Item 8 - Ratif.of IGR Actions - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Ms. Bettman referred to HB 2349, which would reduce the total cost requirement for exemptions from the property tax for eligible programs under the Strategic Investment Program. She believed the council had taken a position against any additional exemptions. Mr. Hill agreed. He said the staff position was consistent with that policy. The bill addressed an existing tax exemption by reducing the threshold for eligibility. It targeted nationally traded firms. Ms. Bettman asked if there was a cap to the number of applicants. Mr. Hill said not to his knowledge. Local eligibility was locally controlled by the City Council. He believed the bill gave the City additional flexibility it could use at its discretion. Ms. Bettman questioned the ability of the legislation to accomplish much in terms of assisting the local economy. It did nothing to assist the City in its focus on smaller businesses. She thought it would have a negative overall impact on the State budget. Ms. Bettman, seconded by Ms. Taylor, moved to change the status of the bill to Oppose. Mr. Heuser said that there were many local governments across the state that supported the bill. The bill was a priority for the City of Gresham. Ms. Bettman withdrew her motion. Ms. Taylor withdrew her second. Ms. Bettman, seconded by Ms. Taylor, moved to change the status of the bill to Neutral. The motion passed unanimously. Responding to a question from Ms. Bettman regarding HB 2356, Ms. Muir said the bill would make final subdivisions a non-land use decision. Ms. Bettman thought it was a land use decisions. Ms. Muir explained that the public involvement process and discretionary actions occurred at the preliminary subdivision stage. The legislation would also allow the City to treat the decision as a Type I process rather than a Type II process. Mr. Pap~ determined from Ms. Muir that the City could retain the process as a Type II process if it wished. Responding to a question from Ms. Bettman, Ms. Muir said staff recommended the City monitor the bill but she would like to support it. Mr. Pap~ asked that the bill be held pending more information about its sponsors. Ms. Bettman asked for a description of the differences between the Type I and Type II processes. Ms. Bettman asked why staff recommended support for HB 2379, relating to homicides involving unborn children. Mr. Cushman said the scenario the legislature addressed was not currently addressed in law. He noted that the legislation exempted abortion or an act by the mother of the unborn child. He acknowledged the ambiguity of the point at which a fetus became an unborn child. Mr. Heuser noted that another, similar bill had been introduced in the Senate. Ms. Bettman and Ms. Taylor indicated opposition to the bill. Mr. Heuser recommended that the committee drop the bill. He anticipated a bitter struggle would occur over the bill, and a Senate bill had been introduced that would accomplish the best parts of the legislation in MINUTES--Council Committee on Intergovernmental Relations February 11, 2005 Page 5