Relating to legislative measure introduction; prescribing an effective date.
Summary
SB 1006 restructures Oregon law governing who may request and introduce legislative measures. The bill removes existing authority for state agencies and certain statewide elected officials to directly submit proposed measures for drafting or introduction, and instead directs that legislative changes be sought only through measures requested and introduced by members or committees of the Legislative Assembly. It also updates related statutes to remove references to the repealed provisions and to conform cross-references throughout the Oregon Revised Statutes.
Beyond the core change to bill introduction procedures, SB 1006 makes conforming amendments in several subject areas where agencies, councils, or task forces previously had express authority to submit legislative proposals. These include the Road User Fee Task Force, the Oregon Health Policy Board, the System of Care Advisory Council, land-use and transportation statutes, public contracting provisions, and a 2001 law concerning dredge-and-fill permitting. In each of these areas, the bill generally replaces direct agency proposal authority with a requirement that any requested measure be filed through a legislator or legislative committee, often with a statement that the measure is filed at the request of the agency or entity.
Impact
The bill would change Oregon’s legislative drafting and introduction process by limiting direct measure requests to members and committees of the Legislative Assembly and repealing ORS 171.127 and 171.133, which currently support agency and official-initiated measure requests. It would also amend multiple statutes to replace references to those repealed provisions with the new framework, affecting how state agencies, statewide elected officials, and certain advisory bodies interact with the Legislative Counsel and the Legislature when seeking statutory changes. The practical effect is to centralize legislative proposal authority in the Legislature itself, while still allowing agencies and other entities to seek changes indirectly through legislators or committees.
Sentiment
No committee transcripts or recorded votes were provided, so there is no documented floor or committee sentiment in the materials supplied. Based on the bill text alone, the measure appears to reflect a strong institutional preference for legislative control over bill introduction, rather than agency-driven drafting. The overall tone of the bill is procedural and structural, focused on separation of roles and legislative prerogative rather than policy expansion in any substantive program area.
Contention
The main point of contention is likely to be the removal of direct bill-request authority from state agencies, the Governor, and other statewide elected officials, because that change reduces executive-branch and agency access to the drafting and introduction process. Supporters would likely view the bill as reinforcing legislative independence and ensuring that measures are introduced only by elected legislators or legislative committees. Opponents may argue that it makes it harder for agencies and constitutional officers to efficiently propose technical or programmatic fixes, especially in specialized areas such as health policy, transportation funding, land use, and environmental permitting. The bill also touches several existing statutory schemes, so affected agencies and councils may be concerned about losing established pathways for advancing needed legislation.