Laserfiche WebLink
Permits retroactive claim for military homestead property tax exemption for qualifying persons <br />for tax years beginning on July 1, 2005, and July 1, 2006, to be filed within 180 days after <br />effective date of Act or within 30 days of person’s return from service. Takes effect on 91st <br />day following adjournment sine die. LC # 132 <br />Sponsored by: House Committee on Veterans Affairs <br />URL: http://www.leg.state.or.us/09reg/measpdf/hb2000.dir/hb2028.intro.pdf <br />ContactRespondentDept Updated Priority Policy Poli Numb Recommendation <br /> <br />Brenda Wilson Larry Hill CMO-IGR 1/9/2009 Pri 3 II. A1 Neutral <br />Comments: <br /> I recommend neutrality on LC132. The impact of the measure on local property taxes is not <br />clear, but is unlikely to be significant. <br /> <br /> <br />HB 2037 <br />Relating Clause: Disclosures concerning public contracts. <br />Title: Requires Oregon Department of Administrative Services and local contracting agencies to <br />maintain records concerning certain public contracts and to submit reports concerning that <br />information to Governor and Legislative Assembly. Provides that records that agencies <br />maintain are public records, but requires agencies to redact information other than <br />individual’s name that could identify individual before disclosing records. Requires agencies <br />to make records available electronically by means of Internet. <br />Sponsored by: House Committee on GOVERNMENT ACCOUNTABILITY & INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY <br />URL: http://www.leg.state.or.us/09reg/measpdf/hb2000.dir/hb2037.intro.pdf <br />ContactRespondentDept Updated Priority Policy Poli Numb Recommendation <br /> <br />Mary Feldman CS-CMO-CRO 1/9/2009 Pri 2 Oppose <br />Comments: <br /> Purchasing should weigh in on this but I believe the bill would be unreasonably burdensome <br />to Eugene and even more so to smaller cities that would now become reporting agencies but <br />that lack personnel and technological resources to meet the requirements to create and <br />maintain an additional contract reporting system that captures new information and to <br />summarize, manipulate and provide such information to the State regularly. It would also <br />require development of publicly accessible databases in which certain information would be <br />available and other captured information would be redacted. These new requirements would <br />necessitate additional FTE resources in the Finance Division and I am unaware that a need <br />or demand for such additional information has been adequately demonstrated. <br />Brenda Wilson Larry Hill CMO-IGR 1/9/2009 Pri 2 Oppose <br />Comments: <br /> LC 1476 would have a significant adverse financial impact on the City of Eugene due to the <br />extensive prescriptive record-keeping requirements it contains. It would be an unfunded state <br />mandate, and our Legislative Policies require opposition such a measure. <br />I recommend strong opposition. <br />Paul Klope Paul Klope PWE 1/12/2009 Pri 2 Yes YesVIII. B Oppose <br />Comments: <br /> This bill requires public agencies conduct tracking and documentation regarding <br />compensation, number of contracts, type of contract, specific information regarding each <br />contract awarded, comparison between contracts awarded independently and contracts <br />awarded as part of a cooperative procurement, number of minorities and women contractors <br />and subcontractors and their employees providing consulting services, goods and services <br />and public infrastructure construction, as well as the selection method used to select each <br />contractor and post this information on-line for public access and provide annual reports to <br />the Governor and Legislative Assembly. The bill will have an impact on Eugene Public Works <br />because of the number of public contracts we bid every year. It will add a large volume of <br />administrative work to staff at a time when our budgets are being decreased and staff <br />reduced. <br />Glen Svendsen Glen Svendsen CS-FAC 1/12/2009 Pri 2 No No Oppose <br />Comments: <br /> <br />I would agree that this is a lot of work, for no clear benefit. It isn't clear what problem this is trying to <br />address, so there may be a simpler solution out there. It seems like it could be a diversity issue, or a <br />