Laserfiche WebLink
Task Force and to employ or contract with sexual assault forensic examiner trained to <br />satisfy certification requirements of Oregon SAE/SANE Certification Commission. <br />Declares emergency, effective July 1, 2011. <br />Sponsored by: <br />Sponsored by Senator EDWARDS, Representative HOYLE; Senators BONAMICI, <br />DEVLIN, DINGFELDER, MONNES ANDERSON, PROZANSKI, ROSENBAUM, <br />Representatives BAILEY, BARKER, BERGER, BREWER, DOHERTY, GELSER, <br />GREENLICK, KOTEK, MATTHEWS, READ, J SMITH, TOMEI (Presession filed.) <br />URL: <br />http://www.leg.state.or.us/11reg/measpdf/sb0500.dir/sb0557.intro.pdf <br />Contact Respondent Dept Updated Priority Recommendation <br />Chuck Tilby EPD-ADM 2/28/2011 Pri 3 Support <br /> <br />Comments: This bill establishes a multi-disciplinary team to develop procedures and protocols for <br />sexual assault case handling. It also mandates that trained medical and nursing staff work <br />on sexual assault cases and also develop internal protocols. This standardizes sexual <br />assault forensic investigations around the state. This has little impact on CoE since Lane <br />County officers and hospitals already process these cases at a level recommended by <br />SATF, etc. <br />SB 0657 <br />Relating Clause: <br />Relating to retainage on contract payments. <br />Title: <br />Reduces percentage of construction contract, home improvement contract or public <br />improvement contract payment that may be held as retainage. <br />Sponsored by: <br />By COMMITTEE ON GENERAL GOVERNMENT, CONSUMER AND SMALL <br />BUSINESS PROTECTION <br />URL: <br />http://www.leg.state.or.us/11reg/measpdf/sb0600.dir/sb0657.intro.pdf <br />Contact Respondent Dept Updated Priority Recommendation <br />Mike Penwell CS-FAC 2/11/2011 Pri 2 Oppose <br /> <br />Comments: This bill would reduce the retainage held on public improvement projects from 5% to <br />1%. This would have a negative impact on City projects as the retainage protects the City <br />by keeping enough money set aside to bring in another contractor if the original <br />contractor defaults, but not so much that it penalizes the contractor. The contractor is also <br />protected financially as they are entitled to the interest earned on funds held in retainage. <br />The existing 5% retainage system (with interest accruing to the contractor) has worked <br />well for years. Why fix something that isn't broken? <br />Contact Respondent Dept Updated Priority Recommendation <br />Mark Whitmill PDD-BPS 2/23/2011 -- -- <br /> <br />Comments: Bill does not impact Building Permit Services; I defer to others. <br />Contact Respondent Dept Updated Priority Recommendation <br />16 | Page <br />March 9, 2011 IGR Committee Meeting <br />