Item 3: Ratification of Intergovernmental Relations Committee Actions

Home Browse Search

BOLI indicated that it was not the intention to set this up in this way, but BOLI was being intentional in chasing HUD dollars. Ms. Bettman observed that the bill had “quite a list of sponsors.” Ms. Hyatt related that the Human Rights Program supported a prohibition on discrimination in housing, but this bill had seemed inconsistent to them. Ms. Bettman, seconded by Mr. Pryor, moved to adopt a Priority 2 Monitor stance. The motion passed unanimously, 3:0. SB 813 Mr. Breitenstein stated that the bill sought to regulate non-point source pollution by adding a surcharge to point source dischargers, which would be, in the City’s case, both the Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System (MS-4) stormwater discharge permit and the National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDS) waste discharge permit that the wastewater treatment plant had in order to provide money for the Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) to regulate non-point source pollution. He believed that non- point source pollution was one of the biggest contributing factors to the impairment of the water quality. He noted that the most significant contributions of non-point source pollution were from agriculture and forestry practices. He thought this bill provided a subsidy which would affect ratepayers in this area by adding an extra charge on their bills. Ms. Bettman, seconded by Ms. Taylor, moved to monitor the bill. Mr. Pryor averred that he was willing to support monitoring the bill but it seemed to him that someone wanted money. The motion passed unanimously, 3:0. SB 111 Mr. Cushman said the biggest concern lay in that the bill would make grand jury transcripts of proceedings that involved a police officer’s use of deadly force accessible to anyone. He averred that there was reason people who served on grand juries remained anonymous. He also thought if people knew their words would end up in the paper they would be more guarded about the way they would speak. Ms. Bettman said the plan would be adopted by the local jurisdictions. She thought the bill provided a standardized approach to “these kinds of extreme circumstances” and that was appropriate in this situation. She agreed that the bill should be amended so that transcripts would not be made public, though the findings would still be published. Ms. Wilson stated that the bill would have a fiscal impact. She noted that it the bill had a hearing but it still needed to go to the Ways and Means Committee. Ms. Bettman, seconded by Mr. Pryor, moved to oppose the bill unless it was amended so that the transcripts would not be made public, but the findings would be published. The motion passed unanimously, 3:0. MINUTES—Council Committee on Intergovernmental Relations April 12, 2007 Page 3