HB 3544
Establishes uniform processes for hearing contested case proceedings relating to the use of water.
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
18%
Oppose
82%
- Introduced
- Passed House
- Passed Senate
- To Governor
- Became Law
Bill overview
This bill establishes a standardized process for resolving disputes regarding the use of water in Oregon. It outlines specific procedures for filing protests against proposed final orders, including requirements for the content and timing of those protests. The bill also addresses how the Water Resources Department will handle contested cases, potentially streamlining the process and ensuring fairness. It incorporates amendments to existing water law related to application review, public notice, and final order issuance, particularly concerning House Bill 3342.
Key provisions
- Establishes a 45-day protest period for challenging proposed final orders related to water use.
- Specifies detailed requirements for protest submissions, including content and fee considerations.
- Outlines a process for parties to request party status in contested case proceedings.
- Defines criteria for the Water Resources Department to determine if a hearing is necessary.
- Details the information included in a proposed final order, such as findings of fact and conditions.
- Addresses the timing of final orders and refund of fees if no protest is received.
- Incorporates amendments to existing Oregon water law sections related to application review and procedures.
- Establishes an operative date of April 1, 2026, for many of the bill’s provisions.
Who is affected
- Water rights holders
- The Water Resources Department
- Citizens affected by water use decisions
- Agricultural interests
Sponsors
Official sponsors from legislative records.
Primary sponsors
Cosponsor
Emerson Levy
Arguments in favor
Reasons to support this legislation.
the need for refinements to the current water right contested case process, citing significant delays and costs associated with the existing system. They argue that a more streamlined process would not only alleviate financial burdens on all parties involved but also provide greater predictability and efficiency in decision-making. By expediting water rights and permit decisions, proponents believe this reform will ultimately benefit cities, districts, and residents by reducing bureaucratic hurdles and promoting timely access to essential water resources.
Source: Testimony Summaries
Arguments opposed
Reasons to oppose this legislation.
The opposition to HB 3544-2 expresses concerns about its potential to undermine the efficiency goals of the bill by introducing unnecessary complexity and burdens on non-applicants who wish to file protests. that the new definition of who can file a protest would lead to protracted litigation, restrict due process rights, and potentially harm Oregon's water resource management. They also express concerns about the cost, scope, and funding of the bill, with some testifiers calling it "irresponsible and incompetent." Overall, opponents believe that the bill fails to address the root cause of the contested case backlog and would instead impose new burdens on individuals and organizations seeking to challenge proposed decisions by the Water Resources Department.