CONFERENCE COMMITTEE ON HB 3143 #2

 

 

July 21, 2005 Hearing Room C

8:00 A.M.      Tapes 3 - 4

 

MEMBERS PRESENT:            Rep. John Lim, Chair

Rep. Mike Schaufler

Rep. Greg Smith

Sen. Betsy Johnson

Sen. Rick Metsger

Sen. Ben Westlund

 

STAFF PRESENT:                  Janet Adkins, Committee Administrator

Erin Seiler, Committee Assistant

 

MEASURES/ISSUES HEARD:

                                                HB 3143C – Work Session

 

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 3, A

001

Chair Lim

Opens the meeting at 8:02 a.m. Opens a work session on HB 3143C.

HB 3143C – WORK SESSION

010

Janet Adkins

Committee Administrator. Summarizes the measure history.  Submits and summarizes –C20 amendments (EXHIBIT A). Submits and summarizes –C21 amendments (EXHIBIT B). Submits and summarizes –C22 amendments (EXHIBIT C).

032

Rep. G. Smith

Discusses –C22 amendments, identifying the language relating to reciprocal communication responsibilities associated with applying for enterprise zone designation.

060

Rep. G. Smith

Cites language in –C22 amendments that gives the Oregon Economic and Community Development Department (OECDD) the authority to adopt rules relating to consent requirements for enterprise zone designations.

076

Sen. Johnson

Explains why special districts “need to be at the table” when discussing designating an enterprise zone.

102

Rep. G. Smith

Comments that if a project has merit, it should be able to withstand the scrutiny of all governmental entities affected by implementation of an enterprise zone.

123

Doris Penwell

Policy Specialist, Association of Oregon Counties. Referring to –C22 amendments, asks that counties be given consultation and consent authority when the jurisdiction of a ports’ enterprise zone overlaps into a county.

160

Penwell

Explains possible conceptual amendments.

175

Dexter Johnson

Deputy Legislative Counsel, Office of Legislative Counsel. Asks if the goal is to require any local government seeking an enterprise zone designation to have consent of effected municipalities.

195

Arthur Fish

Business Incentives Coordinator, OECDD.  States that OECDD could resolve consent and consultation concerns by adopting administrative rules. 

205

Sen. Johnson

Explains why there is an affirmative obligation to consult with special districts before approving an enterprise zone.

225

Fish

Speaks to the efforts of OECDD to notify and consult with all municipalities who could be impacted by an enterprise zone. 

255

Sen. Johnson

States that because the an opt-out for special districts is not a supported option, there needs to be an affirmative consultation obligation.

260

Chair Lim

Expresses support for the conceptual amendment to include counties.

270

D. Johnson

Clarifies the intent of the conceptual amendment.

277

Rep. Schaufler

Questions if a promise by OECDD is sufficient to ensure the inclusion of special districts.

285

Fish

In reference to –C22 amendments, points out the additional requirements placed on OECDD to consult with special districts.

290

Rep. Schaufler

Comments that consults “is still just a promise.”

295

D. Johnson

Explains why the addition of the word “county” does not give a county “veto” authority.

310

Hasina Squires

Representative, Special Districts Association of Oregon. Discusses why special districts want to be able to opt-out of an enterprise zone.

340

Squires

Discusses why one local government should not be able to override the authority of another government.

365

Rep. G. Smith

Questions the extent of including special districts in enterprise zone negotiations.  

375

Squires

States that when there is a potential for the abatement of property tax revenue, any effected special districts should be involved in negotiations.

380

Rep. G. Smith

Asks how a community attracts new industry if negotiations for an enterprise zone involve a multitude of municipalities.

385

Squires

Responds.

400

Rep. G. Smith

Comments that negotiating with small special districts, many who do not trust the county or city government, is “not a prudent method” of attracting economic development.

TAPE 4, A

003

Sen. Johnson

Asks what the best way is to include special districts in negotiations process. 

010

Squires

Clarifies that the intention is not to hamper economic development, but to allow special districts to opt-out of an enterprise zone.

020

Sen. Johnson

Points out that there is no support for opt-out or veto authority, thus the focus needs to be on finding a “meaningful point of consultation for special districts.”

025

Squires

Citing –C22 amendments, confirms that the language relating to consultation of local taxing districts is adequate.  

030

Rep. Schaufler

Comments on the potential budgetary impact that the abatement of property tax revenue could have on a fire district.

040

Fish

States that it is only new property being exempted and the property tax exemption is only for three or five years.

055

Sen. Metsger

Discusses the responsibilities of OECDD to ensure that consultation occurs with all effected municipalities and all concerns are appropriately addressed.

080

Chair Lim

Asks whether the word “county” needs to be inserted into the language of –C22 amendments.

085

D. Johnson

Recommends the addition of the phrase “a port shall obtain prior consent of a county, prior to applying.” Asks if the intention is to require cities to get prior consent from ports and counties before applying to OECDD.

102

Fish

Explains why a similar requirement for cities would be logical.

111

Rep. G. Smith

Verifies the language of the conceptual amendment.

121

D. Johnson

Repeats the language of the conceptual amendment.

125

Sen. Johnson

Asks, if the port is coming to the county prior to designation, what does a port gain with this legislation.

130

Rep. G. Smith

Explains that the intention is to ensure that cities, ports, and counties are all working together when seeking an enterprise zone designation.

135

Sen. Westlund

Points out that the –C22 amendments will require the submission of one application.

140

Rep. G. Smith

Comments on the improvement in the ability to market enterprise zones.

145

Ken Armstrong

Representative, Oregon Ports Group. States that Oregon Ports Groups supports the amendments.

150

D. Johnson

Repeats the language for the conceptual amendments.

180

Rep. Lim

MOTION:  Moves to AMEND HB 3143C on page 1, in line 15, after "enterprise zone." insert "A port shall obtain the consent of the governing body of the county prior to applying to the department for designation of an area as an enterprise zone," and on page 3, in line 9, after "a city," insert ", county".

 

 

VOTE:  6-0-0

 

Chair Lim

Hearing no objection, declares the motion CARRIED.

190

Rep. G. Smith

MOTION:  Moves to ADOPT HB  3143-C22 amendments dated 07/20/05.

199

Rep. Schaufler

Comments on displeasure if fire firefighters are not consulted.

205

Chair Lim

Acknowledges the importance of special districts and that if special districts are not being adequately consulted the provisions can be amended.

225

 

VOTE:  6-0-0

 

Chair Lim

Hearing no objection, declares the motion CARRIED.

230

Adkins

Submits a revenue chart on HB 3143C (EXHIBIT D).

237

Mary Ayala

Economist, Legislative Revenue Office. Summarizes the revenue chart, noting that there will not be any additional increase on the revenue impact by allowing reservation lands held in trust by the federal government to be an enterprise zone.

260

Ted Hughes

Representative, Cow Creek Band of the Umpqua Tribe. Explains why Cow Creek sponsored –C21 amendments.

300

Sen. Westlund

Asks whether there would be any restrictions as to where the Cow Creek Tribe could purchase land.  

312

Hughes

States that the only restriction would be that it has to be land purchased and put in trust by the federal government.

320

Sen. Westlund

Verifies that the federal government must put the land in trust. Asks if the federal government has ever denied a request to put land in trust.

330

Hughes

States uncertainty of denial by federal government.

338

Sen. Johnson

Questions the ability of OECDD to deal with sovereign nations inside this framework.

345

Fish

Discusses the criteria for designating reservation land an as enterprise zone.

360

Sen. Johnson

Questions the point where it is not possible to require a sovereign nation to consult with anybody.

370

Fish

Explains how tribal enterprise zones are designated.

377

Sen. Johnson

Comments on the complicated nature of –C21 amendments and the need to consult with other tribes.

390

Sen. Metsger

Discusses the importance of consulting with other tribal entities and why this bill is not the appropriate way to extend enterprise zone authority.

TAPE 3, B

007

Rep. G. Smith

MOTION:  Moves HB 3143C to the floor with the recommendation that the House CONCUR in Senate amendments dated 07/05/05 and that the bill be FURTHER AMENDED by –C22 amendments dated 07/20/05 and the measure be REPASSED.

022

 

VOTE:  6-0-0

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

 

Chair Lim

The motion CARRIES.

REP. G. SMITH AND SEN. JOHNSON will lead discussion on the floor.

026

Chair Lim

Closes the work session on HB 3143C. Adjourns the meeting at 8:58 a.m.

 

 

 

 

EXHIBIT SUMMARY

 

  1. HB 3143C, -C20 amendments, staff, 2 pp
  2. HB 3143C, -C21 amendments, staff, 2 pp
  3. HB 3143C, -C22 amendments, staff, 12 pp
  4. HB 3143C, revenue chart, staff, 1 p