HB 5051
Modifies the amounts authorized for certain capital construction costs.
Jurisdiction
Oregon
Session
2025 Regular Session
At the request of
(at the request of Oregon Department of Administrative Services)
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
100%
Oppose
0%
- Introduced
- Passed House
- Passed Senate
- To Governor
- Became Law
Bill overview
House Bill 5051 adjusts the amounts authorized for capital construction costs within the state. It allocates funds from the General Fund to a specific agency for biennial expenses and sets maximum limits on expenditures from various revenue sources, excluding lottery and federal funds. The bill also establishes maximum limits on expenditures from federal funds. An emergency declaration allows the bill to take effect immediately.
Key provisions
- Appropriates funds from the General Fund to a designated agency.
- Establishes maximum spending limits on fees, miscellaneous receipts, and other revenues.
- Sets maximum spending limits on federal funds.
- Specifies the amount appropriated for a particular capital construction project.
- Declares an emergency, allowing the bill to take effect immediately.
Who is affected
- Oregon State Government
- Oregon Department of Administrative Services
- Taxpayers (indirectly through budget allocations)
- State Agencies
Notable changes
- Modifies existing spending limits for capital construction projects.
- Specifies amounts appropriated from the General Fund.
- Establishes maximum limits on revenue-based expenditures.
Fiscal impact
The bill appropriates funds from the General Fund and establishes spending limits, potentially impacting state budget allocations and agency operations.
Sponsors
Official sponsors from legislative records.
Primary sponsor
Oregon Department of Administrative Services
Arguments in favor
Reasons to support this legislation.
Supporters of the proposed wastewater system improvements express concerns that the project will result in significant cost increases for residents, potentially making Sandy less affordable. They argue that the estimated costs and projected rate hikes would disproportionately affect low-income households, exacerbating existing socioeconomic challenges. Opponents claim that the city's current infrastructure is inadequate and that the upgrades are necessary to prevent more costly repairs down the line, while also emphasizing the need for a phased implementation approach to mitigate the financial burden on residents.
Source: Testimony Summaries
Arguments opposed
Reasons to oppose this legislation.
No arguments opposed have been submitted.
Submit yours