Legislative and Public Affairs Committee
The Legislative and Public Affairs Committee (LPAC) is responsible for developing and implementing the Chapter's legislative and policy action program. Board oversight and involvement is ensured through the Legislative Policy Review Subcommittee (LPRS). LPRS is comprised of the President (or Vice-President) of the Board and two afdditional Board members - one representing cities and one counties - as well as a University representative and a member from the Department of Land Conservation and Development. The Chair and Vice-Chair of LPAC serve as ex officio members of LPRS. LPRS represent the Exectuive Board and Chapter on legislative and planning policy matters, as well as in determining the Chapter's position on proposed legislation and policy when the Executive Board is unable to define the Chapter position in a timely manner.
Legislative Positions/Tracking
Click here for the most recent OAPA Legislative Tracking (updated Feb 22, 2010).
General Legislative & Policy Agenda presented November 4, 2009 to OAPA Board.
Download testimony on Destination Resorts presented by Greg Winterowd to the House Land Use Committee on March 12, 2009 here.
BALLOT MEASURE 63 WAS DEFEATED! Ballot Measure 63 proposes to exempt home improvements valued at $35,000 or less from building permits. The potential risks to this measure include:
- Unpermitted work may result in risks to the safety and lives of owners and renters of residential properties due to substandard construction. Such risks can be avoided through permitting and inspection.
- Adoption of Measure 63 could result in the loss of eligibility for federal floodplain insurance. This would not just affect an individual property owner making improvements without a permit, but may cause entire communities or the state to become ineligible for participation in the National Flood Insurance Program.
- Homeowner insurance rates statewide will likely increase because of unknown risks associated with undocumented or un-inspected home improvement projects.
- Unpermitted improvements may violate zoning ordinances, resulting in the potential of fees imposed against the property owner and/or the need of the current or subsequent owners of the property to either apply for relief of a violation or remove the improvement.
- Neighbors will be unprotected from unlawful improvements and may be forced to incur expenses in seeking enforcement of zoning and building regulations.
- Substandard home improvements can decrease neighboring property values.
Because of these unforeseen consequences, OAPA has submitted the following statement in opposition for inclusion in the Voter's pamphlet.
Measure 63-Threat to Homeowner Safety and Flood Insurance Eligibility
Measure 63 would strip residential property owners and renters from the protections of building permits and inspections.
Risk to Safety
Through the building permitting, and following inspection, process, the safety of improvements is verified through compliance with applicable building codes. By exempting improvements from this process, the Measure would strip residential home occupants from assurances regarding the structural or seismic integrity of their homes or the electrical or plumbing safety of improvements.
Provisions of the Measure are inadequate to ensure the safety of improvements for the protection of future owners or renters. Owners making improvements need only provide "detailed descriptions" of improvements to potential purchasers. There's no requirement to provide proof that improvements met applicable building codes and no disclosure requirements to renters.
Loss of Flood Insurance
Waiving building permit requirements for all projects under $35,000 in value per year, including additions and alterations to buildings within Special Flood Hazard Areas, may cause communities to be unable to enforce the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) regulatory standards. Failure to comply with NFIP regulatory standards can result in higher flood insurance prices or loss of federal flood insurance entirely. In those communities that cannot comply with NFIP standards, property owners are unable to obtain flood insurance. If there is a flood and a natural disaster is declared, these property owners and communities are not eligible for reimbursement for damages from the federal government.
Lack of Enforcement for Unlawful Improvements
The Measure provides no enforcement mechanism for unlawful improvements. It will be up to neighbors to seek enforcement of violations of building setbacks, height or safety regulations. Not only can this result in neighbors incurring costs of enforcement, property owners (both those making improvements and potential purchasers) may incur penalties for violations or be forced to remove unlawful improvements.
Make your voice be heard by voting NO on Measure 63.
Ed Sullivan
American Planning Association, Oregon Chapter
Legislative Positions/Tracking cont.
In September and October 2008, LPAC worked on drafting a proposed Legislative Policy Agenda for the 2009 legislative session. The purpose of this Agenda will guide the LPAC in taking positions on proposed legislation. Topics for the Agenda included:
- Destination Resorts. Testimony was presented to DLCD on October 15, 2008. Follow this link to read the letter.
- Water. The 2008 Legislature passed Senate Bill 1069, which was related to water conservation, reuse and storage and provided funding for the Umatilla Basin to investigate a regional aquifer recovery assessment. It is expected that the 2009 (and likely in 2011) Legislature will look to fund further studies within the 15 identified Groundwater limited areas and 7 groundwater critical areas throughout the state, as well as fund projects identified through these studies. LPAC is recommending the funding of further studies and the possibility of funding projects that are based on good-science.
- Affordable Housing. While Oregon does have laws and regulations addressing housing needs, rising housing prices in the recent past, followed by increasing unemployment rates, have made the issue of affordable housing more pressing. Current trends have affordable housing being pushed out of the major cities into the satellite communities, making the issue not just of housing, but transportation and climate change. LPAC is recommending supporting efforts by DLCD in addressing this issue, include pilot projects allowing communities to designate sites "Dedicated to affordable housing" or removal of the ban on inclusionary zoning.
- The Big Look. The Big Look is currently undertaking its public outreach and is expected to provide recommendations to the legislature by November 2009. OAPA has presented testimony on several occasions to the Big Look. LPAC will work with the Re-Engage Oregon Committee in supporting certain aspects related to the Big Look.
- Population Coordination. Oregon APA recognizes the need for coordinated and accurate population projections. However, the default means of achieving projections in the absence of city-county agreement leaves an inadequate means of dealing with increased population. LPAC has proposed supporting legislation to correct the population coordination Safe Harbor to enable cities to plan for infrastructure development, as well as legislation would establish a conflict resolution process with LCDC acting as mediator or, if necessary, arbitrator between cities and counties. Recognizing the costs associated with population projections, LPAC also recommends for the provision of state funding for population coordination. Improving population coordination should be accomplished in two phases: conflict resolution in short term; and long term (decennial) problem solving.
- Coastal Issues. Marine reserves and wave energy are bound to be addressed in the upcoming legislative session. LPAC is recommending that we put these issues on our watch list.
- Coordination with Other Organizations. Recognizing that there is often strength in numbers, LPAC will continue its efforts to coordinate and collaborate with other organizations on issues impacting planning, including the League of Oregon Cities and the Association of Oregon Counties Planning Directors.
The Agenda will be presented to the Board for approval at the November 7, 2008 Board meeting. Follow this link to read the agenda. Additional topics that have been added include:
LPAC continues its practice of reviewing state and federal judicial decisions relating to planning issues. We are working to strengthen our efforts to get involvement of OAPA members representing the wide-variety of backgrounds, including rural planners from the, central, eastern and southern regions of the state. We are also working at strengthening relationships with organizations, such as the League of Oregon Cities and Association of Oregon County Planning Directors.
If you would like LPAC to consider your opinion on any legislative positions/questions, please send a brief email to Jeannine Rustad, LPAC Vice-Chair jeannine@winterbrookplanning.com.
Note: You will need to log in to this website using your member log in or the information sent to you this past year on your mailing label. If you are an OAPA member and having difficulty logging in, please contact oapa@oregonapa.org.
Historic information:
Click here to read the full 2007 OAPA Legislative Tracking document. Once the 2009 legislative session is underway, we will update this to track current legislation.
2007 Legislative Policy Statement
LPAC Meetings
LPAC meets monthly, and as needed during the legislative session. We welcome all OAPA members' expertise and involvement. Regular meetings are at the offices of GARVEY SCHUBERT BARER, 121 SW Morrison Street / 11th Floor, Portland, Oregon 97204-3141 with conference call provided for those who can't make it in person. Anyone interested in attending, please contact Jeannine Rustad, Vice-Chair rustad_esq@yahoo.com for information on dates and times of meetings. |