HB 3422
Adds a criterion to the standards that the Energy Facility Siting Council must find for the council to take an exception to an applicable statewide planning goal for a proposed energy facility.
Jurisdiction
Oregon
Session
2025 Regular Session
Committee
Climate, Energy, and Environment
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
90%
Oppose
10%
- Introduced
- Passed House
- Passed Senate
- To Governor
- Became Law
Bill overview
This bill modifies the standards the Energy Facility Siting Council (EFSC) must meet to take an exception to a statewide planning goal for a proposed energy facility. Specifically, it adds a new criterion requiring the EFSC to demonstrate that the land where the facility is proposed is either physically developed to the point it can’t accommodate alternative uses, irrevocably committed to uses not allowed by the goal, or that an exception is justified based on specific standards related to the goal’s impact and available alternatives. The bill also clarifies the process for the EFSC to determine applicable substantive criteria and provides for judicial review of local government approvals and advisory group recommendations.
Key provisions
- Adds a requirement for the EFSC to demonstrate land is physically developed or irrevocably committed to non-compliant uses to justify an exception.
- Establishes standards for justifying an exception to a statewide planning goal, including environmental, economic, social, and energy consequences.
- Clarifies the EFSC’s process for determining applicable substantive criteria, potentially involving a special advisory group.
- Specifies that local governments must amend their comprehensive plans to reflect EFSC decisions.
- Outlines judicial review procedures for local government approvals and advisory group recommendations.
- Provides for technical assistance to local governments regarding the siting process.
- Defines when the amendments to ORS 469.504 take effect.
Who is affected
- Energy Facility Siting Council
Sponsors
Official sponsors from legislative records.
Primary sponsors
Shelly Boshart Davis
Cosponsors
Arguments in favor
Reasons to support this legislation.
Supporters of HB 3422 generally express enthusiasm for the legislation, citing its potential to address climate change and promote renewable energy. They emphasize the need to protect farm lands from industrial solar facilities, which could harm agricultural land, wildlife habitats, and local communities. Many that the bill aims to bring parity to the process by considering alternative locations for energy facilities covering farmland, recognizing and respecting the land-dependent agricultural economy. Some also highlight the potential benefits of solar energy for farmers and ranchers, such as saving money on electricity costs and protecting against rising prices. Overall, supporters view HB 3422 as a crucial step towards reducing greenhouse gas emissions in Oregon and promoting sustainable development.
Source: Testimony Summaries
Arguments opposed
Reasons to oppose this legislation.
Opponents of HB 3422 express concerns about the proposed legislation's potential impact on agriculture in Sherman County, Oregon, and its suitability for alternative energy projects. They argue that the county's unique characteristics make it an ideal location for large-scale renewable energy development, but current regulations would hinder this growth. Testifiers highlight challenges such as weather variability, international trade conflicts, and limited diversification opportunities into renewable energy, which could exacerbate existing difficulties faced by Eastern Oregon farmers. Additionally, opponents believe that adding new standards to the state Energy Facility Siting Council's permitting process would reduce renewable energy investment, slow down Oregon's clean energy transition, and undermine the policy choice made by the Oregon Legislature regarding EFSC review and local review.