Laserfiche WebLink
Ms. Taylor, seconded by Ms. Bettman, moved to change the status of the bill to Oppose. <br /> <br />Mr. Pap~ determined from Ms. Bettman that the source of her concern was the potential such a bill could <br />facilitate the construction of a power plant in Coburg and that it could make it easier to transfer water rights <br />from farmers to industry. Mr. Heuser suggested the committee seek more information about the ramifica- <br />tions of the bill and retain the neutral status assigned the bill pending more information. <br /> <br />Ms. Taylor withdrew her motion. Ms. Bettman withdrew her second. <br /> <br />Mr. Pap~ referred to HB 2298, related to stalking, and requested more information. Mr. Cushman said the <br />bill gave the courts more discretion and separated criminal and civil issues related to stalking. It allowed <br />documents to be served through the mail. He interpreted the bill as a housekeeping measure. <br /> <br />The committee considered HB 2438, relating to exceptions to land use goals, held over from the previous <br />meeting. <br /> <br /> Ms. Bettman, seconded by Ms. Taylor, moved to change the status of the bill to Priority 2, <br /> Oppose. <br /> <br />Mr. Heuser reported that the bill passed in the House of Representatives by a unanimous margin in a very <br />short time. <br /> <br />Ms. Bettman interpreted the bill as an erosion of State land use laws. Ms. Taylor agreed. Mr. Pap~ asked if <br />the bill would be applicable inside the city. Ms. Muir said it could, but was more likely to be used in the <br />county. <br /> <br />Mr. Heuser again noted the wide margin of support the bill enjoyed. He did not know how the City would <br />be able to make an impact in this case. Mr. Pap~ feared wasting Eugene's political capital on a measure <br />enjoying such popular support. Ms. Bettman wanted the Lane County delegation to be aware of the City's <br />position on the bill. <br /> <br /> The motion passed, 2:1; Mr. Pap~ voting no. <br /> <br />Referring to HB 2496, prohibiting smoking in places of employment, Ms. Bettman asked why staff had not <br />assigned the bill a higher priority Ms. Osborn attributed it to the fact the bill would not affect Eugene. Ms. <br />Bettman believed it affected Eugene because of its anti-smoking ordinance. She believed the bill would level <br />the playing field between Eugene and other communities. <br /> <br /> Ms. Bettman, seconded by Ms. Taylor, moved to change the status of the bill to Priority 2. <br /> The motion passed unanimously. <br /> <br />Responding to a question from Ms. Bettman regarding SB 0473, relating to wild fish management policy, <br />Mr. Duckett explained that the bill was intended to increase the diversity of hatchery stock by making wild <br />fish the source of all hatchery stock. Mr. Heuser noted that the bill had been referred to a senate committee <br />and no further action occurred. <br /> <br />Ms. Bettman suggested the committee change the status to monitor and that staff return with more specifics <br />about what was proposed. The committee concurred. <br /> <br />MINUTES--Council Committee on Intergovernmental Relations March 9, 2005 Page 5 <br /> <br /> <br />