HB 4108
Allows the City of Eugene to annex noncontiguous land upon receipt of a petition from all owners of the land that satisfies four eligibility criteria.
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
71%
Oppose
29%
- Introduced
- Passed House
- Passed Senate
- To Governor
- Became Law
Bill overview
House Bill 4108 allows the City of Eugene to expand its boundaries by annexing land that isn't directly connected to the city. To do this, the city must receive a petition signed by all property owners within the proposed annexation area, provided the land meets specific requirements. This bill clarifies that the annexed land must have access to city-provided water, wastewater, and stormwater services, or be serviced by a contracted provider. The amendment clarifies that the land must receive these services to be eligible for annexation.
Sponsors
Official sponsors from legislative records.
Primary sponsor
Cosponsors
Arguments in favor
Reasons to support this legislation.
Supporters of House Bill 4108 generally agree that the proposed amendment provides a practical and commonsense solution to outdated administrative barriers, allowing cities to annex non-contiguous parcels within their urban growth boundaries in a timely and efficient manner. They argue that this reform would increase housing supply, make efficient use of existing public investments, and support local innovation, as well as promote better alignment of land use authority with service provision. By removing unnecessary barriers to housing production, cities can unlock real housing potential, address the growing housing crisis, and provide more equitable governance, services, and voting rights for rural residents and unincorporated neighborhoods within a city.
Source: Testimony Summaries
Arguments opposed
Reasons to oppose this legislation.
Opponents of HB 4108 express concerns about its potential unintended consequences. They argue that the bill could lead to funding pressure on special districts, premature operating levies, and issues with bonded indebtedness distribution. Cities and counties also raise concerns about annexation policies, citing the need for autonomy in deciding whether to annex properties that may negatively impact their communities, as well as inadequate provisions for providing necessary urban services to newly annexed property. Additionally, opponents point out potential equity and fairness issues, such as preferential matching treatment for small cities but exclusion of special districts, which could exacerbate existing disparities.
Read the latest version inline or switch to a previous version.