. |
|
466 |
Pitts |
Comments on fish and eel that are important to the
tribes, and fishing rights. |
|
TAPE 101 B |
||
|
023 |
John Chandler |
Legislative Advocates, speaking for Schnitzer Steel
Industries and the Urban Developers Coalition. Testifies in support of SB 751 A. Submits testimony for Schnitzer Steel Industries (EXHIBIT F). States he believes SB 751 A represents a good step toward
getting a group together to fix the problem. |
|
035 |
Rep. Barnhart |
Asks if Schnitzer has a position on any of the
amendments. |
|
|
Chandler |
Responds he believes they support SB 751-A9
amendments. |
|
048 |
Travis Williams |
Willamette Riverkeeper. Submits a prepared statement and booklet, “Willamette
Riverkeeper’s Citizen’s Guide to the Willamette River Portland Harbor
Cleanup: A Public Challenge” (EXHIBIT
G) and testifies in opposition to SB 751-A. |
|
154 |
Chair Doyle |
Notes that the Democratic members have gone to a
caucus meeting, and that the committee will not hold a work session on the
bill today. |
|
175 |
Rhett Lawrence |
Environmental Advocate, Oregon State Public Interest
Research Group (OSPIRG). Submits
prepared testimony and speaks in opposition to SB 751-A (EXHIBIT H). States that
he does not believe this bill brings us any closer to a solution of the
problem of the Willamette River or the Portland harbor because the system is
in place and is working. |
|
228 |
Chair Doyle |
Asks if there are solutions that would speed up or
otherwise improve the cleanup of the Superfund site. |
|
|
Lawrence |
Responds that we should focus on the federal level
for reauthorization of the Superfund tax so the money will be there to clean
up the orphan sites if there are any.
We don’t know what share of the cleanup moneys are going to the orphan
sites. One solution would be to come
up with a pot of money directed at the orphan sites, which SB 751 A does not
seem to do. |
|
224 |
Williams |
Comments it would make more sense if we were three
or four years down the road and we had a known quantity of orphan sediment. Part of the fears that there are those who
might be inclined to push certain parts of the harbor and certain types of
contamination and sediment into the orphan column if they knew there was a
ready pot of funding to help pay to clean it up. |
|
259 |
Williams |
States that last week’s decision by EPA to not
provide funding to McCormick and Baxter is driving some of the urgency on
this. There is money today to fund
work to develop the plan for the cap.
The work will continue. People
do not hear that there will be future opportunities to bring McCormick and
Baxter back to the funding table. . |
|
277 |
Liz Frankel |
League of Women Voters of Oregon. Testifies in opposition to SB 751-A. States that everything has been said. States concerns of the League. (EXHIBIT I). |
|
326 |
Martin Taylor |
Sierra Club of Oregon. Testifies in opposition to SB 751-A. Believes there a couple of core concerns from the environmental
community that focus on the polluter-pays concept. It is about defending taxpayers from assuming a tax liability
for pollution that was really caused by others. There is a point when we have to do something about the river
and the harbor. The question is who
should bear the cost. Does not
believe Oregonians currently have the ability to fund the costs and we should
not be asked to when the polluters are responsible. Sierra Club believes that creating another authority could
confuse the current process and create a pot of money prematurely which would
make it easier to get some of the polluters out from under their
responsibility. |
|
338 |
Chair Doyle |
Asks if the Port of Portland and the City of
Portland and other public entities will be sharing some of the
responsibility. |
|
|
Taylor |
Responds they should apportion the
responsibility. |
|
396 |
John DiLorenzo |
An attorney from Portland representing himself. Submits prepared statement (EXHIBIT J). Testifies in support of SB 751 A. Reviews the history of SB 751 A. Comments in response to paragraphs 3 and 4 on page 2 of Lawrence’s
testimony (EXHIBIT H). |
|
TAPE 102,
B |
||
|
011 |
DiLorenzo |
Summarizes his prepared statement (EXHIBIT J). |
|
070 |
DiLorenzo |
Continues presentation of his statement (EXHIBIT J, page 3). |
|
122 |
DiLorenzo |
Explains why he does not support the SB 751-A8
amendments (EXHIBIT E). |
|
131 |
DiLorenzo |
Speaks in support of the SB 751-A9 amendments (EXHIBIT A). States that the words “or designee of the
Governor” could be stricken from the amendments. Lines 15-17 of the amendments were designed to address Sen.
Carter’s concern regarding separation of powers. There is a Supreme Court case called Martin v. Oregon
Building Authority that stands for the proposition that the legislative
and executive cannot co-mingle in the exercise of a government function. Eliminating the provisions regarding
subpoenas and compelling witnesses, which really are not needed, would
eliminate even the specter of that problem. |
|
153 |
DiLorenzo |
States that the SB 751-A10 amendments are a mater of
policy choice and he has no position on them. |
|
166 |
Rep. Flores |
Ask if DiLorenzo thinks this bill would set up a
duplicative process. |
|
|
DiLorenzo |
Responds that he does not think it is a duplicative
process; the process is more investigative.
It will investigate the option of the State of Oregon in cleaning up
our waterway like we should. Believes
the Governor has a moral authority to clean up the Willamette River. Instead of duplicating a process, this
bill builds on an existing study process, takes advantage of all the
resources that have been devoted to the study. Once the study is completed, they would give a recommendation
to the legislature as to whether we should do this and how much it will cost. |
|
200 |
Chair Doyle |
Closes the public hearing on SB 751-A and adjourns the
meeting at 3:14 p.m. |
EXHIBIT
SUMMARY
A
– SB 751, SB 751-A9 amendments, Sen. Metsger, 1 p
B
– SB 751, SB 751-A10 amendments, Rep. Hansen, 1 p
C
– SB 751, testimony prepared by Sebastian Degens, Keith Leavitt, 4 pp
D – SB 751, report, “Portland
Harbor Superfund Site, Remedial Investigation/Feasibility Study, Programmatic
Work Plan Overview,” Robin Plance, 17 pp
E
– SB 751, SB 751-A8 amendments, Jon Christenson, 4 pp
F
- SB 751, statement from Schnitzer Steel Industries, Jon Chandler, 1 p
G – SB 751, prepared statement
and report by Willamette Riverkeeper’s, “Citizens Guide to the Willamette River
Portland Harbor Cleanup: A Public Challenge” Travis Williams, 12 pp
H
– SB 751, prepared statement, Rhett Lawrence, 3 pp
I
– SB 751, prepared statement, Liz Frankel, 1 p
J
– SB 751, prepared statement, John DiLorenzo, 5 pp