Item 2C: Ratif. of IGR Actions - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Ms. Bettman questioned if this bill increases the disincentive to address issues within the workplace, as the City could be fined for attempting to create a neutral religion zone within its offices. Ms. Bettman, seconded by Ms. Taylor, moved to change the status of the bill to Priority 2, Oppose. Mr. Lidz pointed out this is a difficult issue as government supports the free exercise of religion. He said that the question before the City is to what extent does the right to that free exercise require employers to carve out exceptions to their general policies. Mr. Lidz indicated that the burden of proof for the government is not that it has a reasonable policy and apply it even-handedly; rather, it is that government has a compelling interest to restrict free exercise even in the workplace and there are no other alternatives. Mr. Lidz stressed this is an impossible standard to meet under the law. Ms. Bettman opined that the bill adds an additional liability to the City, given that any interpretation or movement on the part of management to point out an impingement to an employee that impacts other co-workers to their right of religious freedom may result in a fine. Ms. Bettman asked that the City's stand on this issue be relayed in the hearing process as it increases the burden on municipalities. The motion passed 2-0. HB 2939 RELATING TO THE FINANCIAL ADMINISTRATION OF THE OREGON GOVERNMENT STANDARDS AND PRACTICES COMMISSION; APPROPRIATING MONEY; LIMITING EXPENDITURES; AND DECLARING AN EMERGENCY (Priority 3 Monitor) Ms. Walston explained HB2939 is an allocation bill with a rider that stipulates a limitation of $3,500 as the maximum payment of expenses from fees or other revenues. She surmised that the Legislature is attempting to prohibit over-expenditure. Ms. Brooks reported that the bill is currently in the Ways & Means Committee. Ms. Bettman asked that Ms. Walston undertake additional research on the bill and return it to the committee for further review. SB650 MODIFIES STANDARDS FOR AMENDING EXISTING URBAN GROWTH BOUNDRY (Priority 3 Monitor) Ms. Bettman asked how this bill will impact an urban growth expansion. Mr. Yeiter responded that the bill does not force a change in the rules that currently exist. Rather, he explained that it appears to spread the thought-process out to fit into the State rules, which he surmised is being done anyway. Mr. Yeiter opined that the State rules may change if the bill passes. He said that if the urban growth boundaries were to be MINUTES--Council Committee on Intergovernmental Relations March 24, 2005 Page 9