//  Script generated by Search Maker Pro:

sQ1=new Array();sQ1[1]=new Array("http://www.sdao.com/","Special Districts Association of Oregon","Insurance Services for Oregon Local Governments","Home Programs Training Register Member Login Contact Us   Classifieds Resources FAQs About Us  The Special Districts Association of Oregon (SDAO) was formed in 1978 to provide a broad range of membership services to special service districts located throughout the state of Oregon. Member districts include some 35 different types of districts. SDAO represents approximately 950 local governments of varying sizes and functions throughout the state. SDAO is governed by a twelve-member Board of Directors elected by the membership from different types of special districts. The SDAO Board appoints a five-member Board of Trustees to oversee the Association's insurance programs and services through the Special Districts Insurance Services Trust (SDIS). The Association staff, under the direction of the Executive Director, provide staff support to both the SDAO Board of Directors and SDIS Board of Trustees.   Home | About Us | Site Map | FAQs | Contact Us © 2005 www.sdao.com - All Rights Reserved.  Keywords: sdao, sdis, special districts, special districts association of oregon, oerp, oregon education risk pool");sQ1[2]=new Array("http://www.sdao.com/training_sdao.htm","SDAO Training and Education Programs","","Home Programs Training Register Member Login Contact Us   Classifieds Resources FAQs About Us    2006 SDAO/OFDDA Regional Workshop Schedule Risk Management Training for Elected Officials, Public Directors, Staff, and Volunteers Sponsored by: Special Districts Association of Oregon and Oregon Fire District Directors Association Board Duties and Responsibilities Join attorney Ken Jones for this free training. In a short evening session, we'll address what Oregon law requires of District Board Directors as well as what liability exposures can be avoided. When making decisions that impact the future of your District, it's important to know the labyrinth of legal ropes! A light meal will be served at 5:30 p.m. with trainings starting at 6:00 p.m. Space is limited. RSVP: Paulette Oliver, Wilson-Heirgood Associates, pauletteoliver@whainsurance.com or (800) 852-6140 Thursday, March 9 - Colton Fire Department, 20987 Highway 211, Colton, Oregon 97017 Thursday, April 27 - Winston Dillard, 250 SE Main Street, Winston, Oregon 97496 Thursday, May 11 - Polk County #1, 1800 Monmouth Street, Independence, Oregon 97351 Thursday, May 18 - Marion County #1, 4910 Brooklake Road NE, Brooks, Oregon 97305Civil Rights: The Importance of SOGsJoin Paulette Oliver as we explore the in's and out's of Civil Rights. District policies may be one of the most effective safeguards to protecting your district from an expensive litigation battle! We'll explore the problems districts often get involved with and how to avoid them as well as how to bring the importance of this expensive topic home to district staff and members. A light meal will be served at 5:30 p.m. with trainings starting at 6:00 p.m. Space is limited. RSVP: Paulette Oliver, Wilson-Heirgood Associates, pauletteoliver@whainsurance.com or (800) 852-6140 Tuesday, May 16 - Curry Transit District, The Grange Lodge in Sixes, Oregon Cultural DriftThis free training addresses the importance of the policies that our directors and staff write. Too often though, our good intentions are slowly moved from the forefront as everybody gets busy with the next agenda item. Jeff Griffin calls this phenomenon "Cultural Drift" and will help district staff, directors, and volunteers understand how this process opens the district up to workplace injuries, lawsuits, claims and losses. A light meal will be served at 5:30 p.m. with trainings starting at 6:00 p.m. Space is limited. RSVP: Paulette Oliver, Wilson-Heirgood Associates, pauletteoliver@whainsurance.com or (800) 852-6140 Thursday, April 13 - Philomath RFPD, 1035 Main Street, Philomath, Oregon 97370 Harassment Sexual Harassment is still a large area for district liability. This course describes activities that can place a district in harm's way and it's responsibility to prevent sexual harassment. Diversity training is also included as part of the presentation. A light meal will be served at 5:30 p.m. with trainings starting at 6:00 p.m. Space is limited. RSVP: Paulette Oliver, Wilson-Heirgood Associates, pauletteoliver@whainsurance.com or (800) 852-6140 Dates and locations to be announced. Mentoring The importance of developing a succession plan is discussed. Training opportunities should be provided for future leaders. This workshop provides suggestions and guidance in the development of future managers. A light meal will be served at 5:30 p.m. with trainings starting at 6:00 p.m. Space is limited. RSVP: Paulette Oliver, Wilson-Heirgood Associates, pauletteoliver@whainsurance.com or (800) 852-6140 Wednesday, March 22 - Halsey Fire Department, 740 West 2nd, Halsey, Oregon 97398 Risk Leadership Successful loss reduction is a direct result of smart hiring, team building, organization, forward communication and empowerment. Effective leadership not only reduces claims, it promotes fewer injuries, higher retention and increased job satisfaction. Risk Leadership looks at the importance of effective leadership as a strategy for district risk management. A light meal will be served at 5:30 p.m. with trainings starting at 6:00 p.m. Space is limited. RSVP: Paulette Oliver, Wilson-Heirgood Associates, pauletteoliver@whainsurance.com or (800) 852-6140 Wednesday, March 8 - Columbia River 911, 58611 McNulty Way, St. Helens, Oregon 97051 Thursday, March 23 - Siuslaw RFPD, 2625 Highway 101 North, Florence, Oregon 97439 Tuesday, April 25 - Boring, 28655 SE Highway 212, Boring, Oregon 97009 Wednesday, May 3 - Klamath #1, 143 North Broad Street, Klamath Falls, Oregon 97601 Thursday, May 23 - Jackson County #3, 833 Agate Road, White City, Oregon 97503 Public Entity Risk Management for Insurance Agents SDAO's insurance agents' workshop is for independent insurance agents who have public entity clients. The focus of this training will be to educate insurance agents about the unique nature of Oregon public entity risks. We also plan to introduce you to PACE, the new Property and Casualty Coverage for Education Trust. PACE is a result of merging the property/casualty business of the Special Districts Association of Oregon and the Oregon School Boards Association, which brings together over 210 education service districts, school districts, and community colleges to create the largest Trust serving schools in Oregon. Course topics include the following: Liability & Property Coverage Additional Insureds & Insured Contracts: What is and is not allowed under the Oregon Torts Claims Act Trends in Public Entity Claims Fighting Arson in Oregon's Schools Four hours of continuing education credits are being applied for through the Department of Consumer & Business Services Insurance Division. To register, complete the registration form on the brochure. Brochure Defensive Driving - How to Avoid Being In A Traffic Crash This four-hour class is designed for the professional who wants a refresher on basic driving skills, techniques, and knowledge to keep pace with current training, literature, and technology. The class also incorporates various advanced strategies, coupled with some fundamental laws of physics to challenge even the most experienced of drivers. Complex enough to answer most of your questions. Simple enough to share with your family. An interactive discussion will take place among the following topics and more: Being a smart driver Vehicle Maintenance and Oversights Evasive Tactics Roadway Friction Perception and reaction times Speed Vehicle Rollovers Black boxes in cars Case Studies Any "What If's" brought up during class The primary instructor for this training is Gary G. Miller. Gary retired in August after spending 27 years in the Patrol Services Division of the Oregon State Police. Gary was the Assistant Director of the Patrol Services Division upon retirement and spent most of his career either reconstructing traffic crashes or managing the Collision Reconstruction Program for the Department. He has testified as an expert witness in many counties in the state where he has reconstructed over 60 traffic fatalities that resulted in criminal prosecution and over 600 other crashes. He has a Bachelor of Science Degree in Wildlife Science from Oregon State University and has received accreditations from Northwestern University, the University of Northern Florida, and Texas A&M University, and is a nationally accredited Crash Reconstructionist. Tentative Dates and Locations March 3-4, 2006 - Phoenix April 7-8, 2006 - Redmond May 5-6, 2006 - Pendleton June 9-10, 2006 - Coos Bay Look for the 2006 SDAO training program to be updated regularly throughout March Home | About Us | Site Map | FAQs | Contact Us © 2005 www.sdao.com - All Rights Reserved.");sQ1[3]=new Array("http://www.sdao.com/contactus.htm","SDAO Contact Information","","Home Programs Training Register Member Login Contact Us   Classifieds Resources FAQs About Us  SDAO Home Office    CLAIMS OFFICE P.O. Box 12613 P.O. Box 23879 Salem, OR 97309-0613 Tigard, OR 97281-3879 Phone: (503) 371-8667 Phone: (503) 670-7066 Toll Free: (800) 285-5461 Toll Free: (800) 305-1736 Fax: (503) 371-4781 Fax: (503) 620-9817 Email: sdao@sdao.com Email: claims@sdao.com     Home | About Us | Site Map | FAQs | Contact Us © 2005 www.sdao.com - All Rights Reserved.");sQ1[4]=new Array("http://www.sdao.com/classifieds.asp","SDAO Classified Ads","","Home Programs Training Register Member Login Contact Us   Classifieds Resources FAQs About Us  SDAO Classified Ads SDAO members can post advertisements to this page as well our bi-monthly newsletter for no cost! The newsletter deadline is the 15th of the preceding month of desired publication. Online ads are posted immediately.   6 Records   Job Listings  Wastewater Treatment Operator - Entry Level SOUTH SUBURBAN SANITARY DISTRICT WWTF is accepting applications for WASTEWATER TREATEMENT OPERATOR - ENTRY LEVEL. For a complete job description including wages, benefits, position requirements and how to obtain an application please click the link below.  Organization: South Suburban Sanitary District Link: http://www.sdao.com/ref/jobs/sssd-wwto.pdf Phone: 541-882-5744 / Fax: 541-882-5013 Email: bob@sssd.org Date Posted: 3/3/2006 Human Resource/Risk Program Manager II WILLAMALANE PARK AND RECREATION DISTRICT is seeking a HUMAN RESOURCE/RISK PROGRAM MANAGER II to plan, organize, and manage the Human Resource and Risk Management programs. Salary: $3,435-$4,812 per month, 40 hours per week, with benefits. Job announcement, detailed job description, and required application packets are available online at the link below or at the Willamalane Administration Center, 200 South Mill Street, Springfield, Oregon 97477. Resumes are not accepted in lieu of application. Application deadline: Friday, March 10, 2006, at 5:00 p.m. Willamalane is a drug-free workplace. EOE.  Organization: Willamalane Park and Recreation District Link: www.willamalane.org Phone: 541-736-4044 / Fax: 541-736-4023 Email: janetm@willamalane.org Date Posted: 2/21/2006 Operations Manager Wastewater/Collections Operator Grade II The Neskowin Regional Sanitary Authority is seeking an Operations Manager-Wastewater/Collections Operator, Grade II. NRSA operates and manages the public wastewater utility serving the unincorporated community of Neskowin in Tillamook County, Oregon. The facilities consist of a septic tank effluent collection system, seven pump stations, and a secondary treatment facility with a surface water outfall to Neskowin Creek. Send resume and cover letter to NRSA, P O Box 383, Neskowin, OR 97149. Call (503) 392-3404 or email nrsa@harborside.com for job description. An Equal Opportunity Provider.  Organization: Neskowin Regional Sanitary Authority Link: Phone: 503-392-3404 / Fax: 503-392-3477 Email: nrsa@harborside.com Date Posted: 2/20/2006 City County Insurance Services CITY COUNTY INSURANCE SERVICES, a 50-staff, governmental agency that provides workers' compensation, property and liability coverage to Oregon local governments, is seeking an experienced RISK MANAGER to provide assistance, support, and resources to member entities, primarily in Eastern Oregon, where the position will be based. The position works with CIS members to evaluate risks and to advise officials on policies, plans, and strategies to mitigate covered losses. Requires an advanced understanding of governmental operations, exposures, and public sector risk management. Must work independently and as a member of a team. Strong problem-solving, computer, communication, project management, and presentation skills are needed, along with excellent oral and written communications. Send, fax, or e-mail cover letter and resume to CIS, Attn: HR, 1212 Court Street NE, Salem, Oregon 97301; No calls please. EOE  Organization: SDAO (on behalf of CIS) Link: Phone: N/A / Fax: 503-375-7996 Email: LMcNamara@cciservices.com Date Posted: 2/6/2006 Port of Hood River PORT OF HOOD RIVER is seeking an Executive Director. For more information click on the link below.  Organization: Port of Hood River Link: ../ref/jobs/portofhoodriver.pdf Phone: 503-620-1266 / Fax: Email: john@waldronhr.com Date Posted: 2/1/2006   Items For Sale  Metal Electrical Control Boxes Metal Control Boxes 14 x 18 x 18 N-3R HC Enclosures. The boxes are powdered coated gray. We have 10 of these units in our inventory that are new and have never been used. We purchased them for $130.00 and we will sell them for $65.00. You pay the freight or pick up at our location. Have pictures available upon request.  Organization: Umpqua Basin Water Association, Inc. Link: Phone: 541-672-5559 / Fax: 541-672-4909 Email: engineering@ubwa.org Date Posted: 2/13/2006 Home | About Us | Site Map | FAQs | Contact Us © 2005 www.sdao.com - All Rights Reserved.");sQ1[5]=new Array("http://www.sdao.com/resources.htm","SDAO Resources Links","","Home Programs Training Register Member Login Contact Us   Classifieds Resources FAQs About Us  Resources Links Domestic Water  Drainage Districts  Education and Library  Fire & 911  Hospital & Health  Irrigation  Park & Recreation  PUD's  Ports  Sanitary  State & Federal Resources  Soil & Water  Transit & Road  Vector Control  Water Control  Other Districts  Insurance Agents  State & Federal Resources Administrative Rules Association of Oregon Counties Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) Elections Governor's Office League of Oregon Cities Oregon Attorney General's Opinions Oregon Blue Book Oregon Department of Education Oregon Economic Development Department Oregon Health Department Oregon Revised Statutes Oregon State Bulletin - Monthly Administrative Rule Changes Oregon State Constitution Oregon State Department of Transportation Oregon State Fire Marshal Oregon State House of Representatives Oregon State Library Oregon State Marine Board Oregon State Senate Oregon Water Resources Department OSHA Regulations PERS Records Retention Schedule Search for Oregon Laws and Legislative Measures State of Oregon Resource Links (Including State of Oregon Telephone Directory) Water Districts American Water Works Association (AWWA) Domestic Water Supply Districts - ORS 264 Oregon Association of Water Utilities Oregon Health Department Oregon Water Resources Research Institute - OSU Oregon Water Resources Department Water Authorities - ORS 450 Irrigation, Water Control & Drainage Corporations for Irrigation, Drainage & Flood Control - ORS 554 Drainage Districts - ORS 547 Irrigation Districts - ORS 545 Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife Oregon Water Resources Congress Oregon Water Resources Department Water Control Districts - ORS 553 Water Improvement Districts - ORS 552 Education & Library Service Districts American Library Association Library Districts - ORS 357 Oregon Department of Education Oregon State Library Fire & 911 Districts Emergency Communications Districts - ORS 401 Federal Emergency Management Agency Fire and EMS Records Retention Requirements International Association of Fire Chiefs Law Enforcement Records Retention Requirements Oregon Fire Chiefs Association Oregon Fire District Directors Association Oregon Volunteer Firefighters Home Page Oregon State Fire Marshal National Fire Protection Association Rural Fire Protection Districts - ORS 478 Hospital & Health Health and Hospital Districts - ORS 440 National Rural Health Association Parks & Recreation Districts Oregon Recreation & Park Association (E-Mail) National Recreation and Park Association Parks & Recreation Districts - ORS 266 Peoples Utility Districts Oregon Peoples Utility Districts Association Peoples Utility Districts - ORS 261 Public Ports Oregon Economic Development Department American Association of Port Authorities Pacific Maritime Association - PMA Port Districts - ORS 777 Sanitary Districts Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) Oregon Sanitarians Registration Board Sanitary Districts & Sanitary Authorities - ORS 450 Soil & Water Conservation Districts Soil & Water Conservation Districts - ORS 568 National Association of Conservation Districts USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service Oregon Association of Conservation Districts Transit & Road Districts Oregon State Department of Transportation Oregon Transit Association Mass Transit Districts - ORS 267 Transportation Districts - ORS 354 Special Road Districts - ORS 371 Road Assessment Districts - ORS 371 American Public Transit Association Vector Control Districts Vector Control Districts - ORS 452 Northwest Mosquito and Vector Control Association American Mosquito Control Association Other Districts Cemetery Maintenance Districts - ORS 265 County Service Districts - ORS 451 Oregon Department of Agriculture Insurance Agencies Abel Insurance Agency Bain Insurance Agency - Bandon CAL/OR Insurance Specialists, Inc. Gustafson Insurance Agency Marsh USA Inc. Nasburg and Company Rogue Valley Insurance Waltz, Sheridan, Crawford - Forest Grove Wilson Heirgood - Eugene  Domestic Water  Drainage Districts  Education and Library  Fire & 911  Hospital & Health  Irrigation  Park & Recreation  PUD's  Ports  Sanitary  State & Federal Resources  Soil & Water  Transit & Road  Vector Control  Water Control  Other Districts  Insurance Agents Home | About Us | Site Map | FAQs | Contact Us © 2005 www.sdao.com - All Rights Reserved.");sQ1[6]=new Array("http://www.sdao.com/faq.htm","SDAO FAQ's","","Home Programs Training Register Member Login Contact Us   Classifieds Resources FAQs About Us  Frequently Asked Questions Is the Trust assessable? The Trust is not assessable. This means we cannot go back and ask the members for more money from any adverse claims years. That is why we have followed very conservative investment and surplus reserving requirements, to ensure that the program is funded better than most insurance companies and certainly better than most public entity pools in the nation. If the Trust is self-insured how do I know it won’t run out of money? With nearly $20 million in surplus against a written premium of approximately $20 million, the Trust has 30 times more surplus than its self-insured retention. In addition, SDIS contracts for an outside audit and actuarial study each year to ensure that it is funded at well beyond the 95% actuarial confidence level. To protect against catastrophic loss above the Trust’s self-insured retention, the Trust purchases reinsurance from some of the world’s highest rated reinsurance companies. We will provide a copy of our audited financial statement to any interested organization and recommend that the same should be done for any self-insured Trust the district is with or considering. Are members of OERP eligible for safety grants? OERP contributes $20,000 and serves on the Board of the Oregon School Safety Association (OSSA). Grant funds distributed by OSSA are used to fund a wide variety of safety and risk management programs and equipment. Does OERP have a Trust committee that specifically represents the interests of school districts, education service districts and community colleges? Yes it does. The committee consists of eight school district representatives throughout Oregon. The role of the committee is to assist with overseeing OERP. The committee is charged with setting goals, developing a five year plan, reviewing the budget, approving rates increases, and designing risk management programs. Why should school districts be part of a Trust that represents such a diverse membership? Diversity is strength. The Trust represents over 34 types of public entities. This diversity helps spread risk across all types of public entity exposures. This ensures that no one specific exposure, such as child molestation, can overwhelm the financial stability of the entire Trust.  Home | About Us | Site Map | FAQs | Contact Us © 2005 www.sdao.com - All Rights Reserved.");sQ1[7]=new Array("http://www.sdao.com/aboutus.asp","SDAO About Us","","Home Programs Training Register Member Login Contact Us   Classifieds Resources FAQs About Us  Special Districts Association of Oregon The Special Districts Association of Oregon was formed in 1977 to give special districts a stronger and united voice at the Oregon Legislature. As with similar associations that support cities, counties, schools, and local governments, the Association provides advocacy with state administrative agencies and other units of government, training, information resources, and other support programs. SDAO has grown its membership to over 950 special districts, school districts and community colleges and has become an important support organization for their individual efforts. SDAO currently operates as a 501(c)(6) not-for-profit corporation. Based upon its legal status and bylaws, SDAO/SDIS Board decisions and programs are limited primarily to Oregon special districts as listed in ORS Chapter 198; intergovernmental organizations created under ORS Chapter 190; affiliate organizations covered by the Oregon Tort Claims Act in ORS Chapter 30; school districts under ORS Chapter 332, and educational service districts under ORS Chapter 334. Other statutes of importance include those for Oregon not-for-profit corporations, ORS Chapter 65, and ORS Chapter 731 and Chapter 656, which regulate self-insured pools.  Special Districts Insurance Services Trust In 1985 the Special Districts Association of Oregon (SDAO) created a self-insured Trust, Special Districts Insurance Services (SDIS), to escape the volatilities of the traditional insurance market. The Trust created an opportunity for members to control insurance costs by jointly pooling resources to self-insure for property, liability and workers compensation coverage. All of the participants in the Trust, both members and associate members, are owners of the program. All of the equity, or surplus, belongs to the participants whether they are school districts, fire districts, water districts or community colleges etc. Unlike an insurance company where the profits are distributed to shareholders, SDIS’s only objective is to provide reasonable and stable rates and broad coverage to participating Oregon public entities of all kinds and sizes. Beginning in 2003 SDIS made the decision to expand the Trust to include Oregon public school districts and community colleges. At that time, one of the major insurers of Oregon schools left the State, leaving many school districts and their insurance agents with few options. Because SDIS already represented over 34 types of other districts, including education services districts, opening the Trust to school districts and community colleges was a natural fit. With the addition of over 85 school districts and community colleges to its self-insured programs, SDIS now has nearly 900 Oregon local government members with annual contributions exceeding $20 million. Oregon Education Risk Pool To serve the unique needs of Oregon’s public school districts, education service districts and community colleges, Special Districts Insurance Services (SDIS) created the Oregon Education Risk Pool (OERP) to meet these unique needs. OERP is part of the SDIS Trust and has the full financial security of the nearly $20 million of member surplus equity that has been accumulated during the past 20 years. OERP’s coverage documents, reinsurance policies, underwriting guidelines, claims adjusting services, loss control programs and training opportunities are all designed to tailor fit the risk management needs of Oregon’s public education organizations.  Membership Profile Cemetery 32 Communications 10 Council of Government 1 County Service 4 Dike 1 Drainage 24 Education Service 5 Fire / Ambulance 256 Hospital / Health 27 Irrigation 74 Library 20 Miscellaneous 17 Park & Recreation 49 Port 23 PRC Client 4 Public Utility 10 Road 64 Sanitary 49 School District 137 Soil & Water Conservation 41 Transit 11 Vector 15 Water 129 Water Control 19 Home | About Us | Site Map | FAQs | Contact Us © 2005 www.sdao.com - All Rights Reserved.");sQ1[8]=new Array("http://www.sdao.com/sitemap.htm","SDAO.COM Site Map","","Home Programs Training Register Member Login Contact Us   Classifieds Resources FAQs About Us  Site Map aboutus.asp announcerqst.asp awards.htm bestpractices.htm classifieds.asp conferencereg.asp contactus.htm employeebenefits.asp faq.htm financial.htm firegrant.htm grouppurchasing.htm index.htm legislative.htm news.htm privacy policy programoverview.htm publications.htm resources.htm risk_school.htm risk_sdao.htm technicalassist.htm training_sdao.htm training_other.htm wirelessphone.htm  Home | About Us | Site Map | FAQs | Contact Us © 2005 www.sdao.com - All Rights Reserved.");sQ1[9]=new Array("http://www.sdao.com/training_other.htm","SDAO Training and Education","","Home Programs Training Register Member Login Contact Us   Classifieds Resources FAQs About Us   Project Management Workshops - Last Chance to Register! Measuring Project Performance • West Linn • March 6-7, 2006 Project Risk Management • Salem • March 9-10, 2006 The above workshops are slated to be offered next week. At this point, the enrollment is too low to offer the workshops. Before canceling these workshops, we wanted to give those of you who might be interested one last opportunity to register. The workshops are part of the LOC, AOC, and ODOT cooperative program, offering project management workshops to local governments at a reduced cost. The reviews of this series have been outstanding and if you or your staff would benefit, we want to make them available. To register, please use the following link and select the appropriate workshop: http://www.orcities.org/Training/OregonLocalLeadershipInstituteOLLI/tabid/863/Default.aspx Northwest Leadership Seminar Red Lion on the River • Portland, Oregon March 1-3, 2006 Successful Leadership Starts Now! Join Northwest Leadership Seminar's 37th Annual seminar at the Red Lion on the River, 909 Hayden Island Drive, Portland, Oregon 97217, (503) 283-4466. Event Fee: $275 Brochure Register Contact: Teri VanWagner 727 Center Street NE, Suite 300 Salem, Oregon 97301 (503) 365-0222 E-mail: registrar@nwleadershipseminar.com Announcing The eLearning Center for SDAO Members The eLearning Center offers over 2000 online training opportunities, a speaker's bureau, educational materials for trainers, and online executive and employee coaching and consulting. The eLearning Center Customer Service Team Our team is available Monday through Friday, 8 am to 5 pm Pacific Time to answer your questions, assist with registration and provide technical support. Continuing Education Credits CEUs are provided in many areas. For a complete list please contact The eLearning Center Customer Service Team or call 1-800-752-5446. Virtual Classroom Join other participants from around the world in a virtual classroom for live two-way interactive training with nationally and internationally known subject matter experts. Just-in-Time Archived Training Library Archived self-paced training modules you can access anytime and right from the convenience of your desktop. Speakers Bureau Take advantage of this talent pool for their next conference or training event. Our speakers offer a wide variety of topics and presentations. Customized Training Training modules designed specifically for your work group, organization, or industry. Just let us know what you need! A variety of formats are available to accommodate all budgets! Educational Materials for Trainers Just-in-Time training modules packaged for trainers to use in the workplace including facilitator's guides, participant guides and handouts. Traffic Safety Management Training AlertDriving.com provides web-based traffic safety management training programs in an effort to help reduce accidents and violations while eliminating classroom-scheduling issues all at a fraction of the cost of traditional training. Drivers learn defensive backing, parking, dealing with blind spots, intersection perils, defensive highway driving, dealing with road rage issues, corporate fleet safety and how to drive 15 passenger vans among others. Contact: (877) 867-6642 http://www.alertdriving.com Injury Prevention Programs BodyLogic Health Management delivers on-site injury prevention programs. They have 14 years of experience teaching employees the skills they need to take responsibility for their own health. BodyLogic provides employee education and facilitator training using high quality materials and creative, energetic instructional techniques. Contact: (800) 887-8018 http://www.bodylogic.com Safety Training Programs Comprehensive Loss Management Inc. (CLMI) provides online, CD-ROM and video based safety-training programs on a variety of topics both in English and Spanish. CLMI is dedicated to helping entities reduce their losses and claims while improving productivity and compliance.  Contact: (800) 279-0288 http://www.clmitraining.com/prima_and_clmi_home_htm Safety, Environmental, and Defensive Driving Trainings FirstNet Learning Inc. provides a suite of affordable online health and safety training, environmental training and online "defensive driving" training for public entities. All courses are designed to be comprehensive, learner-centric, and were developed to help reduce claims and losses. The FirstNet learning System includes an internet-based training management system that automatically tracks the employee's training status, progress and course completions so Risk Managers and Safety Managers can deliver and manage training. Contact: (888) 948-4949 http://www.firstnetlearning.com OSHA Internet Online Safety Trainings http://www.cbs.state.or.us/external/osha/educate/training/pages/courses.htm Oregon Association of Water Utilities 2006 Training Schedule http://www.oawu.net  Home | About Us | Site Map | FAQs | Contact Us © 2005 www.sdao.com - All Rights Reserved.");sQ1[10]=new Array("http://www.sdao.com/ref/education/040606agentsworkshop.pdf","042006.pmd","","Special Districts Association of Oregon Public Entity Risk Management for Insurance Agents SDAO's insurance agents' workshop is for independent insurance agents who have public entity clients. The focus of this training will be to educate insurance agents about the unique nature of Oregon public entity risks. We also plan to introduce you to PACE, the new Property and Casualty Coverage for Education Trust. PACE is a result of merging the property/casualty business of the Special Districts Association of Oregon and the Oregon School Boards Association, which brings together over 210 education service districts, school districts and community colleges to create the largest Trust serving schools in Oregon. Course topics include the following: Liability & Property Coverage: A general discussion involving liability and property exposures for schools and special districts throughout the state. Additional Insureds & Insured Contracts: What is a n d is not allowed under the Oregon Torts Claims Act: Oregon public bodies have specific liability protections and prohibitions that are outlined in the Oregon Torts Claims Act. This session will examine the Oregon Tort Claims Act in relation to additional insureds and insured contracts. Tre n d s in Public Entity Claims: This session will present material dealing with claims and litigation management for both liability and workers' compensation claims, and how to develop effective claims management to respond after the claim happens, and best practices to help prevent the claim from happening. Fighting Arson in Oregon's Schools: This session will focus on arson prevention techniques and awareness, including SDAO's cooperative program with Oregon fire districts to assist in educating school administrators. When : Where : April 6, 2006, 11:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. Crowne Plaza Hotel 14811 Kruse Oaks Drive Lake Oswego Free Cost: Questions: 503.371.8667 or 1.800.285.5461 By email at sdao@sdao.com Registration: 10:30 a.m. Workshop: 11:00 a.m. - 5:00 p.m. Lunch will be provided. Four hours of continuing education credits are being applied for through the Department of Consumer & Business Services Insurance Division. Registration Form Please complete this form and mail or fax it to the SDAO office at P.O. Box 12613, Salem, Oregon 97309-0613. Fax: (503) 371-4781. NAME: TITLE: AGENCY: ADDRESS: CITY: PHONE: EMAIL: ZIP: Registration begins at 10:30 a.m. The seminar will begin at 11:00 a.m. and end at approximately 5:00 p.m.");sQ1[11]=new Array("http://www.sdao.com/classifieds.asp?filter=ALL","SDAO Classified Ads","","Home Programs Training Register Member Login Contact Us   Classifieds Resources FAQs About Us  SDAO Classified Ads SDAO members can post advertisements to this page as well our bi-monthly newsletter for no cost! The newsletter deadline is the 15th of the preceding month of desired publication. Online ads are posted immediately.   6 Records   Job Listings  Wastewater Treatment Operator - Entry Level SOUTH SUBURBAN SANITARY DISTRICT WWTF is accepting applications for WASTEWATER TREATEMENT OPERATOR - ENTRY LEVEL. For a complete job description including wages, benefits, position requirements and how to obtain an application please click the link below.  Organization: South Suburban Sanitary District Link: http://www.sdao.com/ref/jobs/sssd-wwto.pdf Phone: 541-882-5744 / Fax: 541-882-5013 Email: bob@sssd.org Date Posted: 3/3/2006 Human Resource/Risk Program Manager II WILLAMALANE PARK AND RECREATION DISTRICT is seeking a HUMAN RESOURCE/RISK PROGRAM MANAGER II to plan, organize, and manage the Human Resource and Risk Management programs. Salary: $3,435-$4,812 per month, 40 hours per week, with benefits. Job announcement, detailed job description, and required application packets are available online at the link below or at the Willamalane Administration Center, 200 South Mill Street, Springfield, Oregon 97477. Resumes are not accepted in lieu of application. Application deadline: Friday, March 10, 2006, at 5:00 p.m. Willamalane is a drug-free workplace. EOE.  Organization: Willamalane Park and Recreation District Link: www.willamalane.org Phone: 541-736-4044 / Fax: 541-736-4023 Email: janetm@willamalane.org Date Posted: 2/21/2006 Operations Manager Wastewater/Collections Operator Grade II The Neskowin Regional Sanitary Authority is seeking an Operations Manager-Wastewater/Collections Operator, Grade II. NRSA operates and manages the public wastewater utility serving the unincorporated community of Neskowin in Tillamook County, Oregon. The facilities consist of a septic tank effluent collection system, seven pump stations, and a secondary treatment facility with a surface water outfall to Neskowin Creek. Send resume and cover letter to NRSA, P O Box 383, Neskowin, OR 97149. Call (503) 392-3404 or email nrsa@harborside.com for job description. An Equal Opportunity Provider.  Organization: Neskowin Regional Sanitary Authority Link: Phone: 503-392-3404 / Fax: 503-392-3477 Email: nrsa@harborside.com Date Posted: 2/20/2006 City County Insurance Services CITY COUNTY INSURANCE SERVICES, a 50-staff, governmental agency that provides workers' compensation, property and liability coverage to Oregon local governments, is seeking an experienced RISK MANAGER to provide assistance, support, and resources to member entities, primarily in Eastern Oregon, where the position will be based. The position works with CIS members to evaluate risks and to advise officials on policies, plans, and strategies to mitigate covered losses. Requires an advanced understanding of governmental operations, exposures, and public sector risk management. Must work independently and as a member of a team. Strong problem-solving, computer, communication, project management, and presentation skills are needed, along with excellent oral and written communications. Send, fax, or e-mail cover letter and resume to CIS, Attn: HR, 1212 Court Street NE, Salem, Oregon 97301; No calls please. EOE  Organization: SDAO (on behalf of CIS) Link: Phone: N/A / Fax: 503-375-7996 Email: LMcNamara@cciservices.com Date Posted: 2/6/2006 Port of Hood River PORT OF HOOD RIVER is seeking an Executive Director. For more information click on the link below.  Organization: Port of Hood River Link: ../ref/jobs/portofhoodriver.pdf Phone: 503-620-1266 / Fax: Email: john@waldronhr.com Date Posted: 2/1/2006   Items For Sale  Metal Electrical Control Boxes Metal Control Boxes 14 x 18 x 18 N-3R HC Enclosures. The boxes are powdered coated gray. We have 10 of these units in our inventory that are new and have never been used. We purchased them for $130.00 and we will sell them for $65.00. You pay the freight or pick up at our location. Have pictures available upon request.  Organization: Umpqua Basin Water Association, Inc. Link: Phone: 541-672-5559 / Fax: 541-672-4909 Email: engineering@ubwa.org Date Posted: 2/13/2006 Home | About Us | Site Map | FAQs | Contact Us © 2005 www.sdao.com - All Rights Reserved.");sQ1[12]=new Array("http://www.sdao.com/classifieds.asp?filter=Jobs","SDAO Classified Ads","","Home Programs Training Register Member Login Contact Us   Classifieds Resources FAQs About Us  SDAO Classified Ads SDAO members can post advertisements to this page as well our bi-monthly newsletter for no cost! The newsletter deadline is the 15th of the preceding month of desired publication. Online ads are posted immediately.   5 Records   Job Listings  Wastewater Treatment Operator - Entry Level SOUTH SUBURBAN SANITARY DISTRICT WWTF is accepting applications for WASTEWATER TREATEMENT OPERATOR - ENTRY LEVEL. For a complete job description including wages, benefits, position requirements and how to obtain an application please click the link below.  Organization: South Suburban Sanitary District Link: http://www.sdao.com/ref/jobs/sssd-wwto.pdf Phone: 541-882-5744 / Fax: 541-882-5013 Email: bob@sssd.org Date Posted: 3/3/2006 Human Resource/Risk Program Manager II WILLAMALANE PARK AND RECREATION DISTRICT is seeking a HUMAN RESOURCE/RISK PROGRAM MANAGER II to plan, organize, and manage the Human Resource and Risk Management programs. Salary: $3,435-$4,812 per month, 40 hours per week, with benefits. Job announcement, detailed job description, and required application packets are available online at the link below or at the Willamalane Administration Center, 200 South Mill Street, Springfield, Oregon 97477. Resumes are not accepted in lieu of application. Application deadline: Friday, March 10, 2006, at 5:00 p.m. Willamalane is a drug-free workplace. EOE.  Organization: Willamalane Park and Recreation District Link: www.willamalane.org Phone: 541-736-4044 / Fax: 541-736-4023 Email: janetm@willamalane.org Date Posted: 2/21/2006 Operations Manager Wastewater/Collections Operator Grade II The Neskowin Regional Sanitary Authority is seeking an Operations Manager-Wastewater/Collections Operator, Grade II. NRSA operates and manages the public wastewater utility serving the unincorporated community of Neskowin in Tillamook County, Oregon. The facilities consist of a septic tank effluent collection system, seven pump stations, and a secondary treatment facility with a surface water outfall to Neskowin Creek. Send resume and cover letter to NRSA, P O Box 383, Neskowin, OR 97149. Call (503) 392-3404 or email nrsa@harborside.com for job description. An Equal Opportunity Provider.  Organization: Neskowin Regional Sanitary Authority Link: Phone: 503-392-3404 / Fax: 503-392-3477 Email: nrsa@harborside.com Date Posted: 2/20/2006 City County Insurance Services CITY COUNTY INSURANCE SERVICES, a 50-staff, governmental agency that provides workers' compensation, property and liability coverage to Oregon local governments, is seeking an experienced RISK MANAGER to provide assistance, support, and resources to member entities, primarily in Eastern Oregon, where the position will be based. The position works with CIS members to evaluate risks and to advise officials on policies, plans, and strategies to mitigate covered losses. Requires an advanced understanding of governmental operations, exposures, and public sector risk management. Must work independently and as a member of a team. Strong problem-solving, computer, communication, project management, and presentation skills are needed, along with excellent oral and written communications. Send, fax, or e-mail cover letter and resume to CIS, Attn: HR, 1212 Court Street NE, Salem, Oregon 97301; No calls please. EOE  Organization: SDAO (on behalf of CIS) Link: Phone: N/A / Fax: 503-375-7996 Email: LMcNamara@cciservices.com Date Posted: 2/6/2006 Port of Hood River PORT OF HOOD RIVER is seeking an Executive Director. For more information click on the link below.  Organization: Port of Hood River Link: ../ref/jobs/portofhoodriver.pdf Phone: 503-620-1266 / Fax: Email: john@waldronhr.com Date Posted: 2/1/2006 Home | About Us | Site Map | FAQs | Contact Us © 2005 www.sdao.com - All Rights Reserved.");sQ1[13]=new Array("http://www.sdao.com/classifieds.asp?filter=Sale","SDAO Classified Ads","","Home Programs Training Register Member Login Contact Us   Classifieds Resources FAQs About Us  SDAO Classified Ads SDAO members can post advertisements to this page as well our bi-monthly newsletter for no cost! The newsletter deadline is the 15th of the preceding month of desired publication. Online ads are posted immediately.   1 Records   Items For Sale  Metal Electrical Control Boxes Metal Control Boxes 14 x 18 x 18 N-3R HC Enclosures. The boxes are powdered coated gray. We have 10 of these units in our inventory that are new and have never been used. We purchased them for $130.00 and we will sell them for $65.00. You pay the freight or pick up at our location. Have pictures available upon request.  Organization: Umpqua Basin Water Association, Inc. Link: Phone: 541-672-5559 / Fax: 541-672-4909 Email: engineering@ubwa.org Date Posted: 2/13/2006 Home | About Us | Site Map | FAQs | Contact Us © 2005 www.sdao.com - All Rights Reserved.");sQ1[14]=new Array("http://www.sdao.com/ref/jobs/sssd-wwto.pdf","Microsoft Word - WWTP Op Entry Level Job Announcement 2006.doc","","Board of Directors Position 1 - John W. Nickelson Position 2 - Jerry E. Barrett Position 3 - Leonard D. Harrington General Manager/Secretary 2201 Laverne Avenue Klamath Falls, OR. 97603 Phone 541.882.5744 Fax 541.882.5013 Robert C. McDaniel South Suburban Sanitary District WWTF is accepting applications for the following position: Wastewater Treatment Operator ­ Entry Level Hourly wage: $13.50 per hour. Benefits include: · · · · Medical, dental, and vision insurance for self and/or family Oregon PERS retirement system Training opportunities Generous vacation and sick leave package. Position Requirements: The candidate will be required to: Operate and maintain the District's wastewater treatment systems and related facilities. Conduct a variety of maintenance work on equipment, buildings, and dikes to insure proper treatment of wastewater within the treatment facilities, including logging meter, gauge, and dial readings and generating reports. Conduct a variety of laboratory work to insure proper treatment of wastewater within the treatment facilities, including sampling, testing, recording of samples and readings, and generating reports. Have the ability to keep accurate records for reporting purposes. Requires a basic level of computer skills with word processing and spreadsheet. Have the ability to address a variety of technical and operational issues related to a wastewater treatment lagoon system. The successful candidate will be required to acquire a Grade I certification in Wastewater Treatment within twelve (12) months. A Class "A or B" Commercial Drivers License and or the ability to acquire the same within (12) months. Prior employment or experience in a wastewater treatment facility is desirable. South Suburban Sanitary District is an Equal Opportunity Employer and encourages all qualified individuals to apply for this position. The District maintains policies for a drug free and smoke free environment. Applications are available at: South Suburban Sanitary District 2201 Laverne Avenue Klamath Falls, OR 97603 RE: WWTF Operator ­ Entry level job opening Questions regarding this position can be directed to the General Manager, Monday thru Friday 8:00 am to 4:00 pm or the Director of Environmental Services, at 541.850.0339 Monday thru Friday 6:00 am to 3:00 pm. Robert C. McDaniel General Manager South Suburban Sanitary Dist. 2201 Laverne Avenue Klamath Falls, OR. 97603 Protecting Tomorrow's Environment! Board of Directors Position 1 - John W. Nickelson Position 2 - Jerry E. Barrett Position 3 - Leonard D. Harrington General Manager/Secretary 2201 Laverne Avenue Klamath Falls, OR. 97603 Phone 541.882.5744 Fax 541.882.5013 Robert C. McDaniel (541) 882-5744 bob@sssd.org Protecting Tomorrow's Environment!");sQ1[15]=new Array("http://www.sdao.com/announcerqst.asp","Request Email Announcements","","Home Programs Training Register Member Login Contact Us   Classifieds Resources FAQs About Us  SDAO periodically sends out broadcast email announcements with information on a variety of insurance related topics and trainings. Complete and submit this form to receive broadcast email announcements from SDAO. Request Email Announcments Organization Name: First Name: Last Name: Email: Subscribe: Yes, I'd like to receive email announcements from SDAO. No, Please remove my name from SDAO's email list.  Home | About Us | Site Map | FAQs | Contact Us © 2005 www.sdao.com - All Rights Reserved.");sQ1[16]=new Array("http://www.sdao.com/awards.htm","SDAO","","Home Programs Training Register Member Login Contact Us   Classifieds Resources FAQs About Us  Special Districts Association of Oregon 2006 Awards Program Categories and Selection Criteria Outstanding Achievement Award This award category recognizes innovative programs, outstanding safety, public information, public involvement in a district decision-making process, and outstanding project/achievement. Because efforts in these areas should be considered in light of available resources (i.e., smaller districts may have significantly fewer resources than larger districts), two nomination categories have been established for this award: (1) districts with 10 or fewer employees, and (2) districts with more than 10 employees. More than one award may be given in each category. Criteria: Tangible, positive results Developed for a specific purpose (i.e. implementing a new program or service, dealing with a particular problem or issue, etc.) Decreases costs or improves the quality of service without significantly increasing costs Innovative concept(s) Increases the district's visibility with the public Improves communication between district and patrons Demonstrates significant safety and loss control efforts Is easily adaptable for other districts Outstanding Special District Manager Award This award recognizes the manager of a member special district who has contributed substantially to the improvement and successful operation of his or her district. SDAO will pay special tribute to a manager(s) chosen to receive this award. Criteria: Nomination must be made by the district's board of directors. Outstanding Special District Employee Award This award recognizes an employee of a member special district who has contributed substantially to the improvement and successful operation of his or her district. SDAO will pay special tribute to an employee(s) chosen to receive this award. Criteria: Nomination must be made by the district manager. Outstanding Special District Volunteer Award This award recognizes an individual affiliated with a member special district who has made significant contributions to the district, and may also have contributed to the larger community as a volunteer. SDAO will pay special tribute to a volunteer(s) chosen to receive this award. Criteria: Nominees may include elected officials, volunteers who assist with district projects or operations, or board and staff members who have made substantial contributions of time and effort as volunteers of the district and in other community activities (e.g. United Way, March of Dimes, fundraising for a community project, etc.). Application Process Nominations for all award categories will be accepted throughout the year. Those received by December 31, 2005 will be considered for SDAO's 2006 Awards Program, scheduled for Saturday, February 11th, at the 28th Annual Conference in Portland. Nominations received after the December 31 deadline will be considered for the 2007 Awards Program. A separate nomination form needs to be completed for each award category. The 2006 Awards Committee will review applications in early January. Districts selected to receive awards at the annual conference will be notified and asked to write a 100-200 word summary to be read at the Awards Banquet on February 11, 2006. Contact: Luanne Richey, SDAO Information and Resource Manager 503 371-8667 Salem 1-800-285-5461 Toll Free  Home | About Us | Site Map | FAQs | Contact Us © 2005 www.sdao.com - All Rights Reserved.");sQ1[17]=new Array("http://www.sdao.com/bestpractices.htm","SDAO","","Home Programs Training Register Member Login Contact Us   Classifieds Resources FAQs About Us  Best Practices for Oregon Special Districts Members to complete the Best Practices Self-Assessment Checklist Online Public entities are under constant public scrutiny. Policy-making elected officials are concerned about responsiveness to their constituency. Politics may sometimes influence decisions. Because of this, public entities operate in a different environment than the private sector. This environment also impacts actions involving organizational risks arising from administration, operations, and board decisions. To properly perform their duties all Oregon special district boards and management personnel need to address the risk management functions for their entity. Risk management is described as a process of planning, organizing and controlling losses for the district at a reasonable cost. Risk management functions can and do vary widely in Oregon special districts depending upon the type, size, and complexity of a district's operation. Risk management includes five common elements for all Oregon districts. Districts should: Ensure that loss exposures are identified Examine the options to treat the exposures Select and budget for the best option Fully implement the best option Annually monitor and set appropriate policy to best manage your operations Special districts should establish policies that guide their risk management efforts based upon “Best Practices.” Best Practices are tools for specific activities that a district may use or undertake to properly identify risks, and options to mitigate the risks. Staff and budget resource limitations in many cases are obstacles in assessing reasonable costs for the district in attempting to control and manage these risks. In an effort to improve decision maker’s abilities in setting policies to develop a risk management program, SDAO has created a self-assessment checklist for boards and managers to assess the Best Practices available relative to their district size and complexity of operations. This guide generally categorizes the areas of risk by administrative activities, operation of facilities and services, policy setting and organizational structure. Districts are categorized in the matrix as large, medium-sized, small, and very small organizations. Definitions are provided to assist in determining the most appropriate classification for your district. The items identified as “Better Practices”, are considered a minimum level of risk management for an Oregon special district, and “Best Practices” should be considered by districts as organizations get increasingly larger and more complex. The following Best Practices Self-Assessment Checklist is divided into two sections. The first section should be completed by the district Board as the policy making body of the district. The second section should be completed by district management personnel. Size Classification for Oregon Special Districts Large Organizations Characterized by maintaining permanent staff positions for major functional areas including Executive Director, Finance/Accounting Manager, Personnel Administration, and various operational supervisors. Operations of these districts are complex and require ongoing strategic planning, automatic/electronic data systems, formal training programs, and formalized policies and procedures. Medium-Sized Organizations Characterized by employment of a full-time manager but other administrative personnel may share duties that are commonly segregated in large organizations. For example, the Finance Manager may also be responsible for personnel activities. This size organization generally has automated systems but formal training programs and a formal process for continually updating policies and procedures are not as consistent as in larger organizations. Budget limitations can affect the ability of this sized organization to commit to outside consultations and fixed budget authority for various risk management activities. Small Organizations Characterized by full-time managers with no professional staff support. Manager generally has ongoing operational responsibilities. District operations are focused on a few primary activities. Budgets for training and risk management assessments are limited requiring district to rely on utilizing free or low cost training and materials available through associations or informal contact with peers. Very Small Organizations No full-time personnel resulting in the Board being responsible for many tasks that are generally undertaken by staff. This district is characterized by service being delivered and a small budget that limits training and risk management efforts to only specific problems that arise. The district relies almost exclusively on advice from association affiliations and peers. The district generally maintains only manual accounting records and maintains very limited written formal policies. Best Practices Reference Guide SDAO has the following reference material and sample policies available in its resource library. If you need assistance in locating a copy of any of the following or to find reference information on any of the questions listed, please call Melissa High at 1-800-285-5461. Complete the Checklist online at www.sdao.com and get immediate access to reference material. Board Duties and Responsibilities SDAO Management and Policy Resource Guide ORS 198 and the ORS Statute that governs your type of district. A listing of statutes by type of district can be found in the SDAO Management and Policy Guide. ORS 246, 260 and 255 – Elections law Districts Elections Manual – Oregon State Elections Division Campaign Finance Manual – Oregon State Elections Division Attorney General’s Administrative Law Manual and Model Rules of Procedure – Oregon Department of Justice Public Budgeting SDAO Management and Policy Resource Guide ORS 294 – Public Budgeting Local Budgeting in Oregon , Revised Edition – Oregon State Department of Revenue Local Budget Laws and Notice of Property Tax Forms and Instructions Booklet – Oregon State Department of Revenue Personnel Policies SDAO Management and Policy Resource Guide A Handbook for Oregon Employers of Wage and Hour Laws – Oregon Bureau of Labor and Industries Public Contracting SDAO Management and Policy Resource Guide ORS Chapters 279 and 282 OAR Chapter 125 Attorney General’s Model Public Contract Rules Manual – Oregon State Department of Justice Financial Controls SDAO Management and Policy Resource Guide ORS Chapters 294, 297 and 310 Public Meetings and Records SDAO Management and Policy Resource Guide ORS Chapter 192 Attorney General’s Public Records and Meetings Manual – Oregon State Department of Justice Home | About Us | Site Map | FAQs | Contact Us © 2005 www.sdao.com - All Rights Reserved.");sQ1[18]=new Array("http://www.sdao.com/conferencereg.asp","SDAO Annual Conference Registration","","Home Programs Training Register Member Login Contact Us   Classifieds Resources FAQs About Us  2006 Conference Registration begins 12/1/2005  Home | About Us | Site Map | FAQs | Contact Us © 2005 www.sdao.com - All Rights Reserved.");sQ1[19]=new Array("http://www.sdao.com/employeebenefits.htm","SDAO Employee Benefits","","Home Programs Training Register Member Login Contact Us   Classifieds Resources FAQs About Us  Employee Benefits The SDAO Employee Benefits program began in 1985 with two objectives: to provide a benefit program beneficial to both large and small districts, and to take advantage of the potential size protection of group purchasing. Today, both objectives are being met. In the beginning, the SDAO Employee Benefits Program insured 13 districts with approximately 140 employees. Today, the program provides benefits for more than 200 districts, with more than 2,300 employees contributing an annual premium of over $9 million. The size of the participating districts range from 1 to more than 100 employees. The SDAO health plan, provided by Pacific Source Health Plans offers a variety of medical, vision, and dental plan options that enable districts of any size to take advantage of the excellent rates and coverages of a large group policy. SDAO's health plan portfolio features a wide range of preferred provider organization (PPO) plans or the option of traditional indemnity insurance. For most types of care, members are free to select any licensed health care provider, and may self-refer to a specialist. There are no gatekeepers, and the choice is theirs. As employee benefits coverages continue to evolve, the SDIS Board of Trustees, the SDAO staff, and the program administrator remain committed to responding to member needs and making the program the most cost-effective and high-quality benefit program available to special districts. Medical Coverage Health Plan: Preferred Provider Medical Plans: Offers a more cost-effective approach to health care. Plans use a select network of preferred health care providers and facilities to help reduce premiums and out-of-pocket expenses. Traditional Medical Plans - Offers the ability to seek care from any        provider or hospital. Vision Plan: Pacific Source is also the provider for SDAO's two vision plans. Vision insurance is one of the few benefit options that cannot be purchased on a stand-alone basis. To have vision coverage, districts also must have medical coverage. Basic Plan - Pays fixed amount for all vision services. No deductible plan pays 100% of UCR annually. Contact: Century Insurance Group LLC Chet Weichman, SDAO Health Plan Administrator 541-382-4211 Bend 1-800-599-2387 Toll Free Dental Coverage Effective June 1, 2003, SDAO chose Pacific Source to provide dental coverage options. These plans are identical to prior plans, but offer the additional advantage of paying claims on billed charges, not "usual and customary charges." Dental Plan Features: All benefits paid on billed charge, no UCR. Basic Plan: Pays 100% for preventive services. $25 deductible before paying 80% for restorative ser- vices and 50% for major services. Incentive Plan: 70% coverage with no deductible for preventive and restorative services during first year. Percentage increases 10% each year up to 100% as long as employee visits dentist once a year. Low-Cost Plan: $1,000 maximum annual benefit with $50 deductible. Preventive and restorative services paid at 80%; major services at 50%. Orthodontia - Requires 20 employees. $1,500 life- time benefit; percentage paid is 50% to maximum. Orthodontia - Requires 20 employees. $1,500 life- time benefit; percentage paid is 50% to maximum. Contact: Century Insurance Group LLC Chet Weichman, SDAO Health Plan Administrator 541-382-4211 Bend 1-800-599-2387 Toll Free Lifeand Disability Coverages SDAO's provider for life and disability coverage is Standard Insurance. Several plan options are available for life insurance, and both short and long-term disability coverage. Life: $10,000, $20,000, and $50,000 life and accidental death and dismemberment per employee. Short-Term Disability: Four plan options; 13 or 26 week benefit period; 60% of weekly wages to a $100 or $200 weekly maximum. Each begins paying on the first day for an accident and the eighth day for an illness. Long-Term Disability: Two plan options; 90 or 180 day benefit period; 60% of earnings to a maximum of $5,000 in monthly benefit. Contact: Century Insurance Group LLC Chet Weichman, SDAO Health Plan Administrator 541-382-4211 Bend 1-800-599-2387 Toll Free Section 125 Plan As part of our Employee Benefit Program, we offer the Flexible Spending Account Plan (Section 125 Plan) through Manley Services. Section 125 refers to a portion of the Internal Revenue Code that enables employees of special districts to de-duct funds from their earnings on a pre-tax basis to pay for certain allowable expenses. The plan also provides the employer an opportunity to save some payroll-related costs.There are four areas in which employees can take advantage of SDAO's Section 125 Plan: Payroll Deducted Premiums: Employees must contribute for either their own or their dependent's health coverage. This contribution is paid directly to the insurance carrier, but is now deducted on pre-tax basis. Unreimbursed Health Expenses: An employee can pay for eligible health related expenses that are not covered by an insurance or other medical reimbursement plan. Dependent Care Expenses: Covered by the same rules applying to the IRS tax credit. Allows employees to pay for eligible expenses with pre-tax income. Other Health-Related Premiums: Those premiums which are not normally deducted from the employee's paycheck. If health insurance is paid directly to an insurance carrier this may be eligible to be paid pre-tax. Contact: Manley Administrative Services Co. 541-485-7488 Eugene 1-800-422-7038 Toll Free Length of Service Award Program The Length of Service Award Program (LOSAP) acts as a retirement benefit that fire districts can offer to their volunteers as an incentive to continue service, and to express the district's appreciation for the volunteer's efforts over the years. With the investment options SDAO has chosen, margins are low-cost and no commissions are paid out of contributions. The result is higher value for volunteers and districts. SDAO developed the LOSAP Plan and Trust to accommodate various needs expressed by districts.  Contact: Michael Doherty, SDAO Accounting Manager 503-371-8667 Salem 1-800-285-5461 Toll Free Home | About Us | Site Map | FAQs | Contact Us © 2005 www.sdao.com - All Rights Reserved.");sQ1[20]=new Array("http://www.sdao.com/financial.htm","SDAO Financial Services","","Home Programs Training Register Member Login Contact Us   Classifieds Resources FAQs About Us  FlexLease Asset Acquisition Program FlexLease is a pooled financing program which enables SDAO members to finance projects with flexible terms and competitive market rates. Examples of projects financed through the FlexLease program include: Equipment Purchases Fire trucks Rescue and utility vehicles Computer equipment Telecommunications equipment Hospital equipment Park and playground equipment Real Property Land (acquisitions) New building construction Remodeling and improvements FlexLease is a proven alternative to traditional forms of financing capital assets. FlexLease offers districts attractive tax-exempt rates, terms of up to fifteen years, precise and quantifiable costs of borrowing, "user-friendly" documentation; flexible payment terms, prepayment options, fixed rate financing, and no down payment required. The costs associated with financing the projects, such a program administration fees, legal fees, and trustee fees, are included in the amount financed. With FlexLease, districts can maintain cash reserves while acquiring essential equipment or real property quickly and conveniently. Districts retain the benefits of ownership and finance property over its useful life. The average length of time to complete a transaction is 45 days for equipment and 60 days for real property. Contact: Wedbush Morgan Securities David Ulbricht, Senior Vice President, Public Finance  Tim Iltz (503) 471-6790 [Portland] FAX (503) 224-7097-0434 Cell (503) 701-7774 FlexTran Program Many Oregon special districts face short-term cash flow deficits during the year, primarily between the beginning of the fiscal year, July 1, and the first receipt of property tax revenue in late November. SDAO's FlexTran Program provides participating districts with a short-term financing alternative to help with this problem. The SDAO FlexTran Program is available to members of SDAO as part of the Association's ongoing financing programs. RBC Dain Rauscher provides financing services. The SDAO FlexTran Program pools participating districts' short-term cash flow needs and borrowing costs, thereby providing reduced short-term interest rates. Each district issues its own tax and revenue anticipation note. Districts use the note proceeds to meet their short-term cash flow needs, and then invest the corresponding tax revenues for the remainder of the year. Each district's note is paid at maturity. Contact: Wedbush Morgan Securities David Ulbricht, Senior Vice President, Public Finance  Tim Iltz (503) 471-6790 [Portland] FAX (503) 224-7097-0434 Cell (503) 701-7774 Credit Union Membership at First Tech Credit Union is available to all eligible officials, employees and volunteers of SDAO member districts who are not served by another credit union. First Tech is a financial cooperative owned by its members. Instead of paying a group of stockholders, profits are returned to our members in the form of better savings/loan rates and improved services. Membership is good for a lifetime, even if you change jobs or retire. And once you open an account your relatives are also eligible to join. First Tech Credit Union offer a full range of financial services including: Checking accounts Loans for all needs including First Mortgage and Home Equity Around the clock account access including NO FEE Online banking and Bill pay Visa Check and Credit Cards Financial planning and insurance services available Many NO FEE services available THERE’S NO FEE TO BECOME A MEMBER First Tech has been serving Oregonians statewide since 1952, and would be pleased to have you as a member. First Tech branches are in Beaverton, Hillsboro, Portland, Salem, and Eugene and all services are easily accessed via internet at 1sttech.com, phone 800-637-0852, mail, fax, and ATM.  Home | About Us | Site Map | FAQs | Contact Us © 2005 www.sdao.com - All Rights Reserved.");sQ1[21]=new Array("http://www.sdao.com/firegrant.htm","SDAO","","Home Programs Training Register Member Login Contact Us   Classifieds Resources FAQs About Us  Grant Program for Strategic Planning Services and Cooperative Services Feasibility Study Special Districts Association of Oregon (SDAO) and Emergency Services Consulting inc. (ESCi) announce a new partnership designed to assist small fire districts with strategic planning and feasibility of regional service delivery studies (mergers/consolidations). Emergency services have entered into a very competitive evolutionary cycle. Public demands increase while dollars and other resources shrink. This trend places even more pressure on today’s managers, public policy officials, and organization members to come up with ways to become more efficient. The Customer Centered Strategic Planning (CCSP) process helps you guide your organization’s future to meet the community’s needs. The CCSP program has proven very effective in all types of organizations, providing a model for the present as well as the future. This process adapts well to changing and unpredictable environments. The CCSP process assures community as well as organizational participation. The process concentrates on community needs, and is driven by the central theme of “What is in the best interest of the citizens served?” Unlike traditional planning processes, CCSP is designed to focus on internal and external customers, evaluate needs, and identify issues from the citizen up rather than from the mission statement down. CCSP encourages participants to develop the skills that will enable them to continue the strategic planning process in succeeding years. It identifies market niches, matches resources with needs, and helps service providers con centrate effort, while reducing risk and wasted resources. The CCSP program has proven very effective in all types of organizations, providing a model for the present as well as the future. This process adapts well to a changing and unpredictable environment. The Customer Centered Strategic Plan process includes the following components: Developing a Mission Statement Describing Vision(s) of the Future Identifying Membership Values Identifying Critical Organizational Issues Identifying Organizational Strengths Developing Goals and Objectives Identifying Critical Customer Needs Identifying Areas of Needed Enhancement Identifying Functions/Services Identifying Tools to Meet Needs Developing Implementation Strategies The Customer Centered Strategic Plan process has been adopted and used by: International Association of Fire Chiefs Western Fire Chiefs Association Fallen Firefighters Memorial Foundation National Volunteer Firefighters Association Washington Firefighters Association Oregon Fire Chiefs Association Oregon Volunteer Firefighters Association Oregon Fire District Directors Association In keeping with the goal of expanding services to our members, SDAO has fifteen (15) grants ranging from $500 to $750 each available to assist small fire districts with the cost of developing a Customer Centered Strategic Plan or conducting a cooperative services feasibility study. SDAO and ESCi have established a group discounted rate for these services. Grant funds are available to fire districts enrolled in the SDIS property/liability program, and are available on a first come first serve basis. Fire districts undertaking a strategic plan will automatically be certified for a best practices insurance credit. Strategic Planning Services Operating budget of $200,000 or less: $5,000 minus $750 grant = $4,250 Plus out-of-pocket expenses. Operating budget over $200,000: $6,800 minus $500 grant = $6,300 Plus out-of-pocket expenses. Cooperative Services Feasibility Study $750 grant, plus negotiated fee based on the number of organizations requesting the service. Application Process Districts interested in contracting with Emergency Services Consulting inc. for strategic planning services should contact: George Dunkel SDAO Fire Service Consultant (503) 366-8013 Email: dunkelg@colcenter.org Luanne Richey SDAO Information and Resource Manager (503) 371-8667, toll-free at (800) 285-5461 Email: lrichey@sdao.com  Home | About Us | Site Map | FAQs | Contact Us © 2005 www.sdao.com - All Rights Reserved.");sQ1[22]=new Array("http://www.sdao.com/grouppurchasing.htm","SDAO Group Purchasing Program","","Home Programs Training Register Member Login Contact Us   Classifieds Resources FAQs About Us  Group Purchasing Program SDAO has entered into an agreement with National Purchasing Partners to provide all special districts in Oregon another choice in group purchasing. This program is similar to the State of Oregon Procurement program in that it allows districts to purchase goods and services at greatly reduced prices and complies with the Attorney General’s Model Public Contracting Rules. What is a group purchasing organization? The fundamental purpose of a Group Purchasing Organization (GPO) is to allow its members to join together to leverage group purchasing strength in order to acquire goods and services at lower process. GPO’s are not resellers, rather contract negotiators. GPO members are entitled to purchase through those negotiated contracts at the price and other terms so specified. What is the membership cost? Participation in the SDAO Group Purchasing Program is completely free and voluntary to eligible members. Contact: 1-800-752-5446 and request a Service Representative  customerservice@mynpp.com  http://www.mynpp.com Home | About Us | Site Map | FAQs | Contact Us © 2005 www.sdao.com - All Rights Reserved.");sQ1[23]=new Array("http://www.sdao.com/news.htm","SDAO News","","Home Programs Training Register Member Login Contact Us   Classifieds Resources FAQs About Us  maybe put excerpts from the most recent newsletter here... Criminal History Background Checks and Drug Testing Special Districts Association of Oregon (SDAO) and BIO-MED Testing Services have developed two customized programs for SDAO members to assist them in developing and in maintaining an employment screenings through criminal history background checks. Drug and Alcohol Testing Whether your district has conducted drug and alcohol testing for years or is just now thinking of starting a program, BIO-MED's staff can assist you in policy development, labor negotiations, education, and district specific procedures for drug and alcohol testing. Testing facilities are located throughout Oregon making it easy to send your employees and volunteers for drug and/or alcohol testing. This program is for both non-DOT staff (not required to carry a commercial drivers license) and for DOT staff (required to carry a commercial drivers license). The SDAO member fees for the program are: Setup fee paid by SDAO: $50 Non-DOT testing fee: $35 - $42 DOT compliance testing fees are based upon the number of positions your district has. SDAO will pay for the first five tests that your district conducts in the calendar year. BIO-MED will bill SDAO for these five tests and then bill your district for any additional tests conducted each year. more...  Home | About Us | Site Map | FAQs | Contact Us © 2005 www.sdao.com - All Rights Reserved.");sQ1[24]=new Array("http://www.sdao.com/programoverview.htm","SDAO Program Overview","","Home Programs Training Register Member Login Contact Us   Classifieds Resources FAQs About Us  Financial Services SDAO financing programs enable members to finance projects at flexible terms and competitive market rates. Districts can acquire equipment, improve real property, purchase real property or finance short-term cash flow deficits. more . . . Training & Education SDAO provides training and development programs to meet the continuing education needs of its members. Education programs are offered in response to member input as well as external developments and influences. more . . . Awards Program SDAO recognizes innovative programs, outstanding safety, public information, public involvement in a district decision-making process, and outstanding project/achievement each year through its Outstanding Achievement Award. Outstanding managers, employees and volunteers are also recognized annually at the annual conference. more . . . Legislative Services SDAO provides legislative representation and advocacy services on behalf of its members on issues that come before the Oregon Legislature and various state administrative agencies. more . . . Technical Assistance SDAO provides its members with a broad range of support services in the areas of research and technical assistance. Staff will do the research required to respond to a member inquiry and will, if appropriate, attempt to resolve the issue. more . . . Employee Benefits SDAO's Employee Benefits program provides benefits for more than 200 districts, with over 2,500 employees. Coverages include several medical plans, dental plans, vision plans and disability plans. more . . . Risk Management SDAO, through the Special Districts Insurance Trust (SDIS), offers members the most comprehensive and affordable workers compensation and property/casualty coverage available to Oregon special districts. more . . . Publications SDAO provides members with bi-monthly newsletter, online communications and a reference materials where members can download sample polices, manuals and other reference material. more . . .  Home | About Us | Site Map | FAQs | Contact Us © 2005 www.sdao.com - All Rights Reserved.");sQ1[25]=new Array("http://www.sdao.com/publications.htm","SDAO Publications","","Home Programs Training Register Member Login Contact Us   Classifieds Resources FAQs About Us  Newsletter Members to download newsletters, manuals and other reference materials for free Special Districts News and Risk Management Review Newsletter One of the association's most widely recognized publications is the Special Districts News & Risk Management Review newsletter. Published bimonthly, the newsletter contains information about association activities, current events, and new programs and services. The newsletter also covers SDIS Trust news and related issues, including loss control, risk management, insurance coverages, liability issues, workers' compensation, elected officials' exposures, employee benefit insurance, and ancillary coverages. Member contributions are welcome and encouraged. Manuals and Videos SDAO Management & Policy Resource Guide (CD Rom) The Special Districts Management and Policy Resource Guide, 2003 Edition (Microsoft Word and Adobe Acrobat formats) is intended to assist district board members and managers with the operation of the district they serve. This resource guide can be used as a daily reference tool and an excellent orientation guide for new board members and employees. Members to download the Management & Policy Resource Guide Member – $15 Non-member – $25 SDAO 2003 Management & Policy Resource Guide (Printed Version) Member – $50 Non-member - $75 SDAO Boardmanship Training (Video) Andy Jordan, Speaker This is a videotaped version of the popular boardmanship training seminar that attorney Andy Jordan has conducted many times for SDAO. Some of the topics addressed are district powers, ethics and conflicts of interest, and board member responsibilities. Along with the tape you will receive a helpful booklet for reference with future questions. Member - $80 Non-member – Not available SDAO Membership Directory The SDAO Membership Directory is available to SDAO special district and subscriber members in limited quantities. The directory includes the address and phone number of each district member along with a contact person and the current board members when available. Members to download the free SDAO Membership Directory Non-member – Not available Elected Official Guide This reference guide will benefit newly elected officials as well as individuals considering running for a board position. Members to download the SDAO Elected Official Guide Annual Report Members to download the 2005-2006 SDAO Annual Report Reference Library SDAO Members have access to a large online library of reference materials, manuals and links to important websites. The library is searchable by topic or keyword.  Home | About Us | Site Map | FAQs | Contact Us © 2005 www.sdao.com - All Rights Reserved.");sQ1[26]=new Array("http://www.sdao.com/risk_school.htm","SDAO Risk Management","School Districts Risk Management Program","Home Programs Training Register Member Login Contact Us   Classifieds Resources FAQs About Us   Members to Access Online Coverage and Claims Information SDAO, through the Special Districts Insurance Services (SDIS) Trust, offers members the most comprehensive and affordable coverage available to Oregon special districts, school districts, and community colleges. In 1985, SDAO members created their own insurance pool to escape the volatilities of the insurance industry. Pooled coverage is available for liability, workers' compensation, automobile, and property exposures. Premium dollars are invested to stabilize rates, build for the future, and provide crucial member services. All services, including claims handling, are provided in Oregon to ensure fast and responsive service. After nearly 20 years of success, SDAO's membership includes over 800 special districts and 95 school districts, community colleges, and education service districts. Conservative investment policies have added to making SDAO one of the most financially sound and stable member-owned government entity insurance pools in the country. Risk Management Services & Discounts Free Pre-loss Legal Consulting Safety, Management, and Board Member Training Model Policies and Procedures Manual On-site Safety Consulting and OR-OSHA Prevention Inspections Contact: Frank Stratton, Underwriting Manager Sandy Kosharek, Underwriting Technician 503-371-8667 Salem 1-800-285-5461 Toll Free Fax: 503-371-4781 General Liability Coverage Highlights Employment Practices Liability Employee Benefits Administration Public Officials Errors and Omissions Advertising and Personal Injury Fire Legal Liability Corporal Punishment Liquor and Fundraising Liability Garage Liability Sexual Molestation Negligent Training and Supervision Fundraising Liability Sexual Harassment, Civil Rights, and ADA Special Events Volunteers and Work Study Students Good Samaritan Liability Parent Teacher Organizations and Booster Clubs as Additional Insureds Insured Contracts Professional Liability for School Nurses Medical Expense for Guests - $5,000 Sublimit Terrorism - $500,000 Sublimit Pesticide/Herbicide Pollution - $50,000 Sublimit Other Pollution - $100,000 Sublimit Automatic Extension of Coverage Injunction Relief Defense - $25,000 BOLI Defense - $50,000 GSPC Ethics Violation Defense - $2,500 Per Board Member/$5,000 Per Entity OSHA Defense - $5,000 IDEA Hearings Defense - $25,000 Fair Dismissal Hearings Defense - $50,000 Automobile Liability Non-owned Vehicle Liability Replacement Cost of School Buses - 10 Years or Newer Replacement Cost for Other Vehicles - 6 Years or Newer Volunteer/Employee Deductible Reimbursement Commandeered Vehicles Mutual Aid Expense Reimbursement Limited Pollution Liability Multi-Crime Coverage Public Employee Dishonesty Coverage/Depositor's Forgery Coverage - Limits: $5,000 - $500,000 $25,000 Limit Available for Destruction, Theft, or Disappearance of Money and Securities Non-compensated Directors and Officer Coverage Treasurer or Tax Collector Coverage Boiler & Machinery Limits up to $25,000,000 for Property Damage Extra Expense - Included Business Interruption - Included Utility Interruption - $100,000 Sublimits Apply for Certain Causes of Loss Property Coverage Property coverage is a comprehensive coverage form with the following features: Mobile Equipment Included Business Income Extra Expense - $5,000,000 Ordinance or Law - $5,000,000 Course of Construction/Newly Acquired Properties - $5,000,000 Mold as a Result of a Covered Cause of Loss - $1,000,000 Miscellaneous Unnamed Locations - $1,000,000 Transit - $500,000 Accounts Receivable - $500,000 Valuable Papers - $500,000 Property of Students/Employees - $250,000 Leasehold Interest - $100,000 Replacement Cost Valuation Rental Abatement - $100,000 Consequential Loss - $100,000 Sewer/Drain Backup - $50,000 Computer Virus - $10,000 Fine Arts - $10,000 Workers' Compensation Coverage The members of SDAO created their own workers' compensation program in 1988 when many smaller local governments could not obtain workers' compensation coverage from any other source. It has grown from a handful of organizations at inception to over 500 participating Oregon local governments. Participants in the program receive the most affordable coverage available and have access to dedicated loss control services. Our loss control representatives know and understand the unique requirements of safely running a public entity. Coverage has been designed to meet the unique needs of Oregon local governments. Members that participate in both the Property/Casualty and Workers' Compensation programs get the added benefit of a claims department that works on coordinated claims management. Coverage Highlights Statutory State of Oregon Workers' Compensation Coverage $3 Million Employer's Liability Available District Employees Covered Coverage for Board Members (Optional) Coverage for Volunteers (Optional) Retrospected Rated Plans Available UDL&H and Federal Acts Coverage Early Return-to-Work Program Assistance $500 Medical Reimbursement Deductible (Optional) Preferred Worker Assistance Employer-at-Injury Payroll Refund Assistance Custom Loss Reports Claims Management Risk Management Services Loss Control Consultation Safety Training Seminars Job Site Modification Early Return-to-Work Program Home | About Us | Site Map | FAQs | Contact Us © 2005 www.sdao.com - All Rights Reserved.");sQ1[27]=new Array("http://www.sdao.com/risk_sdao.htm","SDAO Risk Management","Special Districts Risk Management Program","Home Programs Training Register Member Login Contact Us   Classifieds Resources FAQs About Us   Members to Access Online Coverage and Claims Information SDAO, through the Special Districts Insurance Services (SDIS) Trust, offers members the most comprehensive and affordable coverage available to Oregon special districts. In 1985, SDAO members created their own insurance pool to escape the volatilities of the insurance industry. Pooled coverage is available for liability, workers' compensation, automobile, and property exposures. Premium dollars are invested to stabilize rates, build for the future, and provide crucial member services. All services, including claims handling, are provided in Oregon to ensure fast and responsive service. SDAO's general liability coverage is designed to comply with Oregon's Tort Claims Act. There are hundreds of issues that come up every day in the public sector that are potential torts not covered by traditional insurance companies. The Property Insurance program provides broad coverage for replacement cost of all real and personal property. A master property policy covers all districts that qualify and purchase coverage. Full policy limits are available for earthquake and flood coverage. Boiler & machinery and crime coverage is provided through group purchase programs. Risk Management Services & Discounts Free Pre-loss Legal Consulting Safety, Management, and Board Member Training Model Policies and Procedures Manual On-site Safety Consulting and OR-OSHA Prevention Inspections Best Practices Credit Multi-line Discount for Districts with General Liability Property, and Workers' Compensation Coverage To participate in the SDIS insurance programs, a district must be a member in good standing of SDAO. Contact: Frank Stratton, Underwriting Manager Sandy Kosharek, Underwriting Technician 503-371-8667 Salem 1-800-285-5461 Toll Free Fax: 503-371-4781 General Liability Coverage Highlights Employment Practices Liability Employee Benefits Administration Public Officials Errors and Omissions Advertising and Personal Injury Fire Legal Liability Fireworks Liability Liquor and Fundraising Liability Garage Liability Owned and Commandeered Water Craft Negligent Training and Supervision Professional Liability (Except Hospitals) Sexual Harassment, Civil Rights, and ADA Special Events Volunteers as Additional Insureds Good Samaritan Liability Coverage Automatic Extension of Coverage Injunction Relief Defense - $5,000 Per Occurrence BOLI Defense - $50,000 Per Occurrence GSPC Ethics Violation Defense - $2,500 annual coverage per board member/$5,000 annual coverage for the district OSHA Defense - $5,000 Per Occurrence Pollution Liability Hostile Fire Operations/Fire/Hazmat/Rescue Training On/Off Premises Potable Water Treatment and Distribution Sewage from Sewer Line or System Pesticide/Herbicide - $50,000 Sublimit Other Pollution - $100,000 Sublimit Automobile Liability Non-owned Vehicle Liability Replacement Cost of Emergency Service Vehicles - 15 Years or Newer Replacement Cost for Other Vehicles - 6 Years or Newer Volunteer/Employee Deductible Reimbursement Commandeered Vehicles Mutual Aid Expense Reimbursement Limited Pollution Liability Multi-Crime Coverage Public Employee Dishonesty Coverage/Depositor's Forgery Coverage: Limits: -- $5,000 - $500,000 $25,000 Limit Available for Destruction, Theft, or Disappearance of Money and Securities Non-compensated Directors and Officer Coverage Treasurer or Tax Collector Coverage Boiler & Machinery Limits up to $10,000,000 for Property Damage Extra Expense - $100,000 Consequential Damage - $100,000 Utility Interruption Sublimits Apply for Certain Causes of Loss Property Coverage Property coverage is a comprehensive coverage form with the following features: Replacement Cost Valuation No Co-insurance Penalties Mobile Equipment Included Non-owned/Commandeered Property Included Optional Earthquake and Flood Coverage (Except Flood Zones A & V) Limited coverage is available for the following at no extra charge: Loss of Income Extra Expense Rental Income Newly Acquired Property Contractor's Equipment Accounts Receivable Valuable Papers and Records Personal Effects of Insureds Fine Arts Electronic Data Processing Mobile Equipment Non-owned/Commandeered Property Available Property Coverage Dams, Canals, or Other Water/Wastewater Conveyance Piers, Docks, or Wharves Submersible Pulps and Wells Backup of Sewers and Drains Freezing of Mobile Equipment Workers' Compensation Coverage The members of SDAO created their own workers' compensation program in 1988 when many smaller local governments could not obtain workers' compensation coverage from any other source. It has grown from a handful of organizations at inception to over 500 participating Oregon local governments. Participants in the program receive the most affordable coverage available and have access to dedicated loss control services. Our loss control representatives know and understand the unique requirements of safely running a public entity. Coverage has been designed to meet the unique needs of Oregon local governments. Members that participate in both the Property/Casualty and Workers' Compensation programs get the added benefit of a claims department that works on coordinated claims management. Coverage Highlights Statutory State of Oregon Workers' Compensation Coverage $3 Million Employer's Liability Available District Employees Covered Coverage for Board Members (Optional) Coverage for Volunteers (Optional) Retrospected Rated Plans Available UDL&H and Federal Acts Coverage Early Return-to-Work Program Assistance $500 Medical Reimbursement Deductible (Optional) Preferred Worker Assistance Employer-at-Injury Payroll Refund Assistance Custom Loss Reports Claims Management Risk Management Services Loss Control Consultation Safety Training Seminars Job Site Modification Early Return-to-Work Program  Home | About Us | Site Map | FAQs | Contact Us © 2005 www.sdao.com - All Rights Reserved.");sQ1[28]=new Array("http://www.sdao.com/technicalassist.htm","SDAO Technical Assistance","","Home Programs Training Register Member Login Contact Us   Classifieds Resources FAQs About Us  Research and Technical Assistance Members  to Access Online Library and Manuals SDAO provides its members with a broad range of support services in the areas of research and technical assistance. Staff will do the research required to respond to a member inquiry, and will, if appropriate, attempt to resolve the issue. Information developed in this process is retained and used for future reference. Reference Material SDAO develops handbooks and sample/model materials to provide members with in-depth information on specific topics. Examples of these reference materials are the Special Districts Management & Policy Resource Guide, Legislative Summary (published after each legislative session), and Model Drug and Alcohol/Drug-Free Workplace Policy. Reference Library SDAO has developed, and continues to expand, a library of reference materials that staff can use to respond to member inquiries. These materials also are available for members to check out. Members are encouraged to call with questions on any subject. Technical Assistance with State Agencies Periodically, members need help in their efforts to interact with state agencies. In this situation, SDAO will gather information on the member's behalf, identify the appropriate contact agency or staff person, and assist with the communication process. Also, to assist the state and other interested agencies and parties in contacting special districts within Oregon, SDAO maintains and distributes a directory of member special districts and their local contact persons. Contact: SDAO 503-371-8667 [Salem] 1-800-285-5461 [statewide] - sdao@sdao.com  Home | About Us | Site Map | FAQs | Contact Us © 2005 www.sdao.com - All Rights Reserved.");sQ1[29]=new Array("http://www.sdao.com/ref/education/measuringprojectperf2006.pdf","Measuring Project Perf 2006.pmd","","Measuring Project Performance and Earned Value Management 15 Professional Development Hours (1.5 CEU) PRSRT STD US POSTAGE PA I D SALEM, OR Permit No. 50 Oregon Local Leadership Institute Measuring Project Performance and Earned Value Management Presents Successful project managers control projects by carefully monitoring, measuring, and managing performance. One very effective technique that is used by these managers is the Earned Value management method. This class provides the practical basis for effective use of the earned value method for controlling schedule and cost. This course goes beyond controlling performance in the fundamental areas of budget and schedule. It also addresses the monitoring, measurement and management of the project's scope, quality, owner satisfaction, and the interdependent team relationships that make projects successful. Effective management of these important elements is what distinguishes the exceptional manager from the average. The Earned Value technique is taught in this class as a way to more accurately measure and manage project performance to enhance control. It allows simultaneous measurement of budget and schedule conformance, and captures their interrelationship better than any other method. Its power lies in measuring work efficiency, forecasting the resulting costat-completion while there is still time to recover, and pin-pointing the source of project problems. Measuring Project Performance and Earned Value Management March 6 & 7, 2006 West Linn Library 1595 Burns Street League of Oregon Cities P. O. Box 928 Salem, OR 97308 Cosponsored by: League of Oregon Cities Association of Oregon Counties Oregon Department of Transportation Course Topics: Comparing costs and budgets Using the planned cost over time and the cost per unit time Determining cost and schedule efficiency Forecasting the cost at completion based on data streams Managing large and small projects using Earned Value methods Managing project risks Controlling quality of the product and service Determining owner satisfaction Evaluating project partnerships Participants learn how and when to apply each performance management method to small and large projects, in both the public and private sectors. This course extends the knowledge from the Managing Scope, Schedule and Budget workshop. Consequently, participants are strongly encouraged to obtain that needed background. Measuring Project Performance and Earned Value Management Date & Location: March 6 & 7, 2006 West Linn Library 1595 Burns Street Time: 8:30 a.m. - 5:00 p.m. (lunch provided) Cost: $300 Note: If possible participants should bring laptop computers with a diskette or CD drive with MS Excel software loaded. The Instructor H. Wynnlee Crisp is a senior project manager with three decades of experience in managing, planning and development of capital projects around the world for public agencies and private industry. He brings this practical knowledge to the project management courses that he develops and teaches. Mr. Crisp taught Managing Project Delivery and teaches Managing Scope, Schedule and Budget; Project Leadership; Managing Consultants; and Measuring Project Performance for the University of Washington and others. He is also the principal leader of the workshop on Implementing Systematic Project Delivery. He was a peer reviewer of the Project Management Institute's Practice Standard for Earned Value. A few of the past participants in his courses include Washington, Oregon and Idaho Departments of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, League of Oregon Cities, Seattle International Airport, Sound Transit, city and county Public Works, Seattle Metro Transit, Portland Water and Environmental Bureaus, manufacturing firms, and A/E consulting firms. * This workshop provided through a partnership between LOC, AOC and ODOT. To Register: To register online, link to LOC's web site at www.orcities.org and select the training tab. Select the LOC - O.L.L.I. (Oregon Local Leadership Institute) link and proceed by selecting the workshops you wish to attend. If you have trouble registering, e-mail your registration information to Kim Shook at: kshook@orcities.org or contact LOC at (503) 588-6550. Who Should Attend? Monitoring, measurement and management of project performance are skills that are needed by program managers, project managers, task leaders, division/department heads, discipline leaders, and project administrators. Participants usually come from the fields of engineering, architecture, landscape architecture, planning, and the sciences. Cancellation Policy: Cancellations must be received at least 5 business days prior to the workshop to receive a refund or to cancel billing. (503) 588-6550 LOC accepts Visa and Mastercard.");sQ1[30]=new Array("http://www.sdao.com/ref/education/projectriskmanagement2006.pdf","Project Risk Management 2006.pmd","","PRSRT STD US POSTAGE PAID SALEM, OR Permit No. 50 Project Risk Management 14 Professional Development Hours (1.4 CEU) The daily newspaper has become a chronicle of project delays, budget overruns, cutbacks in scope or scale, and corresponding criticism leveled by elected officials and taxpayers. Many of these projects faced significant schedule, budget, technical, and sociopolitical risks from the outset. But inadequate attention was given to the sources, nature, probability and severity of these risks; how to avoid or manage them; and how to manage expectations of officials and the public. This course provides the tools and techniques needed to analyze and manage project risks in large and small projects in the public sector, and to communicate variability to decision-makers and stakeholders. This process can help any project team identify, analyze, plan for, manage, and mitigate project risks. The process is described in terms that make it easy to understand how it can be scaled to fit projects ranging from the usual to highly complex. A second focus is a process for identifying beneficial conditions, or opportunities, that can save money, shorten timelines, or improve project performance, and how to take advantage of them. In addition to learning qualitative risk analysis procedures, participants are introduced to quantitative risk analysis, including the Monte Carlo technique and probabilistic risk assessment. These can help determine the likelihood of finishing within budget and schedule, the amount of time and budget contingency that would be appropriate, and the identity of the main risks to time and cost objectives. The two-day course uses short lecture, demonstration, selected readings, and practical exercises based on project examples. P Oregon Local Leadership Institute Presents roject Risk Management Project Risk Management March 9 & 10, 2006 Local Government Center 1201 Court St., Room 113 Salem, OR 97301 League of Oregon Cities P. O. Box 928 Salem, OR 97308 Cosponsored by: Who Should Attend? The course will benefit professionals who manage, supervise, plan, design, and/or implement public capital projects where quality expectations, schedule, and/or budget are critical to achieve, but are at risk. Division and section heads, team leaders, project leaders/managers, project task leaders, system engineers, and technical personnel will benefit from acquiring these highly effective skills. League of Oregon Cities Association of Oregon Counties Oregon Department of Transportation C ourse Topics: Why risk and opportunity management are important to project success The Instructor(s) The inherent risks imposed by project triple constraints Project Risk Management Date & Location: March 9 & 10, 2006 Local Government Center 1201 Court St., Room 113 Salem, OR 97301 H. Wynnlee Crisp is a senior project manager with three decades of experience in managing, planning and developing capital projects around the world for public agencies and private industry. He brings this practical knowledge to the project management courses that he develops and teaches. Mr. Crisp taught Managing Project Delivery and teaches Managing Scope, Schedule and Budget; Project Leadership; Managing Consultants; and Measuring Project Performance for the University of Washington and others. He is also the principal leader of the workshop on Implementing Systematic Project Delivery. He has assisted public and private organizations develop standardized processes for risk management and project delivery. A few of the past participants in his courses include Washington, Oregon and Idaho Departments of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, League of Oregon Cities, Seattle International Airport, Sound Transit, city and county Public Works, Seattle Metro Transit, Portland Water and Environmental Bureaus, manufacturing firms, and A/E consulting firms. The inherent risks in a public process Risk management by project stage and why a project's risk profile changes over its duration How to prepare a risk and opportunity management plan scaled to fit the project Collecting usable schedule, budget, and sociopolitical risk data Identifying risks and opportunities using the Risk Breakdown Structure Time: 8:30 a.m. - 5:00 p.m. (lunch provided) Understanding probability of risks and degree of impact on time, cost and scope or quality objectives Monitoring, statusing, and reporting project risks and opportunities Cost: $300 * This workshop provided through a partnership between LOC, AOC and ODOT. Techniques for managing expectations in highly variable projects among officials and citizens Need for a robust schedule and budget in risk analysis Quantitative analysis of cost and schedule risk Integrated schedule and cost risk analysis Keys to successful implementation of risk management A follow-up course is offered on an "as requested" basis. It addresses conducting quantitative risk analysis of budgets and schedules, advanced techniques, and use of Crystal Ball and Risk+ software. It includes the principles of project scheduling and budgeting that make them robust enough to undergo Monte Carlo simulation. Participants get extensive practice with the software packages and learn their main power, from simple distributions and simulations to more advanced approaches to probabilistic branching, conditional branching and correlation. To Register: To register online, link to LOC's web site at www.orcities.org and select the training tab. Select the LOC - O.L.L.I. (Oregon Local Leadership Institute) link and proceed by selecting the workshops you wish to attend. If you have trouble registering, e-mail your registration information to Kim Shook at: kshook@orcities.org or contact LOC at (503) 588-6550. David T. Hulett, Ph.D., consults and conducts training in project risk management and scheduling. Dr. Hulett directed the international committee of experts organized by the Project Management Institute (PMI) Risk Management SIG to revise the Risk Management chapter of the Project Management Body of Knowledge® Guide for the 2000 and Third editions. His clients have included public and private organizations in transportation, construction, petroleum, pharmaceuticals, scientific R&D, and aerospace and defense. He has consulted for several government agencies including Caltrans, DOE, DOD, and the GAO, and held strategic planning positions at TOSCO oil and TRW. He was an Instructor in the Economics Department at Harvard University and has taught Risk Analysis and Management through American Graduate University of Covina, CA, and University of California, Irvine (Extension). Cancellation Policy: Cancellations must be received at least 5 business days prior to the workshop to receive a refund or to cancel billing. (503) 588-6550 LOC accepts Visa and Mastercard.");sQ1[31]=new Array("http://www.sdao.com/ref/Pub/nwls.pdf","NWLS Brochure 2006 2.indd","","Northwest Leadership Seminar 2006 Successful leadership S T A RT S NOW! Featuring: Jack Canfield Eric Chester The Success Principles Generation Why Dr. Kevin Gilmartin Gordon Graham Reducing Organizational Resistance ­ The Leader's Role Recent Developments in Organizational Risk Management - Strategies and Tactics for Success Dr. Dale Henry Do You Sizzle or Fizzle? A Recipe for Leadership - Country Style March 1-3, 2006 Portland, Oregon Red Lion on the River Jantzen Beach Northwest Leadership Seminar 2006 WEDNESDAY, MARCH 1, 2006 7:oo AM 8:3o AM Registration Begins Opening Session THE SUCCESS PRINCIPLES Jack Canfield Great levels of performance and achievement are attainable by anyone. Yet, most people have never learned the proven self-empowerment tools and time-tested performance strategies that are the basis for personal and professional success. Whether your organization needs to increase output, expand creativity, enhance problem solving, find more balance or improve customer service, these disciplines will create change in the lives of participants and day-to-day operations of your organization. Jack's Ten-Step Action Plan shows exactly how to plan for and create greater achievement, learn how to: · Take responsibility for you life · Decide what you want and be willing to pay the price · Invest every day in developing your knowledge base and core skills · Manage time the way successful entrepreneurs do · Say no to the good, so you can yes to the great · Change outcomes by reacting differently to any event Noon 1:30 PM Lunch (Provided with your registration) Seminar Reconvenes REDUCING ORGANIZATIONAL RESISTANCE ­ THE LEADER'S ROLE Kevin M. Gilmartin, PH.D. This presentation deals with the changes that impact an employee over the course of a professional career that potentially changes the way employees view their agency, community and society in general. Dr. Gilmartin will address how these dynamics can potentially change idealistic and committed individuals into cynical angry people who have significant resentment toward their communities and their own professional agencies by exploring: · · · The "Red Flags" that develop in an employee's world-view that can lead to the rationalization of acts that previously would have been unacceptable to the employee and lead to a "Continuum of Compromise". The strategies for maintaining organizations that possess a focused, ethical, and committed workforce The strategies to assist individual employees from falling into situations that can potentially destroy both personal and professional lives. 5:30 PM A "Networking Event" and vendor displays, with hors d'oeuvres, follows the Wednesday afternoon session to provide an opportunity for participants to interact informally. About the Northwest Leadership Seminar... Our Mission "To provide a variety of dynamic, educational experiences and valuable, practical skills for leaders of today and tomorrow" A Seminar Dedicated to Leaders in the Northwest The Northwest Leadership Seminar has been serving Northwest leaders since 1970. The Seminar has gained recognition throughout the United States and Canada for leadership and management training. March 1, 2, and 3, 2006 THURSDAY - MARCH 2, 2006 8:3o AM Opening Session The Aliens Have Landed ­ Meet Generation Why Eric Chester Ready or not, here comes Generation Why; 68 million Americans born between 1980 and 1994. With over 40 million 16-24 year olds currently employed, the future clearly belongs to those companies and organizations that understand and can connect with Generation Why. They do not see things like you do, and they cannot be recruited, trained, managed, and motivated using the same strategies and methods. This exciting and revealing presentation will give you an in-depth look at Generation Why and help you understand what they value and how they approach the workplace. You'll then learn specific strategies for working with Generation Why, giving you a decided advantage over your competitors. Noon 1:30 PM Lunch (Provided with your registration) Seminar Reconvenes YOUR LEADERSHIP ROLE IN ORGANIZATIONAL RISK MANAGEMENT Gordon Graham In past Northwest Leadership Seminars, Gordon has introduced us to his "Five Pillars of Success". These pillars are People, Policy, Training, Supervision and Discipline. On his last visit to the Seminar, he covered the necessary processes involved in getting and keeping good people. This year, he will cover in depth the processes involved in building a good policy manual so that your good people will have the necessary guidance and direction to encounter their assigned tasks and get them done right. In addition to giving you these processes, he will also identify some of the "missing" policies in many organizations that tend to lead to future problems. The informed attendee will leave this Seminar with a tremendous amount of knowledge regarding real risk management and how this discipline is the key to future success in any organization. You will not be sorry you spent an afternoon with Gordon Graham. FRIDAY, MARCH 3, 2006 Do You Sizzle Or Fizzle? A Recipe For Leadership Country Style Dr. Dale Henry Many believe the road to success belongs to the individual that can make the bottom line boom. This is simply not true. Growing organizations realize that to get to the top floor of success requires you to take the stairs. The future belongs to the listeners, the communicators, and those passionate and dedicated leaders who not only have an enormous amount of energy, but who can energize those around them. Dr. Dale Henry returns to the Northwest Leadership Seminar with a program that is designed to help leaders: · · · · · · Listen - Are you a master communicator? SOFTen your communications with others. Expect the Unexpected - Be alert to unforeseen circumstances. Admire Those Around Them Use the untapped wealth of your most important resource-people. Be Determined - Never give up. Millions have failed because they quit only moments before a major breakthrough. Embrace Change - The only constant in today's society. Learn how to discover and use this valuable tool. Be Resourceful - Look inside at the person you want to be - a Leader. 8:3o AM Opening Session Noon A Wrap-up session concludes the seminar Northwest Leadership Seminar - March 1-3, 2006 Red Lion on the River - Jantzen Beach - Portland, OR Located on the south bank of the scenic Columbia River, the Red Lion on the River is conveniently located just off I-5, only ten minutes from downtown Portland, and 12 minutes from Portland International Airport via complimentary hotel transportation. Vancouver, Washington is just across the Interstate Bridge and shopping is conveniently located nearby. Each guestroom features large work areas, two phones, in-room coffee, voicemail, and 25-inch TVs with in-room movies. Many rooms also have beautiful views. They also offer business services, fitness center, tennis courts, boat dock, outdoor pool and hot tub, plus golf courses, boating, and skiing nearby. For reservations, please call 1-503-283-4466. EDUCATIONAL CREDITS ARE AVAILABLE FOR TRAINING RECEIVED AT THIS SEMINAR: · · Visit the Western Oregon University registration desk on Wednesday morning to discuss credit available, cost and how to sign up for college credit. Sign-up through Oregon Department of Public Safety Standards and Training - and - Washington State Department of Criminal Justice System Commission. Register Online Visit our Web Site at www.nwleadershipseminar.com to register online. Last day for cancellations: February 15, 2006. Substitutions Gladly Accepted PLEASE NOTE: Registration for the Northwest Leadership Seminar is considered a contract for payment. Refunds will not be issued to registrants who do not attend the seminar after registering and who do not cancel prior to the February 15, 2006 deadline! 37th Annual Northwest Leadership Seminar Registration (reproduce for additional registrants) Last Name____________________________________________________First Name__________________________________________ Position ______________________________________________Agency_____________________________________________________ Mailing Address ___________________________________________________________________________________________________ City__________________________________________State/Prov____________________________Zip/PC________________________ Phone (_________)__________________________________Email __________________________________________________________ Make checks payable for $275.00 to: Northwest Leadership Seminar; Billing Authorization #___________________________ Mail registrations to: Don Milligan, Registrar 461 Sacre Lane N. Monmouth OR 97361-1241 or Fax to: (503) 838-5106 Questions: (503) 838-2309 ____________________________________________________________________ Authorized Signature (Required) Credit Card Type - MASTERCARD N u m be r : E xpi ration Date: Name on card:____________________________________________ Or, register online at www.nwleadershipseminar.com VISA");sQ1[32]=new Array("http://www.sdao.com/ref/pub/oawuschedule.pdf","Microsoft Word - January 2006 1.doc","","Oregon Association of Water Utilities 2006 Training Schedule Date February 23 March 6-10, 2006 March 15-16, 2006 March 21 March 21 March 23 April 19 April 19 April 19 May 4-5, 2006 May 11-12 May 23 May 24 May 25 August 21-23 September 13-14 October 5-6 October 11-12 December 12-14 Class Source Water Protection Planning 28th Annual Management & Technical Conference Wastewater Certification Review Proper Management Procedures Setting Water & Wastewater Rates Source Water Protection Planning Proper Management Procedures Setting Water & Wastewater Rates Source Water Protection Planning WT/WD Certification Review WT/WD Certification Review Small Water System O&M part I Small Water System O&M part II Small Water System O&M part III Summer Classic XII Wastewater Treatment/Collections Certification Review Water Treatment/Distribution Certification Review Water Treatment/Distribution Certification Review th 8 Annual End of Year Operator's Conference Scheduled Location Medford Sunriver Salem Independence Independence Woodburn Eagle Point Eagle Point Fairview Medford Salem Salem Salem Salem Seaside TBA Keizer Grants Pass Hood River Credit Hours 7 hours 20 hours (+) 14 hours 4 hours 3 hours 7 hours 4 hours 3 hours 7 hours 14 hours 14 hours 7 hours 7 hours 7 hours 14 hours (+) 14 hours 14 hours 14 hours 20 hours (+) ESAC 1148 TBA 729 939 1137 1148 939 1137 1148 766 766 1129 1130 1131 TBA 729 766 766 TBA Relevancy (W) (w/ww) (ww) (w/ww) (w/ww) (W) (w/ww) (w/ww) (W) (w) (w) (w) (w) (w) (w/ww) (ww) (w) (w) (w/ww) 2006 State Water exam dates: May 18, 2006 October 19, 2006 2006 State Wastewater exam dates: March 31, 2006 (statewide) April 6, 2006 (Pendleton) September 28, 2005 (statewide) Application deadline: April 1, 2006 September 1, 2006 February 1, 2006 February 1, 2006 August 1, 2006 Dates, classes and locations may be subject to change as needed. OAWU strives to ensure CEU awarding, however we are unable to guarantee acceptance for class CEU's for certifications by regulatory agencies. 1/17/2006");sQ1[33]=new Array("http://www.sdao.com/legislative.htm","SDAO Legislative Services","SDAO Legislative Services","Home Programs Training Register Member Login Contact Us   Classifieds Resources FAQs About Us  Legislative Services SDAO provides legislative representation and advocacy services on behalf of its members on issues that come before the Oregon Legislature and various state administrative agencies. The majority of these services are delivered through contracts with Western Advocates, Inc., SDAO's legislative representative, with supplemental support from SDAO staff. Policy direction and guidance is provided by the SDAO Board of Directors, SDAO Legislative Committee, and the Tri-County Water Districts Association Legislative Committee. Legislative services include: The SDAO Legislative Committee, composed of representatives from the major groups of special districts. This committee works throughout the year educating the Oregon Legislature and various agencies about the needs of local governments and special districts. Periodic interaction with Oregon's congressional delegation, and limited contact with federal agencies. Activity on regional issues including Metropolitan Area Boundary Commission, urban growth boundary issues, regional service delivery, and resource allocation issues that affect a large number of association members. Assistance with the Oregon's Land Conservation and Development Department's Periodic Review process, for member districts throughout Oregon. Actively taking positions on statewide ballot measures and providing educational materials about the impacts of the measures on special districts. Contact: Western Advocates Inc. 12725 SW 66th Ave, Suite 107 Portland, OR. 97223 Phone: 503-924-1181, Fax: 503-597-3668 Toll Free: 800-796-0028 Burton Weast, Legislative Director Contact: Hasina E. Squires, Government Affairs Director P.O. Box 1745 Lake Oswego, OR 97035 Phone: 503-906-7228, Fax: 503-620-9817 hasina@sdao.com Legislative Alerts: Important! New Board Member Election Laws New Reporting Requirements - Part 1 New Reporting Requirements - Part 2 2005 Legislative Executive Summary SDAO Legislative Priorities Miscellaneous Local Measures Local School Measures Local Public Safety Measures Local Infrastructure Measures Breakdown of November 2005 Local Measures Legislative Resources: Oregon State Legislature Committee Agendas Oregon State Legislature Committee Members Today's Joint Legislative Committee Schedule 2005-2006 Interim Contact Information: Oregon State Senate 2005-2006 Interim Contact Information: Oregon House of Representatives Search for a Bill by Number Oregon Governor's Office Search for Oregon Laws and Legislative Measures 2005-2006 Legislative Interim Committee Agendas 2005-2006 Legislative Interim Committee Membership Measure 37 - Supreme Court Opinion Candidates Filing for Office in 2006 - Get Filing Forms Here: Candidates Filing By Declaration - SEL 190 Form Candidates Filing By Petition - SEL 191 Form SEL223 News Clippings 172 Million Hole Puts State Poor at Risk Budget - The Department of Human Services need more money than expected as cases rise and federal funds dwindle What? 142 ballot measures filed? Don't worry yet PERS to bill some for excess payments Analysts: E-board shouldn't fill gap Beaverton senator won't run for re-election Kitts plans challenge to David Wu in Congress Atkinson says he'll run as Republican for Governor Values collide on Oregon farms Oregon teeters between cramped and cozy 10 will ask Oregon: What do you want? Oregon senators reject call for special session Riverkeepers sue over storm-water permits Walker won't run for governor Advocacy group stands down, temporarily Oregon might vote on term limits again Jim Hill will run for Democratic Governor nomination Oregon might vote on term limits again Potter hires lobbyist with Oregon roots Supreme Court says yes to Measure 37 It's settled: Measure 37 lives Court clears way for 37 kinds of damages High court upholds Measure 37 Measure 37 legal interpretations remain unresolved Oregon gets "kicker" shock Surprise surge in economy spells $666 million in tax rebates next year PERS Important Update Regarding 2004 PERS Member Statements In the next two weeks PERS will begin mailing 2004 member statements. The following background may be useful to PERS employers and covered employees. Home | About Us | Site Map | FAQs | Contact Us © 2005 www.sdao.com - All Rights Reserved.");sQ1[34]=new Array("http://www.sdao.com/ref/pub/campaignfinance.htm","Untitled Document","","NEW CAMPAIGN FINANCE REPORTING REQUIREMENTS AFFECT SPECIAL DISTRICT CANDIDATES The following is an outline of the provisions contained in HB 3458 (2005) election law/campaign finance reporting changes enacted during the 2005 legislative session. In addition, two memorandums from the Secretary of State related to the bill's provisions are attached: Secretary of State Memo - Candidate Filing Secretary of State Memo - PAC Filing All existing candidates (unless they spend and receive less than $300 and serve as their own treasuer) and political action committees must fill out an SEL 223 by January 1, 2006. The SEL 223 requires disclosure of the following information: name of candidate/political action committee, banking institution, account number, name of account, names of account holder, and names of persons with signature authority. Campaign Finance Reform The 2005 Oregon State Legislature enacted the sweeping campaign finance reforms. The reforms passed include: increasing the fine for converting campaign funds for personal use, establishing a web-based reporting system for campaign contributions and expenditures, and prohibiting candidates from paying themselves for services provided to their own campaigns. HB 3458 contains the majority of reforms however, the bill has three effective dates that will stagger the implementation and enforcement of several portions of the bill’s provisions. What follows is a complete listing of reforms enacted during the 2005 legislative session: Effective: August 29, 2005 Increases penalty for prohibited personal use of campaign funds from $250 to $1,000 plus the amount converted to personal use for each violation. Violation penalties must be paid from personal funds and not from contributions received by candidate or candidate’s principal campaign committee. Prohibits candidate or candidate;s principal campaign committee from making payments to candidate for professional services performed by candidate. Adds the term “controlled committee” and defines it as a political action committee that for purposes of contributions and expenditures, is controlled directly or indirectly or acts jointly with a candidate or controlled committee. Specifies that a candidate controls a political committee if: the candidate, candidate’s agent, member of the candidate’s immediate family or other committee in the candidate’s control has a significant influence on the political committee’s actions or decisions; or if both the political committee and the candidate’s campaign committee have designated the candidate or a member of the candidate’s immediate family as a treasurer or director. Political action committee statements of organization will be required to indicate whether the committee is a “controlled committee” or not. Expands definition of “occupation” to include not only nature of individual’s principal business but employer’s name and address (city and state). Requires contributions received by candidates or political action committee treasurers to be deposited into campaign accounts no later than seven calendar days after receipt date. Requires campaign account statements produced by banking institutions to be retained for at least two years after the date the statement is issued. Requires that loans by or to a candidate or political committee be made by written agreement. A copy of the agreement must be kept until the loan is repaid. Requires statement of organization forms to include name of financial institution in which the account is established, name and number of the account, name of account holder, and names of all persons with signature authority on the account. *Note: statements of organization are not required for candidates who spend or receive less than $300 in a calendar year. Increases the threshold required to file an independent expenditure from $50 to $100. Effective: January 1, 2006 Requires all state and local political action committees (excluding candidates who neither raise nor spend more than $300 per election) to establish an exclusive campaign bank account that may only contain contributions received by the political committee. Requires state and local candidates who have previously filed statements of organization to file an amended statement of organization that includes the name of financial institution in which the account is established, name and number of the account, name of account holder, and names of all persons with signature authority on the account. *Note: statements of organization are not required for candidates who spend or receive less than $300 in a calendar year. Increases threshold for which details about contributor must be reported from more than $50 to more than $100. Increases threshold for which details about expenditure must be reported from any sum to more than $100 and requires reporting of business name and location of payees. Adds loan reporting requirements to include name of lender holding loan, terms of loan, and interest rate and repayment schedule. Effective: January 1, 2007 Directs Secretary of State to create web-based electronic filing system for state and local candidates and committees. Filing system must be operative on January 1, 2007. Requires transactions to be filed within seven days during a primary, general or special election cycle and within 30 days in other cases. Seven day reporting requirement applies to contributions and expenditures made and received beginning on the 42nd day before the date of any primary, general or special election and ending on Election Day. *Note: seven day reporting requirement does not apply to candidates who spend less than $2,000 in a calendar year and run in a special district and a school district election. Requires all new candidates and committees to establish dedicated bank accounts (exempts candidates with less than $300 activity per calendar year). *Note: previous requirement was per election; new requirement defines as calendar year. Allows cities and counties to adopt additional provisions regarding contribution and expenditure statements or independent expenditure statements in addition to requirements set by state statute. *Note: additional provisions do not apply to special districts and school districts. Expands Secretary of State’s role of filing officer for campaign finance reports to include local public offices and measures and respective political committees. Requires independent expenditures to be reported to the Secretary of State within seven calendar days. Hasina E. Squires Government Affairs Director Special Districts Association of Oregon P.O. Box 1745 Lake Oswego, OR 97035 503-906-7228 direct 503-620-9817 hasina@sdao.com");sQ1[35]=new Array("http://www.sdao.com/ref/pub/sosmemocandidatefiling.pdf","sosmemocandidatefiling.pdf","","");sQ1[36]=new Array("http://www.sdao.com/ref/pub/sosmemopacfiling.pdf","sosmemopacfiling.pdf","","");sQ1[37]=new Array("http://www.sdao.com/ref/Pub/sdaoexecutivesummary.pdf","Microsoft Word - Final web friendly version.doc","","Special Diistricts stricts pecial Association of Oregon ssociation 2005 Legislative Executive Summary ~ 73rd Legislative Session ~ Prepared for the Special Districts Association of Oregon Distributed by Western Advocates Inc. 12725 SW 66th Avenue, Suite 107 Portland, OR 97223 1-800-796-0028 * Note: Colored text contains live links that may be used to view bill language, websites, etc. Hold the control button (ctrl) on your keyboard and click on the colored text to access links. TABLE OF CONTENTS 2005 Legislative Session in Review.............................................................................................. 3 Dynamics of the 2005 Legislative Session ................................................................................... 4 The SDAO Legislative Process .................................................................................................... 5 SDAO's 2005 Legislative Priorities ............................................................................................. 6 Elections ......................................................................................................................................... 8 Campaign Finance Reform ......................................................................................................... 8 Statewide Ballot Measures........................................................................................................ 10 Miscellaneous ........................................................................................................................... 10 Finance & Taxation .................................................................................................................... 10 Property Taxes .......................................................................................................................... 10 Economic Development ............................................................................................................ 11 System Development Charges................................................................................................... 11 Miscellaneous ........................................................................................................................... 12 General Government .................................................................................................................. 13 Ethics......................................................................................................................................... 13 Public Records .......................................................................................................................... 13 Public Commission on the Oregon Legislature ........................................................................ 14 Labor............................................................................................................................................ 15 PERS ......................................................................................................................................... 15 Collective Bargaining ............................................................................................................... 16 Definition of Independent Contractor....................................................................................... 17 Miscellaneous ........................................................................................................................... 17 Land Use ...................................................................................................................................... 18 Measure 37................................................................................................................................ 18 Annexations............................................................................................................................... 18 Periodic Review ........................................................................................................................ 19 Comprehensive Land Use Review ­ "The Big Look"............................................................... 20 Public Contracting ...................................................................................................................... 20 Prevailing Wage Reforms ......................................................................................................... 21 Determination of Lowest Responsible Bidder........................................................................... 22 ORS 279 Technical Clean Up ................................................................................................... 22 Oregon Public Contracting Code Technical Revision.............................................................. 23 Special Districts Association of Oregon 2005 Legislative Executive Summary Distributed by Western Advocates Inc. Page 1 Public Safety ................................................................................................................................ 23 Fire Fees ................................................................................................................................... 23 Fire Sprinkler Licensure ........................................................................................................... 23 Homeland Security.................................................................................................................... 24 Volunteer and EMT Tax Credits ............................................................................................... 25 Mutual Aid ................................................................................................................................ 25 Defibrillators............................................................................................................................. 26 Public Safety and the Media ..................................................................................................... 26 Miscellaneous ........................................................................................................................... 27 Water............................................................................................................................................ 29 Municipal Water Rights ............................................................................................................ 29 DHS Cross Connection & Backflow Prevention Program ....................................................... 31 Delinquent Water Bills.............................................................................................................. 32 Direct Lab Reporting ................................................................................................................ 32 Fluoridation .............................................................................................................................. 32 Drinking Water Program Fee................................................................................................... 32 Wastewater .................................................................................................................................. 33 DEQ Wastewater Permitting Program..................................................................................... 33 Ban on Mixing Zones ................................................................................................................ 34 Special Districts Association of Oregon 2005 Legislative Executive Summary Distributed by Western Advocates Inc. Page 2 2005 LEGISLATIVE SESSION IN REVIEW With unfulfilled promises for bi-partisan cooperation and restoration of government credibility, the 73rd Legislative Assembly adjourned what many have described as a "lackluster" and unnecessarily lengthy legislative session at 6:20 a.m. on Friday, August 5. After 208 days, the second longest session in Oregon's history came to an end, leaving many to shake their heads in dismay at the legislature's continued inability to address and resolve some of the major issues facing Oregon today. Included among those issues are the creation of a "rainy-day" fund, establishment of a more stable funding source for public education, and clarification on the many questions and complications surrounding the implementation of the 2004 voter approved property rights initiative, Ballot Measure 37. In addition to partisan struggles and the many conflicts resulting from a Republican-led House and a Democratic-led Senate, the legislature faced further complications in May with the disintegration of the Joint Ways & Means Committee. The Joint Ways & Means Committee (equally representative of members from both the House and Senate chambers) has traditionally been the process that has led to bi-partisan agreement on budget issues each legislative session. However, as the House and Senate chambers each began crafting separate budgets, it became apparent that this legislature was on its way toward yet another record breaking session. Also attributable to the partisan split between the Republican House and Democratic Senate was that for the first time in 100 years, the legislature did not refer a single issue to the ballot. In previous sessions, legislative referrals have often been used as a means for political maneuvering when a party was in control of both the House and the Senate Chambers. For instance, from 1993 to 2001 when the Republicans were in control of both chambers but were subject to a gubernatorial veto on any legislation that did not meet the approval of a Democratic Governor, they referred 55 measures to the ballot. In these instances, referrals were used as both a means to pass legislation through a vote of the people while simultaneously using the ballot to gain partisan advantage during elections. With a partisan split, however, between the two chambers, the 2005 Legislature found itself unable to use the referral process for political maneuvering, and the only statewide measures appearing on the 2006 ballot will be those that qualify via initiative petition. Nonetheless, despite its many complications and partisan nature there were some still some notable agreements reached in the course of the 2005 Legislative Session, with 808 bills having passed out of the 3,015 bills that were originally introduced. And while much was left on the table with the final bang of the gavel, the legislature was able to adjourn having followed through on its promise of a "no new taxes" budget. Special Districts Association of Oregon 2005 Legislative Executive Summary Distributed by Western Advocates Inc. Page 3 DYNAMICS OF THE 2005 LEGISLATIVE SESSION LEGISLATIVE STATS: Session Length: Date Convened: Date Adjourned: Bills Introduced: Bills Passed: Bills Vetoed: SENATE: Democrats: 18 208 Calendar Days January 10, 2005 August 5, 2005 3,015 808 8 Republicans: 12 Senate Leadership: House Speaker ­ Representative Karen Minnis (R-Wood Village) House Majority Leader ­ Representative Wayne Scott (R-Canby) House Democratic Leader ­ Representative Jeff Merkley (D-Portland) HOUSE: Democrats: 27 Republicans: 33 House Leadership: President of the Senate ­ Senator Peter Courtney (D-Salem) Senate Majority Leader ­ Senator Kate Brown (D-Portland) Senate Republican Leader ­ Senator Ted Ferrioli (R-John Day) Special Districts Association of Oregon 2005 Legislative Executive Summary Distributed by Western Advocates Inc. Page 4 THE SDAO LEGISLATIVE PROCESS Members of SDAO often ask how we, as an Association, make decisions on legislative issues each session. SDAO's Legislative Program is successful, in large part, due to the countless hours spent by the SDAO Legislative Committee before, during and after each legislative session. Members of the Committee volunteer hundreds of hours to make certain that the best interests of SDAO are protected and even enhanced each legislative session. The SDAO Legislative Committee is also structured to ensure that all types of special districts are represented. For example, the most numerous types of districts hold designated seats on the Committee. This includes fire, water, sanitary, irrigation, ports, and parks and recreation district representation. There are also "at-large" seats that have representatives from all other types of districts. This ensures that no one type of district can dominate the decisions of the Committee and also provides a broad base of knowledge for the Committee. The Committee by-laws provide for a method of voting; but in almost every case the Committee makes decisions by consensus, which ensures broad support for its positions. Decisions made by the Committee are logged into a legislative bill tracking database (available to members upon request) and are included as part of this legislative report (see Appendix A). When you meet a member of the Legislative Committee, please express your appreciation for their continued dedication and many hours of hard work on behalf of special districts. If you are interested in becoming a member of the Committee, please contact the SDAO staff. Every SDAO member is welcome to attend Committee meetings and participate in discussions. SDAO LEGISLATIVE COMMITTEE MEMBERS Fiscal Year 2004-2005 TODD HEIDGERKEN, Chair Tualatin Valley Water District ALEC JENSEN, Committee Member Tualatin Valley Fire & Rescue BILL GANONG, Committee Member Klamath Falls Irrigation District DON MANN, Committee Member Port of Newport MICHAEL KURTZ, Committee Member Suburban East Salem Water District BOB KEEFER, Committee Member Willamalane Park & Recreation District KAY MOXNESS, Committee Member Central Lincoln P.U.D. JIM GOBLE, Committee Member Nehalem Bay Wastewater Agency SALLY JONES, Committee Member Columbia 9-1-1 Communications BRUCE WILLIAMS, Committee Member Oregon Fire District Directors Association DIEDRE CONKLING, Committee Member Lincoln County Library District ANITA WINKLER, Committee Member Oregon Water Resources Congress DAN BRADLEY, Committee Member Oak Lodge Water District Special Districts Association of Oregon 2005 Legislative Executive Summary Distributed by Western Advocates Inc. Page 5 SDAO'S 2005 LEGISLATIVE PRIORITIES SDAO began its preparations for the 73rd Legislative Session early in the summer months of 2004. Following a process of soliciting member suggestions for legislative change, SDAO was able to bring a number of legislative proposals to its Legislative Committee for consideration. The SDAO Legislative Committee reviewed all proposals and developed a list of five priority bills to be lobbied on behalf of the Association for the 2005 Legislative Session. With an aggressive legislative agenda to pursue, SDAO directed the lobby staff of Western Advocates Incorporated to work toward the passage of the following bills: · SB 660, clarifying that when a citizen petition for a special district formation has been found by the county to meet all of the statutory requirements for an application for formation, the county shall approve the petition for submission to the ballot. The bill passed both the house and senate chambers and was signed by the Governor with an effective date of January 1, 2006. SB 837, establishing minimum requirements for self-insured public bodies for tort liability or property damage in order to protect local government's ability to operate insurance pools. The bill passed both chambers and was signed by the Governor with an effective date of January 1, 2006. HB 2599, exempting districts that provide water, sewer and storm drain services from public record requirements that force the release of personally identifiable information regarding customers. The Governor signed HB 2599 on July 27, 2005, making it effective immediately on that date. HB 3265, eliminating the Lane County Boundary Commission in order to respond to the boundary commission's practice of preventing citizen groups in Lane County from pursuing special district formations and mergers. The bill ran into opposition when the City of Eugene and Lane County legislators insisted that the issue should be dealt with locally. Even though the bill did not pass, SDAO successfully raised the profile of the problems with the Lane County Boundary Commission. If those problems are not addressed locally, SDAO has laid the groundwork for returning to the legislature to request elimination of the commission in the future. · · · In addition to the four priority bills described above, Special Districts also played a key role in the passage of: · HB 3038, providing security for existing municipal water rights through validation of existing permits, codification of the requirement that municipalities have a Water Special Districts Association of Oregon 2005 Legislative Executive Summary Distributed by Western Advocates Inc. Page 6 Management and Conservation Plan, limitation of the period for construction on a new water permit, and revision of the process for extension of existing permits that were issued before 1988. The Governor signed the bill to be effective upon its passage on June 29. (A more detailed analysis of this bill can be found in the "Water" section of this report.) Following the drafting and introduction of SDAO's priority legislation, the Legislative Committee continued to work with Western Advocates, Inc., through bi-weekly meetings in order to track the progress of SDAO priority legislation. In addition, the committee provided direction to Western Advocates, Inc., to ensure that the association was able to respond appropriately to any legislation that could potentially impact the association and/or its members. With nearly 1,000 bills tracked during the 2005 Legislative Session, the committee covered a wide range of subjects including: Economic Development, Elections, Finance and Taxation, General Government, Initiative Petitions, Insurance, Labor, Land Use, Parks and Recreation, PERS, Public Contracting, Public Records, Public Safety, Telecommunications, Transportation, Utilities, Water and Wastewater. The following report illustrates the major legislative issues within these subject areas that were tracked on behalf of SDAO in the 2005 Legislative Session. Special Districts Association of Oregon 2005 Legislative Executive Summary Distributed by Western Advocates Inc. Page 7 ELECTIONS CAMPAIGN FINANCE REFORM The 2005 Oregon State Legislature enacted sweeping campaign finance reforms. The reforms passed include increasing the fine for converting campaign funds for personal use, establishing a web-based reporting system for campaign contributions and expenditures, and prohibiting candidates from paying themselves for services provided to their own campaigns. HB 3458 contains the majority of reforms; however, the bill has three effective dates that will stagger the implementation and enforcement of several portions of the bill's provisions. What follows is a complete listing of reforms enacted during the 2005 Legislative Session. Effective: August 29, 2005 · Increases penalty for prohibited personal use of campaign funds from $250 to $1,000 plus the amount converted to personal use for each violation. Violation penalties must be paid from personal funds and not from contributions received by candidate or candidate's principal campaign committee. Prohibits candidate or candidate's principal campaign committee from making payments to candidate for professional services performed by candidate. Adds the term "controlled committee" and defines it as a political action committee that for purposes of contributions and expenditures, is controlled directly or indirectly or acts jointly with a candidate or controlled committee. Specifies that a candidate controls a political committee if: the candidate, candidate's agent, member of the candidate's immediate family or other committee in the candidate's control has a significant influence on the political committee's actions or decisions; or if both the political committee and the candidate's campaign committee have designated the candidate or a member of the candidate's immediate family as a treasurer or director. Political action committee statements of organization will be required to indicate whether the committee is a "controlled committee" or not. Expands definition of "occupation" to include not only nature of individual's principal business but employer's name and address (city and state). Requires contributions received by candidates or political action committee treasurers to be deposited into campaign accounts no later than seven calendar days after receipt date. Requires campaign account statements produced by banking institutions to be retained for at least two years after the date the statement is issued. Special Districts Association of Oregon 2005 Legislative Executive Summary Distributed by Western Advocates Inc. Page 8 · · · · · · · Requires that loans by or to a candidate or political committee be made by written agreement. A copy of the agreement must be kept until the loan is repaid. Requires statement of organization forms to include name of financial institution in which the account is established, name and number of the account, name of account holder, and names of all persons with signature authority on the account. *Note: Statements of organization are not required for candidates who spend or receive less than $300 in a calendar year. Increases the threshold required to file an independent expenditure report from $50 to $100. · Effective: January 1, 2006 · Requires all state and local political action committees (excluding candidates who neither raise nor spend more than $300 per election) to establish an exclusive campaign bank account that may only contain contributions received by the political committee. Requires state and local candidates who have previously filed statements of organization to file an amended statement of organization that includes the name of financial institution in which the account is established, name and number of the account, name of account holder, and names of all persons with signature authority on the account. *Note: Statements of organization are not required for candidates who spend or receive less than $300 in a calendar year. Increases threshold for which details about contributor must be reported from more than $50 to more than $100. Increases threshold for which details about expenditure must be reported from any sum to more than $100 and requires reporting of business name and location of payees. Adds loan reporting requirements to include name of lender holding loan, terms of loan, and interest rate and repayment schedule. · · · · Effective: January 1, 2007 · · Directs Secretary of State to create web-based electronic filing system for state and local candidates and committees. Filing system must be operative on January 1, 2007. Requires transactions to be filed within seven days during a primary, general or special election cycle and within 30 days in other cases. Seven-day reporting requirement applies to contributions and expenditures made and received beginning on the 42nd day before the date of any primary, general or special election and ending on Election Day. *Note: Seven-day reporting requirement does not apply to candidates who spend less than $2,000 in a calendar year and run in a special district or a school district election. Special Districts Association of Oregon 2005 Legislative Executive Summary Distributed by Western Advocates Inc. Page 9 · Requires all new candidates and committees to establish dedicated bank accounts (exempts candidates with less than $300 activity per calendar year). *Note: Previous requirement was per election; new requirement defines as calendar year. Allows cities and counties to adopt additional provisions regarding contribution and expenditure statements or independent expenditure statements in addition to requirements set by state statute. *Note: Additional provisions do not apply to special districts and school districts. Expands Secretary of State's role of filing officer for campaign finance reports to include local public offices and measures and respective political committees. Requires independent expenditures to be reported to the Secretary of State within seven calendar days. · · · STATEWIDE BALLOT MEASURES Local governments succeeded in getting a representative added to the statutorily designated "Price Tag Committee" during the legislative session. Currently, the Secretary of State, Treasurer, Director of the Department of Revenue and Director of the Department of Administrative Services are charged with preparing financial estimates for state measures submitted to a statewide vote. SB 27 (2005) adds a "representative of a city, county or district" to the committee. MISCELLANEOUS Several bills related to various elections issues that districts may want to review are: HB 2774, extending the time for replacement ballots for irrigation district elections; HB 2926, deleting provisions allowing landowners to force a consolidation vote within a soil and water conservation district; HB 2927, allowing soil and water conservation districts to issue general obligation bonds; and SB 692, revising irrigation district election provisions. FINANCE & TAXATION PROPERTY TAXES Districts' ability to maintain existing revenue sources to operate and fund capital costs continues to be a significant part of SDAO's legislative efforts. Once again, SDAO was faced with several pieces of legislation that would result in direct revenue losses of property taxes for special districts (property tax preemptions). Fortunately, the bulk of preemption bills were defeated due to the efforts of SDAO and other local government associations. However, one significant property tax exemption did pass and was signed by the Governor. SB 479 provides a five-year property tax exemption for purchases of new equipment for companies engaged in the process of freezing, canning, dehydrating, concentrating, preserving, processing or repacking Special Districts Association of Oregon 2005 Legislative Executive Summary Distributed by Western Advocates Inc. Page 10 raw or fresh fruit, beef, pork, poultry, vegetables, legumes, seafood, or nuts (excluding seeds and grains). The exemption is applicable beginning July 1, 2006, and sunsets on July 1, 2011. The bill's revenue impact statewide (includes cities, counties, special districts and school districts) is $0.93 million in 05-07 biennium and $1.95 million in 07-09. Several existing exemption programs were reauthorized and expanded during the legislative session. SB 839 allows local governments to provide a ten-year property tax exemption for multifamily rental units located in certain areas until January 2012. SB 847 revives an exemption that expired in 2003 allowing cities to provide a ten-year property tax exemption to single unit, owner occupied housing located in an economically distressed area. HB 2776 allows cities and counties the option of granting a second 15-year special assessment to owners of historic residential property. Finally, under the provisions of HB 2945, $15,000 of assessed value of a disabled veteran's residence will be exempt from taxation (currently $10,460) and $18,000 of assessed value on a residence owned by a veteran with a service disability will be exempt from taxation (currently $13,390). ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT HB 3143 authorizes the Economic and Community Development Department to designate ten new enterprise zones (three to five-year property tax exemptions). Special districts sought language to allow a district to "opt-out" of the new zones (thereby retaining their property taxation authority). Ultimately the legislature rejected SDAO's language and instead chose to require cities and counties to "consult and confer" with special districts prior to applying for a zone designation. Several hearings regarding urban renewal legislation led to the formation of an urban renewal workgroup during the 2005 legislative session. SDAO participated with other stakeholders and ultimately reached consensus on two points: 1) establishment of a formal process for notification and consultation with special districts, and 2) allowing an urban renewal agency to "under levy" (as a means to return tax increment revenue to the tax rolls). A great deal of debate about these agreements led to a number of legislative proposals in the form of House and Senate bills as well as accompanying amendments. SB 412, as passed by the Senate Revenue Committee, would have allowed urban renewal agencies to: "opt-out" special districts when forming an urban renewal agency; under-levy increment value (thereby returning revenue to the tax rolls); hold a public hearing where affected taxing districts can comment on the urban renewal plan; and provide that increasing the duration of an urban renewal plan be considered a "substantial" plan amendment. Unfortunately the bill did not have enough support to pass as it was written and was sent back to committee where the urban renewal workgroup agreement language was inserted into the bill (see agreed upon points above). SB 412 then passed the Senate and never received a hearing in the House. SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT CHARGES There were a number of bills related to SDCs introduced this session. Some were aimed at controlling SDCs and others were designed to grant SDC authority to additional service providers like schools, libraries, law enforcement agencies and fire service districts. None of them passed. One reason that SDCs saw little action this session was that the main advocate of SDC curtailment, the Oregon Building Industry Association, was primarily occupied with other land use issues such Special Districts Association of Oregon 2005 Legislative Executive Summary Distributed by Western Advocates Inc. Page 11 as annexation and Measure 37 reform. Advocates for school SDCs saw some support in the Democratic-led Senate. However, the Senate, knowing that any new SDC would meet with defeat in the Republican House, ultimately did not pass any SDC changes. SDAO was not required to take action on any SDC bills this session because the majority of SDC bills did not even receive a hearing. However, SDAO is prepared to address tough SDC questions, if necessary. Over the 2004 legislative interim and during part of the 2005 legislative session, a subcommittee of the SDAO Legislative Committee met to draft a set of recommendations by which the SDAO Legislative Committee would analyze proposed changes to SDCs. The following principles were adopted by the SDAO Board on April 14, 2005: 1. SDAO opposes any cap on water, sewer, parks, drainage or transportation SDCs. 2. SDAO believes that impact fees should be used rather than SDCs for fire, library, schools, police and other services that are not currently eligible for SDCs. 3. SDAO supports an aggregated cap on the total impact fee assessments for services. 4. SDAO believes that SDCs should be based on the cost of maintaining a current level of service. If a district chooses to increase its level of service and collects SDCs based on that increased level, matching funds necessary to meet the district's portion of the cost of providing increased service must be budgeted and expended within a set time frame. If the district fails to produce and expend matching funds within the time frame, the SDCs should be returned. 5. SDAO supports developing a dispute resolution process that would take place prior to an SDC dispute entering the traditional court process. 6. SDAO supports revisions to the SDC statute to provide clearer definitions and processes for developing park SDC methodology. These principles are likely to be put to the test over the coming interim and during the 2007 legislative session. School SDC advocates have submitted eight possible ballot measures to the Secretary of State's office for possible circulation. The group Stand for Children plans to test the different measures to see which one has the best likelihood of passage in November 2006. If a school SDC or other similar funding mechanism passes in 2006, existing SDCs could be in jeopardy during the 2007 legislative session as homebuilders seek a way to relieve pressure from the cost of the new charge. MISCELLANEOUS Several bills related to various finance and taxation issues that districts may want to review are: HB 2395, allowing local governments to directly invest deferred compensation funds in mutual funds (currently investments must be made through a third party); HB 2199, transferring the vertical housing zone program from the Economic Development Department to the Housing Department; and HB 2234, increasing the number of electronic commerce zones. Unfortunately three significant bills that would have greatly assisted special districts with onerous auditing and publishing requirements did not pass: HB 2911, increasing the current threshold that triggers a municipal audit; HB 2649, allowing municipal budget publishing requirements to be satisfied via internet/web publishing; HB 2199, moving the vertical housing program from the Economic Development Department to the Housing Department (special districts retain their ability Special Districts Association of Oregon 2005 Legislative Executive Summary Distributed by Western Advocates Inc. Page 12 to opt-out of those property tax exempt zones); and HJR 14, increasing the number of elections that would not be subject to "double majority" requirements. GENERAL GOVERNMENT ETHICS Funding for the Government Standards and Practices Commission (GSPC) proved to be the most contentious of ethics discussions during 2005. Identification of a stable, dedicated funding source was at the top of the list for a number of legislators who felt that dependence on the legislature to fund the Commission, when the Commission is charged with investigating ethics complaints against legislators, was itself a conflict of interest. In an attempt to establish a dedicated funding source for the GSPC, legislators first looked to local governments by introducing SB 420. As initially drafted, SB 420 directed the Oregon Government Standards and Practices Commission to charge public bodies a $3.00-$5.00 fee for each public official (including volunteers) serving that public body. After hearing strong concerns from SDAO and other local governments, however, a work group was formed to rewrite the bill. As amended, SB 420 would have required the Oregon Law Commission to complete a comprehensive project on the reform of government ethics and submit a report to the legislature by October 1, 2006. The report would have included recommended legislation; recommendations on the organizational structure and processes for administering and enforcing government ethics laws; recommendations relating to ethical standards for public officials, public employees, and lobbyists; and recommendations on funding. However, time ran out before the legislature could take final action on the bill. Several other bills funding the GSPC were also introduced, including HB 2939, which would have allocated general fund moneys in the amount of $855,027; HB 5033, allocating $763,527; and HB 5169, with $635,862. All three failed, but SB 5622, which provided $635,862 in general fund dollars, was approved. GSPC funding will likely continue to be an issue in coming sessions, although some legislators have suggested waiting until the Oregon Law Commission completes its rewrite of the ethics statutes. Once that task is done, legislators reason, the duties of the GSPC will be clear and appropriate funding may be determined. Both the House and the Senate introduced bills to limit activities under the ethics statutes. HB 3291 would have placed a limitation on gifts to public officials and SB 550 would have placed limits on lobbying activities by legislators. Neither bill passed. PUBLIC RECORDS Under current law, jurisdictions are authorized to establish fees that are reasonably calculated to reimburse those public bodies for making public records available (see ORS 192.501 to 192.505 for Special Districts Association of Oregon 2005 Legislative Executive Summary Distributed by Western Advocates Inc. Page 13 exemptions on certain types of records). Effective January 1, 2006, however, certain limitations will be placed on fees charged by public bodies to provide copies of public records. This change arose mainly in response to the practice by some agencies of using attorneys to assist them in compiling records (e.g., to determine whether a request is for exempted records), then presenting a bill for the cost of such legal services to whomever requested the information. Specifically, a legislator's request for records from the Department of Justice, for which he was billed in excess of $800, led to the introduction of HB 2545, relating to fees for providing copies of public records. As introduced, the bill would have prohibited public bodies from including the cost of legal services in their fees established for providing copies of public records. Following discussions by a number of work groups involving local governments, the Department of Justice, and others, the final version of the bill allows public bodies to establish fees to reimburse for time spent by attorneys to review records, redact material from records or segregate records into exempt and nonexempt records. However, it prohibits public bodies from charging attorney fees that are related to the determination of the application of the provisions of the public record laws. Public bodies must also limit their fees to no more than $25.00 unless they provide the requestor with a written notification of the estimated amount of the fee and the requestor confirms that he/she wants the public body to proceed. Also effective January 1, home addresses, home telephone numbers, and email addresses of public safety officers will be exempt from disclosure if public so requested. HB 2724 provides privacy protection for certified reserve officers, corrections officers, parole and probation officers, police officers and youth correction officers. The bill contains an exception for addresses and telephone numbers contained in county real property or lien records. An attempt to require public bodies to submit records not normally subject to public disclosure laws (including confidential or attorney-client privileged information), to legislators or legislative committees failed to pass. HB 2489, introduced in response to reluctance by SAIF executives to comply with legislators' requests for information during the 2003-04 interim, was strongly opposed by SDAO lobbyists due to its overly broad application that would have required release of such information not only from state agencies, but also all cities, counties, and special districts. Finally, an attempt to exempt audio recordings of 9-1-1 calls from disclosure under public records law failed to pass. The bill, HB 3341, contained an exemption for the disclosure of 9-1-1 audio recordings "if public interest requires disclosure," but failed to make it out of any committee prior to adjournment. PUBLIC COMMISSION ON THE OREGON LEGISLATURE Having recognized the need for a major review and study of state government and ways to improve the legislature's administration, procedures, facilities, staffing and overall capacity, the Legislative Assembly, at the request of Senate President Peter Courtney (D-Salem) and House Speaker Karen Minnis (R-Wood Village), introduced and passed SB 1084. With 30 years having passed since the last comprehensive review of the State's Legislative branch, the bill creates a 30-member "Public Special Districts Association of Oregon 2005 Legislative Executive Summary Distributed by Western Advocates Inc. Page 14 Commission on the Oregon Legislature," including members of the business community, media, lobby, and the legislature. The Commission's purpose is to review and make recommendations on all aspects of the legislative branch, including the timing, frequency, and length of legislative sessions, legislative procedures, and the adequacy of legislative facilities and staffing. SB 1084 specifies that the Commission consist of two senators, two representatives, and 26 public members having broad experience with, interest in, and perspective on the legislative branch. The Public Commission on the Oregon Legislature began meeting soon after adjournment and will report its findings and recommendations for change to the Emergency Board and members of the Seventy-Fourth Legislative Assembly no later than January 5, 2007. Further information on the Commission including members appointed, meeting times and locations, and the Commission's work plan can be found on the Legislative website at http://www.leg.state.or.us/pcol/. LABOR PERS Significant PERS reform efforts during the 2003 legislative session and an anticipated Oregon Supreme Court ruling challenging those reforms led to relatively few pieces of PERS legislation's passage during the 2005 session. HB 2189 contains provisions related to what constitutes a "break in service" for purposes of joining the Oregon Public Employee Service Retirement Plan (created for public employees beginning or reactivating employment on August 28, 2003, or later). Employees will not incur a break in service (requiring their retirement credit and benefits to be subject to OPSRP) if they are receiving a disability retirement allowance; they leave qualifying employment based on the employment's seasonal nature, provided that the employee returns to work before the expiration of 12 full calendar months; or the employee is an inactive PERS member as of August 28, 2003, but is vested and returns to work with the same qualifying employer before January 1, 2006. HB 3262 clarifies that inactive police officers and firefighters are eligible for full retirement allowances if they have a combined total of 25 or more years of creditable PERS service. The bill also exempts employees of the Black Butte RFPD and Sunriver Service District from the existing limitation that PERS retirees cannot work more than 1,039 hours in a year and still receive retirement benefits. Supreme Court Decision The Eugene case began as a challenge to the PERS Board's 1998 and 2000 employer rate orders for the petitioning employers and the Board's order allocating 1999 fund earnings. Judge Lipscomb Special Districts Association of Oregon 2005 Legislative Executive Summary Distributed by Western Advocates Inc. Page 15 entered a judgment in favor of the petitioning employers and PERS filed an appeal to stay that judgment (both courts denied granting a stay). In the interim, the 2003 Oregon Legislature passed HB 2003 (PERS Reform Legislation) that enacted into law many of the changes that were contained in Judge Lipscomb's decision. HB 2003 was challenged by direct appeal to the Oregon Supreme Court (the Strunk case); the Eugene appeal was also sent directly to the Oregon Supreme Court. While the Strunk and Eugene cases were pending at the Oregon Supreme Court, the PERS Board entered into the "Settlement Agreement" with the petitioning employers in the Eugene case. The Settlement Agreement resolved how PERS would fulfill its obligations under HB 2003 and the Eugene case. Some of those obligations were contingent upon how the Strunk case was decided; others were fulfilled in accordance with the terms of the agreement. The Board's actions in this regard have been challenged in a Multnomah County Circuit Court case, White v. PERB, which was put on hold pending resolution of the Eugene case, and is in the process of being revived. On August 11, 2005, the Oregon Supreme Court issued its decision in the Eugene case. Resolution of that appeal required PERS to carry out certain reductions in member accounts under the court's earlier Strunk decision and the settlement agreement reached by the Board and Petitioners in the Eugene case ("Settlement Agreement"). "Settlement Agreement" provisions include the following: · · · Change variable match calculation ­ Effective July 2004 Re-allocate 1999 "Employer in Variable" earnings ­ Effective March 2004 Adopt contingent rate order in April 2004 reallocating 1999 earnings Contingency reserve to 7.5% Gain/Loss reserve to 30 months funding level 11.33% to Tier One regular accounts Contingent on outcome of Strunk challenges Employer rates and reserves adjusted except for contingent reallocation ­ Effective July 2005 · The Strunk decision triggered the following additional obligations under the Settlement Agreement: · · · Credit the Contingency Reserve with 7.5% of 1999 available earnings Fund the Gain/Loss Reserve up to the 30-month goal Allocate 1999 earnings to Tier One member regular accounts at 11.33% (instead of the original 20%) PERS estimates that member statements will be issued during the month of March 2006. COLLECTIVE BARGAINING Despite numerous attempts via SB 319, SB 320, and SB 321 to change collective bargaining statutes, no changes were enacted. However, the public safety public employee unions will likely continue to make reforms to SB 750 (1995), a legislative priority for future sessions. Special Districts Association of Oregon 2005 Legislative Executive Summary Distributed by Western Advocates Inc. Page 16 DEFINITION OF INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR The definition of independent contractor was written in 1989 to apply to income tax laws, unemployment insurance laws and workers' compensation laws. The definition is important because independent contractors are not considered employees for the purposes of coverage under those areas of law. As of 2003, the Employment and Revenue Departments were still using the definition, but case law had necessitated changes in the definition of independent contractor as it applies to workers' compensation. SB 232, passed during the 2003 session, established a new definition of an independent contractor for purposes of the Oregon Department of Revenue. The measure also established the Independent Contractors Task Force (ICTF) to study issues related to the numerous definitions of independent contractors, because the same individual could be subject to three different definitions of independent contractor. The task force met during the 2003-2004 interim and drafted SB 323 to implement task force recommendations. The bill simplifies and updates the 2003 definition and replaces the definition for Employment Department and Revenue Department purposes. However, the bill does not substantially affect current law regarding who is covered under workers' compensation because the task force did not reach agreement on how to include workers' compensation in the definition. The new definition in SB 323 will take effect on January 1, 2006. It requires that an independent contractor be free from direction and control over the means and manner of providing services, that the person be engaged in an independently established business, and that the person be responsible for obtaining necessary licenses to provide the services. SB 323 specifies five criteria, three of which the person must meet in order to show that they have independently established a business: maintaining a business location, bearing the risk of loss of the business, providing contracted service to two or more persons, having significant investment in the business, and having the authority to hire other persons. The bill exempts farmers who provide services to other farms from the requirement to establish a separate business. The bill also specifies that "stringers" and correspondents or photographers for print or broadcast media who submit material by the piece or flat rate are not considered employees for purposes of unemployment insurance statutes and aligns the definition of such professions to the current definition of an independent contractor. Finally, the bill also requires state agencies to cooperate in compliance and enforcement activities to ensure consistent interpretation and application of the new definition. MISCELLANEOUS Additional bills related to various labor issues that districts may want to review are: HB 3319, final wage payments; and SB 618, breast feeding breaks. Special Districts Association of Oregon 2005 Legislative Executive Summary Distributed by Western Advocates Inc. Page 17 LAND USE MEASURE 37 As passed, Measure 37 did not directly impact special districts. The sponsors of the measure, Oregonians in Action, purposely omitted special districts from the measure and included language that made it clear that public health and safety and the extension of services were not issues subject to compensation. For that reason, SDAO did not actively take positions on the various bills that were discussed, other than to carefully monitor them to ensure special districts were not added back in to the measure. When the session started, a small workgroup consisting of cities, counties, homebuilders, 1,000 Friends of Oregon and Oregonians in Action had already begun meeting. The group was "unofficial" but was supported by legislative staff including a legislative counsel who drafted amendments. The House and Senate agreed to have the legislation start in the Senate. The unofficial group met for several months and presented a draft to Senator Charlie Ringo (DBeaverton) for hearings in the Senate. However, there was not complete agreement on all issues, and Senator Ringo had several ideas of his own that were not acceptable to members of the group. The effort fell apart at this point. The House held hearings on the issue, but was also unable to develop a bill that was acceptable to the Senate, specifically Senator Ringo. In the closing days of the session, several attempts were made to deal with specific issues, such as the transferability of property rights gained under Measure 37. In the end, nothing passed. The battle over Measure 37 then moved on to the courts. Because Measure 37 was a "statutory" change and not a constitutional change as was Measure 7, almost everyone assumed that the measure would withstand a constitutional challenge in court. Much to the surprise of almost everyone, a circuit court judge in Marion County found the statute unconstitutional. Because a circuit court ruling only affects the parties to the suit, the ruling only affects the state, cities and counties in Marion, Washington, Clackamas, Multnomah, Jackson and Lane counties. As a result, some jurisdictions are continuing to accept Measure 37 claims while others have suspended the process. Because a ballot measure is being appealed, the issue will go directly to the Oregon Supreme Court. The Court has indicated they will hear oral arguments by January 2006, and a decision would be expected within a few months after that date. In the meantime, both 1,000 Friends of Oregon and Oregonians in Action are circulating new initiative petitions on the subject. For that reason, SDAO will monitor these petitions for impact on special districts. ANNEXATIONS There were a number of bills introduced addressing annexation policies this session. The discussion centered mainly on the City of Beaverton and the much-publicized fight over the possible annexation of the Nike Campus. In the end, two bills passed in the area of annexation: SB 887, which temporarily addresses the concerns raised in the Beaverton issue; and HB 2484, addressing the voting process in annexations occurring under an urban services agreement. In a different land use subject, HB 2722 addresses the circumstances under which an existing city may object to the incorporation of a new nearby city. The following summaries highlight the effect of all three bills. Special Districts Association of Oregon 2005 Legislative Executive Summary Distributed by Western Advocates Inc. Page 18 SB 887 took effect on September 2, 2005. The bill prohibits the City of Beaverton from annexing any territory without the approval of the residents or property owners in the territory until January 2, 2008. It also prohibits the annexation of Nike, Tektronix, Columbia Sportswear or E.S.I. property until the year 2035, with a possible extension to 2040. The bill requires that annexation plans initiated by a city under ORS 195 (urban services annexations) be approved by the residents of only the area proposed for annexation until January 2, 2008. Finally, SB 887 requires the Joint Legislative Committee on Land Use (or other appropriate interim committee) to consider alternatives to current forms of annexation and changes in statutory authority designed to enhance the long-term economic health and vitality of Oregon's communities. The bill encourages the interim committee to form a work group of the following members to assist the committee in reaching consensus on recommendations: · The League of Oregon Cities · The Association of Oregon Counties · Special Districts Association of Oregon · Developers · Financial Institutions · Conservation or Environmental Groups · Business Organizations · Neighborhood Associations organized in unincorporated areas HB 2484 requires a "double majority vote" for ORS 195 annexations. Currently, when a city or district engages in urban service planning and annexation under ORS 195 the method to approve the annexation is a simple majority of all voters in the combined areas (i.e., a combination of the area to be annexed and the city or district doing the annexing). HB 2484 changes that method to require both a majority of votes cast in the territory to be annexed and a majority of votes cast in the city or district in order for the annexation to be approved. The bill takes effect on January 1, 2006. HB 2722 eliminates the authority of a city to veto the incorporation of a proposed city within three miles of an existing city. Current law requires that notice of a proposed incorporation be provided to any neighboring city within three miles of the proposed new city. The neighboring city must then hold a public hearing on the proposed incorporation and may take action to allow or disallow it. HB 2722 eliminates the hearing requirement and eliminates the authority of the neighboring city to veto incorporation. The bill takes effect on January 1, 2006. PERIODIC REVIEW Responding to many years of frustration from local governments over a periodic review process that never seemed to end, the 2005 Legislature made significant changes to the statutes by passing HB 3310, sponsored by Rep. Bill Garrard (R-Klamath Falls). The changes, which become effective on January 1, 2006, will greatly reduce the number of cities and counties subject to mandatory periodic review of their comprehensive plans and land use regulations. In the future, only cities with (a) a population of more than 2,500 and within a "metropolitan planning organization" or metropolitan service district, or (b) a population of 10,000 or more inside its urban growth boundary that is not within a metropolitan planning organization, will automatically be required to go through periodic review (cities in the first category, every seven years; cities in the second, every ten years). For counties, periodic review will be required only if there is a portion of its populated area that is within the urban growth boundary of a city subject to the requirements above. Special Districts Association of Oregon 2005 Legislative Executive Summary Distributed by Western Advocates Inc. Page 19 The bill also gives the Land Conservation & Development Commission authority to require other jurisdictions to go through periodic review, but only if the state pays all costs and certain major land use circumstances (e.g., high growth rate, major transportation project, major employment project, etc.) are applicable. Special districts are encouraged to maintain close involvement with any periodic review effort since the land use changes that may result could significant impact future service demands. COMPREHENSIVE LAND USE REVIEW ­ "THE BIG LOOK" SB 82 establishes a ten-member Oregon Task Force on Land Use Planning and charges it with studying Oregon's land use system and recommending changes. With staff support provided by the Department of Land Conservation and Development (DLCD) and an allocation of funds to hire additional employees or consultants, the Task Force will be responsible for conducting public meetings, surveying citizens, collecting specific data, and developing legislation for recommendation to the 2007 and 2009 legislatures. The bill establishes three reporting deadlines for the Task Force. First, a preliminary report on a draft work plan must be submitted to the Governor, Senate President, and House Speaker within three months of its creation. Second, a progress report to the 2007 Legislative Assembly, Governor, and Land Conservation and Development Commission (LCDC) is due by February 1, 2007; and a final report to the 2009 Legislative Assembly, Governor, and LCDC shall be presented by February 1, 2009. The Task Force shall cease to exist, according to a sunset clause, as of January 2, 2010. While SB 82 does not provide specific membership requirements for the makeup of the Task Force, it does specify that members be "knowledgeable about Oregon's land use system" and "familiar with Oregon's economic and employment base." More significantly, it also requires unanimous agreement on all members from the Governor, Senate President, and House Speaker. Whether or not this effort will have any success is anyone's guess. The legislature provided adequate funding for the required work, so the project will not suffer for lack of resources. However, in order to succeed, the undertaking will require strong leadership and willingness to compromise from the Governor and both House and Senate leadership. In the event that the Task Force and Legislature fail to produce meaningful results, the issue of land use reform will likely end up back with the courts and the voters. PUBLIC CONTRACTING QUALIFICATIONS BASED SELECTION FOR LOCAL GOVERNMENTS In 1997, the legislature required state agencies to use Qualifications Based Selection (QBS) when choosing architectural, engineering, and land surveying services. Under a mandatory QBS system, the public agency selects the consultant or firm from a list of applicants based solely on qualifications. After selection, the contracting agency negotiates the compensation and scope of the project with the selected firm or person. If the agency and the consultant cannot negotiate reasonable compensation, as determined by the agency, the contracting agency may terminate the contract and negotiate with another of the qualified consultants. Special Districts Association of Oregon 2005 Legislative Executive Summary Distributed by Western Advocates Inc. Page 20 In 2001, despite vehement opposition from SDAO and other local governments, the legislature expanded the mandatory QBS requirement to local governments for projects over $400,000 that had at least 35 percent of their funding from the state. The 2001 bill set a 2008 sunset on the local requirement. This session, advocates for architects and engineers introduced HB 3272 in an attempt to eliminate the threshold requirements and mandate QBS for all local government contracts for architectural, engineering or land surveying services. SDAO joined our local government partners in adamant opposition to the bill. Through a series of lengthy negotiations with the architects and engineers, local governments remained united and were able to secure a very good compromise agreement. The final bill increases the threshold of project size used for determining when local public contracting agencies are required to use QBS for architectural, engineering, or land surveying services from $400,000 to $900,000. It also decreases the state funding level threshold used for the local QBS requirement from 35 percent to 10 percent. The bill still requires that both thresholds be exceeded for QBS to apply to local governments. If both thresholds are not exceeded, local governments still have the choice of using QBS, but they are not required to use it. Finally, the bill deletes the sunset on the local government provisions. HB 3272-A takes effect on January 1, 2006. PREVAILING WAGE REFORMS Oregon's prevailing wage rate law, known as "Little Davis-Bacon," modeled after the federal Davis-Bacon Act, was passed in 1959. Oregon's law requires wages paid to workers by contractors on all public works projects exceeding a set value be at least the prevailing wage for the same trade in the locality where the labor is performed. SB 477 is an omnibus prevailing wage reform bill that addresses many issues under the current law: how to treat projects that involve volunteers and donated materials as well as local government participation; contractors being fully paid before they verify wage payments; wage claims of subcontractors attaching to contractors' bonds; and difficulty determining whether federal or state prevailing wages apply. The following list briefly outlines the changes included in SB 477. These changes will take effect on January 1, 2006. · Prevailing Wage Threshold: The threshold project value at which contractors must pay the state prevailing wage on public works projects is increased from $25,000 to $50,000. · Wage Claim Bond: Contractors and subcontractors working on public works are required to file a one-time $30,000 "public works bond" specifically for wage claims. The bill provides a one-year exception to the new bond requirement for certified disadvantaged, minority, or emerging small businesses. · Payment Withholding: Public agencies are required to retain 25 percent of contract payments until the contractor files payroll statements. The contractor is required to retain 25 percent of payments to a first-tier subcontractor until the subcontractor files payroll statements. · State or Federal Wage: The bill requires payment of the higher of state or federal prevailing wages when a project includes both state and federal funds and requires the Bureau of Labor and Industries to determine and publish the rates for each trade and locality. · Volunteer Project Value: The value of volunteer labor and donated materials are excluded when calculating a public project's value for purposes of the prevailing wage threshold. Special Districts Association of Oregon 2005 Legislative Executive Summary Distributed by Western Advocates Inc. Page 21 The bill also clarifies that fees paid for or waived by a public agency and government staff resources used for design, management, or inspection, are not counted as part of the project value. Implementation of SB 477 will require public agencies to revise the standard language in most public works contracts to incorporate notice provisions of the new bond requirement, payment withholding and the applicability of state or federal wages. Districts should consult with counsel to ensure that any contracts entered into after January 1, 2006, contain the appropriate new provisions. DETERMINATION OF LOWEST RESPONSIBLE BIDDER SB 1006 takes effect on January 1, 2006. The bill requires public contracting agencies to document their determination of lowest responsible bidder on a form submitted to the Construction Contractors Board. The bill also specifies the content of the form. Current statute requires contracting agencies to consider certain information when determining the lowest responsible bidder before awarding a public improvement contract. The factors the contracting agency is required to consider about the bidder include availability of financial and other resources, contractor expertise, legal qualifications, and the bidder's satisfactory records of performance and integrity. Problems arise when a contractor intentionally bids low and asks for change orders later or does not satisfactorily complete the project. Though the statute seems to give the contracting agencies sufficient authority to keep contractors with poor performance history from getting more public contracts, some agencies say that they may not have enough information about bidders and are almost certain to face formal protests and lawsuits if they choose other than the lowest bidder. The documentation requirement in SB 1006 is intended to focus the agency on the bidder's contracting history and to begin to form a record for other agencies as well. ORS 279 TECHNICAL CLEAN UP In 2003, the Legislature passed HB 2341 which completely overhauled Oregon's Public Contracting Code. HB 2214-A (2005) contains further refinements to the public contracting statutes resulting from continued review by state and local agencies, contractors, vendors, the Attorney General's Office, and others. HB 2214 took effect on May 31, 2005. The following technical changes were contained in HB 2214: · Clarifies that public improvement contracts may be entered into under a joint cooperative agreement (in which agencies are identified) but not under a permissive cooperative agreement (in which an unnamed agency may participate). · Requires a public contracting agency to define characteristics of a class of contracts in order to exempt the projects from competitive bidding and disallows using a particular funding source or procurement method as the sole characteristic of such a class. · Adds requirement for formal declaration of emergency to exempt contracts from competitive bidding for emergency reasons. · Exempts public improvement contracts for less than $50,000 from performance and payment bond requirements. Allows bond amounts to be adjusted to reflect work that is performed in phases. · Maintains exemption for energy savings performance contracts from competitive bidding requirements but makes a correction to reflect current law by subjecting them to the remainder of the Public Contracting Code. Special Districts Association of Oregon 2005 Legislative Executive Summary Distributed by Western Advocates Inc. Page 22 · · Clarifies that it is the contracting agency that makes the estimate of contract value for purposes of whether the project reaches the threshold value which requires first-tier subcontractor disclosure submissions. Makes other reference corrections and clarifies applicability of the code. OREGON PUBLIC CONTRACTING CODE TECHNICAL REVISION An error occurred during the 2003 Legislative Session in the drafting of HB 2341-B, which rewrote the Oregon Public Contracting Code. The language requiring contracting agencies to enter into small procurement contracts "in accordance with small procurement procedures established by rules adopted under ORS 279A.070" should have been omitted. HB 2259 amends the statute to reflect correctly the intention of the 2003 Oregon Legislative Assembly. The bill took effect on May 18, 2005, so the statute now accurately reflects that public contracting agencies may award contracts for less than $5000 in "any manner deemed practical or convenient by the contracting agency." PUBLIC SAFETY FIRE FEES While the statutes are clear with regard to the ability of most special districts and municipal fire departments to charge a fee to recoup the cost of providing services within their scope, the ability of fire districts to charge such fees has been the subject of differing legal opinions. HB 2340, introduced at the request of the Oregon Fire District Directors Association, was intended to clarify this uncertainty by specifically authorizing rural fire protection districts to charge fees to recoup the cost of providing services. After initial concerns and a close vote in the House over concerns about penalty provisions allowing fines and jail time for failure to pay certain fees to local governments, this language was removed on the Senate side and the bill easily passed. After January 1, 2006, districts may charge fees to the extent that they do not exceed the actual cost of performing the service. Districts are encouraged to seek assistance from legal counsel with developing resolutions and policies to reflect the ability to charge fees. FIRE SPRINKLER LICENSURE Two pieces of legislation were introduced at the request of both the fire service and members of the sprinkler industry which would have required individuals working in the fire safety sprinkler industry in Oregon to obtain a license demonstrating a minimum level of competency. From the outset of the session, both HB 2369 and HB 2428 received considerable opposition from other members of the construction industry and the Department of Consumer and Business Services. A workgroup of interested parties was formed in an attempt to find a compromise; but despite numerous discussions, the group was ultimately unsuccessful. In order to move the issue forward, the fire service and the sprinkler industry attempted to amend one of the bills with the following language requiring the Office of the State Fire Marshal to conduct a study of fire protection sprinkler systems: Whereas the proper installation and operation of fire protection sprinkler systems is vital to the safety of all Oregonians: Special Districts Association of Oregon 2005 Legislative Executive Summary Distributed by Western Advocates Inc. Page 23 · · · · The Office of the State Fire Marshal shall conduct a study on fire protection sprinkler systems in the state of Oregon; The study shall include, but not be limited to, an assessment of the operation of existing fire protection sprinkler systems, the extent of code compliance in the installation of new systems and the maintenance, inspection and repair of existing systems and the resulting impact on fire and life safety in the state; To assist in the study, the Fire Marshal shall convene a workgroup of parties knowledgeable in the installation, maintenance, inspection, repair and operation of fire protection sprinkler systems; The Office of the State Fire Marshal shall report its findings and any recommendations to the 74th Legislative Assembly. Although all members of the workgroup supported the sprinkler study, legislative leadership would not grant permission to amend the bill and the amendment did not move forward. Plans to introduce similar legislation next session are already underway. HOMELAND SECURITY HB 2101, a bill requested by the Governor, to elevate the existing Office of Homeland Security to a new state agency (encompassing the Office of Emergency Management, State Fire Marshal, and Criminal Justice Services Division, as well as a director to be appointed by the Governor) initially appeared to be hopelessly stuck in committee. However, with just two weeks left in the session and fears mounting that Governor Kulongoski would be forced to use his power of Executive Order to continue the Office of Homeland Security and pay employee salaries through the Office of State Police, the bill was substantially amended and allowed to pass. As amended, the measure's sections relating to establishing a stand-alone agency--a concept supported by the fire service--were eliminated. Under the new version, Homeland Security, the Office of Emergency Management, and State Fire Marshal will continue as components of the Oregon State Police. HB 2101 establishes the Oregon Homeland Security Council, chaired by the Governor, to receive briefings relating to homeland security and to advise the Governor on the state's disaster planning, preparedness, response, and recovery. Members of the Council include four legislators, the Adjutant General, the Superintendent of State Police, and additional members that may be appointed by the Governor if he determines them necessary to fulfill the functions of the Council, including state agency heads, elected state and local government officials, a member of the governing body of an Indian tribe and private sector representatives. The bill also transfers functions relating to hazardous substances and community right to know to the State Fire Marshal. Those functions have previously been the responsibility of the Interagency Hazard Communication Council, which is abolished under HB 2101. One of the most significant provisions of HB 2101 is the establishment of the State Interoperability Executive Council to develop an Oregon Interoperable Communication Plan for the purpose of Special Districts Association of Oregon 2005 Legislative Executive Summary Distributed by Western Advocates Inc. Page 24 achieving statewide interoperability within six years. Council responsibilities also include developing strategies for state and local government, standards to promote consistent development of wireless communications systems, along with identifying short-term and long-term technological and policy solutions, and recommendations for legislation. The bill contains provisions previously contained in the form of SB 817 (B-Engrossed version) requiring state agencies to develop a Public Safety Wireless Infrastructure Replacement Plan (to be coordinated by the OEM), which is intended to address the consolidation of state agency communications systems including those for OSP and the Departments of Corrections, Forestry, and Transportation. Preparation of the Plan will include an inventory of the current equipment and sites and identification of equipment needs. The OEM is required to report progress on Plan development to the Emergency Board, the Joint Legislative Committee on Information Management and Technology, the Governor, and the Senate President and House Speaker during the 2005-07 biennium. By January 2007, the OEM is also to submit one or more proposals for financing the plan's implementation, looking to federal, fee, tax, local, and state financing components. VOLUNTEER AND EMT TAX CREDITS Several pieces of legislation were introduced to provide incentives for those who volunteer their services not only for emergency medical care, but also a wide array of charitable or benevolent causes. HB 3425, for example, would have created a tax credit for volunteer service on behalf of "education, support of the arts, parks and recreation, environmental stewardship, food banks, shelter for the homeless and related poverty assistance, care for the elderly or disabled or for some other charitable or benevolent purpose." This bill received no hearings and died in committee. A more narrowly written HB 2787 would have expanded rural health care income tax credit to include emergency medical technician (EMT) services performed in rural areas and directed the Office of Rural Health to establish criteria for certifying emergency medical technicians as eligible for credit. The bill failed, but just hours before final adjournment, its provisions were amended into SB 31. SB 31 establishes a new personal income tax credit for volunteer EMTs who perform at least 20 percent of their total services as volunteers in rural areas. In addition, the bill also provides a new definition of rural (areas that are at least 25 miles from any city with a population of 30,000 or more) for the new EMT personal income tax credit. The EMT tax credit is capped at $250, applies to tax years beginning on or after January 1, 2006, and sunsets after five years. MUTUAL AID HB 2049, a bill establishing procedures for local governments to request and receive mutual aid from other jurisdictions during emergencies and in preparation for emergency response, failed to pass despite the fact that similar laws already exist at the federal level and such mutual aid agreements must be in place in order for local governments responding outside their jurisdictions to receive reimbursement from FEMA. The bill was doomed by poorly drafted language and even though extensive efforts were made by a work group formed to rewrite it, little progress was made by close of session. A more carefully crafted bill is anticipated for next session. Special Districts Association of Oregon 2005 Legislative Executive Summary Distributed by Western Advocates Inc. Page 25 Two other bills relating to mutual aid were passed, signed by the Governor, and will be effective as of January 1, 2006. The first, HB 2154, was introduced by the State Fire Marshal and authorizes the Governor to assign expertly trained local resources across jurisdictional boundaries to respond with a state cache of the specialized equipment and tools needed to effect search and rescue at a structural collapse emergency. HB 2154 gives all communities access to specially trained and equipped structural collapse responders to supplement local resources until federal teams arrive. The State Fire Marshal will plan for responses and advise the Governor on use of assigned resources. Mobilized resources would continue to supplement federal and local resources at the incident as long as needed. Also passed was HB 2155, introduced in response to the 2002 Coos Bay fire in which three firefighters lost their lives while fighting a commercial structure fire. Immediately following the incident, neighboring mutual-aid fire departments reacted by sending staffed fire apparatus to cover the stations there and handle emergency calls. This gave the Coos Bay Fire Department the ability to "stand-down" and allowed for the grieving that such a situation generates. Because of the immensity of the events, this need for coverage extended to more than a week. Fire departments from around the state, which did not have mutual agreements with Coos Bay, were organized to send personnel and apparatus to address needs until the memorial services were completed. Absent a mutual aid agreement under ORS 190 or a mobilization under the ORS 476 Conflagration Act, fire departments that sent aid actually lacked the authority to do so and thus incurred considerable liability exposure. HB 2155 amends ORS 476.520 and 476.590 to give the Governor more flexibility to assist local jurisdictions and make firefighting forces and equipment available in response to a heightened danger of fire or during a significant reduction in available firefighting resources. The bill also gives such responders the authority and liability coverage afforded by the Conflagration Act to provide "good neighbor" assistance outside their usual mutual aid agreements. DEFIBRILLATORS A number of bills were introduced this session relating to defibrillators. One would have required school districts to pursue grants and other funding to place defibrillators in schools, and another would have required defibrillators to be placed in health clubs. All bills were eventually combined into HB 3482. In its final form, HB 3482 prohibits a person from bringing cause of action for damages that result from use of automated external defibrillator if certain requirements are met, allows the Department of Education to award grants to school districts and public charter schools to provide automated external defibrillators in public school facilities, and requires health clubs to have automated external defibrillators on premises. The bill contained an emergency clause, making it effective on July 20, 2005. PUBLIC SAFETY AND THE MEDIA Following several instances during the interim where members of the press were excluded from fire and other emergency scenes, Rep. Brad Avakian (D-Portland) introduced HB 3083 at the request of the news media. The bill was originally opposed by fire districts since it was patterned after a California law stating that "Nothing... shall prevent a duly authorized representative of any news Special Districts Association of Oregon 2005 Legislative Executive Summary Distributed by Western Advocates Inc. Page 26 service, newspaper, or radio or television station or network from entering the areas closed pursuant to this section." The bill was later modified in an attempt to address concerns by the fire service regarding the ability of an incident commander to maintain control of the incident scene. In its amended version, the bill provides a premise for defense to a member of the media who disobeys an order to leave a fire scene if they "are reporting on the fire" and "do not unreasonably interfere with firefighting operations." It does not, according to the legislative record, remove authority from the incident commander; and if a reporter does disobey an order, he or she will have the burden of proof in any criminal prosecution to show that their actions were reasonable. The bill contained an emergency clause, making it effective immediately upon being signed by the Governor, which he did on June 29. Another media bill, HB 2730, provides civil immunity for radio or television broadcasters who participate in the Amber Plan. An example might be the broadcaster who provides an inaccurate description of a vehicle, leading to the detainment of an innocent party. However, civil immunity will not be granted in cases of intentional misconduct or gross negligence. The bill becomes effective January 1, 2006. MISCELLANEOUS Smokey Bear Plates HB 2655 would have allowed the Department of Transportation (ODOT) to issue Smokey Bear license plates for organizations that promote prevention of wildfires. The State Forestry Department, in collaboration with the Keep Oregon Green Association, would have been required to seek federal approval of the use of the image of Smokey Bear on group plates. Current law only allows institutions of higher education and groups representing persons who have been issued the Purple Heart medal to have an image representing their group on a license plate. Individuals requesting a Smokey Bear plate would have been required to pay a surcharge of $8 per plate for each year of the registration ($32 for two years; $64 for four years) in addition to the regular registration fee. The bill passed the House by a substantial margin but died in the Senate Rules Committee. Blue Lights HB 2663 would have prohibited fire department emergency response vehicles from using blue lights, which would have been reserved only for police vehicles. OFDDA strongly opposed the bill on the grounds that many fire districts currently use blue lights and it would be extremely costly to replace them on all vehicles. Additionally, blue lights are more easily noticed by the public. The bill did not pass. Helmet Laws HB 2694 and HB 2488 would both have repealed Oregon's helmet law except for those riders under certain ages (HB 2694, under 18; HB 2488, under 21). Neither bill passed. Leave of Absence for DPSST HB 2723 requires an employer to grant a leave of absence to any public safety officer who is on the Board of Public Safety Standards and Training, or on any committee established by the Board, that will allow the officer to attend meetings and perform duties of the Board or committee. The bill was drafted in response to address a single department and is effective January 1, 2006. Special Districts Association of Oregon 2005 Legislative Executive Summary Distributed by Western Advocates Inc. Page 27 Fire Safe Cigarettes SB 738, along with SB 931, would have required the State Fire Marshal to determine if cigarettes sold in Oregon are fire safe. SB 738 quickly emerged as the bill that would go forward and passed the Senate on June 29 by a vote of 21-8. According to the State Fire Marshal, cigarettes are a leading cause of structural fires, as well as forest and brush fires in Oregon. A "fire safe" or "self extinguishing" design for cigarettes has been technically feasible for many years but has been resisted by the tobacco lobby. Under the bill, the Fire Marshal would keep a list of those brands or varieties that are tested and determined to be firesafe. Any person selling a variety not listed as fire safe, or displaying markings on the pack or carton that a variety is fire safe when not on the list is subject to civil penalties, which are established in the bill. All penalties paid are to be deposited in the new Cigarette Fire Safety Fund. After passage by the Senate, House Speaker Karen Minnis refused to grant the bill a hearing in the House and it remained stalled in committee at the close of session. Elder Abuse SB 106, which becomes effective on January 1, 2006, adds firefighters and emergency medical technicians to the list of public and private officials required to report abuse of elderly or disabled persons. The bill also extends the definition of abuse, for reporting and restraining order purposes, to include wrongful taking or appropriating of money or property and non-consenting sexual contact with elderly persons and persons with disabilities. Criminal Fines and Assessments HB 5019 allocates revenues from the Criminal Fines and Assessment Account (CFAA), a statutory depository of revenues collected from fines, assessments, and other financial penalties imposed on conviction for felonies, misdemeanors and violations (other than parking infractions). Each session, the legislature determines the division of such moneys between the General Fund and the Criminal Fine and Assessment Public Safety Fund. The total amount expected to be deposited into the CFAA for the 2005-07 biennium is an estimated $119.1 million, with $80.3 million or 67.43 percent (up from 66.35 percent in 2003-05) going to the General Fund, and $38.8 million or 32.57 percent (down from 33.65 percent in 2003-05) going to the Public Safety Fund. The Public Safety Fund allocation is divided as follows: Department of Public Safety Standards and Training (HB 5136) Department Operations Public Safety Memorial Fund Department of State Police (HB 5157) Officer training Department of Justice (HB 5129) Child Abuse Multidisciplinary Account Regional assessment centers Criminal Injuries Compensation Account Special Districts Association of Oregon 2005 Legislative Executive Summary Distributed by Western Advocates Inc. Page 28 $19,188,582 $104,962 $1,051,174 $7,298,296 $886,403 $6,496,035 Child abuse medical examinations Department of Human Services (HB 5148) Domestic Violence Fund Sexual Assault Victims Fund Emergency Medical Systems Services and Trauma Systems Programs Total allocation $749,280 $2,157,784 $532,342 $315,000 $38,779,858 Note: The allocation to the Department of Public Safety Standards and Training includes $1,500,000 which is available to the agency for working capital for the first few months of the 200709 biennium and for any salary increases during 2005-07. Without these resources, the agency would have insufficient revenues to operate its programs at the beginning of 2007-09. The expenditure limitation for the Department of Public Safety Standards and Training included in its 2005-07 budget does not include this $1.5 million allocation. WATER MUNICIPAL WATER RIGHTS HB 3038 was drafted response to an April 2004 Oregon Court of Appeals decision (Water Watch vs. Coos Bay North Bend Water Board and the Oregon Water Resources Department). In that case, the court held that in order to receive a new water right permit, a municipality must demonstrate that it will fully construct the facilities necessary to use the water within five years of receiving the permit. That decision overturned decades of precedent regarding the treatment of municipal water rights in Oregon. It also called into question the validity of numerous uncertificated water rights held by Oregon water utilities planning for future growth in their communities. SDAO and local government partners (including the League of Oregon Cities, Central Oregon Cities Organization, Eugene Water and Electric Board and the City of Portland) started working in May of 2004 to draft and pass HB 3038 to address the uncertainty created by the Coos Bay case. The bill became law on June 29, 2005. The final language reflects the concerns of both municipal water utilities and the natural resource community. Specifically, it validates existing permits and their previous extensions, codifies the requirement that municipalities have a Water Management and Conservation Plan, limits the period for construction on a new permit to 20 years and revises the process for extension of existing permits that were issued before 1998. The most controversial provision was the section revising the extension process for pre-1998 permits. That piece was the result of heated negotiations with Water Watch, a natural resource Special Districts Association of Oregon 2005 Legislative Executive Summary Distributed by Western Advocates Inc. Page 29 advocacy group dedicated to restoring stream flow in Oregon's streams and rivers. HB 3038 faced vehement opposition from Water Watch in both chambers. They specifically wanted to amend the bill to require a full public interest review on all permit extensions for permits issued before 1998. In the Republican-led House, the Water Watch opposition was largely ineffective and the bill easily passed with only four votes in opposition. However, the dynamics were different in the Democratic-led Senate. Water Watch was able to convince the Senate Environment and Land Use Committee that municipal water utilities were holding large water permits that were not justified under today's environmental standards. It became clear that HB 3038 would not pass the Senate without some compromise language addressing Water Watch's concerns. After weeks of discussion, we reached an agreement that we believed would provide security for municipal water rights. The pertinent language reads as follows: " . . . (c) For the first extension issue after the effective date of this 2005 Act for a permit for municipal use issued before November 2, 1998, the department finds that the undeveloped portion of the permit is conditioned to maintain, in the portions of waterways affected by water use under the permit, the persistence of fish species listed as sensitive, threatened or endangered under state or federal law. The department shall base its findings on existing data and upon the advice of the State Department of Fish and Wildlife. An existing fish protection agreement between the permit holder and a state or federal agency that includes conditions to maintain the persistence of any listed fish species in the affected portion of the waterway is conclusive for purposes of the finding." At the time of negotiating the language, water utilities believed that the words "maintain the persistence of listed fish species" required extensions to be conditioned so that they would not allow the elimination of any existing run of fish species. In order to clarify the legislative intent, the water utility definition was read into the record on both the Senate and House Floors upon passage of the bill. Immediately after the session ended, the Water Resources Department started writing rules to implement section (c). It was clear from the outset of the rulemaking that not all parties agreed with the municipal water utility definition. Water Watch advocates said they believed the language implied a "no-harm" standard. Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife said they could not implement a standard that would ostensibly allow any harm to fish. Negotiations on the definition came to a standstill. On October 28, 2005, the Water Resources Commission adopted a new set of Division 315 rules to implement the HB 3038 language. Because the relevant stakeholders were unable to agree on a definition of "maintain the persistence of listed fish species" the definition was left out of the rules, leaving that part of the statute undefined. It is highly likely that the meaning of the statute will be defined through court action as controversial permit extension applications make their way through the new process. Although municipal water utilities were unable to secure a completely satisfactory set of rules to implement HB 3038, we were able to convince the Water Resources Commission of the need for vigilant review of the new process. At the October 28 meeting, the WRC designated a Special Districts Association of Oregon 2005 Legislative Executive Summary Distributed by Western Advocates Inc. Page 30 subcommittee to monitor the implementation of the new extension process. That subcommittee consists of commissioners, agency representatives, water utility representatives and natural resource advocates. We hope the subcommittee will ensure that the implementation of the new rules is consistent with the legislative intent of HB 3038. In the end, although it wasn't a perfect bill, HB 3038 was a victory for municipal water utilities. Prior to the session, every water utility in the state that held an uncertificated water right was uncertain about the validity of the right. Thanks to the passage of HB 3038, those rights are secure and those water utilities can keep planning to serve the needs of their communities. As for the parts of the bill that are a little less certain, SDAO will continue to monitor the implementation of HB 3038 and will assess the need for future legislative action on this issue after further study. DHS CROSS CONNECTION & BACKFLOW PREVENTION PROGRAM As usual, the backflow issues of the 2005 session were highly controversial and were not resolved until the very end of session. Nevertheless, this time around the results were largely positive. HB 3108 passed on the last full day of session! The main portion of the bill concerns the Oregon Health Plan, but SDAO, with the help of Eugene Water and Electric Board, managed to amend the bill with the following language: SECTION 11. (1) The Department of Human Services shall establish a program for regulating cross connections and the backflow assemblies that are part of a water system. (2) The department may assess an annual fee on community water systems for the purpose of implementing the cross connection and backflow assembly program established pursuant to this section. The fee may not exceed: (a) $30 for a water system that has 15 to 99 service connections; (b) $75 for a water system that has 100 to 999 service connections; (c) $200 for a water system that has 1,000 to 9,999 service connections; or (d) $350 for a water system that has 10,000 or more service connections. This language provides explicit statutory authority for the existing DHS program and gives them the authority to charge a fee to support the program. Currently, the program is operating on one-time funds that expired at the end of this biennium (June 30, 2005). Consequently, this fee will allow the program to survive. The bill language also protects water systems from unnecessary fee increases by placing the fee amount in statute. HB 3093 also passed in the waning days of the session. The bill removes the requirement for journeyman or apprentice plumbers to be certified under the DHS program in order to perform backflow testing. However, the bill directs DCBS to adopt rules requiring journeyman and apprentice plumbers who test backflow devices to complete a state-approved training program for testing backflow assemblies. Special Districts Association of Oregon 2005 Legislative Executive Summary Distributed by Western Advocates Inc. Page 31 DELINQUENT WATER BILLS SB 563 requires water utilities to mail notice of a water bill that is delinquent for more than 120 days to persons listed as owners of property in tax records for the county. The bill takes effect on January 1, 2006, and applies to water utilities operated by public utilities, municipalities, cooperatives and unincorporated associations. DIRECT LAB REPORTING After years of negotiation with the DHS Drinking Water Program and the defeat of many bills that would have required direct reporting of every water utility test, we finally worked out a compromise on direct lab reporting. SB 1080 requires laboratories to report positive, validated test results from water utility compliance samples directly to DHS. The direct reporting does not apply to special tests; therefore, it will be very important for water utilities to label correctly all samples as either routine or special. SB 1080 takes effect on January 1, 2006. Watch for updates from the Drinking Water Program on implementation of the bill. FLUORIDATION HB 2025, requiring all water suppliers serving more than 10,000 people to fluoridate their water supply, received enormous attention this session. After being amended to remove the fiscal impact on water utilities, the bill passed the House Water Committee unanimously and passed the full House on a vote of 36 to 22, with 2 excused. When the bill reached the Senate, it enjoyed a lengthy hearing in the Senate Environment and Land Use Committee. Ultimately, it did not pass due to lack of support in the Senate. However, the bill made newspaper headlines for months and gained tremendous support from a number of legislators who had been previously uninvolved in the process. It would not be a surprise to see the issue make a comeback during the 2007 Legislative Session. DRINKING WATER PROGRAM FEE During the 2003 Legislative Session, the Department of Human Services attempted to pass a bill imposing a per-connection fee on water utilities to support the Drinking Water Program. The DHS claimed that the fee was necessary to maintain the viability of the Drinking Water Program and its ability to retain primacy over the implementation of federal drinking water quality standards. Water utilities aggressively opposed the bill and managed to defeat the fee. However, at the request of House Water Committee Chair, Representative Bob Jenson (R-Pendleton), we agreed to participate in an interim taskforce to study the needs of the Drinking Water Program and propose alternative revenue sources if necessary. SDAO participated in that taskforce during 2003-2004 along with many other water utility stakeholders. By consensus, the taskforce agreed to support an increase in two existing drinking water program fees and the creation of a new fee for water utility sanitary surveys. The taskforce drafted a fee schedule for sanitary surveys that was approved by the majority of the members. DHS needed statutory authority to charge the new fee, so HB 2171 was introduced. The bill contained very simple language granting DHS the authority to charge a fee on sanitary surveys. HB 2171 passed the House Water Committee with strong support from Representative Bob Jenson (R-Pendleton), who was upholding his promise to follow through on the solution crafted by the interim taskforce. However, the bill was referred to Ways and Means and never made it out of the Special Districts Association of Oregon 2005 Legislative Executive Summary Distributed by Western Advocates Inc. Page 32 Subcommittee on Natural Resources, chaired by Representative Susan Morgan (R-Myrtle Creek). Representative Morgan is opposed to almost all new fees and was particularly opposed to this fee because she was lobbied by a constituent from a small water utility that said they simply couldn't afford any additional fees. Representative Morgan offered to pass the bill if we agreed to remove the fee from all water utilities serving less than 250 connections. We were unwilling to make that compromise because we believed that small utilities should bear some portion of the cost of sanitary surveys because they are usually the utilities that receive the most benefit from the service. The Drinking Water Program has already expressed its intent to pursue the sanitary survey fee in the 2007 Legislative Session, so stay tuned. WASTEWATER DEQ WASTEWATER PERMITTING PROGRAM In December 2002, the Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) convened a "Blue Ribbon Committee" to recommend improvements to the state's wastewater permitting program. The committee included industry, environmental and local government representatives. In July 2004, the committee made the following recommendations for changes to DEQ's wastewater program: institute program improvements that promote efficiency, effectiveness and consistency of the permitting program; implement new accountability standards; ensure stable, ongoing funding that improves fee predictability for ratepayers and revenue for budget management. The statutory changes required to implement the Blue Ribbon Committee recommendations were contained in SB 45. The bill allows the DEQ or State Department of Agriculture to issue individual, general or watershed water pollution discharge permits. It specifies that departments may issue permits by order or rule and allows departments to use fees from water pollution discharge permits to administer any water pollution control program. The bill directs DEQ to report annually to the Environmental Quality Commission (EQC) and the legislature on administration of the permitting process. Finally, it allows the EQC to increase fees for certain permits by a maximum of three percent per year. The 2005 Legislature passed SB 45 with the support of all DEQ stakeholders, including local government and industry. The new funding and increased fees continue four existing permit staff and allows the addition of 2.5 new positions to phase in during 2006-2007. DEQ anticipates that the EQC will adopt the revised fee rule in the spring or summer of 2006. All permits will be affected by these changes with the exception of on-site (septic program) permits and suction dredge permits. DEQ anticipates the following fee changes: Annualized fees: Permit holders will pay a single annual fee on the anniversary of their permit issuance date instead of paying several different fees over the permit's five-year term. This annual fee will be consistent from year to year, allowing for improved budget management. Special Districts Association of Oregon 2005 Legislative Executive Summary Distributed by Western Advocates Inc. Page 33 Simplified fee table structure: The number and types of permit fees will be reduced. Obsolete, unused permit categories will be eliminated and replaced with categories that better reflect the mix of industries in Oregon. Proposed Fee Increases: After the renewal fees are annualized and simplified, the overall revenue will be increased as the Blue Ribbon Committee recommended: seven percent increase in Fiscal Year (FY) 05-06, (Note: DEQ did not assess this increase for the July 2005 billing and will combine it with the increase authorized fee for FY 06-07.), and four percent increase in FY 06-07 to add 2.5 positions. Because the Blue Ribbon Committee recommended modifying fee categories, it is possible that some permit fees will go up by more or less than the percentages listed above. BAN ON MIXING ZONES During the 2005 Legislative Session, a number of Oregon environmental advocacy groups joined to create the Oregon Conservation Network (OCN) and advance a common environmental legislative agenda. One of the chief efforts on that agenda was to ban the use of mixing zones in Oregon. The advocacy groups referred to mixing zones as a "toxic pollution loophole" and coined the phrase "toxic mixing zone," which was quickly picked up and used by every media outlet in the state. Although the legislative effort to ban the use of mixing zones was ultimately unsuccessful, the effort to win the attention of the media and the public was very successful. Hearings on the mixing zone bills, SB 555 and SB 532, drew large crowds and consisted of hours of emotional testimony. The two major legislative champions for the bills were Senate President Peter Courtney (D-Salem) and Senator Charlie Ringo (D-Beaverton), Chair of the Senate Environment and Land Use Committee. It is possible that the OCN will attempt to pass a mixing zone ballot measure in 2006. However, at this time, no measures have been submitted to the Secretary of State for consideration. If they do not attempt a ballot measure, it is likely the OCN will introduce another mixing zone bill in 2007. Special Districts Association of Oregon 2005 Legislative Executive Summary Distributed by Western Advocates Inc. Page 34");sQ1[38]=new Array("http://www.sdao.com/ref/Pub/sdaoprioritylegislationfinalupdate.pdf","Microsoft Word - SDAO Priority Legislation Final Update.doc","","SDAO Priority Legislation Update 2005 Legislative Session Following a process of soliciting member suggestions for legislative change, the SDAO Legislative Committee reviewed and agreed upon the following priority bills to be lobbied on behalf of the association for the 2005 Legislative Session. With an aggressive legislative agenda to pursue, SDAO directed the lobby staff of Western Advocates Incorporated to work toward the passage of the following bills: · · · · · SB 660 ­ Clarification of Special District Formation SB 837 ­ Regulation of Insurance Pooling HB 2599 ­ Expansion of Public Records Customer List Exemption HB 3038 ­ Protection of Municipal Water Rights HB 3265 ­ Elimination of the Lane County Boundary Commission The 2005 Legislative Session failed to follow through on promises for bi-partisan cooperation resulting in what many have described as an unnecessarily lengthy and lackluster session. In spite of this, SDAO's legislative agenda was largely successful. The following report provides a comprehensive look at SDAO's priority bills. Western Advocates will be presenting a final executive summary to the board at its November meeting. SB 660 ­ Clarification of Special District Formation Passed - Chapter 747, (2005 Laws) - Effective date January 1, 2006. SDAO introduced SB 660 to clarify that when a citizen petition for a special district formation has been found by the county to meet all of the statutory requirements for an application for formation, the county shall approve the petition for submission to the ballot. In recent years, there have been a handful of cases where citizens attempting to form a special district have been blocked from the ballot process by their local county commission, even though they met all the statutory requirements for an application for formation. In those cases the citizens were prevented from accessing the ballot either indefinitely or for an extended period of time and were forced to spend additional time and money to overcome the sometimes extraneous objections of the county commission. SB 660 maintains the right of the county commission to ensure that the statutory requirements for an application are met before the petition is circulated. Those requirements include compliance with the comprehensive plan, cost effectiveness and minimal impact on other providers of the same service. While the county commission can still deny a petition because it does not meet the standards of the statute, SB 660 simply clarifies that the county may not deny a petition for a reason not reflected in the statute. The Senate General Government Committee passed the bill out of committee on April 5 after hearing testimony from SDAO and invited guest, Harrisburg City Councilor Roger Raven. Mr. Raven is the chief petitioner for Eagle Park and Recreation District in Linn County. The county commission refused to approve Eagle Park's petition for circulation because they did not believe the formation would pass. The commission's decision was overturned by Linn County Circuit Court on appeal and will be on the ballot in May 2006. The delay cost petitioners a year and a half in time and extra money and effort that could have been better spent on other areas of their campaign. During the hearing, even though the Association of Oregon Counties had taken no position on the bill, the committee heard testimony from Clackamas County expressing concerns that the bill language would prevent commissioners from even considering the statutory requirements and would mandate approval of a petition. Clackamas County had called SDAO and staff a few hours prior to the hearing to explain their concerns and it was agreed upon to look at the bill together when it got to the House and draft any necessary amendments at that time. However, representatives of the county felt they needed to place their objections and concerns on the record. Prior to being voted on by the full Senate, similar concerns about the bill were raised in the Democratic Caucus. Rather than risking a confusing floor debate and close vote, we chose to hold the bill over and address the issues raised by caucus members. After discussions with Senate Majority Leader Kate Brown's office, staff decided to re-refer the bill to committee for clarifying amendments, believing that this strategy would allow us to clear up any confusion that existed surrounding the intent of the bill. The bill was re-referred to Senate Rules Committee, received a hearing and work session on June 24, and was passed out of committee with amendments that addressed the concerns that had been previously raised. The bill passed on the Senate floor with 27 aye votes and one nay vote [Senator Kurt Schrader (D-Canby)] with two members excused. Once the bill made it over to the House, the process to pass the bill went quickly and much more smoothly after having flushed out the many concerns raised in the Senate. The bill passed out of the House State & Federal Affairs Committee on July 26 and was placed on the Consent Calendar for a voice vote on the House Floor, where it passed unanimously with 59 ayes votes (one member having been excused). The bill was signed by the Governor on August 17 with an effective date of January 1, 2006. SB 837 ­ Regulation of Insurance Pooling Passed - Chapter 175, (2005 Laws) - Effective date January 1, 2006. In order to protect local government's ability to operate insurance pools, SDAO introduced legislation establishing minimum requirements for self-insured public bodies for tort liability or property damage. Prepared for the Special Districts Association of Oregon By Western Advocates Incorporated Page 2 For the past 20 years in Oregon, public body self-insurance pools have successfully operated to the benefit of cities, counties, schools, and special districts. Presently, such programs provide coverage for more than 30 types of Oregon local governments; and while participation in these pools is optional with public bodies able to insure through the private marketplace, there are nearly 900 participating members. The self-insured public body pools aggregate group risks, maintain a self-insured retention, and purchase reinsurance for catastrophic losses to their members. Because such public entity pools do not sell insurance, their management is unregulated by Oregon's insurance code. This lack of minimum requirements could potentially allow brokers who manage such programs to focus on maximizing fees and commission income rather than the pool's financial integrity and risk management. In response to this concern, SDAO introduced SB 837 to institute a higher degree of public disclosure and to further ensure compliance with basic financial requirements regarding the operation of a self-insured public body insurance program. The bill establishes minimum requirements for public bodies that self-insure for tort liability or property damage. Additionally, the bill requires certain disclosures and institutes basic financial management standards. Through requiring a minimal reserve account, annual independent audits, and adequate reinsurance requirements against catastrophic losses, SB 837 further protects the financial integrity of the insurance pool. Under these newly adopted guidelines, a program or a third party administrator of a program may not collect commissions or fees from an insurer. Finally, if a self-insurance program fails to comply with these requirements, the bill establishes a public body's right of action in such cases. The bill was co-sponsored by Senator Frank Shields (D-Portland) and Representative Alan Brown (R-Newport). Additional sponsors included Senators Roger Beyer (RMolalla), Ted Ferrioli (R-John Day), Gary George (R-Newberg), Floyd Prozanski (DEugene); and Representatives Jeff Barker (D-Beaverton), Derrick Kitts (R-Hillsboro), and Mike Schaufler (D-Happy Valley). The bill was first heard in the Senate General Government Committee on March 10, where a technical flaw was discovered that would provide insurers with a loophole that they could potentially use to circumvent the bill's purpose. An amendment was drafted and the bill moved on to the Senate floor where it was passed with 24 aye votes and one nay vote [Senator Kurt Schrader (D-Canby)], with five members excused. In the House, the A-Engrossed version of the bill was heard by the House Business, Labor and Consumer Affairs Committee on May 13. The bill, having passed unanimously out of committee, was passed on the House floor with 59 ayes and one member excused. The Governor signed the A-Engrossed version of SB 837 on June 7 with an effective date of January 1, 2006. Prepared for the Special Districts Association of Oregon By Western Advocates Incorporated Page 3 HB 2599 ­ Public Records Disclosure Exemption Passed - Chapter 659, (2005 Laws) - Effective date July 27, 2005. The Special Districts Association of Oregon requested legislation be introduced during the 2005 legislative session that would relieve those districts that provide water, sewer and storm drain services from the requirement to release personally identifiable information regarding their customers. ORS 192.410 currently requires public bodies to comply with public records laws, including granting access to "any writing containing information relating to the conduct of the public's business..." This definition casts a broad net, which includes personal information (such as home addresses) included in customer lists of those public bodies providing services relating to water, storm water and sewers. While customer information for the private sector is kept confidential, customer information for those being served by public bodies is open for review by any member of the public. An exception to this policy was passed during the 1999 Legislative Session in the form of HB 3576. That bill amended ORS 192.502, the list of statutory exemptions, to include personally identifiable information for customers of public utilities as follows: (25) Personally identifiable information about customers of a municipal electric utility or a people's utility district. The utility or district may, however, release such information to a third party if the customer consents in writing or electronically, if the disclosure is necessary to render utility or district services to the customer, or if the disclosure is required pursuant to a court order. The utility or district may charge as appropriate for the costs of providing such information. The utility or district may make customer records available to third party credit agencies on a regular basis in connection with the establishment and management of customer accounts or in the event such accounts are delinquent. (See HB 3576, 1999 Regular Session) In response to SDAO's request for a similar exemption, Rep. Jeff Barker (D-Aloha) introduced HB 2599. Additional sponsors included Senators Roger Beyer (R-Molalla); Doug Whitsett (R-Klamath Falls), Ryan Deckert (D-Beaverton), Floyd Prozanski (DEugene); and Representatives Robert Ackerman (D-Eugene), Linda Flores (RClackamas), Bill Garrard (R-Klamath Falls), Wayne Krieger (R-Gold Beach), and Andy Olson, (D-Albany). The bill, in its original form, exempted from public disclosure personal information about customers of any public body providing water, sewer or storm drain services. The bill received its first hearing before the House Judiciary Committee in early March; the same week newspaper organizations launched their "Sunshine Campaign" to promote access to public records and information. Nonetheless, HB 2599 passed out of committee and cleared the House on March 28 by a vote of 56-0. HB 2599 then went to the Senate and was referred to the Senate Judiciary Committee, chaired by Senator Ginny Burdick (D-Portland), who expressed concern over Willamette Week's ability to publish its annual "Water Hog" article. SDAO was told that the bill's language would be amended out and language relating to disclosure in child abuse cases Prepared for the Special Districts Association of Oregon By Western Advocates Incorporated Page 4 would be substituted (a gut-and-stuff). Only social security numbers would be excluded from disclosure by public bodies providing water, sewer and storm drain services. On June 16, HB 2599, as amended, passed out of the Senate Judiciary Committee, with Senator Roger Beyer serving notice of a possible Minority Report in which he would restore the bill's original language. At that time, both Senators Whitsett and Prozanski expressed support of a Minority Report. On June 24, both versions of HB 2599 were considered on the Floor of the Senate and, in an extremely rare move, the Minority Report was adopted. Four Senate Democrats [Senators Avel Gordley (D-Portland), Betsy Johson (D-Scappoose), Bill Morrisette (DSpringfield), Floyd Prozanski (D-Eugene)] crossed party lines to vote in favor of restoring SDAO's original language. The Senate Democrats, in an attempt to save face, voted to refer to bill to the Senate Rules Committee. While SDAO fought hard to exclude customer information, the Willamette Week published a scathing editorial blasting HB 2599. The Senate Rules Committee ultimately passed the bill agreed that the following information would be exempt from disclosure: Customer name Date of Birth Telephone number Email Address Driver's license information Social Security Numbers Under the new bill, the above information could be released only with the customer's consent. The physical address of the water meter and the usage would still be subject to disclosure under the public records law. The Senate unanimously passed the C-Engrossed version of the bill on July 12 and the House concurred in the Senate amendments on July 15. The Governor signed HB 2599 on July 27, 2005, making it effective immediately on that date. HB 3038 ­ Protection of Municipal Water Rights Passed: Chapter 410, (2005 Laws): Effective date June 29, 2005. HB 3038 was a hard fought victory for municipal water utilities. SDAO started working with other municipal interests in April of 2004 to pass this bill in response to the Oregon Supreme Court decision in Water Watch v. Coos Bay North Bend Water Board. That decision threatened the validity of all unperfected municipal water rights and the ability of communities to plan for growth and economic development. The bill as passed provides security for existing municipal water rights and addresses the concerns of natural resource advocates. Specifically, it validates existing permits, codifies the requirement that municipalities have a Water Management and Conservation Plan, limits Prepared for the Special Districts Association of Oregon By Western Advocates Incorporated Page 5 the period for construction on a new water permit to 20 years and revises the process for extension of existing permits. The most important piece of the bill validates and immunizes from challenge existing unperfected municipal water right permits. The operative language is: (3) All final orders by the department that resulted in the issuance of a water right permit, the issuance of a water right certificate or the approval of an extension of time to complete construction or to perfect a water right for a municipal use that were issued before the effective date of this 2005 Act are not subject to challenge in an administrative or judicial proceeding with respect to the requirement to commence and complete construction within a specified period of time. The most controversial section of the bill relates to the treatment of existing unperfected permits and applications for extension of time to use those permits. The final bill contained the following language addressing that issue: (c) For the first extension issue after the effective date of this 2005 Act for a permit for municipal use issued before November 2, 1998, the department finds that the undeveloped portion of the permit is conditioned to maintain, in the portions of waterways affected by water use under the permit, the persistence of fish species listed as sensitive, threatened or endangered under state or federal law. The department shall base its findings on existing data and upon the advice of the State Department of Fish and Wildlife. An existing fish protection agreement between the permit holder and a state or federal agency that includes conditions to maintain the persistence of any listed fish species in the affected portion of the waterway is conclusive for purposes of the finding. Section (c) is the result of months of negotiation with natural resource advocates (primarily Water Watch) over the process for extension of existing permits. They wanted a full public interest review of every extension; water utilities felt that was unnecessarily onerous, and this language is the compromise. It requires that the Water Resources Department condition extensions of time so that they will not lead to the elimination of any existing run of fish species. The Water Resources Department is currently writing rules to implement section (c). HB 3038 had several hearings in the House Water Committee in late March and was passed out of the committee with amendments on April 4. The bill passed on the House floor with 53 aye votes, four nay votes, and three members excused. Following passage of the A-Engrossed version on the House side, the bill was assigned to the Senate Committee on Environment and Land Use where it again passed out of committee with amendments made. The bill passed on the Senate Floor on June 16 with 26 members voting aye, one member voting nay [Senator Roger Beyer (R-Molalla)], and three members excused. The House concurred with the Senate amendments and the Governor signed the bill to be effective upon its passage on June 29. Prepared for the Special Districts Association of Oregon By Western Advocates Incorporated Page 6 HB 3265 ­ Elimination of Lane County Boundary Commission Did not Pass. SDAO introduced HB 3265 to eliminate the Lane County Boundary Commission. The bill was in response to the boundary commission's practice of preventing citizen groups in Lane County from pursuing special district formations and mergers. Review of the Commission's policies revealed that the commission has an active policy against the provision of services by special districts. An example of two policies follows: · · 191-030-0000 (1) states, "The Commission shall favor general purpose governments over single service governments and special districts." 191-030-0020 (2) states, "Annexation to cities shall be the method preferred and encouraged by the commission for delivering urban services to urbanizable land." SDAO secured a hearing on HB 3265 early in the session and thoroughly described the problems with the boundary commission. Despite support from the Lane County Commission and the General Government Committee and its Chair, Representative Vicki Berger (R-Salem), HB 3265 did not make it out of committee. The main reason the bill failed to move is that the Lane County legislative delegation sided with the City of Eugene in opposition to the bill. The city and the Lane County legislators all admitted that the Boundary Commission's policies were problematic, but they insisted the issue should be dealt with locally. The city and the legislators informally agreed to address the issue of the Lane County Boundary Commission over the interim and expressed an interest in working with SDAO to resolve our concerns. Even though the bill did not pass, SDAO successfully raised the profile of the problems with the Lane County Boundary Commission. If those problems are not addressed locally, SDAO has laid the groundwork for returning to the legislature to request elimination of the commission in the future. Prepared for the Special Districts Association of Oregon By Western Advocates Incorporated Page 7");sQ1[39]=new Array("http://www.sdao.com/ref/Pub/misclocalmeasures.pdf","Microsoft Word - Miscellaneous Local Measures.doc","","MISCELLANEOUS LOCAL MEASURES NOVEMBER 8, 2005 ~ SPECIAL ELECTION Columbia County Charter Amendment (Measure 5-137) Taxing District: City of Scappoose Term: Permanent Purpose: Amend City Charter to prohibit condemnation of property for the sole purpose of economic development efforts. Cost: N/A Election Results: Yes (79%) No Coos County Charter Amendment (Measure 6-111) Taxing District: City of Bandon Term: Permanent Purpose: Amend City Charter to allow the City Council to set water utility rates without consent of the voters. Allows the City Council to set water utility rates at levels that will generate sufficient revenues for proper water system operation and maintenance. Current rates are insufficient and the City has been transferring funds from the General Fund to the Water Fund. Passage of this measure would allow for the General Fund subsidies to be ended. Cost: N/A Election Results: Yes No (61%) Lane County Charter Amendment (Measure 20-106) Taxing District: City of Eugene Term: Permanent Purpose: Allow the City Council to hire and supervise an independent police auditor, and to appoint a civilian review board to investigate or oversee investigations of complaints involving police employees. Cost: N/A Election Results: Yes (57%) No November 2005 Local Election Results Prepared for Special District Association of Oregon By Western Advocates Incorporated Miscellaneous Measures -- Page 1 Tillamook County Local Option Tax Levy (Measure 29-93) Taxing District: Tillamook County Term: Five-Year Purpose: Provide funding to the County Veteran's Affairs Office for a full-time Director, Secretary, office space and additional operating expenses. Cost: Estimated tax cost of $0.03 per $1,000 of assessed value. Election Results: Yes (73%) No *Double Majority Requirement Met: No ~ 43% Turnout Umatilla County Charter Amendment (Measure 30-36) Taxing District: City of Pilot Rock Term: Permanent Purpose: Adopt a new Charter for the City and repeal the currently-used 1960 version. New Charter provisions include slight modifications to the 1960 version such as election methods for city council members, but much of the Charter's provisions would remain unchanged. Cost: N/A Yes (63%) No Election Results: November 2005 Local Election Results Prepared for Special District Association of Oregon By Western Advocates Incorporated Miscellaneous Measures -- Page 2");sQ1[40]=new Array("http://www.sdao.com/ref/Pub/localschoolmeasures.pdf","Microsoft Word - Local School Measures.doc","","LOCAL SCHOOL MEASURES NOVEMBER 8, 2005 ~ SPECIAL ELECTION Clatsop County Local Option Tax Levy (Measure 4-111) Taxing District: Clatsop County Administrative School District #10 Term: Five-Year Purpose: Finances district operations. Failure to pass this measure would result in reduction of staff and services. Cost: Estimated tax cost of $0.52 per $1,000 of assessed value. Election Results: Yes (60%) No *Double Majority Requirement Met: Yes ~ 54% Turnout Harney County General Obligation Bond (Measure 13-11) Taxing District: Harney County School District No. 3 Term: 21-Year Purpose: Finance costs of capital construction and improvements to upgrade and renovate district facilities including, but not limited to: heating, ventilation, electrical systems, energy efficiencies, site improvements, and compliance with Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). Cost: $2.7 million bond. Unknown estimated tax cost. Election Results: Yes (55%) No *Double Majority Requirement Met: Yes ~ 64% Turnout Malheur County General Obligation Bond (Measure 23-35) Taxing District: Ontario School District No. 8C Term: Twenty-Year Purpose: Finance capital construction and improvement costs to construct and equip a new high school, renovate and upgrade Pioneer Elementary School, and make related site improvements. Cost: $30 million bond. Unknown estimated tax cost. Election Results: Yes No (70%) *Double Majority Requirement Met: Yes ~ 69% Turnout November 2005 Local Election Results Prepared for Special District Association of Oregon By Western Advocates Incorporated School Measures -- Page 1 Marion County General Obligation Bond (Measure 24-152) Taxing District: Cascade School District No. 5 Term: 21-Year Purpose: Finance capital construction and improvements to district facilities, including, but not limited to; construction, equipping, and furnishing of a new elementary school in Aumsville, four new classrooms at Turner Elementary, and a new sewage system for the Cascade Junior High School and Cascade Senior High School Campuses. The bond would also pay for nine to eleven new classrooms, a new parking lot, gymnasium, auditorium, and athletic fields for Cascade Senior High School. Cost: $19.5 million bond. Unknown estimated tax cost. Election Results: Yes (52%) No *Double Majority Requirement Met: Yes ~ 53% Turnout General Obligation Bond (Measure 24-153) Taxing District: Gervais School District Term: 21-Year Purpose: Finance upgrades and improvements to Gervais High School, Gervais Middle School, Brooks Elementary, and Eldriedge Elementary. Cost: $4 million bond. Unknown estimated tax cost. Election Results: Yes No (58%) *Double Majority Requirement Met: No ~ 46% Turnout Multnomah County Local Option Tax Levy (Measure 26-75) Taxing District: Riverdale School District Term: Five-Year Purpose: Maintain current level of services and programs. Failure to pass this measure would result in reduction of staff and services. Cost: Estimated tax cost of $1.07 per $1,000 of assessed value. Election Results: Yes (77%) No *Double Majority Requirement Met: Yes ~ 52% Turnout November 2005 Local Election Results Prepared for Special District Association of Oregon By Western Advocates Incorporated School Measures -- Page 2 Polk County General Obligation Bond (Measure 27-77) Taxing District: Willamina School District 30J Term: Twenty-One Year Purpose: Expand and upgrade classrooms and facilities at three of the district's schools. Demolish old high school and replace with a new covered bus parking area. Make additional upgrades to athletic facilities on Oaken Hills including resurfacing existing track, constructing a new stadium, and installing lights. Cost: $12 million bond. Unknown estimated tax cost. Election Results: Yes No (63%) *Double Majority Requirement Met: No ~ 39% Turnout Umatilla County General Obligation Bond (Measure 30-58) Taxing District: Athena-Weston School District 29RJ Term: Ten-Year Purpose: Finance the costs of capital improvements including; upgrading facilities at Athena-Weston Middle School, Athena Elementary, and Weston McEwen High School. Improvements to be made include; upgrading electrical and wiring service, installing room heating units, improving lighting systems, re-roofing, and purchasing of modular classrooms. Cost: $2 million bond. Unknown estimated tax cost. Election Results: Yes (55%) No *Double Majority Requirement Met: Yes ~ 50% Turnout November 2005 Local Election Results Prepared for Special District Association of Oregon By Western Advocates Incorporated School Measures -- Page 3");sQ1[41]=new Array("http://www.sdao.com/ref/Pub/localpublicsafetymeasures.pdf","Microsoft Word - Local Public Safety Measures.doc","","LOCAL PUBLIC SAFETY MEASURES NOVEMBER 8, 2005 ~ SPECIAL ELECTION Benton County Local Option Tax Levy (Measure 2-52) Taxing District: North Albany Rural Fire Protection District Term: Five-Year Purpose: Maintains current level of service. Cost: Estimated tax cost of $0.80 per $1,000 of assessed value. Yes (62%) No Election Results: *Double Majority Requirement Met: No ~ 47% Turnout Columbia County Local Option Tax Levy (Measure 5-138) Taxing District: Columbia County Term: Five-Year Purpose: Create an Enhanced Law Enforcement Operating Fund to be used exclusively for increasing law enforcement throughout the County by adding 15 more deputies, and other law enforcement personnel. The Fund would also pay to equip additional law enforcement staff, and would allow for 24-hour patrols. Cost: Estimated tax cost of $0.39 per $1,000 of assessed value. Election Results: Yes No (52%) *Double Majority Requirement Met: No ~ 43% Turnout Deschutes County Local Option Tax Levy (Measure 9-33) Taxing District: Black Butte Ranch Service District Term: Five-Year Purpose: Maintain current level of services such as 24-hour patrols, 7 days a week. Failure to pass this measure would result in a reduction of patrol hours. Cost: Estimated tax cost of $0.40 per $1,000 of assessed value. Election Results: Yes (81%) No *Double Majority Requirement Met: Yes ~ 74% Turnout November 2005 Local Election Results Prepared for Special District Association of Oregon By Western Advocates Incorporated Public Safety Measures -- Page 1 Jackson County Local Option Tax Levy (Measure 15-63) Taxing District: City of Rogue River Term: Five-Year Purpose: Maintain current level of service for Rogue River Police Department. Additional tax revenue would maintain a five member police force including associated costs and would fund a full time Police Clerk. Cost: Estimated tax cost of $0.67 per $1,000 of assessed value. Election Results: Yes (52%) No *Double Majority Requirement Met: No ~ 42% Turnout Jefferson County Local Option Tax Levy (Measure 16-42) Taxing District: Jefferson County Term: Five-Year Purpose: Provide funds necessary to operate existing jail facility. Voters approved a five-year levy of $0.99 per $1,000 in 2000. This measure would replace those funds and would increase the that amount by eight cents per thousand. Cost: Estimated tax cost of $0.99 per $1,000 of assessed value. Election Results: Yes (58%) No *Double Majority Requirement Met: Yes ~ 50% Turnout Lincoln County General Obligation Bond (Measure 21-104) Taxing District: North Lincoln Fire & Rescue District Term: 15-Year Purpose: Finance costs of capital construction and improvements including: construction of a fire station and training building, acquisition and improvement of real property for such station, acquisition of public safety vehicles and attached apparatus, and acquisition, construction and equipping of a Tsunami Warning System. Cost: $7.405 million bond. Estimated cost of $0.2635 per $1,000 of assessed value. Election Results: Yes (62%) No *Double Majority Requirement Met: No ~ 44% Turnout November 2005 Local Election Results Prepared for Special District Association of Oregon By Western Advocates Incorporated Public Safety Measures -- Page 2 Linn County Local Option Tax Levy (Measure 22-50) Taxing District: Mill City Rural Fire Protection District Term: Five-Year Purpose: Continue to fund Fire Chief Position as was originally established and paid for with a five-year voter-approved levy in 2000. Cost: Estimated tax cost of $0.63 per $1,000 of assessed value. Election Results: Yes (79%) No *Double Majority Requirement Met: Yes ~ 57% Turnout General Obligation Bond (Measure 22-51) Taxing District: Lebanon Rural Fire Protection District No. 9 Term: 15-Year Purpose: Construction and equipping of four new fire stations. The measure will also fund the acquisition 2 pumper trucks, 5 pumper/tender trucks, 1 ladder truck with pump, 2 water tenders with drafting capabilities, 3 brush/rescue units, 3 staff/command vehicles, and miscellaneous equipment including breathing apparatus, hoses, nozzles, rescue tools, radios, monitoring equipment and fire extinguishers. Cost: $5.5 million bond. Unknown estimated tax cost. Election Results: Yes (51%) No *Double Majority Requirement Met: No ~ 41% Turnout Washington County Local Option Tax Levy (Measure 34-111) Taxing District: City of Banks Term: Five-Year Purpose: Fund law enforcement services that are currently being contracted from the Washington County Sheriff's department. Failure of this levy would result in the City's inability to continue to pay for services such as crime scene investigations, Public Awareness Programs, access to National Crime Databases, and traffic enforcement sweeps and would only provide enough funding for law enforcement responses for emergency calls. Cost: Estimated tax cost of $1.89 per $1,000 of assessed value. Election Results: Yes (61%) No *Double Majority Requirement Met: No ~ 34% Turnout November 2005 Local Election Results Prepared for Special District Association of Oregon By Western Advocates Incorporated Public Safety Measures -- Page 3");sQ1[42]=new Array("http://www.sdao.com/ref/Pub/localinfrastructuremeasures.pdf","Microsoft Word - Local Infrastructure Measures.doc","","LOCAL INFRASTRUCTURE MEASURES NOVEMBER 8, 2005 ~ SPECIAL ELECTION Clatsop County General Obligation Bond (Measure 4-112) Taxing District: Arch Cape Sanitary District Term: 31-Year Purpose: Finance costs of capital construction and improvements to the District's wastewater treatment plant and collection system in order to comply with DEQ requirements. Cost: $2.5 million bond. Estimated cost of $1.41 per $1,000 of assessed value. Election Results: Yes (89%) No *Double Majority Requirement Met: Yes ~ 68% Turnout Coos County Advisory Vote (Measure 6-112) Taxing District: City of Bandon Term: Five-Year Purpose: Expand use of 2001 voter-approved local option tax to include installing and improving public sidewalks, walkways, and bicycle paths. Current use of funds is limited to street improvements only. Cost: None. Election Results: Yes (73%) No Lane County Advisory Vote (Measure 20-107) Taxing District: City of Florence Term: Permanent Purpose: Approve a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between the City and the Confederated Tribes of the Coos, Lower Umpqua and Siuslaw Indians to allow the City to provide wastewater services to the Tribes' casino, hotel, other developments on Tribes' Hatch Tract, and other contiguous Highway 126 property located outside of the city limits.. Cost: Tribes would pay the City for wastewater services, including standard charges for wastewater services and annual costs associated with providing those services. Yes (61%) No Election Results: November 2005 Local Election Results Prepared for Special District Association of Oregon By Western Advocates Incorporated Infrastructure Measures -- Page 1 Lincoln County District Formation & Permanent Tax Rate Authority (Measure 21-103) Taxing District: Silver Sands Special Road District Term: Permanent Purpose: Formation of road district to maintain public roads within district boundaries. Cost: Permanent tax rate of $0.60 per $1,000 of assessed value. Election Results: Yes (78%) No *Double Majority Requirement Met: Yes ~ 90% Turnout Washington County Charter Amendment (Measure 34-112) Taxing District: City of Sherwood Term: Permanent Purpose: Allow City to use treated Willamette River water as future drinking water source. The City Charter currently prohibits the use of the Willamette River water as city drinking water without prior voter approval. Cost: Future costs associated with expansion of the Willamette Water Treatment Plant and construction of 5.1 miles of waterlines is estimated at $31.7 million. Approximately two thirds of this cost could be paid for by new development. Unknown estimated tax cost. Election Results: Yes (54%) No Fuel Tax (Measure 34-113) Taxing District: City of King City Term: Permanent Purpose: Impose a tax on motor vehicle fuel sold in the City to pay for street improvement costs. The tax is to be collected by motor fuel dealers and forwarded on to the City for street improvements. Revenues can only be used for planning, design, construction, maintenance, repair, operation and use of streets within King City. Cost: Maximum of two-cents per gallon on motor vehicle fuel sold in the City. Yes No (55%) Election Results: *Double Majority Requirement Met: Yes ~ 70% Turnout November 2005 Local Election Results Prepared for Special District Association of Oregon By Western Advocates Incorporated Infrastructure Measures -- Page 2");sQ1[43]=new Array("http://www.sdao.com/ref/Pub/breakdownofmeasures.pdf","Breakdown of Measures.xls","","Breakdown of November 2005 Local Measures Overall: Total # of Measures Passed: Total # of Measures Failed: Total # of Local Measures: 16 12 28 57.14% 42.86% 100.00% 75.00% 28.57% Measures Requiring Double Majority: 21 (of 28) Measures Failing due to Double Majority: (Receiving a majority of Yes votes but failed due to turnout) 6 of 21 Public Safety: Total # of Measures Passed: Total # of Measures Failed: Total # of Public Safety Measures: Measures Requiring Double Majority: Measures Failing due to Double Majority: (Receiving a majority of Yes votes but failed due to turnout) 3 6 9 9 (of 9) 5 of 9 33.33% 66.67% 100% 100.00% 55.56% School: Total # of Measures Passed: Total # of Measures Failed: Total # of School Measures: Measures Requiring Double Majority: Measures Failing due to Double Majority: (Receiving a majority of Yes votes but failed due to turnout) 5 3 8 8 (of 8) 0 of 8 62.50% 37.50% 100% 100.00% 0.00% Infrastructure: Total # of Measures Passed: Total # of Measures Failed: Total # of Infrastructure Measures: Measures Requiring Double Majority: Measures Failing due to Double Majority: (Receiving a majority of Yes votes but failed due to turnout) 5 1 6 3 (of 6) 0 of 3 83.33% 16.67% 100% 50.00% 0.00% Miscellaneous: Total # of Measures Passed: Total # of Measures Failed: Total # of Miscellaneous Measures: Measures Requiring Double Majority: Measures Failing due to Double Majority: (Receiving a majority of Yes votes but failed due to turnout) Prepared and Distributed by Western Advocates Inc. November 2005 Local Elections 3 2 5 1 (of 5) 1 of 1 60.00% 40.00% 100% 20.00% 100.00%");sQ1[44]=new Array("http://www.sdao.com/ref/Legislative/2005senateinterimcontactsheet.pdf","2005 Senate Interim Contact Sheet.xls","","2005 Oregon State Senate Interim Addresses Last Name Atkinson Bates Beyer Brown Burdick Carter Courtney Deckert Devlin Ferrioli George Gordly Johnson Kruse Metsger Monnes Anderson Morrisette Morse Nelson Prozanski Ringo Schrader Shields Starr Starr Verger Walker Westlund Whitsett Winters First Name Jason Alan Roger Kate Ginny Margaret Peter Ryan Richard Ted Gary Avel Betsy Jeff Rick Laurie Bill Frank David Floyd Charlie Kurt Frank Bruce Charles Joanne Vicki Ben Doug Jackie Party/ District Mailing Address R-2 D-3 R-9 D-21 D-18 D-22 D-11 D-14 D-19 R-30 R-12 D-23 D-16 R-1 D-26 D-25 D-6 R-8 R-29 D-4 D-17 D-20 D-24 R-15 R-13 D-5 D-7 R-27 R-28 R-10 P.O. Box 1704 344 E. Ashland Lane 39486 S. Cooper Road 900 Court St. NE, S-323 4641 SW Dosch Road P.O. Box 3722 900 Court St. NE, S-203 P.O. Box 2247 10290 SW Anderson Court 750 West Main Street 15195 NE Ribbon Ridge Rd 10809 NE Fremont P.O. Box R 636 Wild Iris Lane P.O. Box 287 P.O. Box 1531 348 G Street 900 Court St. NE, S-218 1407 NW Horn Avenue P.O. Box 11511 4085 SW 109th Avenue 900 Court St. NE. S-209 7802 SE 111th Avenue 22115 NW Imbrie Dr. #290 8330 SW River Road 2285 N. 13th Court P.O. Box 10314 20590 Arrowhead Drive 23131 North Poe Valley Road P.O. Box 126 City Grants Pass Ashland Molalla Salem Portland Portland Salem Beaverton Tualatin John Day Newberg Portland Scappoose Roseburg Welches Gresham Springfield Salem Pendleton Eugene Beaverton Salem Portland Hillsboro Hillsboro Coos Bay Eugene Bend Klamath Falls Salem Zip State Code OR OR OR OR OR OR OR OR OR OR OR OR OR OR OR OR OR OR OR OR OR OR OR OR OR OR OR OR OR OR 97528 97520 97038 97301 97239 97208 97301 97075 97062 97845 97132 97220 97056 97470 97067 97030 97477 97301 97801 97440 97005 97301 97266 97124 97123 97420 97401 97701 97603 97308 Phone 541-955-0911 541-482-1427 503-829-6910 503-777-6274 503-244-1444 503-282-6846 503-585-7449 503-986-1714 503-691-2026 541-575-2321 503-538-4122 503-288-0837 503-543-4046 541-673-7201 503-668-4378 503-618-3071 541-746-1378 541-979-0540 541-278-2332 541-342-2447 503-643-7500 503-263-2585 503-267-0302 503-649-4391 503-642-2024 541-267-5197 541-302-9533 541-383-4444 541-882-1315 503-581-9114 E-mail sen.jasonatkinson@state.or.us info@alanbates.net rwbeyer@molalla.net sen.katebrown@state.or.us sen.ginnyburdick@state.or.us sen.margaretcarter@state.or.us sen.petercourtney@state.or.us sen.ryandeckert@state.or.us sen.richarddevlin@state.or.us sen.tedferrioli@state.or.us sen.garygeorge@state.or.us sen.avelgordly@state.or.us betsy@betsyjohnson.com sen.jeffkruse@state.or.us sen.rickmetsger@state.or.us sen.lauriemonnesanderson@state.or.us morrsett@clipper.net sen.frankmorse@state.or.us sen.davidnelson@state.or.us sen.floydprozanski@state.or.us cringo@verizon.net sen.kurtschrader@state.or.us sen.frankshields@state.or.us senator@brucestarr.org kstarr@charlesstarr.org jverger@harborside.com sen.vickiwalker@state.or.us sen.benwestlund@state.or.us sen.dougwhitsett@state.or.us sen.jackiewinters@state.or.us 2005 State Senate Interim Contact Sheet Prepared by Western Advocates Inc.");sQ1[45]=new Array("http://www.sdao.com/ref/Legislative/2005houseinterimcontactsheet.pdf","2005 House Interim Contact Sheet.xls","","2005 Oregon House of Representatives Interim Addresses Last Name Ackerman Anderson Avakian Barker Barnhart Berger Beyer Boone Boquist Brown Bruun Buckley Burley Butler Cameron Dallum Dalto Dingfelder Esquivel Farr Flores Galizio Garrard Gilman Greenlick Hanna Hansen Hass Holvey Hunt First Name Robert Gordon Brad Jeff Phil Vicki Terry Deborah Brian Alan Scott Peter Chuck Tom Kevin John Billy Jackie Sal Debi Linda Larry Bill George Mitch Bruce Gary Mark Paul Dave Party/ District Mailing Address D-13 R-3 D-34 D-28 D-11 R-20 D-12 D-32 R-23 R-10 R-37 D-5 R-54 R-60 R-19 R-59 R-21 D-45 R-6 R-14 R-51 D-35 R-56 R-55 D-33 R-7 D-44 D-27 D-8 D-40 P.O. Box 41749 P.O. Box 1389 17915 NW Lonerock Drive P.O. Box 6751 P.O. Box 71188 900 Court St. NE, H-488 P.O. Box 131 P.O. Box 637 P.O. Box 165 1155 SW Coast Hwy 2020 8th Ave. MB 160 71 Dewey St. P.O. Box 9424 P.O. Box E 4742 Liberty Rd. S, #236 1900 W. 13th St. P.O. Box 943 P.O. Box 13432 711 Medford Center #178 4257 Barger Drive #272 P.O. Box 55 P.O. Box 231161 1420 California Ave. 3695 Dodson Drive 712 NW Spring Ave. 612 NW Cecil Ave. 628 N Tomahawk Island Drive 6505 SW 90th Avenue P.O. Box 51048 900 Court St. NE, H-473 City Eugene Grants Pass Portland Aloha Eugene Salem Springfield Cannon Beach Rickreall Newport West Linn Ashland Bend Ontario Salem The Dalles Salem Portland Medford Eugene Clackamas Tigard Klamath Falls Medford Portland Roseburg Portland Beaverton Eugene Salem Zip State Code OR OR OR OR OR OR OR OR OR OR OR OR OR OR OR OR OR OR OR OR OR OR OR OR OR OR OR OR OR OR 97403 97528 97229 97007 97401 97301 97477 97110 97371 97365 97068 97520 97708 97914 97302 97058 97308 97213 97504 97402 97015 97281 97601 97504 97229 97470 97217 97223 97405 97301 Phone 541-242-6486 541-476-3059 503-531-9783 503-649-1767 541-484-5119 503-986-1420 541-726-2533 503-717-9182 503-623-4426 541-265-8315 503-650-6958 541-621-7195 541-480-8007 541-889-3035 503-986-1419 541-296-5826 503-363-1271 503-493-2804 541-734-4369 541-688-4414 503-722-1419 503-516-1101 541-882-0490 541-858-1726 503-297-2416 541-440-9004 503-289-3995 503-292-0385 541-344-5636 503-650-5900 E-mail robertl@pacinfo.com gsagp@rvi.net rep.bradavakian@state.or.us rep.jeffbarker@state.or.us phil@philbarnhart.com rep.vickiberger@state.or.us rep.terrybeyer@state.or.us rep.deborahboone@state.or.us boquist@aol.com alan_brown@charter.net rep.scottbruun@state.or.us info@peterbuckley.org rep.chuckburley@state.or.us cpatom@fmtc.com rep.kevincameron@state.or.us rep.johndallum@state.or.us rep.billydalto@state.or.us rep.jackiedingfelder@state.or.us rep.salesquivel@state.or.us debi@debifarr.com floresteam@aol.com galizio@hevanet.com repgar@aol.com rep.georgegilman@state.or.us rep.mitchgreenlick@state.or.us bruce@brucehanna.com rep.garyhansen@state.or.us mark@markhass.com rep.paulholvey@state.or.us rep.davehunt@state.or.us 2005 House of Representatives Interim Contact Sheet Prepared by Western Advocates Inc. 2005 Oregon House of Representatives Interim Addresses Last Name Jenson Kitts Komp Krieger Kropf Krummel Lim Macpherson March Merkley Minnis Morgan Nelson Nolan Olson Richardson Riley Roblan Rosenbaum Schauffler Scott Shields Smith Smith Sumner Thatcher Tomei Whisnant Wirth Witt First Name Bob Derrick Betty Wayne Jeff Jerry John Greg Steve Jeff Karen Susan Donna Mary Andy Dennis Chuck Arnie Diane Mike Wayne Chip Greg Patti Mac Kim Carolyn Gene Kelley Brad Party/ District Mailing Address R-58 R-30 D-22 R-1 R-17 R-26 R-50 R-38 D-46 D-47 R-49 R-2 R-24 D-36 R-15 R-4 D-29 D-9 D-42 D-48 R-39 D-43 R-57 R-52 R-18 R-25 D-41 R-53 D-16 D-31 2126 NW Despain Avenue P.O. Box 1946 885 Garfield St. 95702 Skyview Ranch Road 900 Court Street NE, H-386 7544 SW Roanoke Drive 740 SE 25th St. 322 2nd Street 842 NE 44th Avenue P.O. Box 33167 P.O. Box 790 P.O. Box 2223 2150 Saint Andrews Drive NW P.O. Box 1686 P.O. Box 891 55 South 5th Street 250 NE Hillwood Drive 2170 Timberline Drive 1125 SE Madison #100B 12910 SE Ridgecrest Road P.O. Box 664 6606 NE Mallory P.O. Box 219 P.O. Box 209 1442 Meadowlawn Pl. P.O. Box 9111 11907 SE 19th Avenue P.O. Box 3565 900 Court St. NE 21740 Lindberg Rd. City Pendleton Hillsboro Woodburn Gold Beach Salem Wilsonville Gresham Lake Oswego Portland Portland Fairview Myrtle Creek McMinnville Portland Albany Central Point Hillsboro Coos Bay Portland Happy Valley Canby Portland Heppner Corbett Molalla Salem Milwaukie Sunriver Salem Clatskanie Zip State Code OR OR OR OR OR OR OR OR OR OR OR OR OR OR OR OR OR OR OR OR OR OR OR OR OR OR OR OR OR OR 97801 97123 97071 97444 97301 97070 97080 97034 97213 97292 97024 97457 97128 97207 97321 97502 97124 97420 97214 97236 97013 97211 97836 97019 97038 97305 97222 97707 97301 97016 Phone 541-276-2707 503-693-6231 503-981-6061 541-247-7990 503-986-1417 503-570-8723 503-239-5200 503-635-2648 503-235-9708 503-261-7826 503-666-7186 541-784-2283 503-472-8015 503-221-4999 541-967-6576 541-601-0083 503-640-8689 541-267-6609 503-231-9970 503-760-4446 503-266-7589 503-493-4411 541-676-5154 503-695-6385 503-829-8861 503-932-6382 503-653-5180 541-598-7560 541-738-8707 503-986-1431 E-mail bjenson@oregontrail.net rep.derrickkitts@state.or.us bkomp@arczip.com wkrieger@harborside.com rep.jeffkropf@state.or.us rep.jerrykrummel@state.or.us rep.johnlim@state.or.us rep.gregmacpherson@state.or.us march415@teleport.com rep.jeffmerkley@state.or.us rep.karenminnis@state.or.us rep.susanmorgan@state.or.us grit@onlinemac.com rep.marynolan@state.or.us rep.andyolson@state.or.us rep.dennisrichardson@state.or.us chuck@chuckriley.org arnie@arniefororegon.com rep.dianerosenbaum@state.or.us mikeschaufler@comcast.net rep.waynescott@state.or.us rep.chipshields@state.or.us repgregsmith@windwave.org rep.pattismith@state.or.us rep.macsumner@state.or.us rep.kimthatcher@state.or.us rep.carolyntomei@state.or.us rep.genewhisnant@state.or.us rep.kelleywirth@state.or.us rep.bradwitt@state.or.us 2005 House of Representatives Interim Contact Sheet Prepared by Western Advocates Inc.");sQ1[46]=new Array("http://www.sdao.com/ref/Legislative/measure37.htm","Untitled Document","","FILED: February 21, 2006 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF OREGON HECTOR MACPHERSON; BANNOCKBURN FARMS, INC.; CLACKAMAS COUNTY FARM BUREAU; LINN COUNTY FARM BUREAU; WASHINGTON COUNTY FARM BUREAU; MARION COUNTY FARM BUREAU; YAMHILL COUNTY FARM BUREAU; DAVID T. ADAMS; MARK TIPPERMAN; JAMES D. GILBERT; NORTHWOODS NURSERY, INC.; DAVID A. VANASCHE; KEITH FISHBACK; FISHBACK NURSERY, INC.; JACK CHAPIN and 1000 FRIENDS OF OREGON, Plaintiffs-Respondents, v. DEPARTMENT OF ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES, Risk Management Division, by and through Laurie Warner, its Acting Director; LAND CONSERVATION AND DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION, Department of Land Conservation and Development, by and through Lane Shetterly, its Director; and THE STATE OF OREGON DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, by and through its Attorney General, Hardy Myers, Defendants-Appellants, and CLACKAMAS COUNTY ; MARION COUNTY ; and WASHINGTON COUNTY , Defendants, and BARBARA PRETE; EUGENE PRETE; DOROTHY ENGLISH; HOWARD MEREDITH; and JACKSON COUNTY ; Intervenors-Defendants-Appellants. (CC No. 05C10444; SC S52875) En Banc On direct review of the General Judgment and Order dated October 24, 2005 , filed in Marion County Circuit Court, Mary Mertens James, Judge. Argued and submitted January 10, 2006 . Russell L. Baldwin, Lincoln City , argued the cause and filed the briefs for appellant Howard Meredith. Michael D. Jewett, Jackson County Counsel, Medford , argued the cause and filed the brief for intervenor-appellant Jackson County . Janet A. Metcalf, Assistant Attorney General, argued the cause for appellants Department of Administrative Services, Land Conservation and Development Commission, and The State of Oregon Department of Justice. With her on the briefs were Hardy Myers, Attorney General, Mary H. Williams, Solicitor General, Stephanie Striffler, Special Counsel to the Attorney General, Erika Hadlock and Kaye E. McDonald, Assistant Attorneys General. James L. Huffman, pro hac vice, Tigard, argued the cause for intervenor-appellants Barbara Prete, Eugene Prete, and Dorothy English. With him on the brief were Ross A. Day and David J. Hunnicutt. Todd S. Baran, Portland , argued the cause and filed the brief for respondents. John M. Groen, of Groen Stephens & Klinge, LLP, Bellevue , Washington , and Russell C. Brooks, Andrew C. Cook, Pacific Legal Foundation, Bellevue , Washington , filed a brief on behalf of amicus curiae Pacific Legal Foundation. David B. Smith, Tigard, filed a brief on behalf of amici curiae Dennis Rasmussen, Harvey Kempema, and Charles Hoff. David J. Hunnicutt, Tigard, filed a brief on behalf of amici curiae Oregon Cattlemen's Association, Oregon State Grange, and Oregonians in Action. Edward H. Trompke, of Jordan Schrader PC, Portland , filed a brief on behalf of amici curiae National Association of Home Builders and Oregon Home Builders Association. With him on the brief was Lisa Grump. Glenn Klein, of Harrang Long Gary Rudnick, PC, Eugene, filed a brief on behalf of amicus curiae League of Oregon Cities. Jason T. Elder, of Sidley Austin Brown & Wood LLP, Hong Kong, and Carter G. Phillips, Jay T. Jorgensen, and Brian R. Matsui, of Sidley Austin Brown & Wood LLP, Washington, DC, and Scott A. LaGanga, Property rights Alliance, Washington, DC, filed a brief on behalf of amici curiae Property Rights Alliance, American Association of Small Property Owners, Americans for Tax Reform, American Land Rights Association, Bluegrass Institute for Public Policy Solutions, Citizens Against Government Waste, Citizens' Alliance for Property Rights, Defenders of Property Rights, Illinois Policy Institute, National Center for Public Policy Research, National Taxpayers Union, Oregon Livestock Producers Association, Small Business and Entrepreneurship Council, and The American Family Business Institute. Dorothy S. Cofield , Cofield Law Office, Lake Oswego , filed a brief on behalf of amicus curiae Washington Legal Foundation. Richard M. Stephens, of Groen Stephens & Klinge LLP, Bellevue, Washington, and William H. Mellor, Jeffrey T. Rowes, Institute for Justice, Arlington, Virginia, and William R. Maurer, Institute for Justice, Washington Chapter, Seattle, Washington, filed a brief on behalf of amicus curiae Institute for Justice. Edward J. Sullivan and Carrie A. Richter, of Garvey Schubert Barer, Portland , filed a brief on behalf of amici curiae Oregon Chapter of the American Planning Association and the American Planning Association. Charles F. Hinkle, ACLU Foundation of Oregon, Inc., Portland , filed a brief on behalf of amicus curiae ACLU Foundation of Oregon, Inc. DE MUNIZ, C. J. The judgment of the circuit court is reversed, and the case is remanded for entry of judgment in favor of defendants and intervenors. DE MUNIZ, C. J. In this case, we are required to determine the constitutionality of Ballot Measure 37 (2004), a statutory enactment that the people approved at the 2004 General Election. (1) The measure requires government to either compensate landowners for reductions of real property fair market value due to certain "land use regulation[s]" or modify, remove, or not apply such regulations. (2) Plaintiffs filed the present declaratory judgment action in circuit court pursuant to ORS 28.020 and ORS 250.044, (3) seeking to invalidate Measure 37 on various state and federal constitutional grounds. The trial court agreed with plaintiffs, concluding that Measure 37 (1) impermissibly intruded on the legislature's plenary power; (2) violated the equal privileges and immunities guarantee of the Oregon Constitution; (3) impermissibly suspended the laws in violation of the Oregon Constitution; (4) violated the separation of powers principles of the Oregon Constitution; and (5) violated the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution. As a result, the trial court declared Measure 37 invalid and entered judgment for plaintiffs. Defendants and intervenors appealed to this court pursuant to ORS 250.044(5). After considering all the parties' arguments on appeal, we reverse the judgment of the trial court. I. FACTS AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND In general, Measure 37 requires state and local governments to compensate private property owners for the reduction in the fair market value of their real property that results from any land use regulations of those governmental entities that restrict the use of the subject properties. As an alternative to the requirement of compensation, however, Measure 37 allows state and local governments to "modify, remove or not * * * apply the land use regulation or land use regulations to allow the owner to use the property for a use permitted at the time the owner acquired the property." ORS 197.352(8). Measure 37 limits compensation and relief from land use regulations to property owners who acquired their property prior to the enactment of the land use regulations that provide the basis for their claims. The people enacted Measure 37 through the initiative process at the 2004 General Election, and the measure became effective on December 2, 2004. On January 14, 2005 , plaintiffs filed the present action, pursuant to ORS 28.020 and ORS 250.044, challenging the validity of Measure 37. Plaintiffs sought a declaration that the measure was unconstitutional based on several provisions of both the Oregon Constitution and the United States Constitution. Plaintiffs named as defendants the Department of Administrative Services, the Land Conservation and Development Commission, and the Department of Justice (collectively, "defendants"). (4) Five parties also intervened as defendants in the action, including the chief petitioners for the initiative petition that ultimately was certified to the ballot as Measure 37 (collectively, "intervenors"). (5) Before the trial court, the parties moved for summary judgment respecting plaintiffs' constitutional challenges. Intervenors also raised arguments regarding plaintiffs' standing to challenge Measure 37 and other aspects of justiciability. Following a hearing on September 13, 2005, the trial court issued a written opinion granting plaintiffs' motion for summary judgment and denying the summary judgment motions filed by defendants and intervenors; the trial court also rejected intervenors' arguments regarding standing and justiciability. In so ruling, the trial court accepted certain of plaintiffs' constitutional arguments and entered a judgment on October 24, 2005, declaring that Measure 37 was unconstitutional and invalid. Pursuant to ORS 250.044(5), see ___ Or at ___ n 3 (slip op at 1 n 3), defendants and the intervenors appealed that judgment directly to this court. II. JUSTICIABILITY We first address the various justiciability issues that certain intervenors have raised. Intervenor English contends that the trial court erred in holding that plaintiffs have standing to assert their claims because none of the plaintiffs can show an actual, concrete impact stemming from Measure 37. We reject Intervenor English's standing argument for the reasons described below. As noted earlier, plaintiffs brought this action under ORS 28.020, Oregon's declaratory judgment statute. To establish standing under ORS 28.020 in a case in which there are multiple plaintiffs, only one plaintiff must show "some injury or other impact upon a legally recognized interest beyond an abstract interest in the correct application or validity of a law." League of Oregon Cities v. State of Oregon, 334 Or 645, 658, 56 P3d 892 (2002). Plaintiff Adams meets that criterion. Plaintiffs allege in their complaint that Adams owns residential property in Clackamas County. Adams's neighbor filed a Measure 37 claim, seeking to subdivide his property for residential construction. Under applicable land use regulations, the neighbor could not subdivide his property for that purpose. Prior to the trial court's decision in this case, the Department of Land Conservation and Development decided not to apply the applicable land use regulations and granted permission to the neighbor to subdivide his property. Plaintiffs allege that Adams will suffer the following concrete harms stemming from his neighbor's successful Measure 37 claim: (1) diminished water quantity and quality available to Adams's property; (2) increased traffic; (3) an increased tax burden due to increased enrollment in the local school system; and (4) increased pollution. We conclude that plaintiffs' allegations concerning Adams are sufficiently plausible and concrete to support standing. SeeLeague of Oregon Cities, 334 Or at 661 (concluding that plaintiffs who submitted evidence regarding "plausible, concrete ramifications" of implementation of ballot measure at issue had satisfied standing requirement of ORS 28.020). Intervenor Meredith argues that this case is not justiciable for another reason. He contends that plaintiffs' claims are not ripe because their facial challenge to Measure 37 does not present an actual controversy. According to Meredith, an actual controversy does not arise until after a claimant can bring an action for compensation under Measure 37, which, according to the measure, is after 180 days have elapsed following a written demand for compensation. ORS 197.352(6). We disagree. This court has explained that a ripe claim for declaratory judgment under ORS 28.020 "must involve present facts as opposed to a dispute which is based on future events of a hypothetical issue." Brown v. Oregon State Bar, 293 Or 446, 449, 648 P2d 1289 (1982). Plaintiffs' claims involve present facts. Measure 37 became effective on December 2, 2004 . As previously explained, plaintiff Adams 's neighbor is a Measure 37 claimant. The Department of Land Conservation and Development has decided not to apply the applicable land use regulations in response to the neighbor's claim, thereby allowing the neighbor to subdivide his property. Those facts are "present facts" giving rise to a justiciable controversy, not hypothetical future events. (6) Intervenor Meredith also contends that plaintiffs' claims are not justiciable because plaintiffs failed to exhaust their administrative remedies. According to Meredith, plaintiffs were required to comply with procedures outlined in the Oregon Administrative Procedures Act, ORS 183.310 to 183.750, before filing an action to challenge the validity of Measure 37. That argument has no merit for the simple reason that Meredith has not identified any administrative scheme -- and we know of none -- that, either inherently or by statutory directive, requires plaintiffs to proceed through any administrative steps before challenging the constitutionality of Measure 37 under ORS 250.044. In sum, we conclude that none of intervenors' arguments respecting justiciability of plaintiffs' claims is well taken. We turn to the merits. III. CONSTITUTIONALITY OF MEASURE 37 As noted, the trial court declared Measure 37 to be unconstitutional on five grounds. In this court, in addition to supporting the five grounds that the trial court identified, plaintiffs also renew two constitutional challenges to Measure 37 that the trial court rejected: (1) Measure 37 impermissibly waives sovereign immunity; and (2) Measure 37 violates separation of powers principles by encroaching on executive power and by improperly delegating legislative power without adequate safeguards. We discuss plaintiffs' constitutional challenges below, beginning with plaintiffs' arguments under the Oregon Constitution. See, e.g., Sealey v. Hicks, 309 Or 387, 397, 788 P2d 435 (1990), overruled in part on other grounds by Smothers v. Gresham Transfer, Inc., 332 Or 83, 23 P3d 333 (2001) ("As is our normal practice, we consider * * * state constitutional challenges before moving on to federal issues."). A. Oregon Constitution 1. Intrusion on the Plenary Power to Legislate We begin with the trial court's conclusion that Measure 37 is invalid because it unconstitutionally "imposes limitations on government's exercise of plenary power to regulate land use in Oregon[.]" For the reasons set forth below, we disagree with that conclusion. At its outset, Measure 37 provides: "If a public entity enacts or enforces a new land use regulation or enforces a land use regulation enacted prior to December 2, 2004, that restricts the use of private real property or any interest therein and has the effect of reducing the fair market value of the property, or any interest therein, then the owner of the property shall be paid just compensation." ORS 197.352(1). In lieu of providing just compensation, the measure alternatively allows "the governing body responsible for enacting the land use regulation [to] modify, remove, or not * * * apply the land use regulation or land use regulations." ORS 197.352(8). In the trial court's view, the foregoing provisions of Measure 37 required the government either to "pay to govern," if it wished to enforce a particular land use regulation, or to refrain from enforcing the regulation in some manner. Based on that reading of the measure, the court held that the measure so eviscerated the legislature's plenary power to regulate land use that the fact "that a later legislature could decide to repeal [the measure's] condition on enforcement [did] not make it permissible." In our view, the trial court misunderstood the nature of the plenary legislative power. In Oregon, the Legislative Assembly and the people, acting through the initiative or referendum processes, share in exercising legislative power. See Or Const, Art IV, §§ 1(1), (2)(a), (3)(a) (vesting in both bodies the power to propose, enact, and reject laws). Respecting the nature of that power, this court previously has explained that "[p]lenary power in the legislature, for all purposes of civil government, is the rule, and a prohibition to exercise a particular power is an exception. It, therefore, is competent for the legislature to enact any law not forbidden by the constitution or delegated to the federal government or prohibited by the constitution of the United States." Jory v. Martin, 153 Or 278, 285, 56 P2d 1093 (1936). Thus, limitations on legislative power must be grounded in specific provisions of either the state or federal constitutions. See, e.g., State v. Hirsch/Friend, 338 Or 622, 639, 114 P3d 1104 (2005) ("any constitutional limitations on the state's actions must be found within the language or history of the constitution itself" (internal quotation marks and citation omitted)). Plaintiffs argue that constitutional limits on legislative power need not be express, but can be implied. We agree with that general proposition. As this court previously has stated: "Our constitution, like all other state constitutions, is not to be regarded as a grant of power, but rather a limitation upon the powers of the legislature. The people[,] in adopting it, committed to the legislature the whole law making power of the state, which they did not expressly or impliedly withhold." Wright v. Blue Mt. Hospital Dist., 214 Or 141, 144-45, 328 P2d 314 (1958) (emphasis added). However, even implied limitations must find their source in some constitutional provision. That is so because, "without such a conflict with a written constitutional provision, there is no basis for any general judicial power to invalidate a law if it is 'bad' enough." Hans Linde, Without "Due Process: Unconstitutional Law in Oregon," 49 Or L Rev 125, 130 (1970). A treatise that plaintiffs themselves cite recognizes that same principle: "The inhibition of a Constitution may be either express or implied; that is[,] the Constitution may expressly prohibit any specified act of the legislature, or the Constitution by its inherent terms may of necessity prohibit certain acts of the legislature by reason of inherent conflict that would arise between the terms of the Constitution and the power claimed in favor of the legislature." Thomas M. Cooley, 1 A Treatise on the Constitutional Limitations 176 n 4 (8th ed 1927) (emphasis added). Here, however, plaintiffs cite no constitutional provision -- and we know of none -- that either expressly or impliedly limits the power of the Legislative Assembly or the people, exercising their initiative power, to authorize state or local entities to decide, in accordance with Measure 37, whether to pay just compensation or to modify, remove, or not apply certain land use regulations. (7) Not only have plaintiffs failed to ground their argument in the Oregon Constitution, but the premise of their argument is also mistaken. Contrary to the assumption underlying their argument, Oregon 's legislative bodies have not divested themselves of the right to enact new land use regulations in the future. Nothing in Measure 37 forbids the Legislative Assembly or the people from enacting new land use statutes, from repealing all land use statutes, or from amending or repealing Measure 37 itself. Simply stated, Measure 37 is an exercise of the plenary power, not a limitation on it. (8) The measure does not impair the plenary power of the Legislative Assembly or the people's exercise of their initiative power. The trial court's contrary conclusion was error. 2. Violation of Equal Privileges and Immunities As noted earlier, Measure 37 limits application of its compensation and relief provisions to those landowners who acquired their property prior to enactment of the land use regulations that they wish to avoid. Based on that provision, the trial court held that Measure 37 violated Article I, section 20, of the Oregon Constitution because the measure favored what the trial court characterized as a "true class" comprised of property owners who obtained their properties before the relevant land use regulations became effective (the "preowners"). The measure, according to plaintiffs and the trial court, therefore disfavored property owners who obtained their properties after the relevant land use regulations became effective (the "postowners"). After concluding that Measure 37 implicated "true classes," the trial court applied a so-called "rational basis" review and concluded that Measure 37 was not rationally related to any legitimate government interest that would justify treating those "classes" differently. For the reasons set forth below, we disagree with that analysis. Article I, section 20, provides: "No law shall be passed granting to any citizen or class of citizens privileges, or immunities, which, upon the same terms, shall not equally belong to all citizens." Article I, section 20, guarantees equality of privileges to each individual citizen as well as to "classes" of citizens. SeeState v. Clark, 291 Or 231, 239, 63 P2d 810 (1981) (Article I, section 20, is a guarantee against unjustified denial of equal privileges as much as against unjustified differentiation among classes of citizens). Some litigants seeking the protection of Article I, section 20, claim -- as do plaintiffs here -- that a particular "class," of which they are not a member, unlawfully has been accorded a special privilege or status. Other litigants claim that they are members of a "class" suffering disparate treatment without legitimate reason. In either situation, this court consistently has held that the protection that Article I, section 20, affords is available to only those individuals or groups whom the law classifies according to characteristics that exist apart from the enactment that they challenge. See, e.g., Sealey, 309 Or at 397 (classes that the challenged law itself creates are not considered "classes" for purposes of Article I, section 20). That is so because, "every law itself can be said to 'classify' what it covers [as distinct] from what is excludes." Clark, 291 Or at 240. Indeed, this court consistently has rejected challenges to statutes under Article I, section 20, when the statutes themselves have created the alleged classes. For example, in Hale v. Port of Portland, 308 Or 508, 525, 783 P2d 506 (1989), overruled in part on other grounds bySmothers, 332 Or 83, this court rejected an Article I, section 20, challenge to the Oregon Tort Claims Act (OTCA) because the alleged disfavored class (victims of governmental torts) existed as a class only by virtue of the statutory scheme. Similarly, in Greist v. Phillips, 322 Or 281, 292, 906 P2d 789 (1995), this court held that a statute capping noneconomic damages in wrongful death actions at $500,000 did not violate Article I, section 20. The court explained that the challenged law itself created the distinction between persons who could receive more than $500,000 and persons who could not, and that Article I, section 20, did not bar the legislature from creating such distinctions. Id. It is true that, before the adoption of Measure 37, certain property owners had acquired their property prior to the enactment of certain relevant land use regulations, while others had acquired their property after the enactment of certain relevant land use regulations. That distinction between preowners and postowners, however, is significant only by virtue of Measure 37 itself. In other words, the date that an owner acquired property has no significance apart from Measure 37. Nevertheless, plaintiffs contend that the classes that Measure 37 creates are "fixed" or "closed" and, for that reason, Measure 37 violates Article I, section 20. In so arguing, however, plaintiffs misconstrue this court's precedents in that regard. Plaintiffs correctly note that this court has stated that "[l]aws which are left open for individuals voluntarily to bring themselves within a favored class do not violate Article I, section 20." Wilson v. Dept. of Rev., 302 Or 128, 132, 727 P2d 614 (1986). However, plaintiffs go on to argue that the converse of that proposition also is true; i.e., they assert that a law that provides a privilege or immunity to a "fixed" or "closed" class must be invalid. This court's decisions in Sealey, Hale, and Greist all demonstrate that that assertion is incorrect. The statutes at issue in those cases all involved classes that were "closed"; that is, the persons allegedly disfavored by the statutes at issue could not "bring themselves within" the classes of persons who were favored. In Hale, for example, victims of governmental torts whose damages were limited under the OTCA could not alter the identity of the alleged tortfeasor to evade that limitation. 308 Or at 524-25. Similarly, in Sealey, persons injured in products liability actions could not alter the sources or timing of their injuries to avoid the applicable statute of repose, ORS 30.905. Sealey, 309 Or at 397-98. Yet, neither statutory scheme violated Article I, section 20. A moment's reflection illustrates that the foregoing refutation of plaintiff's theory must be correct. Were it not, plaintiffs' theory would mean that the legislature would be precluded from enacting a law benefitting, for example, Vietnam veterans or Gulf War veterans, both closed classes. Here, the postowners' inability to "bring themselves within" the class of preowners does not render Measure 37 invalid. We conclude that Measure 37 does not offend Article I, section 20, as plaintiffs contend. 3. Impermissible Suspension of the Laws Article I, section 22, of the Oregon Constitution provides that "[t]he operation of the laws shall never be suspended, except by the Authority of the Legislative Assembly." (Emphasis added.) The trial court accepted plaintiffs' view that Measure 37 had the effect of suspending land use regulations, but only for certain property owners -- that is, those who acquired their property before the land use regulations in question had become effective. As already explained, the trial court then held that "suspending" the laws in that manner violated Article I, section 20. In the trial court's view, Measure 37 therefore also violated Article I, section 22, because the suspension clause set out in that constitutional provision "must not [be used] to provide a privilege or immunity that is not available to all." According to defendants, the trial court's conclusion is wrong in two respects. First, they argue that Measure 37 does not constitute a "suspension of laws"; second, they argue that, even if Measure 37 did effect a "suspension of laws," Article I, section 22, does not operate as a limit on the legislature. In response, plaintiffs echo the trial court's conclusion that, by allowing only certain property owners to avoid land use regulations, Measure 37 effects only a limited suspension of the land use regulations. And, because Article I, section 22, authorizes only general suspensions of the laws, plaintiffs argue, it follows that Measure 37 is unconstitutional. As described below, we disagree with plaintiffs and conclude that Article I, section 22, does not operate to invalidate Measure 37. We first address the wording of the suspension clause of Article I, section 22, which has remained unchanged since the adoption of the Oregon Constitution in 1859. See Charles Henry Carey, The Oregon Constitution and Proceeding and Debates of the Constitutional Convention of 1857 403 (1926) (citing original constitution). A nineteenth-century dictionary defines "suspend," for our purposes here, as "to interrupt; to intermit; to cause to cease for time"; "to stay, to delay; to hinder from proceeding for a time"; or "to cause to cease for a time from operation or effect." Noah Webster, 1 An American Dictionary of the English Language, s.v. "suspend" (Johnson 1828); see also Rico-Villalobos v. Guisto, 339 Or 197, 206, 118 P3d 246 (2005) (when analyzing terms in original Oregon Constitution, court examines meanings of terms as framers would have understood them). Applying those definitions, it is clear that Measure 37 does not "cause to cease for a time," "delay," or "interrupt" any land use regulation. Instead, it authorizes a governing body to "modify, remove, or not * * * apply" certain such regulations in specific situations. The measure is, in effect, an amendment of the land use regulations in those particulars. No law is "suspended"; all laws not amended remain in effect. Nothing in the history of the adoption of Article I, section 22, (9) or this court's case law contradicts the foregoing reading of the text of that provision. (10)SeePriest v. Pearce, 314 Or 411, 414-15, 840 P2d 65 (1992) (describing methodology for analyzing constitutional provision). The trial court's conclusion that Measure 37 unconstitutionally suspended land use regulations was error. 4. Violation of Separation of Powers Principles Article III, section 1, of the Oregon Constitution provides: "The powers of the Government shall be divided into three seperate [sic] departments, the Legislative, the Executive, including the administrative, and the Judicial; and no person charged with official duties under one of these departments, shall exercise any of the functions of another, except as in this Constitution expressly provided." The trial court held that Measure 37 violated Article III, section 1, to the extent that the measure "purports to permit the legislature to delegate to public entities a limit on the legislature's plenary power, the authority to treat a class of property owners * * * differently from other property owners * * *, and the suspension of land use regulations for a specified group of property owners." As stated, the trial court's separation of powers holding explicitly relied on its earlier conclusions that Measure 37 impermissibly intruded on the legislature's plenary power, violated Article I, section 20, and violated Article I, section 22. We already have concluded that Measure 37 does none of those things. It follows that the trial court's stated reasons for holding that Measure 37 violated Article III, section 1, were also incorrect. Plaintiffs, however, raise two additional separation of powers arguments in support of the trial court's ruling. Specifically, plaintiffs contend that Measure 37 violates Article III, section 1, because it (1) intrudes on the executive power; and (2) fails to provide adequate safeguards to prevent improper use of the power conferred. Because the roles of governmental actors frequently overlap, this court has held that the separation of powers doctrine does not require an "absolute separation between the departments of government." Rooney v. Kulongoski, 322 Or 15, 28, 902 P2d 1143 (1995). Instead, a separation of powers analysis under the Oregon Constitution involves two inquiries: (1) whether one department of government has "unduly burdened" the actions of another department where the constitution has committed the responsibility for the governmental activity in question to that latter department; and (2) whether one department has performed functions that the constitution commits to another department. Id. (citations omitted). Plaintiffs focus on the second inquiry. Measure 37 provides that "the governing body responsible for enacting the land use regulation may modify, remove or not * * * apply" that land use regulation. ORS 197.352(8). Plaintiffs contend that, in so providing, Measure 37 improperly allows legislative bodies, rather than the executive, to determine whether and when to enforce a general law. Specifically, plaintiffs appear to argue that, because "enacting" a land use regulation is a legislative function, the "governing body" deciding whether to modify, remove, or not apply a particular regulation cannot be the same body that enacted the legislation. Plaintiffs' argument, however, rests upon two assumptions: (1) the "governing body" referred to in the measure can be only a legislative body; and (2) the decision to pay compensation or to modify, remove, or not apply a land use regulation can be only an executive function. As explained below, plaintiffs' assumptions do not support the type of separation of powers violation required for plaintiffs' argument to succeed. As noted, Measure 37 directs "the governing body responsible for enacting the land use regulation" in question to decide whether to pay compensation to property owners who acquired their property prior to the enactment of that regulation or to "modify, remove or not * * * apply" that regulation. ORS 197.352(8) (emphasis added). That provision does not concentrate executive power in the legislative branch. Indeed, if the "governing body" in question is a state agency that is itself part of the executive branch, then Measure 37 removes no executive function from the executive branch and devolves none on its legislative counterpart. The flaw in plaintiffs' argument becomes even more clear when the "governing bodies" in question are comprised of local city or county officials. Such bodies are not solely legislative, executive, or judicial. As this court has explained, "members [of local general-purpose governing bodies] are politically elected to positions that do not separate legislative from executive and judicial power on the state or federal model; characteristically they combine lawmaking with administration that is sometimes executive and sometimes adjudicative." 1000 Friends of Oregon v. Wasco Co. Court, 304 Or 76, 82, 742 P2d 39 (1987); see alsoFasano v. Washington Co. Comm., 264 Or 574, 580, 507 P2d 23 (1973) ("Local and small decision groups are simply not the equivalent in all respects of state and national legislatures."). Plaintiffs' argument fails to undermine the constitutional permissibility of the "combined functions" performed by local government bodies. In our view, plaintiffs have not demonstrated -- as they must to prevail on their separation of power argument -- that Measure 37 improperly delegates executive power to legislative bodies. Plaintiffs also assert that Measure 37 delegates legislative authority without providing adequate safeguards against "arbitrary and deleterious exercise of the power" so delegated. We continue to take the following view, first expressed by this court nearly a half century ago: "There is no constitutional requirement that all delegation of legislative power must be accompanied by a statement of standards circumscribing its exercise." Warren v. MarionCounty, 222 Or 307, 313, 353 P2d 257 (1960). Rather, the procedure established for the exercise of that power must furnish adequate safeguards against the arbitrary exercise of the delegated power. Id. at 314. Measure 37 does just that. The measure provides a cause of action for claimants seeking compensation. ORS 197.352(6). Further, avenues exist for both claimants and interested third parties, such as plaintiffs, to obtain judicial review of the decisions that local governing bodies make in accordance with the measure. Those avenues provide adequate safeguards against the arbitrary exercise of power, as Warren requires. We therefore hold that Measure 37 does not violate the separation of powers principles encompassed in Article III, section 1. 5. Impermissible Waiver of Sovereign Immunity Article IV, section 24, of the Oregon Constitution authorizes the state to waive its sovereign immunity, as follows: "Provision may be made by general law, for bringing suit against the State, as to all liabilities originating after, or existing at the time of the adoption of this Constitution; but no special act authorizeing [sic] such suit to be brought, or making compensation to any person claiming damages against the State, shall ever be passed." Plaintiffs contend that ORS 197.352(6) impermissibly waives sovereign immunity. That section authorizes a Measure 37 claimant to bring an action for compensation, including reasonable attorney fees, expenses, and costs, if a challenged land use regulation continues to apply to the subject property more than 180 days after the claimant filed a written Measure 37 claim. ORS 197.352(6). (11) Plaintiffs assert that Article IV, section 24, does not extend to liabilities for economic consequences of regulation. As explained below, we disagree. Article IV, section 24, allows the state to waive immunity "as to all liabilities originating after, or existing at the time of the adoption of this Constitution." Or Const, Art IV, § 24 (emphasis added). That section neither creates nor limits sovereign immunity. As this court discussed in Hale, Article XVIII, section 7, of the Oregon Constitution incorporated sovereign immunity from the Oregon Territory's pre-existing law. Hale, 308 Or at 514-15; see also Or Const, Art XVIII, § 7 (declaring that territorial laws continued through adoption of Oregon Constitution). "Sovereign immunity originated in the rule that the English King could not be sued in his own courts." Hale, 308 Or at 513. Article IV, section 24, in turn, allocates the power to waive sovereign immunity, within specified limits, to the legislature. Id. at 516. Plaintiffs contend that neither the Legislative Assembly nor the people exercising their initiative power are permitted to waive sovereign immunity simply to "subject the state to suit for purely consequential economic harm caused by past or prospective regulation." However, plaintiffs point to nothing in Article IV, section 24, itself, or in case law interpreting that section, that so limits the legislative authority. (12) Nothing in Article IV, section 24, or, so far as we are aware, in any other state constitutional provision, forbids the state from deciding that it will compensate property owners for the economic consequences of the state's land use regulations, including waiving the state's sovereign immunity to permit those owners to assert their claims in court. We conclude that Article IV, section 24, does not bar Oregon 's legislative bodies from waiving immunity as the people have chosen to do in enacting Measure 37. (13) B. United State Constitution: Due Process Clause Having rejected all plaintiffs' state constitutional arguments, we turn to plaintiffs' arguments based on the United States Constitution. Plaintiffs' federal constitutional arguments are limited to the Fourteenth Amendment's Due Process Clause. (14) Plaintiffs' due process claim raises both the procedural and substantive components of due process. As to the procedural component, the trial court held that Measure 37 violated the procedural due process rights of affected nonclaimant property owners because the measure failed to provide predeprivation procedures for those property owners to challenge governmental actions that adversely would affect their property interests. The trial court held that, because nearby property owners may suffer "irreparable harm" as a result of a governmental decision to modify, remove, or not apply a land use regulation, property owners so affected "must be given notice and an opportunity to be heard before a public entity decides the Measure 37 claim." (Emphasis in original.) (15) In so ruling, the trial court asked more of Measure 37 than the measure was required to deliver. While it is true that Measure 37 does not expressly provide the predeprivation procedures that the trial court outlined, it does not follow that that omission renders Measure 37 unconstitutional under the Fourteenth Amendment. The foregoing is true because, at least for purposes of this case, plaintiffs are asserting only a facial challenge to Measure 37. Plaintiffs therefore must demonstrate that Measure 37 affirmatively permits the government to deprive plaintiffs of their property without affording procedural due process. SeeUnited States v. Salerno, 481 US 739, 745, 107 S Ct 2095, 95 L Ed 2d 697 (1987) (plaintiffs asserting facial challenge bear "heavy burden" to demonstrate that statute cannot be constitutionally applied under any circumstance). Nothing in Measure 37 denies predeprivation procedures to individuals such as plaintiffs who may wish to challenge particular governmental actions that may harm individual property interests. Neither does Measure 37 preclude responsible governmental entities from implementing such predeprivation procedures. To the contrary, Measure 37 contemplates that a "metropolitan service district, city, or county, or state agency may adopt or apply procedures for the processing of claims under this act[.]" ORS 197.352(7). And, as the trial court noted, for claims that a state entity must decide, the state has adopted rules that provide for notice and an opportunity to be heard to affected third parties. See OAR 125-145-0080 (outlining procedures). Plaintiffs do not contend that those procedures are insufficient or that similar procedures adopted by local officials would be insufficient. Therefore, even assuming that predeprivation procedures are constitutionally required for Measure 37 claims in the manner that plaintiffs contend -- an issue that we do not decide here -- many circumstances exist in which applying the statute would not violate the constitution. SeeSalerno, 481 US at 745 (to succeed in a facial challenge under Due Process Clause, "the challenger must establish that no set of circumstances exists under which [the statute] would be valid"). We therefore conclude that Measure 37, on its face, does not violate plaintiffs' procedural due process rights. The trial court also concluded that Measure 37 violated the substantive component of the Fourteenth Amendment's Due Process Clause. The trial court explained that, although the measure did not implicate a fundamental right, "the government, through the initiative process, couldnot have had a legitimate reason for enacting Measure 37, because, as described earlier, the compensation provision of Measure 37 impedes the exercise of the plenary power." (Emphasis in original.) On appeal, plaintiffs argue that the trial court correctly held that Measure 37 was unable to withstand rational basis review, i.e., that the measure was not reasonably related to a legitimate state interest. The trial court's express reasons for declaring that Measure 37 offends principles of substantive due process were erroneous, because, as we already have explained, the premises on which that court relied were themselves incorrect. Plaintiffs, however, offer an additional rationale for the trial court's ruling that that court did not address. Plaintiffs assert that compensating persons who suffer economic loss due to governmental regulation furthers "private interests," which is not a legitimate state interest. We address that argument below. As was true respecting their waiver-of-sovereign-immunity arguments, plaintiffs assert in this argument that, before the enactment of Measure 37, no law required governments to offer such compensation. Plaintiffs reason from that fact that it would be "manifestly destructive" to society to burden the public with compensating individuals when the government has enacted land use regulations for the public good. Additionally, according to plaintiffs, Measure 37 allows claimants to demand payment for the economic impact of a regulatory scheme that did not rise to the level of a taking under the Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution; such an allowance would be "reverse extortion," according to plaintiffs. We find none of those arguments persuasive. When a statute does not implicate a fundamental right, (16) a party challenging that statute on substantive due process grounds must show that the statute bears no reasonable relation to a legitimate state interest. SeeWashington v. Glucksberg, 521 US 702, 722, 117 S Ct 2258, 138 L Ed 2d 772 (1997) (stating principle). Plaintiffs cannot meet that burden. Although it is true that neither the state nor the federal constitution requires compensation to individuals who suffer any loss in property value as a consequence of land use regulation, Pennsylvania Coal Co. v. Mahon, 260 US 393, 413, 43 S Ct 158, 67 L Ed 322 (1922); Kroner v. City of Portland, 116 Or 141, 152, 240 P 536 (1925), it is equally true that neither constitution forbids requiring such compensation in the manner provided for in Measure 37. The people, in exercising their initiative power, were free to enact Measure 37 in furtherance of policy objectives such as compensating landowners for a diminution in property value resulting from certain land use regulations or otherwise relieving landowners from some of the financial burden of certain land use regulations. Neither policy is irrational; no one seriously can assert that Measure 37 is not reasonably related to those policy objectives. And, that determination is the only one that this court is empowered to make. Whether Measure 37 as a policy choice is wise or foolish, farsighted or blind, is beyond this court's purview. Our only function in any case involving a constitutional challenge to an initiative measure is to ensure that the measure does not contravene any pertinent, applicable constitutional provisions. Here, we conclude that no such provisions have been contravened. IV. CONCLUSION In sum, we conclude that (1) plaintiffs' claims are justiciable; (2) Measure 37 does not impede the legislative plenary power; (3) Measure 37 does not violate the equal privileges and immunities guarantee of Article I, section 20, of the Oregon Constitution; (4) Measure 37 does not violate the suspension of laws provision contained in Article I, section 22, of the Oregon Constitution; (5) Measure 37 does not violate separation of powers constraints; (6) Measure 37 does not waive impermissibly sovereign immunity; and (7) Measure 37 does not violate the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution. The trial court's contrary conclusions under the state and federal constitutions were erroneous and must be reversed. The judgment of the circuit court is reversed, and the case is remanded for entry of judgment in favor of defendants and intervenors. APPENDIX Measure 37, codified at ORS 197.352, provides: "The following provisions are added to and made a part of ORS chapter 197: "(1) If a public entity enacts or enforces a new land use regulation or enforces a land use regulation enacted prior to the effective date of this amendment that restricts the use of private real property or any interest therein and has the effect of reducing the fair market value of the property, or any interest therein, then the owner of the property shall be paid just compensation. "(2) Just compensation shall be equal to the reduction in the fair market value of the affected property interest resulting from enactment or enforcement of the land use regulation as of the date the owner makes written demand for compensation under this act. "(3) Subsection (1) of this act shall not apply to land use regulations: "(A) Restricting or prohibiting activities commonly and historically recognized as public nuisances under common law. This subsection shall be construed narrowly in favor of a finding of compensation under this act; "(B) Restricting or prohibiting activities for the protection of public health and safety, such as fire and building codes, health and sanitation regulations, solid or hazardous waste regulations, and pollution control regulations; "(C) To the extent the land use regulation is required to comply with federal law; "(D) Restricting or prohibiting the use of a property for the purpose of selling pornography or performing nude dancing. Nothing in this subsection, however, is intended to affect or alter rights provided by the Oregon or United States Constitutions; or "(E) Enacted prior to the date of acquisition of the property by the owner or a family member of the owner who owned the subject property prior to acquisition or inheritance by the owner, whichever occurred first. "(4) Just compensation under subsection (1) of this act shall be due the owner of the property if the land use regulation continues to be enforced against the property 180 days after the owner of the property makes written demand for compensation under this section to the public entity enacting or enforcing the land use regulation. "(5) For claims arising from land use regulations enacted prior to the effective date of this act, written demand for compensation under subsection (4) shall be made within two years of the effective date of this act, or the date the public entity applies the land use regulation as an approval criteria to an application submitted by the owner of the property, whichever is later. For claims arising from land use regulations enacted after the effective date of this act, written demand for compensation under subsection (4) shall be made within two years of the enactment of the land use regulation, or the date the owner of the property submits a land use application in which the land use regulation is an approval criteria, whichever is later. "(6) If a land use regulation continues to apply to the subject property more than 180 days after the present owner of the property has made written demand for compensation under this act, the present owner of the property, or any interest therein, shall have a cause of action for compensation under this act in the circuit court in which the real property is located, and the present owner of the real property shall be entitled to reasonable attorney fees, expenses, costs, and other disbursements reasonably incurred to collect the compensation. "(7) A metropolitan service district, city, or county, or state agency may adopt or apply procedures for the processing of claims under this act, but in no event shall these procedures act as a prerequisite to the filing of a compensation claim under subsection (6) of this act, nor shall the failure of an owner of property to file an application for a land use permit with the local government serve as grounds for dismissal, abatement, or delay of a compensation claim under subsection (6) of this act. "(8) Notwithstanding any other state statute or the availability of funds under subsection (10) of this act, in lieu of payment of just compensation under this act, the governing body responsible for enacting the land use regulation may modify, remove, or not to [sic] apply the land use regulation or land use regulations to allow the owner to use the property for a use permitted at the time the owner acquired the property. "(9) A decision by a governing body under this act shall not be considered a land use decision as defined in ORS 197.015(10). "(10) Claims made under this section shall be paid from funds, if any, specifically allocated by the legislature, city, county, or metropolitan service district for payment of claims under this act. Notwithstanding the availability of funds under this subsection, a metropolitan service district, city, county, or state agency shall have discretion to use available funds to pay claims or to modify, remove, or not apply a land use regulation or land use regulations pursuant to subsection (6) of this act. If a claim has not been paid within two years from the date on which it accrues, the owner shall be allowed to use the property as permitted at the time the owner acquired the property. "(11) Definitions - for purposes of this section: "(A) 'Family member' shall include the wife, husband, son, daughter, mother, father, brother, brother-in-law, sister, sister-in-law, son-in-law, daughter-in-law, mother-in-law, father-in-law, aunt, uncle, niece, nephew, stepparent, stepchild, grandparent, or grandchild of the owner of the property, an estate of any of the foregoing family members, or a legal entity owned by any one or combination of these family members or the owner of the property. "(B) 'Land use regulation' shall include: "(i) Any statute regulating the use of land or any interest therein; "(ii) Administrative rules and goals of the Land Conservation and Development Commission; "(iii) Local government comprehensive plans, zoning ordinances, land division ordinances, and transportation ordinances; "(iv) Metropolitan service district regional framework plans, functional plans, planning goals and objectives; and "(v) Statutes and administrative rules regulating farming and forest practices. "(C) 'Owner' is the present owner of the property, or any interest therein. "(D) 'Public entity' shall include the state, a metropolitan service district, a city, or a county. "(12) The remedy created by this act is in addition to any other remedy under the Oregon or United States Constitutions, and is not intended to modify or replace any other remedy. "(13) If any portion or portions of this act are declared invalid by a court of competent jurisdiction, the remaining portions of this act shall remain in full force and effect." 1. Measure 37 is codified at ORS 197.352. Throughout this opinion, when necessary to refer to specific sections of the measure, we cite to the codification. The full text of Measure 37 is set out in the Appendix. 2. Measure 37 defines the term "land use regulation" as follows: "(i) Any statute regulating the use of land or any interest therein; "(ii) Administrative rules and goals of the Land Conservation and Development Commission; "(iii) Local government comprehensive plans, zoning ordinances, land division ordinances, and transportation ordinances; "(iv) Metropolitan service district regional framework plans, functional plans, planning goals and objections; and "(v) Statutes and administrative rules regulating farming and forest practices." ORS 197.352(11)(B). In this opinion, we use the term "land use regulation" as Measure 37 defines that term. 3. ORS 28.020 provides, in part: "Any person * * * whose rights, status or other legal relations are affected by a * * * statute * * * may have determined any question of construction or validity arising under any such * * * statute * * * and obtain a declaration of rights, status or other legal relations thereunder." ORS 250.044 provides, in part: "(1)An action that challenges the constitutionality of a measure initiated by the people * * * must be commenced in the Circuit Court for Marion County if: "(a) The action is filed by a plaintiff asserting a claim for relief that challenges the constitutionality of a state statute * * * initiated by the people or referred to the people under section 1(1) to (4), Article IV of the Oregon Constitution; [and] "(b) The action is commenced on or after the date that the Secretary of State certifies that the challenged measure has been adopted by the electors and within 180 days after the effective date of the measure[.] "* * * * * "(5) If a judgment in an action subject to the requirements of this section holds that a challenged measure is invalid in whole or in part, a party to the action may appeal the judgment only by filing a notice of appeal directly with the Supreme Court within the time and in the manner specified in ORS chapter 19 for civil appeals to the Court of Appeals." 4. Also named as defendants were Marion County , Clackamas County , and Washington County . They are not parties to this appeal. 5. The intervenors are (1) the chief petitioners Dorothy English, Barbara Prete and Eugene Prete (collectively, "English"); (2) Howard Meredith; and (3) Jackson County . 6. Meredith also challenges the trial court's decision, under ORCP 23, to allow plaintiffs to amend their pleadings to conform to certain aspects of their evidence. This court will reverse that decision only on a showing of abuse of discretion. SeeEngelcke v. Stoehsler, 273 Or 937, 944-45, 544 P2d 582 (1975) (stating principle under former ORS 16.390, repealed by Or Laws 1979, ch 284, § 199). We find no abuse of discretion here. 7. Plaintiffs do mention Article IV, section 1, of the Oregon Constitution, but that section merely vests legislative power in the Legislative Assembly and the electorate. The section neither expressly nor impliedly limits the scope of the legislative power; it simply states where that constitutional power resides. 8. Plaintiffs cite to and rely upon a number of cases, but those cases are inapposite. Generally, the cases involved public contracts that purported to contract away state or local governments' ability to enact legislation. See, e.g., Northern Pacific Railway v. Duluth, 208 US 583, 596, 28 S Ct 341, 52 L Ed 630 (1908) ("the right to exercise the police power is a continuing one [that] cannot be contracted away"); Stone v. Mississippi, 101 US 814, 817, 25 L Ed 1079 (1879) ("the legislature cannot bargain away the police power of a State"); Morris v. City of Salem, 179 Or 666, 675, 174 P2d 192 (1946) (authority to exercise police power is implied in a public contract); see alsoCounty Mobilehome Positive Action Com., Inc. v. County of San Diego, 62 Cal App 4th 727, 73 Cal Rptr 2d 409 (1998) (state cannot abdicate police power by contract; contracts are subject to further exercise of police power); City of New Albany v. New Albany St. R. Co., 172 Ind 487, 87 NE 1084 (1909) ("a city council cannot bargain away or divest itself of the right to make reasonable laws"). Here, Measure 37 does not contract away the plenary power to enact legislation. 9. As the parties acknowledge, Article I, section 22, was not the subject of any reported debate during Oregon 's constitutional convention. Claudia Burton and Andrew Grade, A Legislative History of the Oregon Constitution - Part I (Article I & II ), 37 Willamette L Rev 469, 539-40 (2001). 10. In Holden v. James, 11 Mass 396, 403-05 (1814) -- a case that plaintiffs cite here -- the Massachusetts Supreme Court explained that state constitutional "suspension of laws" clauses sought to correct abuses of regal authority and were rooted in the Magna Charta and the English Bill of Rights of 1689. Id. The English Bill of Rights enumerated "the oppressive acts of James 2," the first of which was "the assuming and exercising [of] a power of dispensing with and suspending the laws, * * * without consent of parliament." Id. at 404. The first article of the Bill of Rights provided that "the exercise of such power, by regal authority, without consent of Parliament, is illegal." Id. 11. ORS 197.352(6) provides: "If a land use regulation continues to apply to the subject property more than 180 days after the present owner of the property had made written demand for compensation under this section, the present owner of the property, or any interest therein, shall have a cause of action for compensation under this section in the circuit court in which the real property is located, and the present owner of the real property shall be entitled to reasonable attorney fees, expenses, costs, and other disbursements reasonably incurred to collect the compensation." 12. Instead, plaintiffs cite cases that note, generally, that states are not obligated to compensate for losses sustained by virtue of the exercise of governmental power. See, e.g., Branson v. City of Philadelphia, 47 Pa 329 (1864) ("no obligation at law requires [the Commonwealth] to repair the mere consequences collaterally falling upon those who suffer from the exercise of a great reserved power of acting for the general good"); The Western College of Homeopathic Medicine v. City of Cleveland, 12 Ohio St 375, 377-78 (1861) ("It is not the policy of governments to indemnify individuals for losses sustained, either from the want of proper laws, or from the inadequate enforcement of laws made to secure the property of individuals."). But, even assuming that the state is not obligated to compensate for economic losses stemming from regulation, it does not follow that the state is forbidden from doing so. 13. To the extent that plaintiffs also argue that Measure 37 unconstitutionally waives sovereign immunity because the measure impermissibly limits the plenary legislative power, we reject that argument as well, for the reasons stated in our discussion of plenary legislative power. 14. The Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment provides: "[N]or shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law[.]" Plaintiffs' brief on appeal mentions two other federal constitutional provisions -- the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment and the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. Plaintiffs raised neither claim in their complaint or their motion for summary judgment below, however, and neither theory is well developed in their brief to this court. We therefore limit our discussion to plaintiffs' Fourteenth Amendment Due Process Clause arguments. 15. The trial court's holding appears to have been, in part, specific to the procedures utilized in deciding the claim of plaintiff Adams's neighbor. Those facts might have been relevant if plaintiffs had asserted an "as applied" challenge to Measure 37, but they are irrelevant to plaintiffs' facial challenge to Measure 37. 16. The trial court concluded that Measure 37 did not implicate plaintiffs' fundamental rights, and the parties do not contest that conclusion.");sQ1[47]=new Array("http://www.sdao.com/ref/Pub/pers.htm","Untitled Document","","2004 PERS Member Annual Statements  PERS delayed 2004 Tier One and Tier Two Annual Statements due to two Oregon Supreme Court cases, Strunk and Eugene. Those cases have been resolved and the PERS 2004 Annual Statements should arrive at members’ home addresses before January 31, 2006.  Contributions No contributions were added to your Tier One or Tier Two regular or variable accounts in 2004; beginning in January 2004, all member contributions have been placed in your Individual Account Program (IAP) account.  Earnings For Tier One members, your regular account has been adjusted based on the following: §    1999 earnings on regular accounts were recalculated at 11.33 percent (instead of 20 percent) as a result of the Eugene case; §    The recalculated amount for 1999 has been carried forward for 2000, 2001, and 2002 with 8 percent earnings per year and contributions for each year added to your regular account; §    Earnings crediting for 2003 (with contributions for that year) and 2004 (with no contributions for that year) at 8 percent per year have been added as a result of the Strunk decision.  Your Tier One total account balance reflects the results of those adjustments.  A generic example showing the adjustments to a Tier One member regular account is presented below and uses the following: Beginning regular account balance of $75,000 as of 12-31-1998, and Beginning salary of $50,000 annually as of 1999.     Pre-Strunk/Eugene Post-Strunk/Eugene Year Salary     (2%/Year Increase) ($) 6% Member Contribution ($) Pre-Earnings Crediting Balance ($) Earnings Crediting Rate (%) Ending Account Balance ($) Pre-Earnings Crediting Balance ($) Earnings Crediting Rate (%) Ending Account Balance ($) 1998     75,000   75,000 1999 50,000 3,000 78,000 20.00 93,600 78,000 11.33 86,837 2000 51,000 3,060 96,660 8.00 104,393 89,897 8.00 97,089 2001 52,020 3,121 107,514 8.00 116,115 100,210 8.00 108,227 2002 53,060 3,184 119,299 8.00 128,843 111,411 8.00 120,324 2003 54,122 3,247 132,090 0.00 132,090 123,571 8.00 133,457 2004 55,204 0 132,090 8.00 142,657 133,457 8.00 144,133 Tier Two Members Tier Two member regular account balances were not affected by the Strunk or Eugene cases. Earnings crediting for 2004 is 13.27 percent.  Variable Account Participants If you participate in the variable account, your variable account earnings are not affected by Strunk/Eugene. The variable portion of your Tier One or Tier Two account will be credited with 13.00 percent for 2004.  Sample 2004 Annual Statement To see a sample Annual Statement, and learn more about what information the statement contains, visit the PERS website at http://www.oregon.gov/PERS/.  2005 Tier One/Tier Two Annual Statements Resolution of the Strunk and Eugene cases allows PERS to return to its normal schedule of Annual Statement distribution. PERS anticipates distributing Tier One/Tier Two 2005 Annual Statements in late Spring 2006.");var sQb=0;var sQc=1;var sQd=2;var sQe=3;var sQf=4;var sQg=5;var sQh=6;var sQi=7;var sQj=8;var sQk;var sQdl;var sQm;var sQn; var sQ98 ; var sQB=true;var sQC=1;var sQE=2;var sQD=3;var sQF=4;var sQP=true;var sQQ=true;var sQ46=true;var sQ83=true;var sQ73=true;var sQ14=true;var sQ17=false;var sQ90=-1;var sQ45=0;var sQT;function SMPSetFocus() { document.formSearch.txtSearch.focus(); }
function sQp(sQq) {if ((sQq>="a" && sQq<="z") ||(sQq>="A" && sQq<="Z") || (sQq>="0" && sQq <="9")) { return true; } else { return false; } }function sQr( sQt, sQu, sQv ) {var sQy;var sQz, sQ7, sQ2; var sQ3=0; var sQ42; var sQ43=true; var sQ44;sQ1[sQt][sQg]=0;for( sQ42=0; sQ42<sQ41.length; sQ42++ ){ if (sQ41[sQ42].length>0) { sQy=sQ1[sQt][sQu];if ( !sQ17 ){ sQy=sQy.toUpperCase(); } sQz=sQy.indexOf( sQ41[sQ42] );sQ44=sQ1[sQt][sQg];while (sQz >= 0){ sQ3 = sQ3 + sQz + 1;if(( sQm== -2 ) || ( sQm== -5 )) { sQ7 = false; } else { if (sQz == 0) { sQ7=false; } else { sQ7=sQp(sQy.charAt(sQz-1)); }  } if(( sQm == -3 ) || ( sQm == -5 )) { sQ2 = false; } else { if ( sQy.length - sQz == sQ41[sQ42].length) { sQ2 = false; } else { sQ2 = sQp(sQy.charAt(sQz + sQ41[sQ42].length)); }  } if (!sQ7 && !sQ2) { sQ1[sQt][sQj+sQ1[sQt][sQg]] = sQ3 - 1;sQ1[sQt][sQg] ++; } sQy = sQy.substring(sQz+1,sQy.length);while( sQp(sQy.charAt(0)) && sQy.length > 0 ) { sQy = sQy.substring( 1, sQy.length ) ;sQ3 ++; } sQz = sQy.indexOf(sQ41[sQ42]); } if( sQ1[sQt][sQg] == sQ44) { sQ43=false; } } } if( (sQ45==2) && (sQ43==false) ) { sQ1[sQt][sQg]=0; } } function sQ4(sQt, sQv) { var sQu=-1, sQ5; var ak=75450047446482; sQ1[sQt][sQf]=-1;while( ++sQu <= sQe && sQ1[sQt][sQf]==-1 ) { sQ5 = sQu==0 ? sQc : (sQu==1 ? sQd : (sQu==2 ? sQb : sQe));if( ((sQ5 == sQc ) && ( sQ46 )) || ((sQ5 == sQd ) && ( sQ83 )) || ((sQ5 == sQb ) && ( sQ73 )) || ((sQ5 == sQe ) && ( sQ14 )) ) { sQr( sQt, sQ5, sQv ); } else { sQ1[sQt][sQg]=0 } if ( sQ1[sQt][sQg] > 0 ) { sQ1[sQt][sQf] = sQ5; } } s="searchmaker";t=eval(s.charAt(2)+s.charAt(8)); } function sQ6() { var sQt, sQu, sQ79, sQ8;for( sQt=1; sQt<sQ1.length; sQt++ ) { sQ1[sQt][sQi] = sQt; } if( sQB ) {for( sQt=1; sQt<sQ1.length; sQt++ ) { if( sQ1[sQt][sQf] == sQc ) { sQ1[sQt][sQh] = (4-sQC) * 15000; } else if( sQ1[sQt][sQf] == sQd ) { sQ1[sQt][sQh] = (4-sQE) * 15000; } else if( sQ1[sQt][sQf] == sQb ) { sQ1[sQt][sQh] = (4-sQD) * 15000; } else { sQ1[sQt][sQh] = (4-sQF) * 15000 + sQ1[sQt][sQg]; } } for( sQt=2; sQt<sQ1.length; sQt++ ) { sQ79 = sQ1[sQt][sQh]; sQ8 = sQ1[sQt][sQi];for( sQu=sQt; sQu>1 && sQ79 > sQ1[sQu-1][sQh]; sQu--) { sQ1[sQu][sQh] = sQ1[sQu-1][sQh];sQ1[sQu][sQi] = sQ1[sQu-1][sQi]; }sQ1[sQu][sQh] = sQ79;sQ1[sQu][sQi] = sQ8; } } } function sQ9(sQt) { var sQA = sQ1[sQt][sQg]==1 ? "match" : "matches";sQk += ""; sQk += "<font face=\"Arial\" size=\"2\" color=gray>"; if( sQ1[sQt][sQf]==sQc ) { sQk += " - matched title"; } else { if( sQ1[sQt][sQf]==sQd ) {sQk += " - matched description"; } else { if( sQ1[sQt][sQf]==sQb ) { sQk += " - matched URL"; } else { sQk += " - " + sQ1[sQt][sQg] + " " + sQA + "";  } } } sQk += "</font>"; sQk += ""; } function sQG(sQt, sQH) { var sQI;var sQJ;var sQK = false; var sQdL=sQ1[sQt][sQj + sQH - 1]; sQI = sQdL<35 ? sQI=0 : sQI=sQdL-35;sQJ = (sQdL+35 > sQ1[sQt][sQe].length) ? sQJ=sQ1[sQt][sQe].length : sQJ=sQdL+35;while ((sQI>=0) && !sQK) { if(sQp(sQ1[sQt][sQe].charAt(sQI))) { sQI--; } else { sQK=true; } } sQI++;sQK=false;while ((sQJ > sQdL) && !sQK) { if(sQp(sQ1[sQt][sQe].charAt(sQJ))) { sQJ--; } else { sQK=true; } } sQk += "<BR><font face=\"Arial\" size=\"2\" color=#000000>\".. "+sQ1[sQt][sQe].substring(sQI,sQdL); sQk += "<B>" + sQ1[sQt][sQe].substring(sQdL , sQdL + sQdl.length ) +"</B>";sQk += sQ1[sQt][sQe].substring(sQdL + sQdl.length ,sQJ) + " ..\"</font>"; } function sQN( sQt ) { if( sQP==false ) { var sQu=1; while ( (sQu < 4) && (sQu<=sQ1[sQt][sQg])) { sQG( sQt, sQu ); sQu++; } } } function sQR( sQy, sQdL ) { sQk += sQy.substring( 0, sQdL );sQk += "<B>" + sQy.substring( sQdL , sQdL + sQdl.length ) +"</B>";sQk += sQy.substring( sQdL + sQdl.length ,sQy.length ); } function sQU( sQt, sQT ) { sQk += "<p><font face=\"Arial\" size=\"2\" color=#000000>" + sQT +".</font> ";sQk += "<a href=\""+sQ1[sQt][sQb]+"\"><font face=\"Arial\" size=\"3\" color=#0000FF>"+sQ1[sQt][sQc]+"</font></a>";if (( sQ1[sQt][sQf]==sQe ) && (sQ45==0)) { sQN(sQt); } else { sQk+=""; } if( (sQ1[sQt][sQf]==sQd ) && (sQ45==0)) { sQk += "<br><font face=\"Arial\" size=\"2\" color=gray>Description:</font><font face=\"Arial\" size=\"2\" color=#000000> "; sQk += "";sQR( sQ1[sQt][sQd], sQ1[sQt][sQj] ); sQk += "</font>"; } else { if( sQ1[sQt][sQd].length > 0 ) { sQk += "<br><font face=\"Arial\" size=\"2\" color=gray>Description:</font></font><font face=\"Arial\" size=\"2\" color=#000000> "; sQk += "" + sQ1[sQt][sQd]; } else {  } } sQk += "</font>"; sQk+= "<br>";sQk += "<font face=\"Arial\" size=\"2\" color=#005500>"; if(( sQ1[sQt][sQf]==sQb ) && (sQ45==0)) { sQR( sQ1[sQt][sQb], sQ1[sQt][sQj] ); } else { sQk += sQ1[sQt][sQb]; } sQk += "</font>"; if( sQQ ) { sQ9( sQt ); } sQk += "<br>"; }; function sQV() { sQT = 0;if (! (sQn )) { for( var sQt=1; sQt<sQ1.length; sQt++ ) { if(( sQ1[sQ1[sQt][sQi]][sQg] > 0 ) && (( sQT < sQ90 ) || ( sQ90 == -1 ))) { sQU(sQ1[sQt][sQi], ++sQT); } }  } else { if( sQm == -4 ) { sQk += "<BR><font face=\"Arial\" size=\"2\" color=#000000>ERROR: The wildcard character (*) must be at the beginning or end of the text.</font>"; } }  } function sQW() { sQk += "<html><!-- <% @LANGUAGE = \"VBScript\" %> <% Option Explicit %> <% Response.Buffer = True %> --> <!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC \"-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Transitional//EN\" \"http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-transitional.dtd\"> <html xmlns=\"http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml\"><!-- InstanceBegin template=\"/Templates/template.dwt\" codeOutsideHTMLIsLocked=\"false\" --> <head> <!-- #BeginEditable \"doctitle\" --> <title>SDAO Site Search Results</title> <!-- #EndEditable --> <meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=iso-8859-1\" /> <!-- Fireworks 4.0 Dreamweaver 4.0 target. --> <script language=\"JavaScript\" type=\"text/javascript\"> <!-- function MM_swapImage() { //v3.0 var i,j=0,x,a=MM_swapImage.arguments; document.MM_sr=new Array; for(i=0;i<(a.length-2);i+=3) if ((x=MM_findObj(a[i]))!=null){document.MM_sr[j++]=x; if(!x.oSrc) x.oSrc=x.src; x.src=a[i+2];} } function MM_swapImgRestore() { //v3.0 var i,x,a=document.MM_sr; for(i=0;a&&i<a.length&&(x=a[i])&&x.oSrc;i++) x.src=x.oSrc; } function MM_preloadImages() { //v3.0 var d=document; if(d.images){ if(!d.MM_p) d.MM_p=new Array(); var i,j=d.MM_p.length,a=MM_preloadImages.arguments; for(i=0; i<a.length; i++) if (a[i].indexOf(\"#\")!=0){ d.MM_p[j]=new Image; d.MM_p[j++].src=a[i];}} } function fwLoadMenus() { if (window.fw_menu_0) return; window.fw_menu_0 = new Menu(\"root\",150,18,\"Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif\",10,\"#ffffff\",\"#ffcc33\",\"#003366\",\"#336699\"); fw_menu_0.addMenuItem(\"Profile\", \"location='profile.asp'\"); // fw_menu_0.addMenuItem(\"Board & Staff\", \"location='contactus.htm'\"); fw_menu_0.addMenuItem(\"Location\", \"location='contactus.htm'\"); fw_menu_0.hideOnMouseOut=true; // fw_menu_0.writeMenus(); if (window.fw_menu_1) return; window.fw_menu_1 = new Menu(\"root\",160,18,\"Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif\",10,\"#ffffff\",\"#ffcc33\",\"#003366\",\"#336699\"); fw_menu_1.addMenuItem(\"Awards\", \"location='awards.htm'\"); fw_menu_1.addMenuItem(\"Best Practices\", \"location='bestpractices.htm'\"); fw_menu_1.addMenuItem(\"Employee Benefits\", \"location='employeebenefits.htm'\"); fw_menu_1.addMenuItem(\"Financial Services\", \"location='financial.htm'\"); fw_menu_1.addMenuItem(\"Fire Grant\", \"location='firegrant.htm'\"); fw_menu_1.addMenuItem(\"Group Purchasing\", \"location='grouppurchasing.htm'\"); fw_menu_1.addMenuItem(\"Legislative Services\", \"location='legislative.htm'\"); fw_menu_1.addMenuItem(\"Publications\", \"location='publications.htm'\"); fw_menu_1.addMenuItem(\"Risk Management\", \"location='risk_sdao.htm'\"); fw_menu_1.addMenuItem(\"Technical Assistance\", \"location='technicalassist.htm'\"); fw_menu_1.hideOnMouseOut=true; if (window.fw_menu_2) return; window.fw_menu_2 = new Menu(\"root\",150,18,\"Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif\",10,\"#ffffff\",\"#ffcc33\",\"#003366\",\"#336699\"); fw_menu_2.addMenuItem(\"Job Openings\", \"location='classifieds.htm#jobs'\"); fw_menu_2.addMenuItem(\"For Sale\", \"location='classifieds.htm#forsale'\"); fw_menu_2.hideOnMouseOut=true; if (window.fw_menu_3) return; window.fw_menu_3 = new Menu(\"root\",150,18,\"Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif\",10,\"#ffffff\",\"#ffcc33\",\"#003366\",\"#336699\"); fw_menu_3.addMenuItem(\"SDAO Member Site\", \"location='https://mbr.sdao.com/register1.asp'\"); fw_menu_3.addMenuItem(\"Email Announcements\", \"location='announcerqst.asp'\"); fw_menu_3.addMenuItem(\"Seminars\", \"location='seminarreg.asp'\"); fw_menu_3.addMenuItem(\"Annual Conference\", \"location='conferencereg.asp'\"); fw_menu_3.hideOnMouseOut=true; fw_menu_3.writeMenus(); } // fwLoadMenus() function MM_findObj(n, d) { //v4.0 var p,i,x; if(!d) d=document; if((p=n.indexOf(\"?\"))>0&&parent.frames.length) { d=parent.frames[n.substring(p+1)].document; n=n.substring(0,p);} if(!(x=d[n])&&d.all) x=d.all[n]; for (i=0;!x&&i<d.forms.length;i++) x=d.forms[i][n]; for(i=0;!x&&d.layers&&i<d.layers.length;i++) x=MM_findObj(n,d.layers[i].document); if(!x && document.getElementById) x=document.getElementById(n); return x; } var bName = navigator.appName; var bVer = parseInt(navigator.appVersion); var NS4 = (bName == \"Netscape\" && bVer >= 4); var IE4 = (bName == \"Microsoft Internet Explorer\" && bVer >= 4); var intTop=60 if (NS4) {intTop=59;} // SHOW MENU function imgPos(imgName){ img = getImage(imgName); imgLeft = getImagePageLeft(img)+19; // LEFT POSITION return imgLeft; } function getImage(name) { if (NS4) { return findImage(name, document); } if (IE4) return eval('document.all.' + name); return null; } function findImage(name, doc) { var i, img; for (i = 0; i < doc.images.length; i++) if (doc.images[i].name == name) return doc.images[i]; for (i = 0; i < doc.layers.length; i++) if ((img = findImage(name, doc.layers[i].document)) != null) { img.container = doc.layers[i]; return img; } return null; } function getImagePageLeft(img) { var x, obj; if (NS4) { if (img.container != null) return img.container.pageX + img.x - 1; else return img.x - 1; } if (IE4) { x = 0; obj = img; while (obj.offsetParent != null) { x += obj.offsetLeft; obj = obj.offsetParent; } x += obj.offsetLeft; return x; } return -1; } //--> </scr"; sQk +="ipt> <script language=\"JavaScript1.2\" src=\"fw_menu.js\" type=\"text/javascript\"></scr"; sQk +="ipt> <link rel=\"stylesheet\" href=\"css/styles.css\" type=\"text/css\" /> <script language=\"javascript\" src=\"search.js\" type=\"text/javascript\"></scr"; sQk +="ipt> <!-- InstanceParam name=\"onload\" type=\"text\" value=\"\" --> </head> <body onload=\"\" topmargin=\"0\" leftmargin=\"0\" marginheight=\"0\" marginwidth=\"0\" bgcolor=\"#ffffff\" vlink=\"#336699\" alink=\"#003366\" link=\"#336699\"> <script language=\"JavaScript1.2\" type=\"text/javascript\">fwLoadMenus();</scr"; sQk +="ipt> <table width=\"100%\" border=\"0\" cellspacing=\"0\" cellpadding=\"0\" height=\"100%\"> <tr> <td height=\"43\" valign=\"top\" bgcolor=\"#336699\"><img src=\"images/company_name.gif\" alt=\"company\" name=\"company_name\" width=\"582\" height=\"36\" border=\"0\" id=\"company_name\" /></td> </tr> <tr> <td height=\"16\"> <table width=\"100%\" border=\"0\" cellspacing=\"0\" cellpadding=\"0\" height=\"16\"> <tr> <td height=\"16\" rowspan=\"2\" width=\"239\"><img src=\"images/slogan.gif\" alt=\"slogan\" width=\"239\" height=\"16\" /></td> <td height=\"1\"><img src=\"images/spacer.gif\" width=\"100\" height=\"1\" /></td> </tr> <tr> <td height=\"15\" bgcolor=\"#003366\" width=\"95%\" valign=\"middle\" class=\"whitesmall\" nowrap=\"nowrap\"> <img src=\"Templates/images/spacer.gif\" width=\"80\" height=\"8\" /> <a href=\"index.htm\" class=\"whitesmall\">Home</a> <img src=\"Templates/images/spacer.gif\" name=\"programs\" width=\"29\" height=\"8\" /> <a href=\"#\" onmouseout=\"FW_startTimeout()\" onmouseover=\"window.FW_showMenu(window.fw_menu_1,imgPos('programs'),intTop)\" class=\"whitesmall\">Programs</a> <img src=\"Templates/images/spacer.gif\" width=\"29\" height=\"8\" /> <a href=\"training_sdao.htm\" class=\"whitesmall\">Training</a> <img src=\"Templates/images/spacer.gif\" name=\"register\" width=\"29\" height=\"8\" /> <a href=\"#\" onmouseout=\"FW_startTimeout()\" onmouseover=\"window.FW_showMenu(window.fw_menu_3,imgPos('register'),intTop)\" class=\"whitesmall\">Register</a> <img src=\"Templates/images/spacer.gif\" width=\"29\" height=\"8\" /> <a href=\"https://mbr.sdao.com\" class=\"whitesmall\" target=\"_blank\">Member Login</a> <img src=\"Templates/images/spacer.gif\" width=\"29\" height=\"8\" /> <a href=\"contactus.htm\" class=\"whitesmall\">Contact Us</a></td> </tr> </table> </td> </tr> <tr> <td height=\"1\"><img src=\"images/spacer.gif\" width=\"100\" height=\"1\" /></td> </tr> <tr> <td height=\"25\"> <table width=\"100%\" border=\"0\" cellspacing=\"0\" cellpadding=\"0\" height=\"25\"> <tr> <td width=\"197\" bgcolor=\"#993300\"><img src=\"images/spacer.gif\" width=\"197\" height=\"1\" /></td> <td width=\"26\"><img src=\"images/trans1.gif\" alt=\"trans1\" name=\"trans1\" width=\"26\" height=\"25\" border=\"0\" id=\"trans1\" /></td> <td bgcolor=\"#CCCC99\" width=\"95%\">&nbsp;</td> </tr> </table> </td> </tr> <tr> <td height=\"1\"><img src=\"images/spacer.gif\" width=\"100\" height=\"1\" /></td> </tr> <tr> <td height=\"16\"> <table width=\"100%\" border=\"0\" cellspacing=\"0\" cellpadding=\"0\" height=\"16\"> <tr> <td width=\"263\" bgcolor=\"#003366\" valign=\"top\" height=\"16\"> <table width=\"263\" border=\"0\" cellspacing=\"0\" cellpadding=\"0\" height=\"10\"> <tr> <td height=\"9\" bgcolor=\"#CCCC99\"><img src=\"images/spacer.gif\" width=\"187\" height=\"8\" /></td> <td height=\"10\" rowspan=\"2\" width=\"76\" valign=\"top\"><img src=\"images/trans2.gif\" alt=\"trans2\" name=\"trans2\" width=\"10\" height=\"10\" border=\"0\" id=\"trans2\" /><img src=\"images/spacer.gif\" width=\"66\" height=\"8\" /></td> </tr> <tr> <td height=\"1\" bgcolor=\"#ffffff\"><img src=\"images/spacer.gif\" width=\"100\" height=\"1\" /></td> </tr> </table> </td> <td width=\"17\"><img src=\"images/trans3.gif\" alt=\"trans3\" name=\"trans3\" width=\"17\" height=\"16\" border=\"0\" id=\"trans3\" /></td> <td bgcolor=\"#993300\" height=\"16\" class=\"whitesmall\" align=\"right\" width=\"98%\"><img src=\"images/spacer.gif\" width=\"20\" height=\"8\" /></td> </tr> </table> </td> </tr> <tr> <td height=\"24\"> <table width=\"100%\" border=\"0\" cellspacing=\"0\" cellpadding=\"0\" height=\"24\"> <tr> <td width=\"120\" bgcolor=\"#003366\"><img src=\"images/spacer.gif\" width=\"239\" height=\"1\" /></td> <td width=\"24\"><img src=\"images/trans4.gif\" alt=\"trans4\" name=\"trans4\" width=\"24\" height=\"24\" border=\"0\" id=\"trans4\" /></td> <td width=\"95%\">&nbsp;</td> <td width=\"39\" background=\"images/fill_right.gif\"><img src=\"images/fill_right.gif\" width=\"39\" height=\"10\" /></td> </tr> </table> </td> </tr> <tr> <td valign=\"top\"> <table width=\"100%\" border=\"0\" cellspacing=\"0\" cellpadding=\"0\" height=\"73%\"> <tr> <td width=\"120\" valign=\"top\" bgcolor=\"#336699\"> <table width=\"120\" border=\"0\" cellspacing=\"0\" cellpadding=\"0\" bgcolor=\"\"> <tr> <td colspan=\"2\" height=\"2\"><img src=\"images/m_top.gif\" width=\"120\" height=\"2\" /></td> </tr> <tr> <td width=\"115\" height=\"125\" align=\"center\"><img src=\"images/sdaologo75.gif\" alt=\"sdao\" /></td> <td align=\"right\" width=\"5\" height=\"19\"><img src=\"images/m_right.gif\" name=\"m_right\" width=\"5\" height=\"127\" border=\"0\" id=\"m_right\" /></td> <tr> <td colspan=\"2\" height=\"2\"><img src=\"images/m_line.gif\" width=\"120\" height=\"2\" /></td> </tr> <tr> <td width=\"115\" height=\"19\"><img src=\"images/spacer.gif\" width=\"10\" height=\"8\" /><a href=\"classifieds.asp\" class=\"textwhite\">Classifieds</a></td> <td align=\"right\" width=\"5\" height=\"19\"><img src=\"images/m_right.gif\" name=\"m_right\" width=\"5\" height=\"21\" border=\"0\" id=\"m_right\" /></td> </tr> <tr> <td colspan=\"2\" height=\"2\"><img src=\"images/m_line.gif\" width=\"120\" height=\"2\" /></td> </tr> <tr> <td width=\"115\" height=\"19\"><img src=\"images/spacer.gif\" width=\"10\" height=\"8\" /><a href=\"resources.htm\" class=\"textwhite\">Resources</a></td> <td align=\"right\" width=\"5\" height=\"19\"><img src=\"images/m_right.gif\" name=\"m_right\" width=\"5\" height=\"21\" border=\"0\" id=\"m_right\" /></td> </tr> <tr> <td colspan=\"2\" height=\"2\"><img src=\"images/m_line.gif\" width=\"120\" height=\"2\" /></td> </tr> <tr> <td width=\"115\" height=\"19\"><img src=\"images/spacer.gif\" width=\"10\" height=\"8\" /><a href=\"faq.htm\" target=\"_self\" class=\"textwhite\">FAQs</a></td> <td align=\"right\" width=\"5\" height=\"19\"><img src=\"images/m_right.gif\" name=\"m_right\" width=\"5\" height=\"21\" border=\"0\" id=\"m_right\" /></td> </tr> <tr> <td colspan=\"2\" height=\"2\"><img src=\"images/m_line.gif\" width=\"120\" height=\"2\" /></td> </tr> <tr> <td width=\"115\" height=\"19\"><img src=\"images/spacer.gif\" name=\"aboutus\" width=\"10\" height=\"8\" /><a href=\"aboutus.asp\" target=\"_self\" class=\"textwhite\">About Us</a></td> <td align=\"right\" width=\"5\" height=\"19\"><img src=\"Templates/images/m_right.gif\" name=\"m_right\" width=\"5\" height=\"21\" border=\"0\" id=\"m_right\" /></td> </tr> <tr><td colspan=\"2\" height=\"2\"><img src=\"images/m_line.gif\" width=\"120\" height=\"2\" /></td> </tr> <tr> <td width=\"115\" height=\"19\" align=\"center\"><br /> <form name=formSearch action=\"javascript:SMPStartSearch() //\"> <input name=\"txtSearch\" class=\"searcbox\" size=\"18\" /><br /><br /> <input name=send type=image value=\"Search\" src=\"navbuttons/org_search.gif\" alt=\"search\"> </form> </td> <td align=\"right\" height=\"19\"><img src=\"images/m_right.gif\" name=\"m_right\" width=\"5\" height=\"21\" border=\"0\" id=\"m_right\" /></td> </tr> <tr> <td colspan=\"2\" height=\"2\"><img src=\"images/m_line.gif\" width=\"120\" height=\"2\" /></td> </tr> </table> </td> <td width=\"30\"><img src=\"images/spacer.gif\" width=\"30\" height=\"10\" /></td> <td valign=\"top\" height=\"528\" width=\"99%\"> <p>&nbsp;</p> <div align=\"left\" class=\"text\"><!-- #BeginEditable \"content\" -->Search Results"; sQk += "<font face=\"Arial\" size=\"2\" color=#000000>";sQk += "<p>You searched for <b>" + sQ98 +".</b>"; sQk += "</font>" }; function sQY() { if(sQT==0) { sQk += "<p><font face=\"Arial\" size=\"2\" color=#000000>No pages matched your search.&nbsp;&nbsp;</font>"; } else { var sQA = sQT==1 ? "page shown." : "pages shown."; sQk += "<p><font face=\"Arial\" size=\"2\" color=#000000>" + sQT + " " + sQA + "&nbsp;</font>"; } sQk += "<a href=\"javascript:history.go(-1)\"><font face=\"Arial\" size=\"2\">Search Again</font></a></p>"; sQk += "<!-- #EndEditable --></div> </td> <td width=\"39\" background=\"images/fill_right.gif\"><img src=\"images/fill_right.gif\" width=\"39\" height=\"10\" /></td> </tr> </table> <table width=\"100%\" border=\"0\" cellspacing=\"0\" cellpadding=\"0\" height=\"51\"> <tr> <td width=\"120\" bgcolor=\"#336699\"><img src=\"images/spacer.gif\" width=\"120\" height=\"8\" /></td> <td height=\"30\" valign=\"top\" align=\"center\" class=\"bluelink\" width=\"99%\"><p><img src=\"images/oregonlineblu.gif\" alt=\"oregonline\" width=\"601\" height=\"17\" /></p> <p><a href=\"index.htm\" class=\"bluelink\">Home</a> | <a href=\"aboutus.asp\" class=\"bluelink\">About Us</a> <!-- | <a href=\"privacypolicy.htm\" class=\"bluelink\">Privacy Policy</a> --> | <a href=\"sitemap.htm\" class=\"bluelink\" target=\"_self\">Site Map</a> | <a href=\"faq.htm\" class=\"bluelink\">FAQs</a> | <a href=\"contactus.htm\" class=\"bluelink\">Contact Us</a></p></td> <td width=\"39\" background=\"images/fill_right.gif\"><img src=\"images/fill_right.gif\" width=\"39\" height=\"10\" /></td> </tr> <tr> <td width=\"120\" bgcolor=\"#336699\" height=\"21\"><img src=\"images/spacer.gif\" width=\"120\" height=\"8\" /></td> <td height=\"21\" align=\"center\" class=\"whitesmall\" bgcolor=\"#003366\">© 2005 www.sdao.com -&nbsp;All Rights Reserved.</td> <td bgcolor=\"#003366\" height=\"21\">&nbsp;</td> </tr> </table> </td> </tr> </table> <!-- #BeginEditable \"codearea\" --> <!-- #EndEditable --> </body> <!-- InstanceEnd --></html> "; } function sQ11() { var sQ23 = sQk;document.open(); document.write(sQ23); document.close(); } function sQ03( sQy ) { var sQqh="";for( var sQt=0; sQt<sQy.length; sQt++) { if( sQy.charAt(sQt)=="<" ) { sQqh += "&lt;"; } else if( sQy.charAt(sQt)==">" ) { sQqh += "&gt;"; } else if( sQy.charAt(sQt)=="\"" ) { sQqh += "&quot;"; } else { sQqh += sQy.charAt(sQt); } } return( sQqh ); } function sQ93() { sQm = sQdl.indexOf("*"); if( sQm == 0 ) { sQm = -2; sQn = false; } else if (sQm == sQdl.length -1) { sQm = -3; sQn = false; } else if (sQm > 0 ) { sQm = -4;sQn = true; } else { sQn = false; } if ( sQdl.indexOf("*") != sQdl.lastIndexOf("*") ) { if( sQm == -2 ) { if( sQdl.lastIndexOf("*") == sQdl.length - 1 ) { sQm = -5; } else { sQm = -4; sQn = true; } } }if( ( sQm == -2 ) || (sQm == -5 )) { sQdl = sQdl.substring( 1, sQdl.length ); } if( ( sQm == -3 ) || (sQm == -5 )) { sQdl = sQdl.substring( 0, sQdl.length - 1 ); } } function SMPStartSearch() { var sQv;sQdl=document.formSearch.txtSearch.value;if (( sQdl.length > 0 )&&( sQdl != "*" )) { sQk = "";sQ98 = sQdl; sQdl = sQ03(sQdl);sQ93();if( sQ17 ) { sQv = sQdl; } else { sQv = sQdl.toUpperCase(); }if (sQ45 != 0) { sQ41=sQv.split(' '); } else { sQ41=sQv.split(); }if ( !(sQn ) ) { for( var sQt=1; sQt<sQ1.length; sQt++ ) { sQ4( sQt, sQv ); } sQ6(); } sQW();sQV();sQY();sQ11(); } } 

//  End of Search Maker Pro script.