|
|
WORK SESSION: SB 412-A PUBLIC HEARING: HB 2951-A |
|
|
TAPES 135, 136 A |
JUNE 8, 2005 9:00 AM STATE CAPITOL BUILDING
Members Present: Senator Ryan Deckert, Chair
Senator Gary George
Senator Rick Metsger
Senator Floyd Prozanski
Senator Charles Starr, Vice Chair
Witnesses Present: Michelle Deister, League of Oregon Cities
Dexter Johnson, Legislative Counsel
Marge Kafoury, City of Portland
Ralph Groener, AFSCME
Rep. Linda Flores, District 51
Tina Kotek, Children First for Oregon
Julia Brim-Edwards, Nike Inc.
Staff Present: Paul Warner, Legislative Revenue Officer
Mary Ayala, Economist
Lizbeth Martin-Mahar, Economist
Barbara Guardino, Committee Assistant
TAPE 135, SIDE A
|
005 |
Chair Deckert |
Calls meeting to order at 9:08 a.m. Committee will pass out SB 412-A (urban renewal) today.
|
|
WORK SESSION, SB 412-A |
||
|
015 |
Chair Deckert |
Notes SB 412-A5 amendment, which deletes the opt-out provision, has already been heard. Asks Michelle Deister to discuss SB 412-A6 amendment.
|
|
019 |
Michelle Deister |
Testifies in support of SB 412-A6 amendment (EXHIBIT 2), which removes language inserted in the bill that relates to duration. An end date on an urban renewal plan can cause difficulties. An urban renewal agency cannot control when a private sector business chooses to make an investment. Currently, there is a limit on how big a debt can get. Maximum indebtedness gives agencies the flexibility to pay off a bond. SB 412-A6 alleviates concerns that some projects would not be completed. Businesses won’t want to invest with uncertainty.
|
|
052 |
Sen. Metsger |
Asks for an explanation of line 12 of SB 412-A6 amendment, which deletes current statute (page 6, lines 1-27 of the bill).
|
|
062 |
Deister |
Will check, but does not believe this deletes current statute. |
|
|
|
|
|
082 |
Dexter Johnson |
Explains that page 6, lines 1-27 is not deleted from current law, it is simply deleted from the bill.
|
|
099 |
Sen. Prozanski |
Asks Deister to explain why the contents of SB 412-A6 were not brought up sooner during the group meeting. |
|
103 |
Deister |
Responds, this issue was discussed in the work group but there was no consensus.
|
|
107 |
Chair Deckert |
Asks for an example of when deleting the duration would be a problem.
|
|
110 |
Deister |
Describes a situation on South Waterfront in Portland, where Congress is delaying transportation funds and there is no way to complete the project.
|
|
123 |
Marge Kafoury |
Expands on South Waterfront situation. Bonds are sold based on what the investment is expected to be. Without the investment, projects have to be scaled back.
|
|
140 |
Vice Chair C. Starr |
Favors passing the SB 412-A6 amendment today.
|
|
151 |
Sen. Prozanski |
Agrees with Sen. C. Starr, but asks for consideration of a periodic review for how long projects are extended.
|
|
181 |
Sen. George |
Asks, who would determine whether a project needs to be ended or extended?
|
|
188 |
Deister |
The urban renewal agency makes that decision.
|
|
197 |
Sen. Prozanski |
Continues comments on adding a review.
|
|
221 |
Vice Chair C. Starr |
MOTION: MOVES ADOPTION OF SB 412-A5 AMENDMENT.
|
|
223 |
Chair Deckert |
ORDER: THERE BEING NO OBJECTION THE CHAIR SO ORDERS. VOTE: 4-0-1. VOTING AYE: GEORGE, PROZANSKI, C. STARRT, DECKERT. EXCUSED: METSGER.
|
|
226 |
Vice Chair C. Starr |
MOTION: MOVES ADOPTION OF SB 412-A6 AMENDMENT.
|
|
228 |
Chair Deckert |
ORDER: THERE BEING NO OBJECTION THE CHAIR SO ORDERS. VOTE: 4-0-1. VOTING AYE: GEORGE, PROZANSKI, C. STARRT, DECKERT. EXCUSED: METSGER.
|
|
230 |
Vice Chair C. Starr |
MOTION: MOVES SB 412-A AS AMENDED TO THE SENATE FLOOR WITH A DO PASS RECOMMENDATION.
|
|
232 |
Chair Deckert |
ORDER: THERE BEING NO OBJECTION THE CHAIR SO ORDERS. VOTE: 4-0-1. VOTING AYE: GEORGE, PROZANSKI, C. STARRT, DECKERT. EXCUSED: METSGER. |
|
|
|
|
PUBLIC HEARING, HB 2951-A
|
244 |
Lizbeth Martin-Mahar |
Gives overview of HB 2951-A (EXHIBIT 4). Extends the current law sunset date of January 1, 2007 on the dependent care assistance income tax credit to January 1, 2027. Extending the sunset will have an additional revenue impact (EXHIBIT 5). |
|
260 |
Chair Deckert |
Asks why the House Revenue Committee set the extension at 20 years.
|
|
269 |
Martin-Mahar |
Responds, there was no discussion on the actual number. This is an A-engrossed bill; the original bill deleted it.
|
|
272 |
Sen. Prozanski |
Asks how long it’s been since the sunset was in place. Follow-up questions.
|
|
276 |
Martin-Mahar |
Will get that information. |
|
|
|
|
|
288 |
Vice Chair C. Starr |
Comments, 20 years is a good alternative to removing the sunset altogether. Is willing to move the bill as-is today.
|
|
315 |
Sen. George |
Comments, we need to encourage child care, not discourage it.
|
|
340 |
Ralph Groener |
Testifies in favor of the bill on behalf of the union. Notes a conflict of interest with this bill. Day care tax credit benefits companies and the state. AFSCME would appreciate expansion of this program.
|
|
388 |
Rep. Linda Flores |
Testifies that this bill benefits employees and is an incentive to employers. It helps child care become a viable commodity. Day care providing businesses tell her how helpful this tool is as an incentive to their employees. Employment turnover is lowered. Urges support for HB 2951-A.
|
|
442 |
Tina Kotek |
Discusses One Voice for Child Care Coalition. See handout (EXHIBIT 7). The coalition supports the 20-year extension, and would like to see greater utilization of this credit and the sunset extended. Refers to a memo that lists types of businesses that use the credit (EXHIBIT 8). |
|
|
|
|
TAPE 136, SIDE A
|
020 |
Julia Brim-Edwards |
Testifies on behalf of Nike. Reads written testimony (EXHIBIT 9) paraphrased. The Joe Paterno Child Development Center on Nike’s campus in Beaverton has a large waiting list, and Nike wants to expand the center. Encourages the committee to pass this bill.
|
|
051 |
Chair Deckert |
Asks whether Nike would be expanding child care without extension of the sunset on this program.
|
|
057 |
Brim-Edwards |
Responds, it’s a qualitative issue for Nike, but for other companies it makes the difference between child care and no child care.
|
|
066 |
Rep. Flores |
Adds, day care owners she has spoken to say it would be difficult for them to enlist employees without this benefit. Not having this credit would have a severe impact on smaller employers.
|
|
076 |
Kotek |
Concurs. Without this tax credit, small businesses might stop providing child care. |
|
084 |
Sen. Prozanski |
Asks what can be done to get more companies to use this. Only 26 companies have accessed it.
|
|
092 |
Kotek |
One reason for the lack of use is that larger businesses have other deduction opportunities. As far as doing better, the legislature can continue to let businesses know this is available.
|
|
107 |
Brim-Edwards |
Suggests working with business associations to raise awareness.
|
|
117 |
Chair Deckert |
Asks if there is a carry-forward.
|
|
120 |
Martin-Mahar |
Responds, it is five years.
|
|
126 |
Chair Deckert |
Will talk to the sponsor about drafting an amendment for a 10-year sunset. Closes public hearing. Adjourns meeting at 9:45 a.m. |
Tape Log Submitted by,
Barbara Guardino, Committee Assistant
Exhibit Summary:
1. SB 412-A, Staff Measure Summary for SB 412-A5, Ayala, 6/8/05, 1 pp.
2. SB 412-A, Amendment SB 412-A6, Legislative Counsel, 6/7/05, 1 pp.
3. SB 412-A, Staff Measure Summary for SB 412-A6, Ayala, 6/8/05, 1 pp.
4. HB 2951-A, Staff Measure Summary, Martin-Mahar, 6/8/05, 1 pp.
5. HB 2951-A, Revenue Impact of Proposed Legislation, Martin-Mahar, 4/21/05, 1 pp.
6. HB 2951-A, Staff Measure Summary, Martin-Mahar, 4/27/05, 1 pp.
7. HB 2951-A, ONE VOICE for Child Care, Kotek, 6/8/05, 1 pp.
8. HB 2951-A, memo from Heidi McGowan, Commission for Child Care, Kotek, 6/8/05, 1 pp.
9. HB 2951-A, testimony of Julia Brim-Edwards, 6/8/05, 2 pp.
10. HB 2951-A, written testimony of Nanette Bittler, 1 pp.