HB 3130
Requires a member of a district school board to file an economic interest statement only if the member receives a stipend from the district school board.
Take action
Record your position on this measure.
Sign in to record your position, submit testimony, or contact your legislator.
Sign in to take actionPublic sentiment
Support
75%
Oppose
25%
- Introduced
- Passed House
- Passed Senate
- To Governor
- Became Law
Bill overview
This bill changes the requirement for school board members to file economic interest statements. Currently, members who receive a stipend from the district school board must file. This bill removes that requirement, stating that filing is only necessary for members who receive a stipend.
Key provisions
- School board members who do not receive a stipend from the district school board are exempt from filing an economic interest statement.
- The bill amends ORS 244.050 to clarify this exemption.
- The change applies to members of common school districts and union high school districts.
- The bill specifically addresses the filing requirements for candidates running for school board positions.
- Failure to file an economic interest statement when required can result in a civil penalty.
Who is affected
- District school board members
- School districts
- Oregon Government Ethics Commission
- Candidates for school board positions
Notable changes
- Removes the requirement for stipend-receiving school board members to file economic interest statements.
- Clarifies the scope of the exemption to include both common school districts and union high school districts.
Sponsors
Official sponsors from legislative records.
Primary sponsor
Cosponsors
Arguments in favor
Reasons to support this legislation.
Supporters of HB 3130 generally advocate for increased transparency in candidate financial disclosures, with the goal of reducing corruption and promoting accountability in elections. Many believe that requiring candidates to file a statement of economic interest before the statewide general election is a necessary step towards ensuring the integrity of the electoral process. Some argue that this requirement should be more comprehensive, focusing on transparency rather than invasive personal record-keeping, while others see it as an acceptable measure to hold officials accountable for potential conflicts of interest.
Source: Testimony Summaries
Arguments opposed
Reasons to oppose this legislation.
I don't see a testimony summary to synthesize. Please provide the text of the testimony summaries you'd like me to work with, and I'll be happy to assist you in creating a concise and objective paragraph representing the Oppose position.
Source: Testimony Summaries