|
||||||||||||
|
|
|||||||||||
2005-04-20 AlertGood news from Salem!Dear OCVA Members & Friends: I write this after returning from Salem today from whence, I'm pleased to report, there is a double-dose of good news: FIRST, SB-887 passed the full Senate with just 2 "NO" votes (Senators Schrader & Verger...why Sen. Schrader voted "NO" is hard to understand given his strong support for us over the years). SECOND, our HB-2484 moved out of the House Land Use Committee today - in its original form (no amendments) - with a unanimous "Do Pass" recommendation (6-0 with Rep. Nolan absent). Rep. Krummel attended the session and will carry the bill on the House floor....assuming it gets there. A further discussion of these bills: Highlights of 887:
The bill requires that the makeup of the work group include representative(s) of citizens' groups. The strong support in the Senate is good news. That having been said, we all know 887 isn't exactly what most of us had in mind because it puts off final action for 2 years. Nor does it prohibit "Island" annexation everywhere. This is especially of concern to some of our member organizations, e.g., the Eugene UGB River Road/Santa Clara Property Owners Assn., which is also having to deal with "islanding." The delay is tempered by the imposition of the moratoria noted. But there is no "hammer" which means there's little incentive for the League and its allies to negotiate in good faith. However, the clear expectation of the Legislature is that there WILL be a good faith effort made, and we can only hope sufficient presure will be brought to bear to make that happen. Of course, this is assuming 887 gets through the House and past the Governor's desk....we're still a long way from home. I have felt from the day it was suggested that the "work group" was a politically neces- sary inclusion to gain at least something out of this deal. The other potential problem with 887 is one I raised as soon as I became aware of the "Nike" bill, the language of which was included in 887: the granting of 15-year exemptions to certain industries without extending the same opportunity to everyone else is, in my opinion, a clear violation of the "equal protection" clause of Oregon's Constitution. But for now at least, I don't intend to press this point. These concerns aside, 887 represents a significant stride in our battle for meaningful annexation law reform. I'll be writing my Senator and thanking him for his support, and urge all of you to do likewise. With HB 2484, the HLU Committee took less than 5 minutes to deliver its unanimous verdict of support. This has truly been a "long and winding road." And it almost hit another roadblock. Rep. Ackerman called me last night to discuss the -7 amendments he wanted included in the bill - all 58 pages of them. These were mainly aimed at abolishing the Lane County Boundary Commission, the sole remaining B.C. in the state. While I am solidly in support of Rep. Ackerman's recommendations regarding the LCBC, we both concluded that it would be better not to further complicate the bill. He then agreed to pull the amendments, and HB 2484....after all its throes and manipulations....thereby ended up as it was originally written. We all owe Rep. Ackerman a debt of gratitude! Unlike 887 which requires a vote only in the targeted area for an ORS-195 annexation, 2484 includes our original language for "double majority." How all this will play out and be reconciled remains to be seen. There is still the very real issue of time running short. The immediate orders of business are:
The only reason we're this far along is due to YOUR combined efforts, and you should all be proud of that. However, there is a long way to go - we absolutely cannot rest on our laurels and take anything for granted. But tonight you can drink a toast to our combined efforts - well done! Jerry Ritter This page last modified on 2005-11-16 08:29. |
||||||||||||
|
|
|||||||||||
|