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

Home Browse Search

Ms. Taylor moved to change the status of the bill to ';Oppose." Mr. Jones said there was no effect on the City of Eugene from the bill, which related to municipal water right permit extensions. He said that the Eugene Water & Electric Board (EWEB) supported the bill and it was a high priority for the League of Cities. Mr. Heuser indicated a compromise was being worked out by the interested parties. Ms. Taylor asked the purpose of extending the date for completing construction on works pursuant to a water rights permit. Mr. Heuser attributed it to the time needed for planning. Ms. Taylor withdrew her motion. Ms. Bettman, seconded by Ms. Taylor, moved to change the status to Priority 3, Support. The motion passed unanimously. HB 3415A Mr. Jones said he interpreted the bill as allowing up to 25 percent of the Oregon Transportation Improve- ment Act (OTIA) moneys to go to freight route improvements. He did not know if Lane County would benefit because he had been unable to locate the list of affected freight routes. Ms. Bettman moved to change the status of the bill to "Oppose." Responding to a question from Mr. Papd about the reasons for her opposition to the bill, Ms. Bettman expressed concern that the money was collected because of a bridge condition crisis and now it was being proposed for reallocation to other projects. She thought such an approach gave government a bad name. She would have supported a bill that allowed the distribution of such funds to State and city projects related to system preservation. In addition, the bill provided no benefit to Eugene. Mr. Heuser suggested seeking amendments to the bill might be a better approach. He said that many Senators did not want to take up the bill because of concerns the bridges of concern previously had not been adequately addressed. He did not think the bill, in its present form, would make it out of the Senate committee to which it had been assigned. Ms. Bettman withdrew her motion. Ms. Bettman, seconded by Ms. Taylor, moved to change the status of the bill to ~Oppose with amendments." Responding to a question from Mr. Pap~, Mr. Jones was unsure of the proportion of the OTIA moneys to be reallocated; the bill referred to any unexpended balance. Mr. Pap~ questioned when the bridge projects would be completed. The motion passed, 2:1; Mr. Pap~ voting no. MINUTES--Council Committee on Intergovernmental Relations June 7, 2005 Page 3