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

Home Browse Search

Ms. Bettman, seconded by Mr. Papd, moved to change the status of the bill to Support. The motion passed unanimously. Ms. Taylor asked why staff did not recommend the City support HB 2411, directing the Oregon Department of Transportation to conduct a study on outdoor lighting alternatives. Mr. Jones said that staff had no concerns about a study, but was concerned about the potential any regulations that came out of the study could increase the City's operational costs. He added that the City was in pretty good shape when it came to controlling glare from its own fixtures. Ms. Taylor, seconded by Ms. Bettman, moved to change the status of the bill to Support. Ms. Bettman interpreted the focus of the legislation as being on ODOT lighting. She considered the bill a first step toward addressing a greater problem. Mr. Jones quoted from the bill, which required ODOT to do a study that at a minimum reviewed lighting of highways in the State highway system, and gave considera- tion of reduction of the glare from outdoor lighting used on roadways, parking lots, and other public places. He did not interpret %utdoor lighting" as being specific to ODOT facilities. Ms. Bettman reiterated her interpretation of the bill as being focused on ODOT facilities. Mr. Pap6 did not think it sounded as though private lighting was involved. Mr. Pap6 said he would ;;go along to get along." The motion passed unanimously. Ms. Bettman asked for more information about the staff recommendation to monitor HB 5026, appropriat- ing money for the Department of Environmental Quality. Mr. Duckett said that the bill in question was an appropriations bill for the agency and he did not know enough about the past funding levels to gauge the impact. His major concern was about the impact of the bill on the funding available to the Oregon Watershed Enhancement Board (OWEB) budget and the money available for salmon recovery. Ms. Bettman asked if the OWEB funding was the City's only concern in regard to the bill. Mr. Duckett said there was a concern that the State would use lottery proceeds intended for salmon recovery to backfill what should be General Fund or fee-funded DEQ programs. Mr. Pap~ asked staff to assess the proposed budget against past budgets and check with DEQ staff on its concerns. The committee agreed to hold the bill until the next meeting. Responding to a follow-up question from Ms. Bettman, Mr. Heuser explained that the City tracked the appropriations bills of the agencies it worked with the most because reductions in those budgets could affect the service level the City received from them. Responding to a concern expressed by Ms. Bettman about the use of the phrase ;;limiting expenditures" in bills related to the OWEB budget, Mr. Heuser said the phrase was a budgetary term of art and was commonly used in legislation. Ms. Bettman, seconded by Ms. Taylor, moved to change the status of liB 5074 and HB 5075 to Monitor. The motion passed unanimously. Mr. Heuser indicated staff would return for more direction if the bills in question began to move. MINUTES--Council Committee on INtergovernmental Relations February 11, 2005 Page 6