72nd OREGON LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY--2003 Regular Session
 
HA to HB 2906
 
LC 2115/HB 2906-2
 
                       HOUSE AMENDMENTS TO
                         HOUSE BILL 2906
 
      By COMMITTEE ON BUSINESS, LABOR AND CONSUMER AFFAIRS
 
                              May 1
 
  On page 1 of the printed bill, line 2, delete 'creating new
provisions; and' and after 'ORS' insert '223.302 and'.
  Delete lines 4 through 30 and delete pages 2 and 3 and insert:
  '  { +  SECTION 1. + } ORS 223.302 is amended to read:
  ' 223.302. (1) Governmental units are authorized to establish
system development charges, but the revenues produced therefrom
shall be expended only in accordance with ORS 223.297 to 223.314.
If a governmental unit expends any such revenues in violation of
the limitations described in ORS 223.307, the governmental unit
shall replace the misspent amount with moneys derived from other
sources. Replacement moneys shall be deposited in a fund
designated for the system development charge revenues not later
than one year following a determination that the funds were
misspent.
  ' (2) Governmental units shall adopt administrative review
procedures by which any citizen or other interested person may
challenge an expenditure of system development charge revenues.
Such procedures shall provide that such a challenge must be filed
within two years of the expenditure of the system development
charge revenues. The decision of the governmental unit shall be
judicially reviewed only as provided in ORS 34.010 to 34.100.
  ' (3)(a)  { + A person against whom a system development charge
is assessed may challenge the amount of the charge, as the
methodology is applied to the specific development proposal, or
may challenge the calculation of the charge, by objecting in
writing to the governmental unit imposing the charge.
  ' (b)  + }A governmental unit must advise a person who makes a
written objection to the calculation of a system development
charge of the right to petition for review pursuant to ORS 34.010
to 34.100.
  '  { - (b) - }   { + (c) + } If a governmental unit has adopted
an administrative review procedure for objections to the
calculation of a system development charge, the governmental unit
must provide adequate notice regarding the procedure for review
to a person who makes a written objection to the calculation of a
system development charge.
  '  { +  (d) A challenge under this subsection is limited to the
application of the methodology established under ORS 223.304 (2)
and the assumptions or variables incorporated in the
methodology. + }
  '  { +  SECTION 2. + } ORS 223.304 is amended to read:
  ' 223.304. (1)(a) Reimbursement fees shall be established or
modified by ordinance or resolution setting forth a methodology
that considers the cost of the existing facility or facilities,
prior contributions by existing users, gifts or grants from
federal or state government or private persons, the value of
unused capacity available to future system users, rate-making
principles employed to finance publicly owned capital
improvements and other relevant factors identified by the local
government imposing the fee.
  ' (b) The methodology for establishing or modifying a
reimbursement fee shall:
  ' (A) Promote the objective of future system users contributing
no more than an equitable share to the cost of existing
facilities.
  ' (B) Be available for public inspection.
  '  { - (2)(a) - }   { + (2) + } Improvement fees shall:
  '  { - (A) - }   { + (a) + } Be established or modified by
ordinance or resolution setting forth a methodology that
 { - considers - }   { + is available for public inspection and
takes into account + } the cost of
  { - projected - }  capital improvements needed to increase the
capacity of the systems to which the fee is related.
  '  { - (B) - }  { +  (b) + }   { - Be calculated to obtain the
cost of capital improvements for the projected need for
available - }   { + Take into account the need for increased + }
system capacity for future users.
  '  { - (b) The methodology for establishing or modifying
improvement fees shall be available for public inspection. - }
  ' (3) The ordinance or resolution that establishes or modifies
an improvement fee shall also provide for a credit against such
fee for the construction of a qualified public improvement. A
'qualified public improvement' means a capital improvement that
is required as a condition of development approval, identified in
the plan adopted pursuant to ORS 223.309 and either:
  ' (a) Not located on or contiguous to property that is the
subject of development approval; or
  ' (b) Located in whole or in part on or contiguous to property
that is the subject of development approval and required to be
built larger or with greater capacity than is necessary for the
particular development project to which the improvement fee is
related.
  ' (4)(a) The credit provided for in subsection (3) of this
section shall be only for the improvement fee charged for the
type of improvement being constructed, and credit for qualified
public improvements under subsection (3)(b) of this section may
be granted only for the cost of that portion of such improvement
that exceeds the government units minimum standard facility size
or capacity needed to serve the particular development project or
property. The applicant shall have the burden of demonstrating
that a particular improvement qualifies for credit under
subsection (3)(b) of this section.
  ' (b) When the construction of a qualified public improvement
gives rise to a credit amount greater than the improvement fee
that would otherwise be levied against the project receiving
development approval, the excess credit may be applied against
improvement fees that accrue in subsequent phases of the original
development project. This subsection shall not prohibit a unit of
government from providing a greater credit, or from establishing
a system providing for the transferability of credits, or from
providing a credit for a capital improvement not identified in
the plan adopted pursuant to ORS 223.309, or from providing a
share of the cost of such improvement by other means, if a unit
of government so chooses.
  ' (c) Credits shall be used in the time specified in the
ordinance but not later than 10 years from the date the credit is
given.
  ' (5) Any unit of local government that proposes to establish
or modify a system development charge shall maintain a list of
persons who have made a written request for notification prior to
adoption or amendment of a methodology for any system development
charge.
  ' (6) Written notice shall be mailed to persons on the list at
least 90 days prior to the first hearing to establish or modify a
system development charge, and the methodology supporting the
system development charge shall be available at least 60 days
prior to the first hearing. The failure of a person on the list
to receive a notice that was mailed does not invalidate the
action of the local government. The unit of local government may
periodically delete names from the list, but at least 30 days
prior to removing a name from the list must notify the person
whose name is to be deleted that a new written request for
notification is required if the person wishes to remain on the
notification list. Legal action intended to contest the
methodology used for calculating a system development charge may
not be filed after 60 days following adoption or modification of
the system development charge ordinance or resolution by the
local government. A person shall request judicial review of the
methodology used for calculating a system development charge only
as provided in ORS 34.010 to 34.100.
  ' (7) A change in the amount of a reimbursement fee or an
improvement fee is not a modification of the system development
charge if the change in amount is based on the periodic
application of an adopted specific cost index or on a
modification to any of the factors related to rate that are
incorporated in the established methodology.'.
                         ----------