Item 3: Discuss and Approve Non-Unanimous IGR Positions

Home Browse Search

Sponsored by: Representative BUCKLEY; Representatives HOLVEY, KOTEK, SHIELDS, TOMEI URL:http://www.leg.state.or.us/09reg/measpdf/hb2800.dir/hb2881.intro.pdf ContactRespondentDept Updated Priority Policy Poli Numb Recommendation Myrnie Daut Myrnie Daut CS-HRRS 3/19/2009 Pri 2 No No Oppose Comments: The City's medical consultant and Medical Review Officers recommend that the City oppose HB 2881. Medical Review Officers are not required to be trained to assess and treat substance abuse, as would be required by this bill. On the US DOT website a MRO is described as: "A Medical Review Officer (MRO) is a person who is a licensed physician and who is responsible for receiving and reviewing laboratory results generated by an employer's drug testing program and evaluating medical explanations for certain drug test results. As a MRO, you act as an independent and impartial "gatekeeper" and advocate for the accuracy and integrity of the drug testing process. You provide quality assurance review of the drug testing process for the specimens under your purview, determine if there is a legitimate medical explanation for laboratory confirmed positive, adulterated, substituted and invalid drug test results, ensure the timely flow of test result and other information to employers and protect the confidentiality of the drug testing information." According to the City's medical consultant, many prospective employees currently test positive for marijuana. If each were to be referred to a Medical Review Officer it would increase employer costs significantly. It is also not clear that the MROs in this community have the training required in this bill. Also, allowing labs to report to employers the results for any substance except marijuana doesn't make sense. The City consulted with a medical expert at OHSU on a CDL drug test question and the expert told the City that THC, which is the main psychoactive substance found in the Cannabis plant, "has the potential to cause cognitive impairment including impaired attention and impaired ability to process complex information when used chronically." HB 2885 Relating Clause: Relating to vehicle taxes; providing for revenue raising that requires approval by a three- fifths majority. Title: Increases fuel tax and motor carrier taxes. Schedules future increases of fuel tax every five years. Sponsored by: Representative GREENLICK URL:http://www.leg.state.or.us/09reg/measpdf/hb2800.dir/hb2885.intro.pdf ContactRespondentDept Updated Priority Policy Poli Numb Recommendation Larry Hill Larry Hill CS-FIN 3/11/2009 Pri 1 Yes YesIII. A Support Comments: HB 2885 would potentially increase revenue the City would receive from the State Highway Trust Fund for street. Any attempt to amend the bill to preempt of freze local fuel taxes must be strongly resisted. ContactRespondentDept Updated Priority Policy Poli Numb Recommendation Eric Jones Eric Jones PW-ADM 3/11/2009 Pri 1 Yes YesIII. A Support Comments: An increase in the state gas tax, along with a fair (i.e. 20-30-50) split among cities, counties and the state and no pre-emption of local fuel taxes is a vital component of a workable transportation funding solution for Oregon. At 5 cents a gallon (indexed to increase 5 cents every five years), this proposal is stronger than the 2 cent increase suggested in Gov. Kulongoski's HB 2120. Eugene should vigorously support this proposal and vigorously any efforts to amend it to pre-empt local fuel taxes. HB 2900 8