Oregon 2024 Regular Session

Oregon House Bill HB4122

Introduced
2/5/24  
Refer
2/5/24  
Refer
2/19/24  
Refer
2/19/24  
Report Pass
3/5/24  
Engrossed
3/6/24  
Refer
3/6/24  
Report Pass
3/7/24  
Enrolled
3/7/24  
Passed
4/4/24  
Chaptered
4/10/24  

Caption

Relating to fingerprint retention; prescribing an effective date.

Impact

The enactment of HB 4122 is expected to have significant implications for state laws surrounding employment and criminal justice. Specifically, it amends existing statutes to enable authorized agencies to retain fingerprint cards and related information, which will be properly regulated and restricted in terms of use. The new provisions require that individuals be clearly informed of their participation options in the fingerprint retention program, ensuring that there is no coercion to enroll, thus maintaining civil liberties while enhancing public safety.

Summary

House Bill 4122, titled as the fingerprint retention bill, seeks to establish a systematic approach for handling and retaining fingerprint records in the state of Oregon. The bill outlines the operational framework for a voluntary 'Rap Back program,' where authorized agencies, such as state and local government bodies, can subscribe to receive ongoing notifications regarding the criminal history status of individuals whose fingerprints are registered in the system. This mechanism is intended to enhance the security and efficiency of background checks required for employment and licensing purposes, particularly for positions of trust.

Sentiment

The general sentiment around HB 4122 appears to be cautiously optimistic among supporters, particularly from law enforcement and regulatory bodies. They view the bill as a necessary advancement in the capability to monitor individuals involved in sensitive positions. However, there are concerns regarding privacy implications and the potential for misuse of the retained information, which opponents fear could lead to overreach and infringe on individual rights. Hence, debates surrounding the bill often revolve around balancing public safety with personal privacy rights.

Contention

Key points of contention include the concerns voiced by civil rights advocates about the broader implications of a fingerprint retention program. Critics argue that while monitoring individuals in positions of trust is important, it could result in a database that is vulnerable to abuse. Additionally, discussions on how to process and inform individuals about their participation in the Rap Back program have raised questions about the adequacy of existing safeguards to prevent discrimination or unintended consequences as a result of this system.

Companion Bills

No companion bills found.

Previously Filed As

OR SB1173

behavioral health facilities; fingerprinting

OR HB2884

ESAs; teacher qualifications; fingerprinting requirements

OR HB2583

ESAs; teacher qualifications; fingerprinting requirements

OR SB1641

Qualified schools; fingerprinting requirements; penalties

OR SB1700

qualified schools; fingerprinting requirements; penalties

OR HB4115

Relating to health care providers; and prescribing an effective date.

OR H5120

Fingerprinting, offenses by minors

OR HB689

Align and modernize fingerprinting and disposition reporting

OR SB2725

Pawnbrokers; provide precious metal retention requirements and revise fingerprinting requirements for.

OR SB5223

Concerning criminal offense fingerprinting.

Similar Bills

MO SB636

Modifies provisions relating to background checks for certain applicants of agencies, boards, and commissions

AZ SB1173

behavioral health facilities; fingerprinting

AZ SB1171

AHCCCS; dual enrollment; notice

AZ SB1136

Schools; noncertificated personnel; background investigations

CO SB146

Fingerprint-Based Criminal History Record Checks

AZ SB1292

Noncertificated school personnel; disciplinary action

OH HB689

Align and modernize fingerprinting and disposition reporting

WA SB5223

Concerning criminal offense fingerprinting.