Item 3: Ratification of Intergovernmental Relations Committee Actions

Home Browse Search

Ms. Taylor said she would prefer to monitor the bill rather than oppose it. She asked if there was another bill that related to the DPSST. Mr. Cushman replied that there was not another bill on this particular subject. In response to a question from Ms. Bettman, Ms. Wilson indicated she would find out why the American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees (AFSCME) was involved. Ms. Bettman felt there was a lot of community support for more training. She wanted to support the bill. She suggested the CCIGR adopt a Priority 3 Support stance with a proposed amendment to hold the rest of the training harmless. Ms. Wilson stated that the bill could not be amended at this point, but there was a separate bill that addressed the potential cut in training. She thought the two bills could be “used against each other.” Ms. Bettman, seconded by Mr. Pryor, moved to adopt a Priority 2 Monitor stance with the understanding that the City supported the training but it did not want to shift resources. The motion passed unanimously, 3:0. HB 3295 Mr. Hill stated that currently there was a state program for the deferral of property taxes for seniors and/or disabled people. He said the program allowed for complete deferral of property taxes for people who were eligible, with property taxes paid by the State out of a revolving fund. He related that when the senior or disabled person left the home or the home was sold property taxes would be recovered as a lien against the property. He explained that the bill in question would leave the program intact but would create a program that was an outright exemption which would mean it would be a straight loss of property tax revenue. He noted that the legislative policies document had a strong statement in opposition to additional tax exemptions that injure local tax jurisdictions. Ms. Taylor, seconded by Ms. Bettman, moved to monitor the bill. The motion passed unanimously, 3:0. HB 2795 Mr. Perry thought the bill was a “clean up” that would allow the Bureau of Labor and Industries (BOLI) to access wage survey data. Ms. Bettman, seconded by Ms. Taylor, moved to adopt a Priority 3 Support stance. The motion passed unanimously, 3:0. SB 725 Mr. Ramsing reported that the way the bill was drafted it would give BOLI the authority to address fair housing complaints, the definition of which would be expanded. He was somewhat concerned as it would now include construction. He stated that with the bill BOLI would not collect Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) monies. He said the concern lay in that BOLI could take complaints that came to its attention and would delegate the investigation to the local jurisdictions, though the HUD money would remain at the level of BOLI. He stressed that staff was not concerned with the fair housing aspect of the bill, they just opposed the method by which it was being delegated to the local jurisdictions. He noted that MINUTES—Council Committee on Intergovernmental Relations April 12, 2007 Page 2