Item 2C: Ratification of IGR Committee Minutes of January 30, 2007

Home Browse Search

Ms. Bettman continued to perceive a home rule issue. She asked if a hearing was scheduled. Ms. Wilson said no. Ms. Bettman moved to change the status of the bill to Priority 1, Oppose. The motion died for lack of a second. Ms. Taylor suggested that the bill might be an improvement on the existing situation as it would make planning more regional in nature. Mr. Pryor supported the current staff recommendation. Ms. Bettman suggested that Ms. Taylor read the bill and be ready to take a position at the next meeting. She withdrew her motion and asked that the bill be carried over to the next meeting. Mr. Ruffier reviewed SB 317, which would stipulate that permit holders would pay for monitoring and markers. He suggested the intent of the bill was to pull back monitoring to the end of the pipe, but it was not clearly written. The committee agreed to monitor the bill for now. In regard to SB 33, Mr. Ruffier said the bill would require public water supply systems over a certain size to add fluoridation to the water. Ms. Bettman perceived a home rule issue given that the community had voted on the issue in the past. Ms. Bettman, seconded by Ms. Taylor, moved to change the status of the bill to Priority 1, Oppose. The motion passed unanimously, 3:0. Regarding HB 2211, Mr. Ruffier reported that the bill would increase annual cap on amount of business energy tax credit. There was no change made to the status of the bill. Mr. Ruffier reviewed the elements of HB 5022. Ms. Bettman asked why the City would not support the bill given the funding problems experienced by the Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ). Mr. Ruffier expressed concern that the agency’s underground injection control program would be one of the first programs DEQ would drop if it did not receive more funding. He did not object to a status of Monitor or Support. Ms. Bettman had no objection to the staff recommendation. The committee deferred consideration HB 2370 because the legislative contact was in Salem testifying in regard to other City priorities. Referring to SB 45, Mr. McVey said the bill mixed school and parks systems development charges together, and removed local control from the nature of the parks SDC and included an unspecified cap on the SDC. It limited the school SDC to use for facilities adjacent to parks and recreation facilities and used for recrea- tional purposes. He did not think it was not a good solution for either parks or schools. If there was an amendment to separate parks and schools and make the bill solely focused on schools, he would recommend support. Ms. Bettman, seconded by Mr. Pryor, moved to change the status of the bill to Priority 1, Oppose. The motion passed unanimously, 3:0. Ms. Bettman deferred the remaining items to the next agenda. 5. Items from Members and Staff MINUTES—Council Committee on Intergovernmental January 30, 2007 Page 7 Relations