2025 legislative overview

The 2025 session of the Oregon legislature begins on Tuesday, January 21, and runs through the end of June. 1000 Friends of Oregon is leading the advocacy on bills to advance agricultural and forest land protection, produce more diverse and affordable housing options for all Oregonians, and fund wildfire mitigation and resiliency efforts. We are also supporting other bills to protect natural and marine resources, support carbon sequestration on agricultural lands, fund working lands easements, and provide funding for affordable housing.

Of course, we expect we will have to oppose bills that seek to undermine Oregon’s land use laws, and we will let you know about those too.

Major dates to know:

• March 21: Deadline for bills to be scheduled for a work session in committee in the first chamber
• April 9: Deadline for bills to be voted on in a committee in the first chamber
• May 9: Deadline for bills to be scheduled for a work session in committee in the second chamber
• May 23: Deadline for bills to be voted on in a committee in the second chamber
• June 29: Constitutional sine die

The capitol building is still under significant construction to address seismic upgrades and technology needs. Therefore, major parts of the building are not open to the public, and the building itself has capacity limits. You will be able to testify remotely or in person for all committee hearings. Every committee webpage has instructions on how to do that, as well as how to submit written testimony. We will also provide this information in all legislative alerts we send throughout the session.

Subscribe to our emails for alerts and regular updates

Here are key legislative concepts we plan to engage with this session, divided into key advocacy areas: 

Housing production
Natural and working lands
Transportation
Healthy communities
Wildfire preparedness and resiliency
Public involvement

This page will be updated as the session goes on.

Housing production

Ensuring that all communities provide a variety of accessible housing options that are affordable for folks at all income levels is a cornerstone of Oregon’s land use Goal 10 and our work. 1000 Friends of Oregon is supporting housing legislation in four broad areas to help achieve this:

• Production of infill housing and “middle” housing, such as duplexes and quadplexes.
• Infrastructure to support residential development in existing neighborhoods
• Preservation of existing affordable housing
• Promotion of innovative housing types and materials

We expect to support several bills that will fund at least some infrastructure for housing, allowing many thousands of much-needed homes to be built in communities across Oregon. We also anticipate several bills focused on making investments in existing affordable housing to ensure already-affordable homes last for more decades. 

1000 Friends of Oregon expects to support other bills that advance diverse, accessible housing affordable to all inside urban growth boundaries. We will let you know about these as legislation unfolds.

HB 2138-2 Middle and infill housing production

Support

What it does: Oregon passed groundbreaking legislation allowing middle housing (duplexes, three- and fourplexes, cottage clusters, townhomes, and accessory dwelling units, often called ADUs) in most neighborhoods, which other states and regions are now following. However, as that legislation has rolled out, some local barriers remain that need to be removed or changed to truly allow these housing choices. This legislation does that. The new dash-2 amendment provides additional clarification and definitions. With the -2, HB 2138 will:

• Add flexibility for the various “plex” homes to be attached or detached.
• Increase the home size for cottage-cluster developments.
• Provide a density bonus for housing that is affordable or meets “Type A” accessibility requirements.
• Clarify and simplify the path to retain an existing house on a lot while locating middle housing on the remainder.
• Make it easier to develop small homes with shared communal facilities.
• Remove private and economically exclusionary restrictions and hurdles to middle housing development.
• Make it easier to site manufactured middle housing types and ADUs.
• Remove or simplify various local procedural hurdles.

Why it matters: Producing middle and infill housing in existing neighborhoods means all sorts of families – people with middle and lower incomes, older folks, small families, and more – have the opportunity to live closer to schools, stores, parks, and jobs. It means teachers, utility workers, medical technicians, and others can live in the communities they serve. And it’s better for the climate when people don’t have to drive as far or as often, because what they need is close by. Yet local cumbersome processes and unnecessary requirements are proving a hurdle to actually building this housing. This bill will remove or modify those hurdles, allowing more infill and middle housing.

Status: This bill passed out of the House Committee on Housing and Homelessness and is now in the Joint Committee on Ways and Means.

Testimony: Read our March 3 hearing testimony, our March 26 hearing testimony, and our one pager on the bill.

HB 2968 Deferred system-development charges

Support

What it does: This bill would remove risk to cities of allowing housing developers to defer paying system-development charges (SDCs) until the completion of the development, thereby lessening the cost of the home.

Why it matters: Most local governments require residential SDCs to be paid up front at the time of permitting, the costs of which are then folded into and financed with the project’s overall debt. HB 2968 would allow local governments to defer SDC payments for market-rate developments until 180 days after the certificate of occupancy has been issued, and for affordable-housing developers up to one year after the certificate of occupancy. HB 2968 directs the Oregon Housing and Community Services (OHCS) agency to create a Municipal Development Protection Fund to cover the cost of any unpaid fees, with the fund responsible for collecting unpaid fees from the developers. This greatly reduces the risk to local governments of SDCs going unpaid

Status: This bill passed out of the Senate Committee on Housing and Development, and is now in the Joint Committee on Ways and Means.

Testimony: Read our March 12 hearing testimony.

HB 3031-1 Infrastructure for residential development

Support

What it does: Oregon’s cities have thousands of acres designated for residential use inside their urban growth boundaries (UGBs), but many of these lands lack some or all infrastructure or need upgrades – roads, sewers, water, sidewalks. This bill will provide funding to build some of this infrastructure.

Why it matters: Almost every city in Oregon – from very large to very small – has land the community has already decided is good for housing, yet no homes have been built there because extensions or upgrades of water and sewer lines, local roads, and sidewalks are expensive. These areas are well located near things like schools and stores. Decades ago, this infrastructure was commonly funded by federal, state, and local funding sources, but those have significantly dwindled. This long-term neglect has negatively impacted building the housing Oregonians need. Housing advocates, builders, cities, and many others agree that investing in these lands is the most important step the state can take now to unlock large parcels to quickly produce the housing we need, where we need it.

Status: This bill passed out of the House Committee on Housing and Homelessness and is now in the Joint Committee on Ways and Means.

Testimony: Read our February 26 hearing testimony and our one pager on the bill.

HB 3145 Innovative housing types

Support

What it does: This bill will help advance development of innovative housing-construction materials and methods in Oregon, thereby enabling housing to be built and sited quickly, especially housing for people with moderate and lower incomes.

Why it matters: Many innovative housing-construction methods and materials are being developed – such as modular, mass timber, and factory-produced – that allow housing of different sizes to be built, generally offsite, and assembled onsite at costs less than conventional homebuilding methods, yet blending in with those conventional homes. Investment in this industry, in Oregon, will help produce housing quickly, refine these innovative methods, and provide Oregon jobs. 

Status: This bill passed out of the House Committee on Housing and Homelessness and is now in the Joint Committee on Ways and Means.

Testimony: Read our March 10 hearing testimony and our one pager on the bill.

HB 3589 Senior housing initiative

Support

What it does: This bill would establish a senior housing-development initiative to incentivize creation of housing for older adults and people with disabilities, including housing that prioritizes accessibility. Funding for this program would come from dollars left over from existing programs, like the Low-Income Housing Tax Credit.

Why it matters: Senior homelessness is on the rise, Oregon’s population is aging at a faster rate than the national average, and our current housing supply already underserves people who need accessible solutions as they age or to accommodate disabilities. We need to address current gaps in our housing options for seniors, and start now to provide safe, accessible, appropriate, and affordable housing for older Oregonians of tomorrow.

Status: This bill passed out of the House Committee on Housing and Homelessness and is in the House Committee on Revenue before it goes to the Joint Committee on Ways and Means.

Testimony: Read our Mach 5 hearing testimony.
 

HB 3649 Regional housing coordinators

Support

What it does: This bill funds housing coordinators in five regions of the state to bring together local builders, public and private employers, employers, school districts, and others with knowledge of public and private investment sources, understanding of how to remove various barriers, and connections to local leaders to facilitate housing development. 

Why it matters: Communities throughout Oregon need housing for current and future workers to grow local prosperity and stabilize communities. This will take innovative partnerships and funding methods. HB 3649 provides one of those opportunities by establishing regional housing coordinators to support public, private, and civic partnerships focused on developing co-investments for middle income, or workforce, housing. It is modeled on a successful program in Tillamook County. 

Status: This bill passed out of the House Committee on Housing and Homelessness and is now in the Joint Committee on Ways and Means.

Testimony: Read our March 24 hearing testimony.

HB 3939 Infrastructure funding for housing in rural towns and cities

Support

What it does: This bill provides the infrastructure funding needed to bring to the finish line more than 3,000 new homes in 10 rural towns and cities, with 30 percent being available for sale or rent to people with moderate incomes.

Why it matters: Many Oregon towns and cities have land ready for housing, but providing the pipes and roads to enable actual development is expensive, and getting more so. HB 3939 closes that funding gap, while ensuring that enough of the housing is available for people who form the working backbone of our communities.

Status: This bill passed out of the House Committee on Housing and Homelessness and is now in the Joint Committee on Ways and Means.

Testimony: Read our April 7 hearing testimony.

SB 51 Preservation of existing affordable housing

Support

What it does: We expect one or two bills focused on filling the need for major repairs, upgrades, and operational support in existing affordable housing. Public and nonprofit developers have built tens of thousands of homes across Oregon that provide long-term affordable housing for people with lower income, including seniors, veterans, people with disabilities, families, and people on fixed incomes, often paired with supportive services. Many of those buildings are reaching an age where they need major repairs, just like any home. 

Why it matters: Repairing and upgrading existing buildings is more cost efficient than building new ones. These investments also keep people in the homes, schools, and communities they know, rather than uprooting them.

Status: This bill passed out of the Senate Committee on Housing and Development and is now in the Joint Committee on Ways and Means.

Testimony: Read our March 26 hearing testimony and our one pager on the bill.

SB 444Accessible housing 

Support

What it does: This bill establishes important first steps to meet the need of many Oregonians for accessible housing. The bill:

• Requires that 10 percent of housing built with state funds complies with the Uniform Federal Accessibility Standard (UFAS).
• Requires that in buildings with 10 or more units, 10 percent of the project meet Type A accessibility standards.
• Triggers Fair Housing Act design and construction requirements at three units (this is currently triggered at four units).

Why it matters: The US Census estimates that 15 percent of Oregonians have one or more disabilities. While people of all ages and all sorts of families need accessible housing, we are an aging population, meaning this percentage is projected to significantly increase. Many are on fixed incomes. We need to start building accessible units now, not just for today but for the future. However, the state’s current building code requires accessibility features in only 2 percent of units in buildings with over 20 units. But we have fallen short, including significantly failing to meet the housing needs of Oregonians with disabilities. No city in Oregon has even close to a sufficient amount of housing to meet the needs of its current and future residents with disabilities. 

Status: This bill passed out of the Senate Committee on Housing and Development and is awaiting referral.

Testimony: Read our February 5 hearing testimony.

SB 684Revolving loan fund for mixed-income residential projects

Support

What it does: This bill provides a new and needed funding source for mixed-income housing developments. SB 684 provides a tool new to Oregon but proven in other jurisdictions, creating the Construction Revolving Loan Fund at the Oregon Housing and Community Services (OHCS) agency. General funds will be used to seed public-private partnerships with below-market-rate loans to develop housing that integrates affordable, work-force, and market-rate units, while providing long-term affordability for the affordable units. The fund is structured to be self-sustaining, with the loans being repaid and then reinvested into new projects. 

Why it matters: In other states where this type of revolving loan fund for mixed-income projects has been in place, it has been successful both in building new projects and bringing private projects to the finish line with public dollars, in exchange for inclusion of affordable units. The Construction Revolving Loan Fund provides a powerful new financial tool for building both market-rate housing and affordable housing.

Status: This bill passed out of the Senate Committee on Housing and Development and is in the Senate Committee on Finance and Revenue before it goes on to the Joint Committee on Ways and Means. A public hearing is scheduled May 12.

Testimony: Read our March 12 hearing testimony.

Natural and working lands

1000 Friends is leading the advocacy efforts on two key bills to close loopholes in statutes that protect agricultural and forest land. Currently, the statutes are being used to allow luxury homes, hotels, and other hospitality and entertainment venues on agricultural and forest lands across the state. These abuses are leading to gentrification and displacement in Oregon’s rural areas, pricing out new and existing farmers, ranchers, and forest land managers. 1000 Friends is also supporting bills prepared by allied organizations that will close loopholes that allow inappropriate residential and solar development on valuable resource land.

In addition, we expect to see legislation for several programs that provide funding and support resiliency and market reach of farmers and small-forest managers. These programs often don’t have their own bills, but the funding for them is instead incorporated into the larger funding package at the end of the session. 

We also expect a few lawmakers to introduce several bills that will harm farming and forestry by allowing or expanding unrelated activities in exclusive farm and forest zones. These will likely include expanding the current limits on size and duration of agritourism events, increasing the percentage of nonfarm income allowed for farm stands, and allowing cafes on farm land.

SB 73 Ends case-by-case rezoning of agricultural and forest land for residential and industrial development

Support

What it does: This bill requires local governments to use an existing statutory planning process when rezoning designated agricultural and forest land for residential or industrial development, rather than allowing case-by-case rezoning of individual properties outside a planning process. Unlike property-by-property rezonings, the state planning process requires careful consideration of the impacts of exurban sprawl on groundwater, wildlife habitat, and wildfire risk, as well as future urbanization and agricultural and forestry productivity. 

Why it matters: Counties across Oregon are allowing landowners to rezone individual tracts of agricultural and forest land for rural residential and industrial development without adequate planning oversight and direction. This case-by-case rezoning is converting thousands of acres of valuable resource land into a crazy quilt of harmful development in the middle of large blocks of agricultural and forest land. This opportunity for speculative development drives up agricultural and forest land prices; introduces expensive and disruptive conflicts for farmers, ranchers, and forest land managers; and breaks up the large blocks of resource land Oregon’s agricultural and forest economies need to operate. 

Status: This bill was not scheduled for a work session by the March 21 deadline and will not move forward.

SB 77 Prevent elite development abuse of “home occupations” on agricultural and forest land

Introduced for 1000 Friends of Oregon

What it does: A loophole in the statutory provisions for “home occupation” businesses in rural homes is being abused to allow large-scale hospitality and entertainment facilities on land designated for agricultural and timber production. This legislation would close the loophole by clarifying the definition of “home occupations” and providing clear and objective standards to ensure the primary use of a rural home is residential and not commercial. 

Why it matters: Oregon land use law allows people living in exclusive farm and forest use zones to operate small businesses, called “home occupations,” within their homes, such as bookkeeping services or small-scale childcare facilities. But the home occupation provision is vaguely written and has become a loophole to allow hospitality, entertainment, and other commercial uses in exclusive farm and forest use zones, evading the legislature’s specific requirements for such nonfarm and nonforest uses.

Status: This bill was not scheduled for a work session by the March 21 deadline and will not move forward.

Testimony: View our presentation at the March 6 hearing.

SB 78 Common-sense reform of “replacement dwellings” provision on agricultural and forest land

Introduced for 1000 Friends of Oregon

What it does: Oregon land use laws authorize “replacement dwellings” for homeowners in farm and forest zones who have lost their homes to natural disaster or decay. This is a narrow hardship exception designed to help homeowners quickly and reliably replace the home they lost, and it does not require the standard review process for siting new homes in exclusive farm and forest zones. However, wealthy landowners and speculators are abusing this lack of review criteria to tear down modest homes and build large, expensive country estates unrelated to growing food and fiber. This bill helps address this misuse by limiting the scale of “replacement dwellings,” thereby reducing the speculative attraction of agricultural and forest lands for luxury homesite development.

Why it matters: Oregon agricultural and forest land is being lost to luxury home developers who are misusing the limited authorization for “replacement dwellings” in Oregon’s exclusive farm and forest zones. This both takes land out of production and drives up the price of nearby agricultural and forest land. Oregon’s farmers, ranchers, and forest land managers – especially people who are just growing their businesses – are finding it increasingly difficult to locate land they can afford to lease or purchase. 

Oregon is losing nearly 300 tracts of agricultural and forest land every year for high-end residential development in the form of replacement dwellings. That hurts family farmers, ranchers, and forest land managers who need large blocks of undeveloped agricultural and forest land for efficient food and fiber production.

Status: This bill was not scheduled for a work session by the March 21 deadline and will not move forward.

Testimony: View our presentation at the March 6 hearing.

SB 79 Limits new homes unrelated to agricultural and forest management in critical groundwater areas, wildlife habitat, and high-value farm land areas

Support

What it does: This bill would prohibit new houses that have nothing to do with agriculture or forest management from being built in critical groundwater areas, on priority wildlife habitat and migration corridors, and on high‐value farm land.

Why it matters: In exclusive farm and forest use zones, Oregon counties are annually approving an average of 697 new houses that have no relationship to agricultural or forest management. Rural residential sprawl not only threatens our agricultural and forest land base, it also negatively impacts groundwater supplies and critical wildlife habitat and priority connectivity areas. It makes no sense to continue the expansion of residential development in these state-designated areas of concern.

Status: This bill was not scheduled for a work session by the March 21 deadline and will not move forward.

SB 438 Extra houses for resale on farmland (duplicate of HB 2400)

Oppose

What it does: This bill is a duplicate of HB 2400. Read about that bill.

Status: This bill was not scheduled for a work session by the March 21 deadline and will not move forward.

Testimony: Read our February 26 hearing testimony.

SB 878 Additional houses for resale on farm land

Oppose

What it does: This bill is a near duplicate of HB 2400. It would authorize every landowner in rural Oregon to put an additional house on their property, including properties inside exclusive farm use and forest zones, as well as in the nearly 1 million acres of land outside UGBs zoned for rural residential use in Oregon. The bill allows a bait-and-switch process, stating that the additional house must be for a family member but only until the property is sold. 

Why it matters: Read about why this matters in our listing for HB 2400, an essentially duplicate bill.

Status: This bill was not scheduled for a work session by the March 21 deadline and will not move forward.

Testimony: Read our February 26 hearing testimony.

SB 936 Bypass land use laws to allow $2 billion water-treatment facility

Oppose

What it does: The bill proposes to give government agencies a pathway to supersiting infrastructure projects in communities across the state. The bill would permit development outright – whether new facilities or alterations – in any zone in response to an agreement or rule issued by the Oregon Health Authority, the Department of Environmental Quality, or the United States Environmental Protection Agency.. Local governments would be allowed to bypass LCDC rules and land use planning goals when approving applications for such developments.

Why it matters: If the bill goes forward, government agencies can decide where and how they build major infrastructure projects without regard for who’s living there now or what’s there now. The bill would enable government agencies to build in communities and pave over our environment without addressing the direct harms or spillover impacts that come during demolition, construction, and operation of the facilities. This bill attempts to bypass a recent ruling by the Land Use Board of Appeals that halted construction of a $2.1 billion water-treatment facility because local officials failed to consider impacts on area natural resources.

Status: This bill was not scheduled for a work session by the March 21 deadline and will not move forward. 

HB 2164 State Meat Inspection Program funding

Support

What it does: This bill would fund Oregon’s meat-inspection program. For ranchers to sell cuts of meat commercially, a USDA-licensed facility must process the meat. That process is expensive, and there has been a chronic shortage of licensed facilities to meet the demand. 

In 2020, the legislature created a state inspection program to fill some of the gaps, and in the years since has provided grants to Oregon businesses to build or modify facilities that can operate under that system.

Why it matters: Many inspection facilities are ready to begin operations, but the Oregon Department of Agriculture needs to hire inspectors to run the program. A fully staffed inspection program will reduce costs and help Oregon ranchers be more successful.

Status: This passed out of the House Committee on Agriculture, Land Use, Natural Resources, and Water and is now in the Joint Committee on Ways and Means.

HB 2316-3 Housing development on public lands (amended)

Support (position changed)

What it does: Originally a bill to develop sprawling housing on public lands outside urban growth boundaries (UGBs), HB 2316 is now proposed to be amended for the better, focused on evaluating public lands inside UGBs for possible affordable housing development. If amended, which the bill’s sponsor has committed to, 1000 Friends can change our position from “oppose” to “support.”

The amended bill would require state agencies to evaluate lands they own inside UGBs – where people overwhelmingly need us to build affordable housing and starter homes inside convenient, connected cities and towns – for their possible use for homes for people with moderate and lower incomes. 

Why it matters: State agencies own lands, such as large parking lots that are no longer needed, leftover parcels from public-works projects, and more that should be put to better use with affordable housing. Being inside a UGB means the housing will be closer to stores, schools, jobs, and parks. 

Status: This bill passed out of the House Committee on Housing and Homelessness and is in the House Committee on Revenue before it goes on to the Joint Committee on Ways and Means. A public hearing is scheduled for May 15. 

Testimony: Read our February 10 hearing testimony (when we opposed the bill) and our new March 26 hearing testimony in support of the amendment.

HB 2400 Extra houses for resale on farmland 

Oppose

What it does: HB 2400 would authorize every landowner in rural Oregon to put an additional house on their property, including inside exclusive farm use and forest zones, as well as the nearly 1 million acres of land outside UGBs zoned for rural residential use in Oregon. The bill allows a bait-and-switch process, stating that the additional house must be for a family member, but only for the initial application. The family member can move out of the house any time after the application is approved, and the owner may then lease the house to anyone for 18 months. After that, the owner may sell the house to anyone.

Why it matters: This bill is unnecessary. Oregon law already allows new homes for relatives of agricultural and forest land managers, as well as additional new homes for unrelated farm workers. Locating more housing in and around farm and forest areas increases conflicts with common farming and forestry practices, increases traffic on farm roads, creates additional demand on limited water resources, and can increase wildfire risk. And the mere opportunity for additional residential development drives up land prices beyond what farmers, ranchers, and forest land managers can afford. 

Status: This bill was not scheduled for a work session by the March 21 deadline and will not move forward.

Testimony: Read our February 10 hearing testimony.

HB 2422 Haphazard higher-density rural land upzoning

Oppose

What it does: HB 2422 would override existing state policy that requires a planning process to increase dwelling densities on thousands of acres of rural land. The bill would authorize counties to more than double the dwelling density on rural lands where it is currently limited to one house per 2.5 acres, increasing it to one house per 1 acre without taking an exception to Goal 14 – as is required under existing law.

Why it matters: This bill bypasses the benefits of requiring counties to plan for additional rural development through the exceptions process, or through the Big Look provisions of ORS 215.788.-794, both of which ensure any increased densities will not have unintended negative consequences on Oregon’s precious resources. These planning processes also ensure an equal playing field where everyone, not just well-financed individual landowners, have access to the planning process.

Status: This bill was not scheduled for a work session by the March 21 deadline and will not move forward.

Testimony: Read our February 10 hearing testimony.

HB 2979 Small-farm disaster relief and resilience funding

Support

What it does: This year, we anticipate another funding request for small farms needing disaster relief, shifting emphasis from recovery to resilience. 

In 2023, the Oregon legislature allocated $6.65 million in disaster-relief funds for small farms (split $2.65 million for farmer and rancher disaster relief, $1.5 million for food hub infrastructure, and $2.6 million for farmers’ market disaster-resilience work). The Oregon Community Food Systems Network and the Oregon Farmers Market Association administered the funds. 

Why it matters: Wildfires and drought impact farmers across the state, and many small or otherwise nonconventional farmers cannot qualify for federal disaster relief.

Status: This bill passed out of the the House Committee on Agriculture, Land Use, Natural Resources, and Water, and is now in the Joint Committee on Ways and Means.

HB 3131 Oregon Agricultural Heritage Program (OAHP) funding

Support

What it does: The legislature created the Oregon Agricultural Heritage Program (OAHP) in 2017 but did not fund its operation until 2022. Since then, the program has provided millions of dollars (and attracted millions more in federal funding) for willing farm and ranch landowners to create easements that permanently protect their land and ensure it remains in production. This bill, which has strong bipartisan support, would ensure continued funding. 

Why it matters: OAHP is not a land use program in and of itself; rather, it is another tool to help Oregon achieve the goal of preserving farm land by placing working lands easements on the land of willing property owners. The program also has provisions for helping farmers with transition planning to pass their land on to the next generation of farmers. Fully funding the currently identified need would leverage more than $27 million in federal matching funds for the program – which Oregon will lose access to if the program is not funded.

Status: This bill passed out of the House Agriculture, Land Use, Natural Resources, and Water Committee and is now in the Joint Committee on Ways and Means.

Testimony: Read our January 27 hearing testimony.

HB 3422 Ensures all large-scale energy facilities are subject to the same siting criteria

Support

What it does: This bill would require the Energy Facility Siting Council (EFSC) to use the same land use standards as counties for siting energy facilities. Most energy facilities are permitted at the local level by cities and counties, but bigger facilities requiring large acreages of high-value or cultivated farm land require EFSC permitting, which has laxer siting criteria. 

Why it matters: Unlike counties, the EFSC is not required to consider alternative sites before approving an energy facility on a protected class of farm land. This bill would create parity and subject all energy facilities to the same siting criteria.

Status: This bill was not scheduled for a work session by the March 21 deadline and will not move forward.

Testimony: Read our March 25 hearing testimony.

HB 3580 Marine eelgrass resources support

Support

What it does: This bill establishes a task force to develop recommendations for the protection, conservation, and enhancement of eelgrass resources. Marine eelgrass areas are nurseries for juvenile fish – including salmon, herring, and shellfish species – and support migratory birds. 

Why it matters: Eelgrass can sequester carbon faster than many terrestrial habitats, and it improves water quality.

Status: This bill passed out of the House Committee on Agriculture, Land Use, Natural Resources, and Water, and is now in the Joint Committee on Ways and Means.

Testimony: Read the letter we signed for the March 5 hearing.

HB 3587Rocky habitat stewardship

Support

What it does: This bill provides funding both to protect Oregon’s important coastal rocky habitat areas and to enable the public to safely visit, enjoy, and understand these natural areas.

Why it matters: The rocky-habitat areas that line Oregon’s coast – like Haystack Rock and Coquille Point – are vital and unique ecosystems that provide habitat and feeding and breeding areas for diverse marine life, including fish, sea stars, anemones, seabirds, and marine mammals. These are environmentally delicate and are under stress from heat waves and human use. This fund will enable local communities to lead in balancing protection and responsible use of these iconic places. 

Status: This bill passed out of the House Committee on Agriculture, Land Use, Natural Resources, and Water, and is now in the Joint Committee on Ways and Means.

Testimony: Read the letter we signed for the March 5 hearing.

HB 3858 So-called remainder parcels

Oppose

What it does: This bill invents its own convoluted problem – so-called remainder parcels – on all rural and urban land across the state, including farm and forest land, and natural areas. Experts on all sides don’t agree on the foundational definitions of this bill. “Remainder parcels” are a solution looking for a problem: When you divide a property, you end up with two or more new lots and parcels. There is no remainder.

Why it matters: This bill would confuse and complicate land use matters by creating a new type of land unit eligible for development, with the ultimate effect of eradicating essential protections on agricultural and forest lands and opening an untold amount of land to non-farm and non-forest development.

Status: This bill passed out of the House Committee on Agriculture, Land Use, Natural Resources, and Water, and is now in the Senate Committee on Natural Resources and Wildfire. This bill was not scheduled for a work session in the second chamber by the May 9 deadline and will not move forward. 

Testimony: Read our March 26 hearing testimony.

HB 3928Spot zoning on rural lands to encourage speculative pricing

Oppose

What it does: HB 3928 authorizes counties to create random and haphazard housing developments on land outside urban growth boundaries, including on lands zoned for agricultural and forest use. The bill creates incentives for developers to purchase agricultural land, take it out of production, and build sprawling and inefficient low-density subdivisions in the middle of agricultural and forest land.

HB 3928 would allow the random spot zoning of residential subdivisions throughout the Oregon countryside. It encourages land developers to purchase productive agricultural land and stop the production of the food and fiber that supports Oregon communities. 

Why it matters: This bill bypasses the benefits of requiring counties to plan for additional rural development through the exceptions process, or through the Big Look provisions of ORS 215.788.-794, both of which ensure any increased densities will not have unintended negative consequences on Oregon’s precious resources. 

The type of haphazardly placed, large-lot, single-family housing the bill authorizes is not designed to meet the state’s housing needs and introduces expensive and time-consuming conflicts in and among areas designated for farming, ranching, and forestry. 

Status: This bill was not scheduled for a work session by the March 21 deadline and will not move forward.

Testimony: Read our March 31 hearing testimony.

Bill number TBD Natural climate solutions funding

Support

What it does: We anticipate a $5 million request to continue the Natural Climate Solutions program, in an end-of-session budget bill.

In 2023, HB 3409 created a $10 million fund for natural climate solutions – particularly for programs that help create resilience and promote carbon sequestration on land being used for agriculture, forestry, and natural-resource conservation. With guidance from the Oregon Climate Action Commission, four agencies distributed that funding to projects and landowners. Many of these projects attracted matching federal funding. 

Why it matters: These funds supported some of the first “payment for practice” programs that incentivize willing private landowners to invest in resilience and carbon sequestration. Oregon landowners who choose to participate – and Oregon’s working lands on the whole – benefit from these programs. 

Status: There may not be a stand-alone bill for this funding request. In that case, this will be incorporated into the major funding package at the end of the session.

Bill number TBD Farm to School, Double Up Food Bucks, and other programs’ funding

Support

What it does: Funding requests are coming for Double Up Food Bucks, which matches SNAP benefits at farmers’ markets and faces cuts in federal funding; Farm to School programs across the state; and possibly other farm-to-institution programs. These programs provide direct economic-development support for Oregon’s small farms.

Why it matters: Oregon spends money every year on public health, nutrition, and food-education programs. It makes good economic sense for that funding to be spent with Oregon businesses and farmers. 

Status: There may not be a stand-alone bill for these funding requests. In that case, this will be incorporated into the major funding package at the end of the session.

Transportation

1000 Friends is helping lead the Move Oregon Forward campaign to advocate for a safe, clean, fair, and accountable transportation funding package. The legislature must address the lack of funds available for basic operations and maintenance, as well as the oversubscription of numerous popular active- and public-transportation grant programs. Oregonians in every corner of the state supported these priorities in testimony to the Joint Committee on Transportation at their listening tour over the summer.

In early April, the legislature released their proposed outline of components to be included in the drafted transportation package bill language, which should be amended on to one of the placeholder bills in OLIS in the coming weeks. For the 2017 package, the first real draft of the bill was not posted until the end of May. We will post updates as they become available, and we will have a number of opportunities throughout the session for Oregonians to advocate for their own transportation priorities.

HB 2184 Hood River–White Salmon bridge replacement

Support

What it does: This bill authorizes funding for Oregon’s portion of matching funds for the replacement of the Hood River–White Salmon Bridge.

Why it matters: The Hood River–White Salmon Bridge is a crucial link between interdependent communities to access employment, education, daycare, shopping, healthcare, recreation, and more. The current bridge is more than 100 years old, and just last year was struck and damaged by a semitruck because it is narrow and has minimal height clearance – not ideal for modern freight needs. When the bridge is closed from events like this, it forces people to detour more than an hour to the nearest bridge, in The Dalles. The current bridge also prohibits people from crossing by walking or rolling, because there is no shoulder. For seismic resilience, increased accessibility, and strong connections between these communities, replacing this bridge is an essential bistate priority.

Status: This bill passed out of the Joint Committee on Transportation and is now in the Joint Committee on Ways and Means.

Testimony: Read our April 1 hearing testimony in partnership with our affiliate Thrive Hood River.

HB 3453 WES to Salem (and beyond)

Support

What it does: This bill establishes a Westside Express Service (WES) Authority to transfer operational responsibility away from TriMet. It lays out how the WES Authority would operate and lays out direction to extend the service to Salem and Eugene, and increase frequency of service. 

Why it matters: Commuters have limited options to travel between the Portland and Salem metro areas. Extending WES to Salem (and beyond) would change that – allowing travelers to skip sitting in traffic that adds to greenhouse-gas emissions. It would ease congestion on I-5 and make our state’s capitol more accessible to people who can’t or don’t drive. It would even help legislators and their staff get to work without worrying about carpools and paying for parking. 

Status: This bill passed out of  the Joint Committee on Transportation and is now in the Joint Committee on Ways and Means. 

Testimony: Read our March 11 hearing testimony.

HB 3626 Micromobility safety regulations

Support

What it does: This bill creates clear definitions for what a micromobility device is (e.g., e-scooters, e-bikes, electric skateboards), who can operate them, and where riders can use them. It sets safety standards for micromobility batteries and promotes public education of safety using these devices.

Why it matters: There has been confusion caused by illegally built micromobility devices, such as high-speed dirt bikes, that do not meet the standards and definitions in this bill and have caused safety concerns for other system users, so this bill clarifies this issue. It also addresses concerns about early and safe adoption of micromobility devices for teenagers, who are already using them regardless of current, more restrictive laws. Micromobility devices, like e-bikes, have served as car replacements for many households in Oregon. They help lower transportation costs and increase mobility and choice. This bill gets our laws up to date with technology and how it’s being used.

Status: This bill had a public hearing March 17 in the Joint Committee on Transportation. Because this bill is in a joint committee, it is not subject to the deadlines requiring bills to move from their chamber by a certain date. 

Testimony: Read our March 17 hearing testimony.

SB 1201 Zombie bridge

Oppose

What it does: The bill would require the ODOT to study whether constructing bridges across the Columbia River west of the I-5 bridges would be feasible and useful. The study would examine extending State Route 127, beginning where it intersects with State Highway 30 and continuing across the Columbia River and connecting with I-5.

Why it matters: Constructing a bridge in this area would most likely pave over Exclusive Farm Use land on Sauvie Island, Forest Park, wetlands, and other natural resources, or the St. John’s neighborhood in Portland. We call it a “zombie bridge” because it’s part of the long-dead westside bypass proposal that keeps being resurrected in the legislature. The state can’t afford the current megaprojects it wants to construct, and building a bridge like this would not promote the increased transportation options and operations and maintenance needed across the state. Instead, it would induce increased vehicle miles traveled and climate pollution. 

Status: This bill will be heard in the Joint Committee on Transportation. Because this bill is in a joint committee, it is not subject to the deadlines requiring bills to move from their chamber by a certain date. 

SB 1202 Oregon Rail and Transit Department

Support

What it does: This bill moves state governance of public transportation and rail from the Oregon Department of Transportation to a new Oregon Rail and Transit Department (much like how there is a separate Oregon Department of Aviation). A similar concept has been proposed in SB 689, solely focused on a rail department, but SB 1202 now appears to be the primary bill for the issue.

Why it matters: ODOT was originally created as a state highway agency. Since then, its responsibilities have grown to cover all modes of transportation. Rail governance is particularly technical, complicated, and involves more jurisdictions than other modes. Historically, Oregon misses out on a lot of federal funding available for rail by not putting more capacity into securing funds. While transit investments have been very successful since HB 2017 established ongoing statewide funding, ODOT has not made it a priority to advocate for the needs of public-transit agencies as part of the department’s work. 

While transit faces a similar funding crisis to state operations and maintenance needs, and megaproject desires, it has not been part of the pitch ODOT has been making to legislators over the past year when identifying transportation-system needs. It has been up to agencies to advocate for themselves. Oregon needs an agency that is tracking and identifying needs and opportunities for both transit and rail. Whether legislators opt to pass this bill this session or fund a study of rail and transit governance in the interim, we encourage legislators to embrace this conversation.

Status: This bill had a public hearing April 8 in the Joint Committee on Transportation. Because this bill is in a joint committee, it is not subject to the deadlines requiring bills to move from their chamber by a certain date.

Bill framework (Bill number TBD) Major state transportation package

Neutral

What it does: The proposed outline for the transportation package includes increasing the gas tax and indexing it to inflation, increasing registration and title fees, increasing the weight-mile tax, establishing a Road Usage Charge program (paying per mile you drive), and establishing a new one-time system-use fee on all vehicles at the time of purchase. These funding streams will support safety programs like Great Streets and Safe Routes to School. A majority of the revenue will go toward operations and maintenance. And $250 million per biennium from the system-use fee would go toward finishing megaprojects named in the last transportation package. 

The package outline also names transit as a key priority, including maintaining and expanding service, increasing access for youth and veterans, and expanding rural transit. The proposed increase in the transit tax is wholly inadequate to even maintain current levels of service, and will result in service cuts across the state unless increased. 

Also included is dedicated ongoing funding for Amtrak service and rail operations and improvements, funded in part by a new tire tax. Tire tax revenue would also go toward wildlife crossings and salmon restoration (negating the harm caused to salmon from tire pollution in waterways). 

Oregon Community Paths (OCP) is mentioned alongside an increase in the bicycle excise tax, but it’s unclear if the increase in the bike tax is the only proposed increase in funding for OCP. It’s a challenging program to fund because it supports multiuse paths outside the road right of way, so State Highway Fund dollars cannot support these projects, per the state constitution. 

Notably missing from the outline is any mention of electrification rebates or other similar climate initiatives. The outline does mention accountability, but doesn’t go into details as proposals are still being developed.

Why it matters: The legislature historically passes large transportation funding packages only every eight years. This is our opportunity to close the funding gap and meet the level of demand for popular but underfunded safety and climate programs. Without a deep investment in public transit this session, communities across the state will start to see near-immediate service cuts, due to the increased costs of service operations and improvements since 2017.

We are at the table with Move Oregon Forward, championing investments in a more sustainable, accessible transportation system that meets the needs of all Oregonians. This package is also where other stakeholders are advocating for maintaining the status quo through further investments in freeway expansion, which we continue to advocate against. Providing an unending stream of hundreds of millions of dollars for billion-dollar megaprojects from eight years ago would be a huge step in the wrong direction. Any new revenue must come with strong accountability measures.

Status: We are waiting for the bill to be filed, but a framework has been released.

Healthy communities

HB 2411 Industrial land readiness loan fund

Support

What it does: This bill would create a $40 million loan fund to help with planning and project costs for industrially zoned lands inside cities and towns.

Why it matters: Land readiness is key to using our existing lands inside current urban growth boundaries and preventing sprawl. Often, cities and towns have lands that are already zoned for industrial uses, but some initial barriers (often financial) remain to building on that land. 

1000 Friends of Oregon has asked for an amendment that would exclude data centers from this funding, so that these investments can focus on creating high-quality jobs instead of subsidizing automation. We also want to see this bill support retrofits, so that buildings and sites don’t sit vacant when needs change over time.

Status: This bill passed out of  the House Committee on Economic Development, Small Business, and Trade and is now in the Joint Committee on Ways and Means.

Testimony: Read our February 10 hearing testimony.

HB 3062 Healthy communities act

Support 

What it does: Provides clear direction for cities and industry to address potential public health impacts on hospitals, care facilities, and schools from nearby industrial uses. The concept combines technical and community input to quickly identify land use conflicts and possible impacts through early detection and intervention.

Why it matters: Incompatible industrial zoning continues to harm vulnerable Oregon communities. Not only do such communities face more pollution, but they are generally more susceptible to negative health impacts from that pollution due to socio-demographic factors and/or preexisting health conditions. It’s time to adopt model policies enacted in other cities and states that are protecting and safeguarding neighborhoods facing disproportionate public health and safety risks. This modernized approach enhances the health and safety for Oregonians, brings certainty for business, and relieves cities of complaints and litigation.

Status: This bill was not scheduled for a work session by the March 21 deadline and will not move forward.

Testimony: Read our February 20 hearing testimony. 

Wildfire preparedness and resilience

Over the past 20 years, wildfires in Oregon have increased in number, size, and intensity, including destroying significant portions of the towns of Talent and Phoenix and communities in the Santiam Pass and leading to loss of lives. In response, the 2021 Oregon legislature passed and funded the state’s first comprehensive wildfire-preparedness bill, which established wildfire-preparedness and resiliency programs and investments across the state and made a measurable difference for Oregonians. Because of this legislation, even though the 2024 fire season broke records for acreage burned, Oregon did not experience anything near the level of loss of life or property as we have in years past. However, since 2021, funding to maintain and grow these programs has dwindled, thereby increasing our vulnerability to wildfires and smoke.

HB 3172Making homes wildfire safer

Support

What it does: This bill establishes and funds the Wildfire Prepared Structure grant program, which funds retrofitting homes and accessory structures to reduce their vulnerability to wildfire, thereby making homes and communities more wildfire prepared and resilient.

Why it matters: Oregon’s land use program provides a wide range of tools to help Oregonians live more safely with wildfire. HB 3172 helps to ensure that all Oregonians are prepared for wildfire and that their homes and communities are wildfire resilient by: 

• funding retrofits of homes with key elements, including fire-resistant siding, roofs, and vents;
• funding education on the most important steps Oregonians can take to make their homes more wildfire prepared; and
• prioritizing grants to socially and economically vulnerable populations, Oregonians who live in wildfire-prone areas, and people whose homes have been destroyed or damaged by wildfire.

Status: This bill passed the Committee on Climate, Energy, and the Environment and is now in the Joint Ways and Means Committee.

Testimony: Read our March 6 hearing testimony.

SB 85 A Wildfire mitigation and preparedness

Support

What it does: Senate Bill 85, with the -1 amendment, directs the Department of Consumer and Business Services and the State Fire Marshal (OSFM), in consultation with the Oregon Department of Forestry and the insurance industry, to evaluate, develop, and report on community-based wildfire risk-mitigation actions, programs, and strategies that could reduce wildfire risk and positively impact insurance affordability and availability in Oregon.

Why it matters: SB 85-1 will help inform and empower property owners and communities in how to mitigate wildfire risk, and it will potentially have a positive impact on insurance availability and affordability. But it is only the first step. We encourage the legislature to fund continued work by the OSFM and other agencies that are actually conducting defensible-space actions and providing technical assistance and grants for this work and for home hardening.

Status: This bill passed out of the Senate Natural Resources and Wildfire Committee and is scheduled for a work session in the House Committee on Climate, Energy, and Environment May 15.

Testimony: Read our April 1 hearing testimony and April 29 hearing testimony.

Land use laws

HB 2950 Comprehensive updates to land use Goal 1

Support

What it does: This bill would require the Land Conservation and Development Commission to update Oregon’s land use goal regarding citizen involvement by June 2027.

Why it matters: The architects of Oregon’s land use planning program understood the value of getting broad public input into decisions about how and where their communities develop, and where farm and forest land, natural resources, and clean air and water should be protected. They made sure that public involvement was integrated into land use planning by making it the first goal. However, Goal 1 hasn’t been updated since 1988, and the current language does not reflect modern needs, nor does it ensure equitable standards for public participation. Oregon’s population has grown and diversified, and the many ways in which the public engages with local and state governments and with each other has changed dramatically.

Status: This bill passed out of the House Committee on Agriculture, Land Use, Natural Resources, and Water, and is now in the Joint Committee on Ways and Means.

Testimony: Read our February 12 hearing testimony.

HB 3013 Ensure legal rulings of Land Use Board of Appeals are enforced

Support

What it does: The bill would make orders of the Land Use Board of Appeals (LUBA) self-executing. If LUBA reverses a local government’s permit, the permit would automatically be void. Additionally, a party to the LUBA appeal would have the right to enforce LUBA’s order in circuit court.

Why it matters: LUBA does not enforce its orders but, instead, relies on the parties in an appeal to take proper corrective action according to the board’s legal decision. This process usually runs smoothly, but not always. Sometimes both local governments and state agencies have not revoked the permits related to land use decisions that LUBA ruled were improper, and construction went on nonetheless.

Status: This bill was not scheduled for a work session by the March 21 deadline and will not move forward.

Testimony: Read our February 3 hearing testimony.

HB 3921 &  & HB 2647 Land swaps bypassing land use planning

Oppose

What they do: Both bills would allow cities to make site-specific urban growth boundary land swaps, which is a process that brings land into a specific UGB while taking other land out of that UGB. HB 3921 would do this for Roseburg, and HB 2647 would do this for Monmouth. 

Why they matter: An existing process in state law allows cities to make UGB land swaps, and cities have used it successfully over many years. These bills bypass that process. Engaging in site-specific land use planning is not an appropriate role for the legislature, especially when a process that works is already available. 

Status: These bills passed out of the House Committee on Housing and Homelessness and will go to the House floor. HB 2647 is scheduled for a work session in the Senate Committee on Housing May 14.

Testimony: Read our March 31 hearing testimony for HB 3921 and testimony for HB 2647.

This page will be updated as the session goes on.