SENATE COMMITTEE ON WATER AND LAND USE

 

 

April 2, 2003                                                                                                           Hearing Room D

3:00 PM                                                                                                                          Tapes 40-41

 

MEMBERS PRESENT:         Sen. Ted Ferrioli, Chair

Sen. Jason Atkinson

Sen. Rick Metsger

 

MEMBER EXCUSED:          Sen. Charlie Ringo, Vice-Chair

 

STAFF PRESENT:                 Judith Callens, Committee Administrator

Megan Jensen, Committee Assistant

 

MEASURE/ISSUES HEARD:           SM 1 Public Hearing and Work Session

                                                SB 499 Public Hearing

                                                SB 642 Public Hearing

                                                SB 645 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 40, A

005

Chair Ferrioli

Calls meeting to order as a subcommittee at 3:18 p.m. and opens public hearing on SM 1.

SM 1 – PUBLIC HEARING

008

Michael Grainey

Office of Energy. Provides testimony in support of SM 1. States that SM 1 sends an important message to Congress about the cleanup of Hanford.

116

Chair Ferrioli

Discusses the objective of SM 1. Closes public hearing and opens work session on SM 1.

SM 1 – WORK SESSION

029

Sen. Metsger

MOTION:  Moves SM 1 be sent to the floor with a BE ADOPTED recommendation.

034

 

VOTE:  3-0

AYE:            In a roll call vote, all members present vote Aye.

EXCUSED:  1 - Sen. Ringo

036

Chair Ferrioli

The motion CARRIES.

SEN. METSGER will lead discussion on the floor.

Closes work session on SM 1 and opens public hearing on SB 499.

SB 499 – PUBLIC HEARING

039

Judith Callens

Committee Administrator. Provides overview of SB 499 and -1 amendments (EXHIBIT A).


 

065

Brad Harper

Water for Life. Provides testimony in support of SB 499 and discusses the background of SB 499.

099

Glen Stonebrink

Oregon Cattlemen Association. States support of SB 499.

104

Ed Goodman

Oregon Water Trust. Provides testimony in support of SB 499. Explains the background of the -1 amendments.

132

Sen. Atkinson

Asks if any of the task force members represents hydro operators.

136

Goodman

Responds that there is no representation of hydro operators.

137

Sen. Atkinson

Asks if that is intentional.

138

Goodman

Responds that the work group must be small to function efficiently.

149

Harper

Explains that a small work group will be more effective.

165

Roger Martin

Confederated Tribes of the Umatilla Indian Reservation (CTUIR). Expresses concern regarding SB 499 and objects to the fact that CTUIR is not represented on the task force.

200

Jean Wilkinson

Oregon Farm Bureau. Provides testimony in support of SB 499 and states that water right transfers need a task force to resolve issues.

222

Anita Winkler

Oregon Water Resources Congress. States support of SB 499 and conveys the support of Gail Achterman from the Deschutes Resources Conservancy.

238

Aubrey Russell

Oregon Trout. Provides testimony on SB 499 (EXHIBIT B). States support for a collaborative forum in which to discuss improvement of the Water Resource Department’s current means of assessing injury and enlargement and expresses concern that western water law might be unwittingly revised by the task force.

297

Willie Tiffany

League of Oregon Cities. States support for SB 499 and -1 amendments.

313

Chair Ferrioli

Comments that CTUIR should have a representative on the task force. Closes public hearing on SB 499 and opens public hearing on SB 642.

SB 642 – PUBLIC HEARING

345

Adam Sussman

Water Resources Department (WRD). Provides testimony against SB 642 (EXHIBIT E). Believes a proposal to change any water right priority date is inconsistent with the foundation of Oregon’s water code, contrary to long-established Legislative policy that protects the priority date of existing water rights.

415

Chair Ferrioli

Inquires who holds statutory water rights.

420

Sussman

Replies that the State of Oregon holds statutory water rights.

425

Chair Ferrioli

Asks about circumstances under which an instream water right could be converted to another use.

TAPE 41, A

003

Sussman

Explains that there are no statutes that preclude the transfer of an instream water right to some other use.

009

Chair Ferrioli

Confirms that nothing precludes the transfer of water rights and that WRD has no experience transferring instream water rights to another use.

010

Sussman

Affirms that WRD would need to explore the issue.

008

Chair Ferrioli

Inquires if the instream water right becomes part of the public trust.

015

Sussman

Explains that instream water rights are held by WRD in trust for the people of Oregon.

020

Ferrioli

Asks if the rights are covered by the Public Trust Doctrine.

021

Sussman

Affirms.

022

Chair Ferrioli

Comments on instream water rights as irrevocable transfers.

026

Sussman

Discusses irrevocable transfers.

031

Chair Ferrioli

Clarifies that the transfer of a water right would not preclude a water right holder from making a different beneficial use of that water right, but a transfer to instream water rights would not be subject to modification.

048

Glen Stonebrink

Oregon Cattlemen Association. Provides testimony on SB 642 and states that water rights belong to the land.

080

Aubrey Russell

Oregon Trout. Provides testimony against SB 642 (EXHIBIT F). Believes SB 642 would significantly undermine the Instream Water Rights Act by providing no benefit to out-of-stream users while impairing the ability of individuals to provide for the recovery of threatened fish stocks.

120

Janet Neuman

Oregon Water Trust. Provides testimony against SB 642 (EXHIBIT G). Asserts that SB 642 would deprive Oregon of an effective, voluntary, market-based tool for addressing the problems of low streamflows and would diminish the economic value of senior water rights.

160

Ed Goodman

Oregon Water Trust. Discusses instream water rights.

201

Chair Ferrioli

Comments on instream water rights having the same priority as any other beneficial uses. Closes public hearing on SB 642 and reopens public hearing on SB 499.

SB 499 – PUBLIC HEARING

225

Chair Ferrioli

Discusses modifications to SB 499 to reduce legislative participation in the task force and asks for -2 amendments. Closes public hearing on SB 499.

255

Sen. Atkinson

Opens public hearing on SB 645.

SB 645 – PUBLIC HEARING

258

Callens

Provides overview of SB 645 and -1 amendments (EXHIBIT J).

359

Rod Johnson

Douglas County. Provides testimony in support of SB 645 (EXHIBIT K). Believes that SB 645 will encourage compact development, help save farmlands and assist rural cities to create jobs, a tax base and general economic improvement.

TAPE 40, B

005

Johnson

Continues testimony in support of SB 645. States that the primary focus of SB 645 is marginal wetlands that dry up in the summer, are sloped, or have non-wetlands plants.

027

Chair Atkinson

Asks about the tests for determining marginal wetlands.

035

Johnson

Responds that only one test has to be met for wetlands to be determined marginal.

040

Paul Adamus

Benton County. Provides testimony against SB 645 (EXHIBIT L) Expresses concerns:

  • Eliminates protection of many freshwater wetlands because of the definition of isolated and marginal wetlands
  • Requires that the wetland contain visible surface water for a certain number of days
  • Singles out wetlands on steeper slopes as disposable

120

Chair Ferrioli/Adamus

Discussion of issues surrounding wetlands and the urban growth boundary.

210

Adamus

Talks about hydrophytes.

225

Robert Frenkel

Benton County. Provides testimony against SB 645 (EXHIBIT M). Discusses isolated wetlands, marginal wetlands and the application of wetland jurisdiction to counties and small cities.

294

Chair Ferrioli

Asks for clarification on citations.

296

Frenkel

Restates that approximately 57% of wetlands within urban areas are small wetlands. Discusses benefits relating to social issues

320

Chair Ferrioli

Talks about criteria for excluding wetland areas when designating urban growth boundaries.

352

Frenkel

Discusses mitigation to allow development and gain wetlands.

397

Jeffrey Kee

Multnomah County. Provides testimony against SB 645 (EXHIBIT N). Discusses the functions and values of wetlands for society.

410

Liz Frenkel

League of Women Voters of Oregon. Provides testimony against SB 645 (EXHIBIT O).

TAPE 41, B

003

Frenkel

Continues testimony against SB 645. Asserts that all waters, whether large or small, function as an interconnected system serving for the maintenance of wildlife species, biological diversity, pollution control, water storage, and flood control and isolated or marginal wetlands should not be excluded from state wetland jurisdiction.

040

Tim Acker

Applied Technology. Provides testimony against SB 645 (EXHIBIT P). Expresses concerns:

  • Based on assumptions concerning federal regulation of isolated wetlands that may not be valid
  • Unnecessarily complicates the development process where wetland issues exist within urban growth boundaries
  • Ignores other means could be used to achieve the same ends

140

Acker

Discusses recommendations for managing wetlands.

185

John Lilly

Division of State Lands (DSL). Provides testimony against SB 645 (EXHIBIT Q). Supports testimony given by Tim Acker and talks about standards for creating public policy.

200

Chair Ferrioli

Asks if his written testimony addresses the SB 645-1 amendments.

201

Lilly

Replies that it does not address SB 645-1 amendments.

204

Chair Ferrioli

Requests he review the -1 amendments. Summarizes issues surrounding SB 645.

230

Lilly

States that DSL opposes SB 645.

234

Chair Ferrioli

Asks for DSL’s approach to solving the following problems:

  • Potential cause of action
  • Cost shifting
  • Increase of urban growth boundaries or mitigation

240

Lilly

Replies that those are global issues.

244

Chair Ferrioli

Asks if DSL has a strategy to deal with issues that cause difficulty to landowners with wetlands.

250

Lilly

Affirms and talks about wetland regulations.

259

Chair Ferrioli

Asks which house bill DSL is working on.

261

Lilly

Replies that HB 2431 has been heard and that a work group has been organized.

280

Chair Ferrioli

Summarizes SB 645 and closes public hearing on SB 645. Adjourns meeting at 5:05 p.m.

 

EXHIBIT SUMMARY

 

A – SB 499, SB 499-1 amendments dated 3/27/03, staff, 1 p.

B – SB 499, written testimony, Aubrey Russell, 1 p.

C – SB 499, written testimony, Adam Sussman, 4 pp.

D – SB 499, written testimony, Kimberly Priestley, 1 p.

E – SB 642, written testimony, Adam Sussman, 2 pp.

F – SB 642, written testimony, Aubrey Russell, 1 p.

G – SB 642, written testimony, Janet Neuman, 3 pp.

H – SB 642, written testimony, Michael Carrier, 1 p.

I – SB 642, written testimony, Theodore Eady, 1 p.

J – SB 645, SB 645-1 amendments dated 3/20/03, staff, 18 pp.

K – SB 645, written testimony, Rod Johnson, 2 pp.

L – SB 645, written testimony, Paul Adamus, 4 pp.

M – SB 645, written testimony, Robert Frenkel, 2 pp.

N – SB 645, written testimony, Jeffrey Kee, 3 pp.

O – SB 645, written testimony, Liz Frenkel, 3 pp.

P – SB 645, written testimony, Tim Acker, 6 pp.

Q – SB 645, written testimony, John Lilly, 13 pp.

R– SB 645, written testimony, Dan Huff, 2 p.

S – SB 645, written testimony, James Bennett, 1 p.

T – SB 645, written testimony, Richard Meyers, 1 p.

U – SB 645, written testimony, Scott Duckett, 1 p.