Item 3: Discussion and Action on Non-Unanimous IGR Actions/HB 3608

Home Browse Search

LC 96 Relating Clause: Relating to contracts for housing developments; creating new provisions; and amending ORS 456.625. Title: Authorizes Housing and Community Services Department to contract to provide compliance monitoring or other administrative functions regarding housing developments and affordable housing. Contact Respondent Dept Updated Priority Policy Policy No Recommendation Richie Weinman PDD-DEV 01/11/2010 Pri 3 Support Comments: I'd say we support LC 96 but I wouldn't spend any energy on it. I doubt that it will be controversial. So, support level 3 and OHCS needs to have the tools it needs to monitor the funds it allocates for affordable housing. LC 108 Relating Clause: Relating to land reserves; creating new provisions; amending ORS 195.141 and 195.145; and declaring an emergency. Title: Provides that counties and metropolitan service districts may not, after having cooperatively designated land as urban reserve, designate additional land as urban reserve until at least 50 percent of previously designated urban reserves have been included within urban growth boundary of district. Declares emergency, effective on passage. Contact Respondent Dept Updated Priority Policy Policy No Recommendation Steve Nystrom PDD-ADM 01/19/2010 Pri 2 Oppose Comments: This bill would limit a city's ability to add any land to their designated urban reserve areas until at least 50% of the previously established urban reserved were brought into the UGB. As background, the state allows cities to establish urban reserves as priority areas for future UGB expansion, should the city determine as expansion is needed. While cities are not required to establish urban reserves (the city of Eugene does not have any established urban reserves at this time), it's possible such reserves could be established in the future. Cities would essentially need to live with the urban reserves originally established until 50% of that area is brought into the UGB. This would bill would preclude cities from revisiting any new opportunities in the interim. If other potential viable (and perhaps more appropriate) urban reserve areas emerged over time, the opportunity to revisit our designations would be significantly limited. Given the lack of flexibility this bill would afford, staff recommend this bill be opposed. 2 | Page