HB 2346 establishes the Office of Resilience and Emergency Management within the Oregon Department of Human Services (DHS). The office is tasked with helping DHS maintain continuity of operations and access to services during emergencies, coordinating with the Oregon Department of Emergency Management, local governments, tribal governments, and other entities to plan for and deliver mass care and related support. It may also adopt rules and be organized by a director under DHS supervision.
The bill gives the new office broad authority to assist with emergency response and recovery. Its duties include helping with evacuations, identifying and supporting vulnerable populations, providing shelter and temporary housing, distributing food, water, hygiene supplies, emergency first aid, and other emergency items, and coordinating reunification and recovery services. It also authorizes the office to provide grants, contracts, equipment, and other support to public or private partners, including tribal entities, and to help people access benefits, case management, and other recovery resources.
HB 2346 also addresses specific emergency scenarios such as drought, poor air quality, utility loss, displacement, asylum or refugee arrivals, repatriation operations, and support for household pets, service animals, and support animals. The bill allows the office to collect and share limited information for safety and reunification purposes and to support individual assistance programs, including replacement of personal property and direct financial or vendor payments. In addition, it creates potential liability for a person whose willful, unlawful, malicious, or negligent fire causes DHS to incur costs providing services to people affected by the fire.
The bill’s impact on state law is to create a new DHS office and expand statutory authority for emergency human services, disaster recovery, and continuity planning. It would formalize DHS’s role in mass care and social-service response during natural, technological, or human-caused disruptions, while also authorizing coordination with multiple levels of government and outside partners. The fire-liability provision would add a new cost-recovery mechanism tied to fire-caused emergency response services.
The general sentiment reflected in the available record appears supportive and noncontroversial at the committee level: the House committee voted 6-0 to do pass with amendments and refer the bill to Ways and Means by prior reference. No committee transcript is available, so there is no recorded debate in the provided materials. The main points of potential contention are the breadth of the office’s authority, the scope of services it may provide, and the new liability provision for fire-related costs, though no opposition is documented in the supplied history.
HB 2346 would create a new Office of Resilience and Emergency Management within DHS and give it broad statutory authority over emergency human services, evacuation support, sheltering, food and water distribution, recovery assistance, continuity planning, and coordination with local, tribal, state, federal, and private partners. It would also authorize DHS to use internal resources, adopt rules, and implement individual assistance programs, while adding a new potential cost-recovery liability for persons responsible for certain fires.
The available voting history suggests the bill was received favorably, with a unanimous 6-0 House committee vote to pass the measure with amendments and refer it to Ways and Means by prior reference. No committee testimony or transcript is provided, so there is no direct record of public debate, but the procedural outcome indicates broad support at the committee stage.
The most likely areas of contention are the bill’s broad delegation of authority to a new DHS office, the wide range of populations and services covered, and the provision making a person liable for DHS costs when a fire is caused willfully, unlawfully, maliciously, or negligently. The bill also touches on sensitive issues such as support for asylum seekers, refugee services, and information-sharing about vulnerable individuals, but no specific opposition or competing viewpoints are documented in the materials provided.