Item 8 - Ratif.IGR Comm.Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Speaking to SB 0491, relating to annexation, Ms. Bettman asked the basis of the staff recommendation to oppose the bill. Mr. Lidz said staff did not see any reasons to make it more difficult to annex property to cities. Ms. Bettman believed the bill would place the onus on a jurisdiction to prove annexation was a good idea so that people will vote for it. Ms. Bettman, seconded by Ms. Taylor, moved to change the status of the bill to Priority 2, Support. Mr. Heuser pointed out that the motion was in direct contradiction to the City's legislative policies document. Ms. Bettman acknowledged that the issue required a policy discussion but she thought things had changed because of the Santa Clara land swap. Ms. Muir pointed out that the situation in Santa Clara was not addressed by the bill. Ms. Bettman withdrew her motion. Ms. Taylor reluctantly withdrew her second. Ms. Bettman, seconded by Ms. Taylor, moved to change the status of SB 0527 to Priority 1, Support. Ms. Bettman thought that the bill, which related to energy facility siting, was preferable to current law, which essentially allowed such facilities to be located in a community without local control. Ms. Muir said her recommendation was based on a lack of council policy. Ms. Bettman perceived the current situation as a pre-emption. Mr. Pap6 asked if the bill hurt the Eugene Water & Electric Board in any way. Mr. Heuser said he would follow up on the question. The motion passed unanimously. Responding to a question from Ms. Bettman regarding the progress of SB 0650, which modified the standards for amending urban growth boundaries, Mr. Heuser said the bill had been referred to a committee. Ms. Bettman, seconded by Ms. Taylor, moved to change the status of the bill to Oppose. Mr. Pap~ asked what the bill actually did. Ms. Muir said a local government must currently make findings related to changes in an urban growth boundary; the bill would expand the categories of findings. Ms. Bettman asked that the bill be held over for additional information. She left the meeting. Ms. Muir called the committee's attention to the staff memorandum regarding SB 82 and noted some amendments to the bill prepared by the Oregon Planning Association to make the membership of the commission being called for more balanced. She recommended Priority 3 Support for the bill, with the amendments proposed. Mr. Pap~ requested more information about whether the bill memorialized the governor's plan to review the State's land use planning system. Ms. Taylor, seconded by Mr. Pap~, moved to forward the committee's recommendations regarding pending legislation to the City Council. The motion passed unanimously. MINUTES--Council Committee on INtergovernmental Relations March 9, 2005 Page 6