A8
STATE
Blue Mountain Eagle
Wildfire bills moving forward
Fate of ambitious wildfire plan rests with
legislators who decide on state budget matters
By Sam Stites
Oregon Capital Bureau
Two bills being consid-
ered by Oregon lawmak-
ers this session are expected
to be the one-two punch the
state needs to considerably
reduce the impact of wildfire
on its landscape and citizens.
In recent years, the
onslaught of smoke from
major wildfires has choked
many parts of the state
through the summer months.
Fires threaten homes where
forests meet urban sprawl,
and timber owners are los-
ing precious resources for
renewable building material
and wood products.
Wildfire is one of the pre-
eminent threats to Oregon’s
way of life in a multitude of
ways, but the state is hoping
this year it can make head-
way in minimizing its effects
through an approach that
takes both the short term and
future into account.
The first is a bill — Sen-
ate Bill 1514 — creating
15 projects to be led by the
state Forestry Department
that would clear trees, under-
brush and other forest mate-
rial considered to be “fuel”
for wildfire. The projects
would take place in loca-
tions across the state deter-
mined by the department
within the 5.2 million acres
identified as high-risk areas
by the Governor’s Council
on Wildfire Response. The
projects would be funded by
a $25 million allocation laid
out within the bill.
The second bill — Senate
Bill 1536 — would overhaul
the state’s approach to fire
mitigation and suppression
and help communities adapt
to smoke and fire.
It includes a lengthy list of
new policies and regulations
around:
• Assessing wildfire risk
for utilities and having them
create their own mitigation
plans.
• Bolstering fire insurance
and setting standards that
encourage homeowners near
forests to harden their homes
against fire.
• Creating new positions
within the state Office of
Emergency Management to
administer new mitigation
and recovery efforts.
• Mitigating the health
effects of smoke by helping
homeowners in smoke-prone
areas retrofit their homes with
filtration systems.
• Establishing minimum
standards of defensible space
around homes.
• Setting a goal to annually
treat 300,000 acres of forest
and remove fuels to prevent
fires from growing too large.
• Developing Oregon’s
forestry workforce.
• Requiring the State Fire
Marshall and State Forester to
help local jurisdictions, land-
owners, businesses and indi-
viduals create new wildfire
service districts, or expand
and adjust current ones, as
well as providing financial
help.
It’s unclear just how much
the bill would cost or where
that money would come from.
A fiscal impact statement
found the proposal needs fur-
ther work by the Legislature’s
budget committee, but Gov-
ernor’s Council estimated the
cost approximately $4 bil-
lion over the next 20 years, or
about $200 million a year.
It’s a robust approach to
many aspects of the conver-
sation the Governor’s Coun-
cil and legislators continue
to have around reducing the
impact of wildfire. But a
party-line vote in the Sen-
ate Wildfire Committee last
week to send both bills into
the budget committee indi-
cates Republicans might not
have the appetite to tackle the
entire plan now.
The bill has a lot of mov-
ing pieces, and the version
passed by the committee
includes everything but one
provision on land use. House
Bill 4054, sponsored by Rep.
David Brock Smith, R-Port
Orford, creates an advisory
committee within the Depart-
ment of Land Conservation
and Development to review
land use policies related to
wildfire.
Sen. Herman Baertsch-
iger Jr., R-Grants Pass, com-
mittee vice-chair and Senate
Republican leader, failed in
his attempts to amend the bill
to drop several sections.
Baertschiger said he’s
concerned the bill does too
much at once and needs
more discussion on certain
policy and funding aspects.
He pointed out that he’s not
attempting to derail the effort
but be realistic about what’s
feasible, especially at the
budget committee.
“Ways and Means has
already told me there’s not a
lot of money, so I want some-
thing we can get through the
process,” he said. “I don’t
want something that dies at
the end of the session stuck
in ways and means. That’s
my bottom line.”
Golden is more optimistic.
“We’re talking about
significant dollars, and of
course, the wildfire council’s
even talking about a lot more
money over time, but I think
all this work we’ve been
doing makes for a pretty stra-
tegic launch,” he said. “The
question is how much agree-
ment is there that this is a
tier-one emergency.”
Golden said he believes
there would be no question
of the emergency around
wildfire and support for this
bill had the 2019 fire season
been as bad as the two pre-
vious years. With the state
removed this year from the
devastating fires and noxious
smoke levels in 2017 and
2018, he thinks the bill is a
bit tougher of a sell. It comes
down to what can wait for
lengthier policy discussions
in the 2021 Legislature, and
what needs to be done now.
According to State For-
ester Peter Daugherty, wait-
ing isn’t the best option.
“A lot of people would
say, we’ve been waiting a
number of years with fuel
build ups and have known
about the conditions for
almost a decade and of the
need for fuel reductions and
restoration on federal lands,”
Daugherty said.
Testimony from sev-
eral groups and local gov-
ernments raised issues over
mandating fuel treatments
and dealing with the federal
government for projects on
national forests.
According to Daugherty,
those partnerships are in
place and the state’s relation-
ship with the federal govern-
ment is strong.
“They would love it for us
to come in. We just recently
signed a shared stewardship
agreement about how we’ll
operate with the goal of hav-
ing much more state influ-
ence,” Daugherty said. “We
have mutual goals in terms of
healthy, resilient forests.”
Golden and Daugherty
said they believe the “his-
toric” deal between timber
interests and environmental
groups announced last week
would have a positive bear-
ing on discussions around
wildfire investment.
“I had some concern that
the wounds from the timber
wars were going to get in the
way of this wildfire work,”
Golden said.
Moving forward, Golden
and his committee mem-
bers will watch the budget
committee’s schedule and
discussions on funding the
bill.
With wildfire a major pri-
ority for Gov. Kate Brown,
Democrats on the budget
committee likely will keep
step, but Republicans aren’t
quite as convinced the bill
should be addressed now.
“This is just too much
too soon,” said Sen. Kim
Thatcher, R-Keizer, a mem-
ber of the Senate Wildfire
Committee. “I might have
been on board with a lot of
this, but I just don’t want to
commit to something I don’t
fully grasp yet.”
Wednesday, February 19, 2020
Proposed amendments to cap and trade bill
borrow ideas from Republicans, Timber Unity
By Claire Withycombe
Oregon Capital Bureau
Lawmakers revealed on Feb. 12 changes to
the plan to cut back on the state’s greenhouse
gas emissions that would ease the impact on
rural Oregon and adopt elements proposed by
Timber Unity.
The revisions are part of the continuing
effort of Democratic sponsors to drive a policy
that has greater statewide acceptance.
The proposed revisions to Senate Bill 1530
incorporate requests from Republicans and
Timber Unity, a grassroots organization that
has been agitating against a cap and trade sys-
tem. Republicans in the Senate fled the state
over last year’s version of the bill.
The cap and trade program would set a limit
on statewide carbon emissions and aims to
reduce emissions over time.
Limits on emissions would apply to cer-
tain industries and major fuel importers. The
policy would carve up the emissions limit into
allowances that emitters can buy and sell on a
market. The idea is that as emissions targets
get lower, fewer allowances are available, and
industry would improve pollution controls.
Opponents have criticized the plan for its
potential impact on consumers and small busi-
nesses, particularly through higher fuel costs.
The amendments could change how fuel
would be regulated under the program. It delays
the impact on Curry and Coos counties, as well
as the Bend and Klamath Falls metro areas, to
2028, six years later than for the Portland area.
And rather than 20 counties triggering a
statewide adoption of limits on fuel importers,
this amendment sets the trigger at 23 counties.
And under the amendment, a greater share
of the revenue from transportation — 90%
— would go to counties or metro areas that
engaged in the program to use on emissions
reduction and climate adaptation projects.
The rest would go to the state Transportation
Department for projects around the state.
The amendments would incorporate pol-
icy ideas from Sen. Alan Olsen, R-Canby, and
Sen. Lynn Findley, R-Vale, who sit on the Sen-
ate Committee on Environment and Natural
Resources.
Climate activists swarm Capitol
By Sam Stites
and Claire Withycombe
Oregon Capital Bureau
Activists seeking to clean
Oregon’s environment by
reducing greenhouse gas
emissions turned out by the
hundreds at the Capitol Feb.
11, pushing legislators to
move ahead with a cap and
trade policy.
Demonstrators
ranged
from Salem-area teenag-
ers who took time out from
school to middle-aged Wasco
County residents.
All told, organizers say
that more than 1,000 peo-
ple traveled to the Capi-
tol to support Senate Bill
1530, which aims to cap
and shrink the state’s car-
bon emissions and generate
revenue for environmental
projects.
One of those local teens
was Angelique Prater, 17,
of Salem, who spoke to the
Oregon Capital Bureau/Sam Stites
From left, Portland State student Rachel Rodri and Willa-
mette University students Emily Grunken, Sonia Zand, Jamie
Smith, Maggie Chapin and Samantha Smith demonstrate at
the Oregon State Capitol Tuesday, Feb. 11, to urge lawmak-
ers to take action on climate change.
crowd Tuesday about her
activism.
In an interview, she said
that her parents, immigrants
from Mexico who work in
agriculture, were already
feeling the effects of climate
change — extreme tempera-
tures in winter and summer.
She said she first heard
about the proposal from
friends in school and then
got involved in activism.
“I’m here today to fight
for the climate crisis and to,
you know, push our legisla-
tors to fight for strong cli-
mate legislation,” Prater
said, adding that legisla-
tion was the most important
part of “solving the climate
crisis.”
Bill giving public records advocate
independence heads to vote
By Sam Stites
Oregon Capital Bureau
It took less than two minutes
Wednesday for a Senate com-
mittee to approve legislation to
solidify independence for Ore-
gon’s public records advocate
and the Public Records Advi-
sory Council.
During a Feb. 12 work ses-
sion, members of the Senate
Committee on General Govern-
ment sent Senate Bill 1506 to
the Senate floor with a recom-
mendation that it be approved.
Sen. Kim Thatcher, R-Keizer,
will carry the bill during Thurs-
day morning’s debate.
Senators spent most of
Monday’s work session hear-
ing from supporters of the pub-
lic records advocate and coun-
cil. They told the committee
both play important roles in
promoting open government.
“Since their inception
in 2017 … the council and
advocate have utilized their
broad perspectives and col-
lective knowledge to collect
data and make recommenda-
tions on improving the appli-
cation of public records law
in Oregon, as well as how the
council and advocate can bet-
ter serve Oregonians on public
records laws,” said Stephanie
Clark, council chairwoman and
director of the State Archives
Division.
Clark and others, such as
Society of Professional Jour-
nalists board member and Port-
land Tribune reporter Nick
Budnick, support improving
public records law in Oregon
through independence for the
public records advocate and
the council.
Budnick pointed out that
following the abrupt depar-
ture in September of former
Public Records Advocate Gin-
ger McCall, Gov. Kate Brown
expressed her support for an
independent advocate who was
not attached to the governor’s
office. McCall cited attempts to
influence her work by former
Brown adviser and staff mem-
ber Misha Isaak among her rea-
sons for leaving the post.
“We don’t always agree
with the governor, our mem-
bers, on this stuff,” Budnick
said. “But in this case, what
you have is an issue of, will
the advice that’s being given to
the public — to local and state
government officials who des-
perately need education, as do
requesters — will that advice
be neutral and independent?
Will they adhere to the records
law that you all passed? Or will
they adhere to an elected offi-
cial’s interpretation of that law
or partisan politics? Indepen-
dence of this office is crucial to
its credibility.”
Grant Soil & Water Conservation District
2020 Annual Meeting
Thursday, March 5th, 6:00 – 7:30pm
Grant County Municipal Airport, John Day, OR
Guest Speaker: Brenda Sanchez, OR Dept. of Agriculture Strategic Implementation
Area (SIA) Program Lead
Upcoming Changes to Oregon’s Agricultural Water Quality Management Program
Oregon Department of Agriculture (ODA) has the authority to enforce Administrative
Rules under their Agricultural Water Quality Management Program; these rules apply to
private property owners or operators whose land is engaged in agricultural use.
Since 2003, enforcement has occurred on a complaint driven basis; ODA is currently
proposing an alternative known as the “Strategic Implementation Area” (SIA) process.
This process will select specific watersheds within Grant County and conduct remote
evaluations of private lands using aerial and satellite imagery to identify potential water
quality concerns; follow up field evaluations will be initiated to further examine the
accuracy of the findings conducted remotely.
The proposed schedule to implement this program on private lands includes the North
and Middle Fork John Day River as well as the Crooked River basins in 2021, Middle John
Day River (downstream of Mountain Creek), Malheur River and the Silvies Basin (Greater
Harney Basin) in 2022 and the Upper Mainstem and South Fork John Day Rivers in 2023.
The public is invited to join Grant Soil and Water Conservation District for this infor-
mative event. Complimentary refreshments will be served. More information can be
obtained either by visiting our website: grantswcd.net, stopping by the District Office
located in the USDA Agricultural Service Center (721 S. Canyon Blvd, John Day) or by
contacting Kyle Sullivan at (541) 575-0135 x111.
S165194-1
S172758-1
