Item 2C: IGR Committee Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

necessary. Mr. Ramsing said not necessarily, but there was some regionalization occurring in an attempt for consistency. The bill would formalize that. He noted that the bill was sponsored by the construction industry, and an element staff had opposed related to administration was deleted from the bill. Mr. Ramsing said an additional surcharge of one percent would be added to permits to pay for the bill. It would provide staffing throughout Oregon to support local interpretations and applications. Ms. Bettman pointed out Eugene already administered the State code. Mr. Ramsing agreed, but said the bill would force some staffing into the regions to answer questions and staff thought the bill had the potential to create better service by ensuring that contractors working with multiple jurisdictions received the same answers to their questions. Ms. Bettman, seconded by Ms. Taylor, moved to change the status of the bill to Neutral. The motion passed, 2:1; Mr. Pap6 voting no. SB 587 Ms. Taylor, seconded by Mr. Pap6, moved to change the status of the bill to Priority 2. Responding to a question from Mr. Pap6, Mr. Heuser said the bill, which was related to campaign contributions, had received two hearings and enjoyed bipartisan support The motion passed unanimously. SB 0898 Ms. Taylor, seconded by Ms. Bettman, moved to change the status of the bill to Neutral. The motion passed unanimously. SB 1032 Ms. Taylor, seconded by Ms. Bettman, moved to change the status of the bill to Priority 2. The motion passed unanimously. SB 1037 The committee held the bill over pending a more comprehensive discussion of Ballot Measure 37. 5. Salem Report Mr. Heuser indicated that there was a ~gut and stuff" attempt to amend HB 3312 to change the existing law and allow property owners to opt out of historic listings and local land standards based on historic preservation for a local and State listing. The bill was offered at the behest of residents of the South University neighborhood, who opposed the formation of such a district in their neighborhood. The bill was considered on April 25, and at the request of the committee chair, he had offered a summary of the facts in question. He had indicated the City had no position on the bill at this time but he had also indicated it could affect the City's ability to do historic preservation. Mr. Heuser said the chair of the committee had halted the proceedings when he realized what was occurring, and scheduled the bill for a full public hearing on MINUTES--Council Committee on Intergovernmental Relations April 28, 2005 Page 5