Laserfiche WebLink
<br />SB 0260 <br /> <br />Relating Clause: Relating to the development of this state’s transportation system; creating new <br />provisions; amending ORS 184.621; appropriating money; and declaring an emergency. <br /> <br />Title: Authorizes issuance of lottery bonds for transportation projects. Establishes Local <br />Government Transportation Improvement Fund for purpose of funding local government <br />transportation projects. Continuously appropriates moneys in fund to Department of <br />Transportation. Directs Land Conservation and Development Commission to consider <br />certain criteria when pre-paring, adopting and amending goals and guidelines that relate <br />to this state’s transportation system. Directs Oregon Transportation Commission to <br />consider certain criteria when selecting projects for Statewide Transportation <br />Improvement Program. Declares emergency, effective on passage. <br /> <br />Sponsored by: Printed pursuant to Senate Interim Rule 213.28 by order of the President of the Senate in <br />conformance with pre-session filing rules, indicating neither advocacy nor opposition on <br />the part of the President (at the request of Senate Interim Committee on Business and <br />Transportation) <br /> <br />URL: http://www.leg.state.or.us/11reg/measpdf/sb0200.dir/sb0260.intro.pdf <br /> <br />Contact Respondent Dept Updated Priority Recommendation <br />Eric Jones PW-ADM 1/31/2011 Pri 2 Oppose <br /> <br />Comments: This analysis addresses two questions raised by the proposals in SB 260: <br /> <br />What is the likelihood that Eugene would benefit from this bill (i.e., be selected for a <br />local government transportation project grant)? Because of the emphasis on alleviating <br />congestion on regional transportation corridors and Eugene's transportation policy <br />constraints related to additional capacity (this reviewer is unaware of any major new <br />highway construction projects in Eugene's TSP), it is unlikely that Eugene would <br />compete effectively for these funds. Instead, Portland-area projects (e.g., Dundee bypass) <br />would likely receive most of the funding. This is consistent with past legislative efforts to <br />allocate significant amounts of state funding to alleviate congestion in traffic corridors <br />between Salem and Portland. <br /> <br />What existing lottery-funded programs might be affected by a reallocation of funding to <br />the proposed local government transportation improvement fund? SB 260 does not <br />propose to raise money to fund local government transportation projects. Rather, it would <br />take a portion of existing lottery revenue and dedicate it to meet bond obligations for <br />these transportation projects. In the current biennium, the primary recipients of lottery <br />funds are: OWEB, Oregon Parks and Recreation, ConnectOregon (see HB 2166; also <br />related HB 2626), Oregon Department of Education and Oregon University Systems, <br />OECDD, and local economic development projects (see <br />http://www.oregonlottery.org/Good/Docs/2010_coxco_distribution.pdf for details on <br />Lane County projects benefiting from lottery funds). <br /> <br />Because Eugene would not likely benefit from the intended grants resulting from this bill, <br />and because the current allocation of lottery dollars has significantly benefited this <br />community in the past, recommend a priority 2 oppose position. Given that there is no <br />7 <br /> <br /> <br />