Item 4: Ratification of IGR Committee Actions

Home Browse Search

? First paragraph, last sentence: “Regardless, the City will maintain a neutral position on any bills not yet reviewed by City staff and considered acted on by the IGR Committee.” ? First bulleted item: Place the last sentence at the beginning of the item. Insert phrase: “Legislative Coordinators in the appropriate City department analyze all introduced bill that are of interest to or may affect the City.” ? Second bulleted item: Include language that a quicker turnaround is expected in certain situations, such as a scheduled hearing on a bill. ? Forth and fifth bulleted item: Change the word “should” to “shall” or “will.” Ms. Bettman suggested adding the phrase “or is of significant policy interest to the City” to the definition of all three priority levels. Ms. Bettman suggested adding language to the section on Priority 2 bills that indicated the mayor and city councilors could participate in lobbying activities. Ms. Piercy suggested removing the word “also” from the first sentence in Section 12. 5. Items from Members and Staff Ms. Wilson reported that the City had been notified by the U. S. Forest Services that it would receive $460,000 for a Forest Legacy project. Ms. Wilson said that HB 3337 was introduced by Representative Byers at the request of the Springfield City Council. She said the bill was awaiting assignment to a committee. She was concerned that the bill would have a fiscal impact as a buildable lands inventory was estimated to cost $200,000. She said that additionally, splitting the urban growth boundary (UGB) would void a part of the Metro Plan and require a substantial amendment, creating more fiscal impact. She would urge a referral to Ways and Means for the bill and argue that the buildable lands inventory was an unfunded mandate. She hoped that would divert attention from the policy arguments and focus on the costs involved and how those would be paid for. Ms. Bettman asked about the impact of dividing the UGB on the wastewater management plan for the metropolitan area. Ms. Wilson said that a number of Metro Plan components, including transportation and wastewater, were predicated on a shared UGB and that was why the State felt that if the bill passed the plan would have to be amended. She was not certain that Springfield had fully considered the costs involved. Ms. Taylor related her recent conversation with Representative Barnhart during which he urged the City to compromise by continuing to oppose splitting the UGB, but allowing the buildable lands inventory language to remain. Ms. Bettman stated that would be capitulation, not compromise. Ms. Wilson advised working to kill the bill rather than amend it. The next meetings were scheduled for May 15 at 4:30 p.m. and tentatively for May 22 at noon. The meeting adjourned at 1 p.m. (Recorded by Lynn Taylor)