Item 2C: IGR Committee Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Ms. Bettman pointed out there were conflicting legislative policies in regard to the bill. She said that elimination of the provision to target hardship areas would not only serve to further decrease State revenues, it would also subsidize development in areas experiencing private investment. She did not think the bill was well-targeted or in the City's best interest. Mr. Heuser suggested the committee take a neutral position given the fact the Lane County Local Govern- ment Boundary Commission was under attack; he needed the votes of those working on the bill to protect the boundary commission. Ms. Bettman questioned how many bills the City would capitulate on to save the boundary commission, and if it could actually be saved. Mr. Heuser did not know. He said it would be difficult to save the commis- sion, and he was not sure how much value the City's lobbying would have in this instance. He said the City could only fight so many battles, and he was unsure the City would prevail on the bill because of the support the bill enjoyed. Ms. Bettman indicated willingness to take a position of neutral with amendments to limit the increase in the cap and maintain the requirement for hardship areas. The motion failed, 2:1; Ms. Taylor voting yes. Ms. Bettman, seconded by Mr. Pap~, moved to change the status of the bill to Neutral with amendments to retain the provision targeting hardship areas and establishing a cap of no more than 59 zones. The motion passed, 2:1; Ms. Taylor voting no. HB 3244 Ms. Bettman believed the City should support anything that mitigated the damage done by the passage of Ballot Measure 37. Mr. Yeiter said HB 3244 would extinguish a Ballot Measure 37 waiver after development occurred and the development would then become a legally constructed, nonconforming use that could be transferred. Ms. Bettman suggested the bill would stymie the industry that was encouraging landlords to apply for the waiver and sell their property to a developer. Mr. Heuser indicated the bill was sponsored by Representative Robert Ackerman, who was generally sensitive to the concerns of local government, and suggested the CCIGR take a neutral position so he could find out what Representative Ackerman was attempting to accomplish. Ms. Bettman, seconded by Ms. Taylor, moved to change the status of the bill to Monitor. The motion passed unanimously. HB 3245 Ms. Bettman, seconded by Ms. Taylor, moved to change the status of the bill to Support. Mr. Pap~ was opposed to the motion because he felt the bill, which would prohibit the transfer of a claimant's Ballot Measure 37 claim to anyone other than a family member, would relieve hardships. The motion passed 2:1; Mr. Pap~ voting no. MINUTES--Council Committee on INtergovernmental Relations April 21, 2005 Page 5