SB 5701
Modifies amounts authorized for issuance of debt instruments for the biennium.
Jurisdiction
Oregon
Session
2026 Regular Session
At the request of
(at the request of Joint Committee on Ways and Means for Senator Kate Lieber)
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
99%
Oppose
1%
- Introduced
- Passed Senate
- Passed House
- To Governor
- Became Law
Bill overview
This bill modifies the amounts authorized for issuing debt instruments, primarily for the biennium ending June 30, 2027, and potentially extending to 2029. It outlines specific funding allocations for various state agencies and projects, including higher education institutions, transportation improvements, and public safety initiatives. The bill also includes provisions for issuing revenue bonds and certificates of participation to support specific projects, notably the Moda Center capital improvements. An emergency declaration allows the bill to take effect immediately upon passage.
Sponsors
Official sponsors from legislative records.
Primary sponsor
Joint Committee On Ways and Means
Arguments in favor
Reasons to support this legislation.
Supporters of various projects and initiatives emphasize the need for funding to address critical community needs, including public safety, economic development, and social welfare. They highlight the importance of providing safe spaces for vulnerable populations, such as community centers, food banks, and emergency response hubs. The proposed projects aim to enhance regional resilience, promote economic growth, and support local businesses and residents. Additionally, supporters express concern about the need for modern infrastructure, including police facilities, fire stations, and water treatment systems, to ensure public safety and well-being. Overall, the collective view is that investing in these initiatives will have a transformative impact on communities across Oregon, promoting stability, growth, and improved quality of life.
Source: Testimony Summaries
Arguments opposed
Reasons to oppose this legislation.
Opponents of the proposed funding for an additional fire station at Disston express concerns about resource allocation and emergency outcomes. They argue that investing in another fire station would be inefficient due to the geography of the Row River Valley, which may not significantly improve response times or overall safety. Additionally, some the importance of local fire protection services, citing personal experiences with school fires, highlighting the need for reliable emergency services. Furthermore, opponents also question the fiscal responsibility of the proposed funding, suggesting that it would divert funds from existing housing projects and economic development initiatives, such as levee system improvements and port investments, which could have more direct and tangible benefits to the community.
Read the latest version inline or switch to a previous version.