HB 3831
Requires the Department of Land Conservation and Development to study public health impacts of land use and submit findings to the interim committees of the Legislative Assembly related to land use no later than September 15, 2026.
Jurisdiction
Oregon
Session
2025 Regular Session
Committee
Emergency Management, General Government, and Veterans
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
0%
Oppose
100%
- Introduced
- Passed House
- Passed Senate
- To Governor
- Became Law
Bill overview
This bill directs the Department of Land Conservation and Development (DLCD) to conduct a study on how land use affects public health. The DLCD is required to submit its findings and any recommended legislation to the interim committees of the Legislative Assembly by September 15, 2026. This study will focus on the relationship between land use and public health concerns.
Key provisions
- The Department of Land Conservation and Development (DLCD) must study public health impacts of land use.
- The DLCD must submit a report to interim legislative committees.
- The report must be submitted by September 15, 2026.
- The report may include recommendations for new legislation.
- The study's focus is on the relationship between land use and public health.
Who is affected
- Department of Land Conservation and Development (DLCD)
- Interim Committees of the Legislative Assembly
- Oregon Residents (indirectly, through public health impacts)
Notable changes
- Establishes a specific deadline (September 15, 2026) for the DLCD to complete and submit its report.
Arguments in favor
Reasons to support this legislation.
No arguments in favor have been submitted.
Submit yoursArguments opposed
Reasons to oppose this legislation.
concerns that allocating additional taxpayer dollars for land acquisition may be an inefficient use of resources, with some arguing that it diverts funds away from more pressing needs. A common thread among the testimonies is a lack of clarity on the bill's goals and parameters, which has led some to question its necessity and suggest that Oregon's tax money should be used more effectively. Furthermore, concerns have been raised about the potential for misallocated resources, particularly in rural or underserved areas where local governments and businesses may bear the brunt of any negative impacts. Overall, opponents of the bill cite a need for greater transparency and consideration of alternative uses for taxpayer dollars.
Source: Testimony Summaries