HOUSE COMMITTEE ON
BUSINESS, LABOR, AND CONSUMER AFFAIRS
March 23, 2005 Hearing Room B
8:00 A.M. Tapes 66 - 69
MEMBERS PRESENT: Rep. Alan Brown, Chair
Rep. Sal Esquivel, Vice-Chair
Rep. Mike Schaufler, Vice-Chair
Rep. Paul Holvey
Rep. George Gilman
Rep. Derrick Kitts
Rep. Chip Shields
STAFF PRESENT: Janet Adkins, Committee Administrator
Katie Howard, Committee Assistant
MEASURES/ISSUES HEARD:
HB 2238 – Work Session
HB 2637 – Work Session
HB 2374 – Public Hearing
HB 3440 – Public Hearing and Work Session
HB 2670 – Public Hearing
HB 2056 – 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 66, A |
||
003 |
Chair Brown |
Calls the meeting to order at 8:10 a.m. Opens the work session on HB 2238. |
HB 2238 – WORK SESSION |
||
007 |
Janet Adkins |
Committee Administrator. Explains HB 2238. |
017 |
Rep. Jerry Krummel |
House District 26. Speaks in support of HB 2238. States that HB 2238 will help the Oregon Liquor Control Commission and the Lottery Commission to do more procedures online. Wants HB 2238 to be referred to Ways and Means. Mentions that there are no amendments from the workgroup. |
048 |
Rep. Kitts |
MOTION: Moves HB 2238 to the floor with a DO PASS recommendation and BE REFERRED to the committee on Ways and Means by prior reference. |
051 |
|
VOTE: 7-0-0 AYE: In a roll call vote, all members present vote Aye. |
|
Chair Brown |
The motion CARRIES. |
057 |
Chair Brown |
Closes the work session on HB 2238. Opens the work session on HB 2637. |
HB 2637 – WORK SESSION |
||
058 |
Janet Adkins |
Committee Administrator. Explains HB 2637 and the -1 amendment (EXHIBIT A). |
073 |
John McCulley |
Oregon Association of Mortgage Professionals. Mentions the requestor of the -1 amendments. |
082 |
Rep. Kitts |
MOTION: Moves to ADOPT HB 2637-1 amendments dated 03/17/05. |
084 |
|
VOTE: 7-0-0 |
|
Chair Brown |
Hearing no objection, declares the motion CARRIED. |
086 |
Rep. Kitts |
MOTION: Moves HB 2637 to the floor with a DO PASS AS AMENDED recommendation. |
088 |
|
VOTE: 7-0-0 AYE: In a roll call vote, all members present vote Aye. |
|
Chair Brown |
The motion CARRIES. |
092 |
Rep. Kitts |
MOTION: Moves HB 2637 be placed on the CONSENT CALENDAR. |
094 |
|
VOTE: 7-0-0 |
|
Chair Brown |
Hearing no objection, declares the motion CARRIED. |
096 |
Chair Brown |
Closes the work session on HB 2637. Opens the public hearing on HB 2374. |
HB 2374 – PUBLIC HEARING |
||
098 |
Janet Adkins |
Committee Administrator. Explains HB 2374. |
112 |
John Killin |
Executive Director, Independent Electrical Contractors of Oregon (IECO). Submits and reads from written testimony in support of HB 2374 (EXHIBIT B). Talks about projected worker shortage of electrical contractors. Wants to create a new ratio for journeymen and apprentices that allows for more apprentices to be trained on the jobsite. Talks about how this will avert a shortage of electrical journeymen. |
176 |
Killin |
Continues to read from written testimony (EXHIBIT B). States that it is not unsafe to add more apprentices. Talks about the wages of apprentices (EXHIBIT B, Page 5). Notes that IECO has not been able to change the ratio through the Apprenticeship Council. |
221 |
Jeff Dean |
Associated Builders and Contractors (ABC). Submits written testimony in support of HB 2347 (EXHIBIT C). Talks about the aging workforce in the construction industry and the possible workforce shortage. |
235 |
Dan O’Brian |
Current Electrical Construction Company. Submits written testimony in support of HB 2374 (EXHIBIT D). Mentions the Craft labor Supply Outlook for 2005 to 2015 (EXHIBIT D, Page 3 – 20) and the possible labor shortage. States that people need to be trained today so that workers will be available in the future. |
265 |
Chair Brown |
Asks if someone said that there will be 17,000 employees who are retiring and if it is all trade employees. |
266 |
Killin |
Says that it is in Oregon alone and that the source is the Oregon Employment Department. States that it is all trade employees and not just electrical trade employees. |
272 |
Chair Brown |
Ask if the 185,000 jobs in the construction industry are new jobs or the total number of jobs. |
274 |
Killin |
Says that the 185,000 figure is the need for new people in the construction industry per year for the next ten years on a national level. |
282 |
Rep. Kitts |
References the statement about no correlation existing between the ratio of apprentices to journeymen and job safety. Asks where the research was done. |
285 |
Dean |
States that they looked at worker’s compensation claims in other states and compared safety rates. |
295 |
Chair Brown |
Asks where people come from if the people in Oregon are not trained for the specific trade in which a shortage is occurring. |
299 |
Killin |
Says that the workers would come from out of state. |
303 |
Rep. Holvey |
Asks if the Apprenticeship Council (AC) goes over the ratios and if it is their prevue to change the apprenticeship ratios. |
311 |
Killin |
States that groups have gone to the AC. Notes that the AC seems unwilling to change the ratios. |
323 |
Rep. Holvey |
Asks how work will be done if every journeyman is training an apprentice. |
335 |
O’Brian |
Says that the productivity of electricians is estimated by the level the electrician falls under. Says that in the electrical field many jobs are two people jobs and having an apprenticeship actually helps productivity. |
350 |
Rep. Schaufler |
Asks about a situation where a job site has two journeyman and an apprentice and asks which worker will run errands off the jobsite. |
356 |
O’Brian |
Says that a material handler runs errands. |
359 |
Rep. Schaufler |
Shares concern that apprentices will be the ones running the errands. |
394 |
Irene Weber |
Director of Training and Apprenticeship, Area One Inside Electrical JATC. Speaks in support of HB 2374. Says that HB 2374 will create a positive effect in terms of wages. States that apprentices get a ten percent raise every year. |
TAPE 67, A |
||
001 |
Weber |
Believes that apprentices are not cheap labor because of all the costs involved in training them. Says that they are looking to employ an extra 100 to 125 people in terms of apprenticeships. Notes that HB 2374 will help the economy and put money into the economy. |
029 |
Jon Coulimore |
Area One Inside Electrical Apprenticeships, JATC. Speaks in support of HB 2374. Talks about how the new ratio will help apprentices. States that he always attempts to stay under ratio. Believes that HB 2374 will give electricians more flexibility. |
069 |
Deb Marinos |
Chair, Area Two for the JATC. Speaks in support of HB 2374. Asserts that Oregon needs the best trained electricians working on their electrical systems. |
082 |
Chair Brown |
Asks what a journeyman electrician is paid per hour. |
084 |
Coulimore |
Says that they are paid $27.62 per hour, not including benefits. |
091 |
Chair Brown |
Asks if they have difficulty finding journeyman electricians. |
093 |
Coulimore |
States that, when the construction industry is experiencing a peak in production, it can be difficult, at times, to find an electrical journeyman. |
099 |
Marinos |
Says that a difference exists between those who are well-trained and those who are not well-trained. |
101 |
Rep. Holvey |
Asks what the wage and benefit total package for entry level apprentices. |
105 |
Weber |
Talks about how those entering the apprenticeship program start at $10.52 an hour. States that individual contractors determine the benefits. |
115 |
Rep. Holvey |
Asks what the average contractor offers as a benefit package. |
117 |
Coulimore |
States that most apprentices have medical benefits and a retirement program. Mentions that the benefits offered to family members vary. |
127 |
Rep. Holvey |
Asks about how much money per apprenticeship JATC spends to move an apprentice into journeyman status. |
131 |
Weber |
Says that it cost about $8,000 per apprentice to put the apprentice through the program. |
140 |
Dan Gardner |
Commissioner, Bureau of Labor and Industries (BOLI). Submits and reads written testimony in opposition to HB 2374 (EXHIBIT E). States that HB 2374 would take away the authority of the Apprenticeship Council (AC). Talks about how safety is an issue. Says that HB 2374 ignores collective bargaining issues. |
190 |
Gardner |
Talks about why apprentices may be left on a worksite alone and the dangers that exist. Says that issues surrounding the worker shortage in the electrical and construction fields have been addressed by the two industries to help reduce the impact. |
215 |
Chair Brown |
Asks if the comments made about the electrical trade are applicable to other trades. |
218 |
Gardner |
Says that roofers have a one to one ratio and notes the process that the roofers went through to adopt the ratios. |
231 |
Chair Brown |
Asks if BOLI has concerns about filling positions in the trades industry. |
232 |
Gardner |
Shares that he is concerned. Mentions that he is working with Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT) to work on these issues. |
247 |
Rep. Kitts |
States that he brought up a good point about having at least one journeyman there for supervision of the apprentice. Asks if they would be in violation of the ratio if only one journeyman and one apprentice was on the site. |
258 |
Gardner |
Responds that they would be in violation of the Oregon’s statutes. Notes that it is a much more dangerous situation if one journeyman is taken away from the jobsite and the ratio of apprentices to journeyman is two to one. States that BOLI and the Building Codes Division would be liable in those situations. |
277 |
Rep. Kitts |
Asks if there is a difference in the fine between having no journeyman on the job site versus having one journeyman on the jobsite. |
280 |
Gardner |
Says that no difference in the fine exists. Talks about situations where journeyman have to leave the jobsite. |
306 |
Rep. Kitts |
Asks what happens when BOLI examines a jobsite and finds that the apprentice to journeyman ratio is too high. |
309 |
Gardner |
States that BOLI does verify that a journeyman was pulled away on an emergency and states that they attempt to make sure it is not a common practice. |
321 |
Rep. Schaufler |
Shares concerns that the apprentices could work unsupervised and be doing much of the work which does not benefit the consumer. |
331 |
Gardner |
States that he has not heard from consumers who share that concern. Says that businesses do not want injured workers on the job and that they want a good product. |
350 |
Rep. Schaufler |
States that, if the ratio is one to one, an apprentice will be on a jobsite alone. |
361 |
Rep. Holvey |
Talks about the worker shortage and asks if all contractors belong to JATCs to begin with. |
370 |
Gardner |
Talks about how contractors are not required to be a part of JATC. |
384 |
Rep. Holvey |
Asks if we should require a commitment for training from contractors. |
395 |
Gardner |
States that parts of the industry has been supportive and that some have not been supportive. |
TAPE 66, B |
||
004 |
Jessica Adamson |
Associated General Contractors. Submits written testimony which takes a neutral stance on HB 2374 (EXHIBIT F). Talks about the apprenticeship program as a whole. |
020 |
Dan Graham |
Workforce Manager, Associated General Contractors (AGC). Takes a neutral position on HB 2374. Mentions who AGC represents and how they support educational programs in the trades. Talks about HB 3205. States that they currently have six apprenticeship programs in Oregon. Notes the difficulties in creating apprenticeship shops in Oregon and how this issue will soon be resolved. |
060 |
Adamson |
Thanks the committee for allowing them to talk about apprenticeship issues. |
070 |
Ken Fry |
Journeyman Electrician, NECA-IBEW Electrical Training Center, JATC. Speaks in opposition to HB 2374. Talks about how 50 percent of apprenticeship training should occur on the job and 10 percent of the training should be in a classroom. States that over five years they spend $6,000 per year per apprentice. Discusses the apprenticeship ratio and says that, for the first year apprentices, no apprenticeship program allows for a one to one ratio. Says that the JATC is aware of the needs of the industry and is working to meet those needs. Emphasizes the need for quality and safety. |
117 |
Bob Shiprack |
Building Trades Council. Talks about the future of the construction industry and discusses what happened to apprentices when the economy collapsed in 1980s. States that apprentices have to be employed to meet the workforce requirements. Believes that construction workers work for money and the workforce shortage is in part due to employers not paying enough for employees. |
165 |
Shiprack |
Asserts that HB 2374 hurts apprentices and perpetuates cheap labor. Wonders about how many people complete the electrician programs and states that the goal should be to help people complete the programs. Says that every statistic from Oregon Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) shows that more workers are injured within the first six months of employment. |
201 |
John Mohlis |
Brick Layers Local One. Speaks in opposition to HB 2374. States that he does not have specific data on safety but says that common sense would dictate that a one to one ratio would result in more jobsite accidents. |
234 |
Rep. Schaufler |
States that the way he reads HB 2374 would allow any number of ratios for journeyman to apprentices. Believes that not every contractor is concerned about quality or safety. |
251 |
Rep. Kitts |
Concurs that a ten to one ratio of apprentices to journeyman is not safe. Says that first year apprentices start at $10.52 an hour and asks if they believe that being paid $10.52 qualifies as cheap labor. |
271 |
Shiprack |
States that you have to look at the period of long unemployment in the construction industry. Says that total earnings for the year should be a factor in these calculations. Believes that there are other factors than just the hourly wage. |
286 |
Rep. Kitts |
Believes that $10.52 is 11 cents below the AFL-CIO’s definition of a living wage. |
302 |
Mohlis |
States that a journeyman brick laborer is at 22 an hour and 11 an hour is the apprenticeship wage. Adds that there is a huge difference in benefits between apprentices and journeyman. Talks about masonry. Says that the difference between the money involved in hiring journeymen versus apprentices. |
345 |
Rep. Schaufler |
Says that people in the United States are living in shacks and making less than ten dollars an hour. Talks about how ten dollars an hour is not an adequate amount to live on. |
384 |
Rep. Shields |
Mentions the study in which $10.62 an hour is cited as a living wage by the Northwest Job Study. Notes that $10.62 is a living wage that allows someone not to have a subsidy and it is for a single person. |
394 |
Shiprack |
Says that the reason you have more journeyman to apprentices is because you can move the apprentices around to different journeyman who teach different methods. States that people will not learn the electrician trade properly under HB 2374. |
TAPE 67, B |
||
001 |
Chair Brown |
States that he is glad that they are looking at how to fill jobs. |
010 |
Edward Gladd |
United Brotherhood of Carpenters and the Pacific Northwest Regional Council of Carpenters. Speaks in opposition to HB 2374. States that HB 2374 would limit apprentices’ exposure to different types of techniques that journeymen use. States that journeymen do not work year round. |
060 |
Gladd |
Talks about the workforce shortage and believes that the requirement should be that employers are asked to employ apprentices at different levels of development. |
078 |
Bill Cludding |
Western Council of Industrial Workers of Oregon. Talks about industrial journeymen. Says that people have been killed at 109 volts and that it is considered to be low voltage. Urges the committee to move carefully on HB 2374. |
105 |
Chair Brown |
Closes the public hearing on HB 2374. Opens the public hearing on HB 3440. |
HB 3440 – PUBLIC HEARING |
||
115 |
Janet Adkins |
Committee Administrator. Explains HB 3440. References that HB 3440 is the same as HB 2463, except that HB 3440 has a different relating cause. (Please note that a public hearing was held for HB 2463 on February 28, 2005). |
128 |
Rep. Schaufler |
Speaks in support of HB 3440. Submits informational packet about HB 3440 and the -1 amendment (EXHIBIT G). Mentions whom HB 3440 will help. |
154 |
Tamara Brickman |
Legislative Coordinator, Employment Department. States that HB 3440 will not have a fiscal impact on the Employment Department, because it will have a small impact on the program used to withhold state and federal tax. |
173 |
Rep. Esquivel |
Asks what the maximum amount a person can receive through unemployment benefits is. |
175 |
Brickman |
Says that the maximum is $419 a week and the minimum is $98. Says that it is designed to replace up to 64% of a person’s wages from their base year wages. |
187 |
Chair Brown |
Closes the public hearing on HB 3440 and opens the work session on HB 3440. |
HB 3440 – WORK SESSION |
||
190 |
Rep. Schaufler |
Asks Chair Brown if he would like to set the maximum amount of income a person can and still not pay taxes on their unemployment insurance benefits. |
193 |
Chair Brown |
Says that if the amount is not set by the committee then the recommendation of the committee should be no recommendation. |
198 |
Rep. Kitts |
Recommends that the committee postpone the bill to the next committee meeting. |
220 |
Chair Brown |
Postpones the work session on HB 3440 and closes the work session on HB 3440. Opens the public hearing on HB 2670. |
HB 2670 – PUBLIC HEARING |
||
223 |
Janet Adkins |
Committee Administrator. Explains HB 2670. |
244 |
Paul Romain |
Representative, Oregon Petroleum Association. Speaks in support of HB 2670. Says that Washington State, Nevada, Idaho, and Colorado collect taxes on petroleum and deduct a collection fee for taxes. States that there is a charge for using credit cards. Wants to offset the fee for using credit or debit cards in relation to the collection of taxes by requiring the Oregon state government to pay a collection fee to businesses collect the gas tax. |
295 |
Romain |
Emphasizes that the gas stations are losing two to three percent of their money to collect the taxes for the state. Says that the industry is losing money as it tries to stay somewhat competitive while keeping up with gas prices. |
342 |
Jay Goulding |
??? Says that what is fair for businesses is fair for the government. States that everyone is using credit cards when buying gas. Says that his credit card fees to collect the gas tax in February of 2005 were $1200. |
475 |
Romain |
Asserts that they did not mean to include aviation fuel. States that they will form a workgroup with the parties affected by HB 2670. |
397 |
Chair Brown |
Asks what the monetary impact will be for the Highway Trust Fund. |
399 |
Romain |
Says that the revenue impact will be $15 million to $18 million dollars. |
TAPE 68, A |
||
001 |
Romain |
Talks about the collection of the tax and the revenue impact it will have on the state. |
009 |
Rep. Kitts |
Asks how much was slated for the Transportation Budget in the 2003 Legislature. |
010 |
Chair Brown |
States that it was $2.5 billion. |
012 |
Rep. Schaufler |
Asks if there are any constitutional issues with HB 2670. |
019 |
Romain |
Believes that no constitutional issues exist. |
022 |
Rep. Schaufler |
Asks what can be done to deal with the energy crisis in Oregon. |
025 |
Romain |
States that the Oregon Petroleum Association has started conversations about dealing with the energy crisis. Mentions that building a refinery in the state of Oregon would lower gas prices. Talks about storage in the state and creating a petroleum reserve for the state. |
056 |
Rep. Schaufler |
Asks if the Oregon Petroleum Association is looking at biofuels. |
061 |
Romain |
States that the Oregon Petroleum Association distributes biodiesels and ethanol. Talks about a draft report coming out in California that says that ethanol puts more pollutants into the air than gasoline. |
077 |
Rep. Gilman |
Shares concern about a station that only takes cash and says that they will receive a benefit from HB 2670. |
082 |
Romain |
Says the convenience of having HB 2670 apply to everyone outweighs the benefits of just paying those who collect with credit cards. States that fewer and fewer gas stations only take cash. |
096 |
Goulding |
Indicates that 78 percent of all of his customers use credit cards to buy gas. |
100 |
Rep. Holvey |
Asks what prevents the dealers from just raising their prices per gallon instead of trying to get a reimbursement from the tax. |
106 |
Romain |
States that in this competitive environment keeping the profit margins positive is becoming increasingly difficult. |
116 |
Rep. Kitts |
Asks if ATM cards are defined as credit cards. ` |
119 |
Romain |
Says that nothing has been defined in HB 2670. |
124 |
Goulding |
States that debit card fees are less the two percent. Notes that since Oregon is not a self service state few people use their PIN number. |
130 |
Rep. Kitts |
Asks about the difference in the percentage charged based on whether or not a customer uses their PIN number when using a debit card. |
136 |
Goulding |
States that when the PIN number is not used the fee for using the debit card is 2.5% to 2.75%. |
140 |
Robert Hidley |
Director, Oregon Department of Aviation. Submits written testimony asking aviation fuel to be taken out of HB 2670 (EXHIBIT H). Talks about the negative revenue impact it would have with the Oregon Department of Aviation. |
174 |
Mike Marsh |
Deputy Director, Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT). Submits written testimony regarding HB 2670 (EXHIBIT I). Talks about the fiscal impact on ODOT. |
195 |
Willie Tiffany |
Senior Staff Associate, League of Oregon Cities (EXHIBIT J). Submits written testimony regarding HB 2670. Says that any reduction to ODOT’s budget is a concern since a funding gap of currently exists to maintain services. |
210 |
Art Schlak |
Association of Oregon Counties (AOC). Shares concerns about the reduction in revenue to the Highway Trust Fund. Talks about the possibility that Oregon will lose funding for transportation on the federal level. |
250 |
Jessica Harris Adamson |
Associated General Contractors. Speaks in opposition to HB 2670. Believes that it is a dealer’s decision to use credit cards. States that the cost recovery will cause more problems in the long run than it will resolve in the short term. |
285 |
Chair Brown |
Closes the public hearing on HB 2670 and opens the public hearing on 2056. |
HB 2056 – PUBLIC HEARING |
||
295 |
Janet Adkins |
Committee Administrator. Explains HB 2056 and the -2 amendments (EXHIBIT K). |
317 |
Jon Stubenvoll |
Communications Director, Oregon Liquor Control Commission (OLCC). Submits and reads from written testimony in support of HB 2056 (EXHIBIT L). |
406 |
Rep. Kitts |
Asks why the $400 dollar fee was chosen. |
414 |
Stubenvoll |
Talks about the 2003 Legislative Session and how discussion has been going on since this time. Says that the $400 fee helps meet staffing needs. |
TAPE 69, A |
||
001 |
Stubenvoll |
Talks about how budget cuts have lengthened the amount of time it takes OLCC to issue liquor licenses. Wants to be able to process the applications in a timely manner and the fee will help the OLCC process the applications faster. |
006 |
Rep. Kitts |
Asks how many staff will be added and how many restaurants this fee will affect. |
012 |
Stubenvoll |
Says that it will affect 1200 to 1500 new applicants annually. States that it would add 6 FTE employees. |
020 |
Rep. Kitts |
Asks what the starting range is. |
022 |
Stubenvoll |
Says that 4 of the FTE would be Liquor License Investigators and are salary range 24 to start at step two. States that one of the six would be a manager position at the C level which is salary range 28 starting at step two and a secretary at salary range 15. |
031 |
Rep. Schaufler |
Asks if the OLCC have had a conversation with the industry. |
035 |
Stubenvoll |
States that the parties to the discussion are in agreement to the numbers in HB 2056. |
037 |
Rep. Esquivel |
Asks if when the issue was first discussed it was two FTEs. |
039 |
Stubenvoll |
States that it was a different bill. |
051 |
Bill Perry |
Oregon Restaurant Association (ORA). Submits informational packet in support of HB 2056 (EXHIBIT M). States that the biggest issue for the ORA is the temporary license and explains why it is important. Says that the $400 fee only applies to new businesses. Talks about the -2 amendments (EXHIBIT K). Talks about the case that was brought against the Time, Place and Manner Ordinance in Portland (EXHIBIT M). |
094 |
Rep. Kitts |
Shares concern that the fee is too high. Asks if the $400 fee is set in stone. |
123 |
Perry |
Believes that it is up to Ways and Means Committee to come up with an adequate amount for the fee. |
138 |
Rep. Schaufler |
States that there are many more calculations involved than just the salary and hopes that we can get a good number. |
150 |
Bill Linden |
Seven-Eleven. Speaks in support of HB 2056. States that the goal is to make sure we have a licensing program that is efficient. Talks about the -2 amendments and states that they are an important piece for the local governments (EXHIBIT K). Talks about the Time, Place and Manner Ordinance in Portland (EXHIBIT M). Says that clarification of the Time, Place and Manner Ordinance is crucial to avoiding future litigation. Talks about how the ordinance in Portland extends to patrons that are no longer in the establishment. |
203 |
Linden |
States that extending the ordinance to the behavior of patrons after they have left the establishment is unenforceable and not needed. Talks about how business owners should not be held responsible for their patrons’ actions after they have left the premises. |
213 |
Ben Walters |
Attorney, City of Portland. States that the city has difficulty with the terms being extended to two years because it makes it difficult for neighbors’ complaints to be heard. Says that the state fee will double. Says that the revenues will be reduced by approximately $35,000 a year to the city. Mentions the Time, Place, and Manner Ordinance amendment in relation to the -2 amendment and how it was claimed that it preempted the state. |
263 |
Walters |
Continues to speak about the city’s authority in relation to the Time, Place, and Manner Ordinance. Talks about how the judge’s ruling on the case upheld the City of Portland’s authority to administer the ordinance except for the portion that related to the Responsible Neighbor Program. Wants to know what affect it will have on the ability of the city to regulate certain off premise exhibits. |
318 |
Walters |
Continues to talk about the recourse the city cannot have if HB 2056 and the -2 amendments become Oregon Statutes. |
330 |
Rep. Schaufler |
Questions whether the couple with the newborn really had no recourse in relation to the “drunken brawlers”. |
348 |
Walters |
Talks about the couple with a new born and clarifies what happened when the couple was woken up by people outside of a nearby bar. |
364 |
Rep. Esquivel |
States that the police should confront drunken individuals on the street. |
362 |
Rep. Kitts |
Says that regulations and fees do not help business in Multnomah County. |
387 |
Rep. Esquivel |
Says that some municipalities hear complaints for free. Asks if anyone can file a complaint with the OLCC. |
406 |
Walters |
States that people can file a complaint with the OLCC and says that many people felt that their complaints were not being taken seriously. |
410 |
Rep. Esquivel |
States that the problems in Portland seem to be due to the lack of response by the Portland Police Department. |
415 |
Rep. Kitts |
Asserts that he appreciates Mr. Walter’s concerns and shares concerns about the fees involved. |
422 |
Rep. Esquivel |
Closes the public hearing on HB 2056 and adjourns the meeting at 11:07 a.m. |
EXHIBIT SUMMARY