Item 4: Ratification of IGR Committee Actions

Home Browse Search

HB 3535/HB 2745-A Mr. Cushman indicated staff support for the two bills in question was based on the need for consistent funding for the Oregon State Police (OSP). He had asked Larry Hill of Financial Services if the bills would impact the City fiscally and Mr. Hill could find no adverse impact. Ms. Bettman asked how there could be no adverse impact if the State General Fund was to be reduced one percent to fund more State troopers as called for in HB 3535. She supported having more State troopers but did not see how the City would not be affected. Another issue of concern to her was how many of troopers the funding added would be based in Lane County. Mr. Cushman said that not many, but even two would assist in regard to coverage. Mr. Pryor suggested the financial impact of the added troopers would be offset by the increase in patrols. Mr. Cushman acknowledged he was not qualified to say whether the bill would impact the City financially. Ms. Wilson said there were several bills in the Ways and Means Committee dealing with OSP funding. She said at this point, HB 3535 was the main vehicle for increasing the OSP budget, but the source of the funding was not certain. Ms. Bettman asked what amount one percent of the State General Fund represented. Ms. Wilson did not know and indicated she could find out. She reiterated the final funding numbers and funding source was not clear at this time. Ms. Bettman suggested both bills be assigned a status of Priority 2, Monitor, with a message of support but concern about the impact of funding. Mr. Pryor pointed out that HB 2745-A had an identified source of funding. Ms. Bettman, seconded by Ms. Taylor, moved to change the status of the HB 3535 from Priority 3, Support, to Priority 2, Monitor. There was consensus to support the motion. HB 3543-A Ms. Bettman thought the bill, related to climate change, had been changed to the degree it was now ineffective. She suggested the status of the bill be changed from Priority 3, Support, to Priority 3, Oppose. Ms. Taylor did not want to oppose the bill. Mr. Pryor suggested the bill could be dropped from considera- tion. Ms. Wilson noted the bill was in the Ways and Means Committee because all bills forming commis- sions were directed to that committee. She said the City could oppose the bill unless amended to include funding. Ms. Bettman said that funding was not her main concern. She said that previously the bill was to “coordinate state and local” efforts to halt or reduce emissions, the modified version merely had the commission make recommendations. Ms. Taylor suggested the City could support the bill if it was amended. Ms. Bettman said if the bill was not amended, the City would be on record as being in support. Ms. Bettman, seconded by Mr. Pryor, moved to drop the bill. The motion passed unani- mously. Senate Bill (SB) 929-A MINUTES—Council Committee on Intergovernmental Relations June 6, 2007 Page 2