TAPE/#

Speaker

Comments

TAPE 44, A

003

Chair Gilman

Calls the meeting to order at 1:03 p.m. Opens a public hearing on

HB 2897.

HB 2897 – PUBLIC HEARING

007

John Houser

Committee Administrator. Introduces HB 2897.

020

Rep. Mitch Greenlick

House District 33. Testifies in support of HB 2897. Explains the importance of commuter rail operating from Beaverton to Wilsonville and possibly to Salem. Notes the work done by involved parties and that the time frame for the completion of the project is 2017 or 2018.

076

Rep. Jerry Krummel

House District 26. Testifies in support of HB 2897. Discusses the “bullet train” from the Portland area to Salem. Mentions the Newberg to Milwaukie line and the failure of Clackamas County to get involved in the project. Explains that the line is in place from the Portland area to Salem for Western Pacific Railroad.

130

Rep. Krummel

Discusses the funding for the rail project. Estimates that there will be 3000 weekday riders by 2020. Estimates the total project cost at $103.5 million.

150

Rep. Krummel

Explains the importance of involving the railroads in the early stages of the projects. Notes the importance of working with cities and the businesses along the route. Discusses SMART (South Metro Area Rapid Transit) and funding.

210

Rep. Hunt

Asks if the train would tie in with Amtrak in Salem.

215

Rep. Greenlick

Answers that it would come in to Salem at State Street.

218

Rep. Hunt

Asks about the potential for coordination between the commuter rail project and transportation systems such as Amtrak.

220

Rep. Greenlick

Responds that passengers would take a shuttle between the two.

222

Rep. Krummel

Explains that it is important to have a bus system to get people from train terminals to their destinations.

248

Rep. Greenlick

Notes that the rail industry has been very supportive of the passenger rail idea to improve the rail system for freight.

255

Rep. Hunt

Expresses hope that projects are not competing for the same source of funding.

270

Rep. Krummel

Responds that they should not be competing since the project would be under federal funding until the light rail system is complete.

289

Fred Nussbaum

Association of Oregon Rail and Transit Advocates (AORTA). Notes that he took an Amtrak bus from Washington County to the committee hearing and hopes that public transportation will be expanded between Portland and Salem and beyond. Cites a project in Vancouver, B.C. in which a ten-mile commuter rail was operational in  two-and-a-half years.

330

Nussbaum

Notes that light rail has a place in the Portland area, Amtrak has a place for longer distances, and commuter rail has a place between Portland and Salem.

340

Rep. Thatcher

Declares a potential conflict of interest for HB 2897 due to business interests.

345

Kelly Taylor

Administrator, Rail Division, Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT). Explains the work ODOT has done on the commuter rail project.

361

Chair Gilman

Closes the public hearing on HB 2897. Opens a public hearing on

HB 2110.

HB 2110 – PUBLIC HEARING

365

John Houser

Committee Administrator. Introduces HB 2110.

370

Rep. Thatcher

Declares a potential conflict of interest for HB 2110 due to business interests.

375

Bruce Warner

Director, Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT). Testifies in support of HB 2110.

400

Kelly Taylor

Administrator, Rail Division, ODOT. Submits and summarizes prepared testimony in support of HB 2110 (EXHIBIT A). Explains the importance of a Rail Advisory Committee.

TAPE 45, A

020

Rep. Hunt

Asks how the mandate of the advisory committee could change.

030

Taylor

Answers that the concern is not the mandate, but rather the formation and charter of the committee.

042

Pat Egan

Port of Portland, Oregon Rail Users League. Testifies in support of the concept of a Rail Advisory Committee. 

061

Fred Nussbaum

Association of Oregon Rail and Transit Advocates (AORTA). Submits and summarizes prepared testimony in support of HB 2110 (EXHIBIT B).

078

Ken Armstrong

Oregon Shortline Railroad Association, Oregon Ports Group. Testifies in support of HB 2110. Describes the importance of the Rail Advisory Committee.

100

Bob Russell

President, Oregon Trucking Associations, Inc. Submits and summarizes prepared testimony in opposition to HB 2110 (EXHIBIT C).

162

D.E. Bridges

Executive Director, Oregon Forest Products Transportation Association. Testifies in opposition to HB 2110.

183

Cindy Robert

Union Pacific Railroad. Explains that the Rail Advisory Committee is different from the Freight Advisory Committee.

208

Chair Gilman

Closes the public hearing on HB 2110. Opens a public hearing on HB 2576.

HB 2576 – PUBLIC HEARING

212

John Houser

Committee Administrator. Introduces HB 2576.

222

Rep. Jeff Kropf

House District 17. Testifies in support of HB 2576. Explains that the bill came from the Noxious Weed Taskforce and workgroup. Notes that noxious weeds are becoming more prevalent in Oregon and the bill is necessary to prevent their spread.

285

Rep. Kropf

Explains the -1 amendments (EXHIBIT D) and the intent to allow law enforcement the flexibility to enforce the law.

335

Rep. Boone

Notes legislation that addresses larger ships and lakes.

356

Rep. Hunt

Asks if invasive species are addressed in statute.

378

Rep. Kropf

Answers that he does not think it is addressed.

391

Rep. Bruun

Asks if there is evidence of noxious weeds invading Oregon.

TAPE 44, B

004

Rep. Kropf

Answers that the evidence from the noxious weed workgroup was anecdotal, but it does happen.

018

Rep. Bruun

Expresses hesitation about the proposed solution. Notes that similar problems could result from off-road vehicles transporting noxious weeds.

027

Rep. Kropf

Explains that local governments should address the noxious weed issue, but it would not be consistently implemented. Proposes that having Association of Oregon Counties addressing the issue would be a better solution.

053

Rep. Boone

Proposes that the Oregon State Marine Board take a role in addressing the issue.

056

Rep. Kropf

Concurs and states that he is willing to consider it.

065

Randy Henry

Oregon State Marine Board. Submits and summarizes prepared testimony (EXHIBIT E) in support of HB 2576 and -1 amendments.

125

Rep. Boone

Asks if signage would be effective in addressing noxious weeds.

131

Henry

Answers yes.

138

Rep. Hunt

Asks if there is a law to prohibit transferring invasive species on boats.

142

Henry

Explains the law enforcement jurisdiction over invasive species.

150

Rep. Hunt

Asks for clarification of aquatic species.

153

Henry

Clarifies that he is referring to plants.

158

Mark Sytsma

Associate Professor, Environmental Science and Engineering, Portland State University. Submits and summarizes prepared testimony in support of HB 2576 (EXHIBIT F). Explains the weeds from aquariums that have infested lakes along the coast.

210

Sytsma

Notes that in lakes around Florence, lakes with boat ramps had 100% infestation of exotic weeds, while 22% of those without ramps had exotic weeds. States that many people are aware that invasive species are a problem.

248

Rep. Bruun

Asks if the damage has already been done and legislation will help the problem.

254

Sytsma

Answers that some species of plants are already spread throughout the waterways. Explains that the bill would help prevent the spread of other species.

276

Rich Angstrom

Duck hunter. Expresses concern that HB 2576 would make duck hunting illegal “as soon as it comes out”. Describes duck hunters’ use of vegetation for camouflage on their boats and the problems that would result from the passage of HB 2576.

355

Rep. Kropf

Explains the exemption in the Minnesota law for duck hunting pointed out by Paul Donheffner, Director of the Oregon State Marine Board. Reiterates the intent of the bill.

376

Chair Gilman

Closes the public hearing on HB 2576. Opens a public hearing on HB 2586.

HB 2586 – PUBLIC HEARING

385

John Houser

Committee Administrator. Introduces HB 2586.

395

Brenda Trainer-Huber

Oregon resident. Testifies in support of HB 2586. Describes her motorcycle accident and submits photos (EXHIBIT G).

TAPE 45, B

082

Rep. Boone

Notes that she is a volunteer fire fighter. Points out that if someone takes action that causes an accident and wonders if the police have the discretion to further investigate.

094

Trainer-Huber

Answers that attorneys she has spoken with told her it is up to the police to investigate.

098

Rep. Boone

Argues that if someone causes an accident, it should be further investigated.

107

Chair Gilman

Asks how her situation would be different with the passage of HB 2586.

110

Trainer-Huber

Answers that the police could have taken action against the woman who caused the accident. Explains the ongoing suffering and problems associated with the accident. Expresses disappointment that the police did not follow up.

135

Ken Ray

Executive Director, BikePAC of Oregon, Inc. Submits and summarizes prepared testimony and fact sheet in support of HB 2586 (EXHIBIT H). Cites the case of Bill Janklow who ran a stop sign and killed a motorcyclist. Describes the -1 amendments (EXHIBIT I).

214

Rep. Thatcher

Asks for a clarification of the intent of the bill.

218

Ray

Explains the intent of the bill. Notes that driving is a privilege.

229

Rep. Thatcher

Explains her concern that the bill would make no distinction between those who drive with reckless disregard and those who have made an honest mistake.

242

Ray

Explains that the standard in the bill would remain that one would have to be convicted, not only cited.

252

Rep. Thatcher

Expresses concerns about the bill. Cites her experience of an automobile accident that resulted from making an improper lane change and notes that if it had been a motorcycle it could have been worse.

280

Ray

Explains the court and citation process.

325

Wayne Schumacher

BikePAC of Oregon, Inc. Testifies in support of HB 2586. Explains the intent of the bill and the -1 amendments. Notes the concern that driving penalties are not appropriately applied based on citations.

387

Rep. Thatcher

Further explains her accident scenario and asks if she would have had to hire a defense attorney under HB 2586.

400

Schumacher

Answers that would be similar to any other type of citation.

408

Rep. Thatcher

Asks for a clarification of receiving a citation versus a conviction.

415

Schumacher

Explains the legal process for citations and convictions.

431

Chair Gilman

Closes the public hearing on HB 2586.

450

Rep. Boone

Comments on the April 8 committee meeting in Bend.

470

Chair Gilman

Adjourns the meeting at 2:55 p.m.