Laserfiche WebLink
Page 5 of 10 <br /> <br /> REPORT ID: CELEG3 LEGISLATIVE TRACKING PAGE: 3 <br /> BILLS AND RESPONSE DETAIL RL <br /> DAT~t.J~ <br /> TIME: 3:: <br /> PM <br /> <br /> BILLS SENT DUE DATE SUBJECT PRIORITY RECOI~V~ENDATION <br /> <br /> COMMENTS: THIS BILL IS A PLACE HOLDER AND NEEDS REFINEMENT. <br /> INTENT IS TO GET OREGON IN LINE WITH NATIONAL CODES <br /> INSTEAD OF GOING ALONE WITH A LOW-RISE CODE. <br /> CONSIDERABLE RESOURCE IS GOING TO THE INTERPRETATION <br /> AND TRAINING ON THE LOW-RISE CODE WHICH IS UNIQUE TO <br /> OREGON. THERE IS NO NATIONAL SUPPORT OR CERTIFICATION <br /> PROGRAM. BILL WILL WE AMENDED TO MORE ACCURATELY REACH <br /> THE DESIRED OUTCOME OR THE ISSUE MAY BE PURSUED VIA <br /> ANOTHER BILL. <br /> <br /> HB 2996 3/15/2005 3/29/2005 PREVAILING WAGE PRI 2 OPPOSE <br /> <br />RELATING RELATING TO EXEMPTIONS FROM PREVAILING WAGE RATE LAW; AMENDING ORS <br />CLAUSE 279C.810; AND DECLARING AN EMERGENCY. <br /> <br />TITLE <br /> EXEMPTS PUBLIC PROJECTS FOR WHICH CONTRACT PRICE DOES NOT <br /> EXCEED $ FROM PREVAILING WAGE RATE LAW. REQUIRES COMMISSIONER <br /> OF BUREAU OF LABOR AND INDUSTRIES TO ADJUST MAXIMUM CONTRACT <br /> PRICE FOR EXEMPT PROJECTS ANNUALLY FOR INFLATION. <br /> DECLARES EMERGENCY, EFFECTIVE ON PASSAGE. <br /> <br /> POL <br /> CONTACT RESPONDENT DEPARTMENT UPDATED PRIORITY POLICYNuMRECOP~ENDATION <br /> <br /> CAROL CAROL <br /> CS-FCS 4/6/2005 PRI 2 YES IX.B. MONITOR <br /> POMES POMES <br /> <br /> COMMENTS: THIS BILL COULD CHANGE THE DOLLAR THRESHOLD FOR WHEN <br /> PAYMENT OF PREVAILING WAGES IS REQUIRED AND REQUIRES AN <br /> ANNUAL REVIEW AND ADJUSTMENT FOR INFLATION. <br /> <br /> CHANGES TO THE PREVAILING WAGE LAWS IMPACT THE CITY AND <br /> REQUIRE CHANGES TO OUR PUBLIC CONTRACTING RULES AND <br /> SOLICITATION DOCUMENTS. <br /> <br /> ERIC ERIC <br /> PWA 4/8/2005 PRI 2 YES IX.B. MONITOR <br /> JONES JONES <br /> <br /> COMMENTS: DEPENDING ON WHERE THE DOLLAR VALUE IS SET, THIS BILL <br /> SHOULD HAVE LITTLE IMPACT ON THE COST OF MOST PUBLIC <br /> CONSTRUCTION CONTRACTS SINCE LOCAL WAGES FOR <br /> CONTRACTORS THAT MOST OFTEN WORK ON CITY PROJECTS ARE <br /> AT OR ABOVE BOLI RATES. IF THE DECISION IS MADE TO <br /> RAISE THE LIMIT TO A HIGH VALUE SUCH AS $250,000 OR <br /> MORE, THE CITY SHOULD RECONSIDER IT'S POSITION, BECAUSE <br /> OF THE POSSIBILITY THAT THE HIGHER LIMIT COULD LEAD TO <br /> FORMATION OF COMPANIES PAYING MINIMUM WAGE TO POORLY <br /> TRAINED WORKERS. -- REVIEWED BY PAUL KLOPE <br /> <br /> GLEN GLEN <br /> CS-FAC 4/6/2005 PRI 3 NEUTRAL <br /> SVENDSEN SVENDSEN <br /> <br /> COMMENTS: <br /> ADJUSTMENTS OF CONTRACT TOTAL COST THAT TRIGGERS USE OF <br /> PREVAILING WAGE COULD BE HELPFUL. HOWEVER, BASING THE <br /> INFLATION ON THE ALL-CITIES CONSUMER PRICE INDEX MAY OR <br /> <br />http://ceonline/celeg/reports/BillsDetail.asp 5/12/2005 <br /> <br /> <br />