Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutItem A: Options to address field burning ECC UGENE ITY OUNCIL AIS GENDA TEM UMMARY Work Session: Options on Field Burning Meeting Date: January 22, 2008 Agenda Item Number: A Department: City Manager’s Office Staff Contact: Brenda Wilson www.eugene-or.gov Contact Telephone Number: 682-8441 ISSUE STATEMENT This item has been placed on the Council’s agenda at the request of Councilor Bettman who requested a work session on the topic. Since the failure of both field burning bills (HB 3000 and SB 966) during the 2007 Regular Legislative Session, there has been much discussion over what next steps should be taken to address this issue. Over the past several months, staff met with various parties to gather information regarding the issue and have researched any actions that have been discussed or which have occurred since the end of the last legislative session. This work session is to discuss various options which may be available to the City of Eugene to address this issue. BACKGROUND Legislative action – 2007 Regular Session Last session, two bills were introduced in the Oregon State Legislature to ban field burning: SB 966 and HB 3000. SB 966, sponsored by Senator Prozanski and Representative Holvey and co-sponsored by Senator Walker, did not receive a hearing. HB 3000, sponsored by Representative Holvey and co- sponsored by Representatives Barnhart and Nathanson and Senators Morrisette and Walker was assigned to the Health Care Committee with a subsequent referral to the Agriculture and Natural Resources Committee. In the Health Care Committee, the bill received one public hearing and a work session. The Health Care Committee Chair required all testimony before his committee to focus on the health effects of field burning. Testimony supporting the bill focused on the detrimental health effects of people in the Southern Willamette Valley, giving specific examples of people who had suffered at times of field burning. The opposition noted that if field burning had significant health effects on people, seed growers would be suffering too and there was no evidence of that. They also noted that the federal standards include a standard which takes into account sensitive populations – like children, the elderly, and people with asthma. The bill passed out of the Health Care Committee with a “Do-Pass” recommendation on a party-line vote. The bill then went to the Agriculture and Natural Resources Committee. Although the Chair had opened F:\CMO\2008 Council Agendas\M080122\S080122A.doc the bill as a public hearing and possible work session, the bill did not have a work session scheduled and died in the committee. Administrative action When it became apparent that the Legislature would not ban field burning, the Western Environmental Law Center (WELC) asked the Lane Board of Commissioners to request that the Environmental Quality Commission (EQC) use its statutorily granted authority to issue a moratorium on field burning, and in the alternative, request that the EQC find that reasonable and economically feasible, environmentally acceptable alternatives have been developed that warrant cessation of field burning. The City of Eugene joined in Lane County’s action at the direction of the IGR Committee at their June 15, 2007 meeting. In July and August of 2007, the EQC met and took testimony from the public regarding Lane County's request. In response to Lane County and the City’s request, the EQC directed DEQ staff to request $90,000 from the state to conduct a study on the health effects of field burning. Oregon State University proposed they conduct a study to determine the health effects of field burning as well as to study the alternatives that may be available. The studies would be funded from the burn fees paid by the grass seed growers. Additionally, the Oregon Seed Growers Association (OSGA) voluntarily agreed not to burn during the “Eugene 08” Olympic Trials for 10 days after the event, therefore, the EQC did not need to take action on that request. No other action was taken by the EQC. Subsequent actions After the EQC released its decision on Lane County and the City’s request, WELC requested an executive session before the Eugene City Council in order to persuade the Council to join in a lawsuit against the seed growers to obtain an injunction against field burning. WELC had been in discussion with the Board of Commissioners regarding the possibility of the County being a plaintiff in a lawsuit. Although WELC had first approached Lane County to initiate a lawsuit, the Board of Commissioners has not indicated their willingness or intention to file such a lawsuit. Instead, Lane County has put together a biomass working group, including representatives of Lane Microbusiness; the University of Oregon; Northwest Cooperative Development Center; Oregon Environmental Council; Trillium FiberFuels; Novus Group; Lane Council Of Governments; the Good Company; and Lane County Community and Economic Development. The purpose of the work group is to identify economic uses for local biomass, including grass straw, as a value added product for renewable energy production. In addition, the work group will be working in collaboration with the Oregon Seed Council to identify and develop alternatives for use of grass straw. In December 2007, in order to help identify options for adding value to grass straw through renewable energy and fuel production, with the goal that implementation of the options would build economic alternatives for grass straw that would supplant current field burning practices and to initiate a pilot project in Lane County using grass straw as a bioenergy source, the Board of Commissioners directed staff to apply for a $250,000 grant from the Field Burning Research Fund in order to facilitate the work of the group. F:\CMO\2008 Council Agendas\M080122\S080122A.doc OPTIONS UNDER CONSIDERATION There is considerable interest in local action to address field burning. The options for consideration are listed below. 1. Request Reconsideration of the Oregon Environmental Quality Commission’s decision not to issue a moratorium on field burning for the 2007 and 2008 burn seasons. On September 20, 2007, a group of field burning opponents met to discuss the DEQ’s decision and possible next steps, including a lawsuit. In attendance were: Rep. Holvey, Rep. Barnhart, Mayor Piercy, Councilor Bettman, the IGR Manager for Lane County, the IGR Manager for the City of Eugene, WELC staff members, the Director of the Oregon Toxics Alliance, and Dr. Robert Carolan. The groups discussed the option of submitting a Request for Reconsideration to the EQC, asking them to reconsider their decision. Although this was an option at the time, it is now too late to make this request. The consensus of the group who met in September felt the EQC would not change their decision upon a Request for Reconsideration. 2. Wait for the results of the study proposed by Oregon State University (OSU) to study the health effects of field burning. In August, in response to Lane County and the City’s request to issue a moratorium on field burning, the EQC directed Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) staff to request $94,000 from the legislature to conduct a study of the effects of field burning on humans and possible alternatives to field burning. OSU stepped forward offering to conduct the studies with the funds coming from the burn fees paid by the seed farmers. OSU has proposed to use existing data on smoke concentrations and health effects to assess the risk that field burning poses to people. They proposed to calculate the odds for cancer and non- cancerous health problems such as lung irritation and illness. 3. Work with the seed growers to develop alternatives to voluntarily reduce or eliminate field burning. Over the summer, Commissioners Fleenor and Sorenson went on a field trip to two grass seed growers' farms, one from Lane County and one from Linn County. The Lane County farmer stated he is the only grass seed grower to burn in Lane County. Both he and the Linn County farmer claimed they only burn on class 4 soil. After this trip, it appears that the Board of Commissioners’ interest in pursuing a lawsuit waned. In late fall, the Oregon Seed Growers Association (OSGA) contacted Lane County and City of Eugene staff to relay the Seed Growers’ interest in pursuing the use of grass straw for renewable energy production. The OSGA has been discussing market driven options, and believe that using grass straw as a value added product for renewable energy production would provide an economically viable outlet for annual ryegrass straw and would allow the seed growers to reduce the amount of actual field burning in our region by as much as 50%. Lane County has formed a biomass work group to identify economic uses for local biomass, including grass straw, as a value added product for renewable energy production. F:\CMO\2008 Council Agendas\M080122\S080122A.doc 4. A lawsuit. WELC has asked that Lane County and the City of Eugene join as plaintiffs in a lawsuit against the seed growers, asking for an injunction against field burning, with a possibility of naming the State a defendant. WELC believes that a lawsuit would provide the greatest opportunity to resolve this issue, either through providing the “hammer” necessary to get the seed growers to negotiate a significant reduction of field burning, or by obtaining a permanent injunction. In discussion with County staff, it was their opinion that WELC’s proposed causes of action would not be successful in a lawsuit against the seed growers. WELC estimates that the cost of such a lawsuit is somewhere in the neighborhood of $250,000 to $300,000 with the WELC attorneys acting as counsel in the lawsuit. There was also discussion regarding using the City Attorney and County Counsel to pursue such a lawsuit. Evidently, WELC no longer has the financial resources to continue to pursue a lawsuit on their own. 5. Introduce a bill in the 2008 Supplemental Session. Representatives Holvey and Barnhart both requested a new field burning ban bill for the 2008 Supplemental Session, but those requests were not approved by legislative leadership, given the short Supplemental Session and the request by party leaders to keep all measures “uncontroversial.” 6. Introduce a bill in the 2009 Regular Session. Representative Holvey said he would continue pushing this issue in the 2009 session, noting that even if a lawsuit was filed or even completed by then, or a settlement has been reached, legislation would still be required to ratify and memorialize the settlement or court decision. This would also provide more opportunity to work on educating the legislature and the public, which will be necessary to getting any field burning ban bill passed. 7. Do nothing at this time. RELATED CITY POLICIES In 2007, the City of Eugene supported both HB 3000 and SB 966 to ban field burning. COUNCIL OPTIONS The council may direct the City Manager to pursue one or more of the options listed above. CITY MANAGER’S RECOMMENDATION The City Manager recommends no action at this time. While this is an important matter, with limited resources and a number of other pressing priorities, the City Manager recommends that legislative solutions be pursued in the 2009 Regular Legislative Session. F:\CMO\2008 Council Agendas\M080122\S080122A.doc SUGGESTED MOTION No motion is offered as the City Manager recommends no action at this time. ATTACHMENTS None. FOR MORE INFORMATION Staff Contact: Brenda Wilson Telephone: 682-8441 Staff E-Mail: brenda.s.wilson@ci.eugene.or.us F:\CMO\2008 Council Agendas\M080122\S080122A.doc