Laserfiche WebLink
HB 3167 <br /> <br />Relating Clause: Relating to payment of property taxes; prescribing an effective date. <br /> <br />Title: Eliminates discounts for partial or full payment of property taxes on or before November 15. <br /> <br />Sponsored by: By COMMITTEE ON REVENUE <br /> <br />URL: http://www.leg.state.or.us/11reg/measpdf/hb3100.dir/hb3167.intro.pdf <br /> <br />Contact Respondent Dept Updated Priority Recommendation <br />Larry Hill CS-FIN 3/2/2011 Pri 1 Support <br /> <br />Comments: Current law allows payment of 1/3 of billed property taxes by Nov. 15., 1/3 by Feb. 15 and 1/3 by <br />May 15 without penalty. Current law also allows a discount of 2% if 2/3 of taxes due are paid by <br />Nov. 15, and 3% if all taxes are paid by that date. This discount cost the City of Eugene $2.5 <br />million in lost property tax revenue in FY10. HB 3167 would change the statutes to allow <br />payment of ½ of taxes due by Nov. 15, and ½ by May 15 without penalty, and by eliminating the <br />current discount. This would provide more tax revenue without increasing either the tax rate or <br />the amount of taxes levied. <br /> <br /> <br />HB 3254 <br /> <br />Relating Clause: Relating to determinations of responsibility in connection with public contracts; declaring an <br />emergency. <br /> <br />Title: Requires bidder or proposer for public contract to demonstrate that bidder or proposer complied <br />in previous contracts with applicable state and federal health and safety standards and applicable <br />building codes. <br /> <br />Sponsored by: By Representative WITT <br /> <br />URL: http://www.leg.state.or.us/11reg/measpdf/hb3200.dir/hb3254.intro.pdf <br /> <br />Contact Respondent Dept Updated Priority Recommendation <br />Jamie Garner CS-FIN 2/15/2011 Pri 2 Oppose <br /> <br />Oppose unless amended <br />Comments: to provide a time limit on violations required to be reported for these <br />purposes as well as a qualifying scale for disqualifying offenses. Paul's comments accurately <br />reflect my concerns on the open-endedness of this bill as proposed and the potential negative <br />impacts on competition could indirectly cause the City a significant amount of money in <br />increased project costs. <br /> <br />As Paul states there is a fairly broad spectrum of possible offenses and a contractor's <br />interpretation of projects of a "similar nature" where a violation was received may be very narrow <br />to avoid reporting to the awarding agency. In addition to possible higher project costs due to a <br />reduced pool of responsible contractors this could involve even more legwork to determine the <br />responsibility. <br /> <br /> <br />3 | Page <br />March 16, 2011 IGR Committee Meeting <br />