Updates: February 29, 2008

February 29, 2008

It was referred to by many names.

¨      Some called it a short session.  They were correct, it certainly was short.  A session scheduled to begin the 4^th of February and adjourn by the 29^th, the session lasted a total of three weeks.  

¨      Some called it an experimental session.  That was correct, as well. Senate President Peter Courtney (D- Keizer) saw this as an opportunity to test drive an annual session model, believing that the Oregon Legislature needs to meet on a more frequent basis to address the needs of Oregonians.

¨      Some referred to it as a supplemental session.  The idea there is that is was going to supplement the 2007 session by addressing issues not finished during the regular session.

An additional hurdle for legislators during the supplemental session was that the House and Senate office wings were closed for remodeling.  It was difficult for legislators to meet with constituents and the lobby.  In addition, there were only six hearing rooms available so it made for a crowded situation for the entirety of the session.  All in all, I think it is safe to say that the process was managed fairly smoothly during the short period of time legislators were in Salem.  There were a few dust ups in the House at the beginning when the rules of the session were being adopted but those were quickly resolved.

The first week of the session saw a reduction in anticipated revenue when the February revenue forecast was released.  Taxes to be collected were projected to be $183 million less than projected at the end of the 2007 session in June of last year.  That immediately put a lid on any new or extended programs legislators had hoped to approve, with a few notable exceptions.  Funding for additional state police patrols were approved, along with storm relief aid to local governments and school districts as a result of recent winter storms. The land use advisory committee called “Big Look” was also funded after being unexpectedly slashed out of last session’s budget.

As expected, the legislature enacted several new rules for obtaining an Oregon drivers license that mirrored the requirements in the Governor’s recent Executive Order.  Although this session was billed as a time to handle urgent issues, a few bills snuck through that were questionable.  They included a dog fighting bill, a bill allowing firefighters to solicit on city streets and a memorial honoring Salem’s professional baseball team for having a good season last year.  Several important issues that many Oregonians saw as requiring urgent attention were not addressed, most notably the issue of teacher sexual misconduct.

Two issues that were put off until the 2009 regular session were the use of medical marijuana in the workplace and whether or not health care should be offered to all Oregonians as a fundamental right.  Both of those issues are important to the business community and JWA will be keeping a close eye on then as we move towards 2009.

The only significant issue regarding transportation was the concern over freight rail.  An informational hearing was held by the Joint Committee on Transportation that focused on the overall issue, but debate was overshadowed by the problems we are having in Southern Oregon with the railroad that serves our region.

Was it worth it?  It depends on who you talk to.  Members of the Democratic leadership certainly believed they were successful.  Some Republicans would grudgingly agree and some would not agree at all.  Have we heard the last of it?  Not at all. 

Some legislators, past and present, see the need for the legislature to meet on a more frequent basis to address issues of importance to Oregonians.  I count myself among those former legislators who believe that annual sessions would benefit Oregon in the long run.  I do NOT believe, however, that this was the format that should be used as a model.  Three weeks did not give legislators adequate time to debate issues that should have been addressed. 

Like many of my colleagues (both former members and those of us in the lobby), I think we need to shorten the so-called regular session in odd numbered years and increase the length of the session in even numbered years.  The key is to have sessions of absolute lengths.  As an example, the odd numbered year’s session could be limited to 120 days, followed by a 60 day session during the even numbered years.  During the 2009 regular legislative session, this issue will be debated and the legislature may send a referral to voters to change Oregon’s constitution and approve annual sessions.

It was a supplemental session that fortunately did not have many issues with a direct effect on business concerns.  The next session will potentially be a different story and we will remain vigilant to represent our client’s issues and concerns.

back to top