[{"_1":2,"_88":-5,"_89":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,76],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},"mediaId",6089337,"mediaKeyId","2874703-4fc58531b769c967319e7178620076e8","parentId",2874703,"title","Committee hears hours of testimony on civil‑commitment reform bills HB 2467 and HB 2488; supporters call for clearer standards and more treatment capacity, some","audioSeconds",631,"startMs",6175755,"endMs",6807380,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=2874703-4fc58531b769c967319e7178620076e8&start=6175&end=6807","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2874703-4fc58531b769c967319e7178620076e8/thumbnail_6175755.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6089337/Oregon/Committee-hears-hours-of-testimony-on-civilcommitment-reform-bills-HB-2467-and-HB-2488-supporters-call-for-clearer-standards-and-more-treatment-capacity-some","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6089337-8a32e8732cc6089dfaa8326e11104a22/orig.mp4?Expires=1771127316&Signature=HVQU~dDMQyyBny0Qeub5lOnD0tWCEXXDODzzY~oGs5nX8Bo1gCZW4L4OykpcGAQGaFkCakQR3EIbm25wgHt-CrzUqzi3tKW~6CcfnqEzpxc-se8gzvGlPYBo7mOKXcnBmS2UlUXzgXM7~XjpA0Bkqik3XNKCn4RBmq9WWHSQJ7974YrK3brXpBxEZT8kaP4CybdZUH4exg-AfZ9kjd1IMaY8Brob1lP~yCnN6Te8VbJjH26BzW7RFYAeYchYqSseYj1KxFE53RNW5pEKivHxNLT~IKTSQWuWJBQcz4ynGGYAlqH4pVxAEZpcidlkPVnx8wAM5GBQ4sRgdAL2-ynj7g__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","Oregon State Legislature","date","2025-04-03T15:00:00Z","article","The House Committee on Judiciary opened a public hearing April 3 on House Bill 2467 (with a dash‑3 amendment) — a widely discussed package of changes to Oregon’s civil‑commitment statutes — and later heard related technical amendments in House Bill 2488 (dash‑1). Supporters described HB 2467 as a targeted set of clarifications that would let clinicians and judges consider whether someone is likely to cause \"serious physical harm\" to themselves or physical harm to others in the \"near future,\" rather than requiring immediate, imminent harm; the bill also enumerates factors courts may consider and separates the legal standards for \"danger to self\" and \"danger to others.\" OJD and other participants later described HB 2488 dash‑1 as technical, with provisions on diversion, a 14‑day voluntary treatment option, and earlier appointment of counsel.

Why it matters: Testimony framed the bills as attempts to reduce criminalization of severe mental illness (the so‑called \"aid‑and‑assist\" pathway), to give clinicians and courts clearer guidance, and to make civil commitment a more usable last‑resort medical intervention for people with severe psychiatric illness and anosognosia (lack of awareness of illness). Opponents cautioned the proposals risk increasing coercive treatment and highlighted traumatic experiences under current involuntary‑treatment practices.

Major proponents and their arguments
Chris Bonneth, executive director of NAMI Oregon, said the bill came from a broad, months‑long stakeholder process and aims to create \"separate definitions for danger to self and danger to others\" and factors for courts to consider. Casey Liddell, senior behavioral‑health policy adviser to Gov. Tina Kotek, told the committee HB 2467 came from a NAMI work group and was intended to strike a balance so judges and clinicians could look beyond an immediate, minute‑to‑minute imminence standard while avoiding speculative, long‑term forecasts. Amy Kotek Wilson (First Lady of Oregon and former mental‑health practitioner) and practitioners described clinical situations — including anosognosia and progressive worsening of psychosis — where waiting for imminence could mean missed opportunities for treatment.

Local government, providers and law‑enforcement positions
Marion County Commissioner Danielle Bethel, Central City Concern CEO Dr. Andy Mendenhall, and other service providers urged change but emphasized the need to pair statutory changes with more treatment capacity and concrete transportation and timeline protocols. Sheriff Lane Magill, speaking for the Oregon State Sheriffs Association and the Association of Chiefs of Police, said law enforcement supports the bill because it could allow treatment before people are funneled into the criminal‑justice system. Many providers and system leaders stressed that statutory change must be accompanied by funding for residential treatment, secure placements and community services.

Victims, family members and people with lived experience
Several family members and victims described tragedies that they attributed to current thresholds for commitment. Hunter Graham described losing his wife during his son’s untreated psychotic episode and said the son only received sustained treatment after the offense; other family members and survivors gave detailed accounts of delayed hospitalization and repeated contact with police and jails prior to receiving sustained inpatient care.

Opposition and civil‑liberties concerns
Disability Rights Oregon’s supervising attorney Jude Casar warned that Oregon’s system already cycles people through hospital beds and emergency departments without sufficient follow‑up and that adding commitments without expanded supports could produce worse outcomes. Several witnesses with prior civil commitments described traumatic involuntary treatment, long institutional stays and long‑term harms; one speaker said coercion is not compassion and urged opposition to lowering standards. Public defenders supported early appointment of counsel but raised workload and implementation concerns; the Oregon District Attorneys Association and Multnomah County prosecutors urged careful review of counsel‑appointment consequences because one provision could require appointment of counsel on many thousands of cases that do not go to hearing.

Technical amendments and next steps
Judicial staff (Shannon Newell, Oregon Judicial Department) told the committee HB 2488 dash‑1 contains diversion and 14‑day voluntary treatment provisions and that OJD planned to propose technical amendments and a private‑attorney contracting option to avoid creating unsustainable public‑defender workloads. Allison Knight of the Public Defender's Office proposed an amendment to make declarations of mental health treatment (DMHTs) enforceable in lieu of commitment where appropriate, to protect patient autonomy. Melissa Marrero, a Multnomah County deputy district attorney, noted OJD data showing 572 commitment hearings and 7,268 dismissals in a 2024 snapshot, and urged the committee to consider the administrative consequences of earlier or broader appointment of counsel.

Funding and related legislation
Multiple witnesses tied statutory changes to funding needs. Speakers referenced related budget proposals (for example, a bill described in testimony as House Bill 2059 with a -2 amendment that would invest about $90,000,000 in behavioral‑health residential placements) and urged the legislature to pair statutory changes with investments in residential care, peer services and transportation capacity so the system can serve people it might newly authorize for commitment.

Ending and procedural notes
Chair Cropp closed the public hearing on HB 2467 and opened a hearing on HB 2488 later the same day; the committee carried over measures remaining on the agenda to be considered at future work sessions. Witnesses on both sides were encouraged to submit written testimony within 48 hours of the hearing.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","House Committee On Judiciary 04/03/2025 3:00 PM","oneSentenceSummary","The House Committee on Judiciary held a multi‑hour public hearing April 3 on House Bill 2467 (dash 3) — a package of changes to Oregon’s civil‑commitment statutes that would let courts and clinicians consider risk in the \"near future\" and which enumerates factors for evaluation — and later heard related technical changes in HB 2488 (dash 1).","taxTitle","Judiciary, House of Representatives, Committees, Legislative, Oregon","taxId",18092,"location","Oregon","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":77,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":78,"_41":79,"_43":80,"_45":81,"_47":82,"_49":83,"_51":84,"_53":85,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":86,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":87,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6089342,"House Judiciary committee hears testimony on HB 3884 to enable voluntary, temporary firearm storage with FFLs",712,3200,715340,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2874703-4fc58531b769c967319e7178620076e8&start=3&end=715","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2874703-4fc58531b769c967319e7178620076e8/thumbnail_3200.jpg","/articles/6089342/Oregon/House-Judiciary-committee-hears-testimony-on-HB-3884-to-enable-voluntary-temporary-firearm-storage-with-FFLs","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6089342-d2132b51b025e9bc278fa796b03e8f4e/orig.mp4?Expires=1771127316&Signature=W~6ZJUjD4M~GjSNV0rryVVBhsPuLVoBVMov4rGOy~IYRGVIRqCCcXIwPsPM6jRCw6XN5H6dZb6JTBWXiYrCmQqQSNObFPs7nlT3cgAxefB4945xUq64yJHvmqnK4NqBUL9B4DYvo83dRMfIymFaedKOySc8KtVr8KuMn5n6Tk2tl48NpPoSM4jEBdNTsScHOmK2AeQg8v89HkFX12eRbZtHZixy7SauCXmIfwWzwUtvaWEIPHK74JIeAJlBhgbk0L-fzZOlSeUFoQHQ95qa4HfWyP7PvA0CkUMNODgzArMcoO~4tEAuL0aGDEucI586evkbCfjyTTLEjlca5h3wdYA__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","House Committee on Judiciary Chair Cropp opened a public hearing April 3 on House Bill 3884, a bill and -1 amendment that would authorize and protect voluntary, temporary out‑of‑home firearm storage at businesses that hold a federal firearms license (FFL) and direct the Oregon State Police to study whether such \"firearm hold\" agreements reduce firearm risk and report findings to interim judiciary committees by Sept. 15, 2026. The measure includes a sunset date of Jan. 2, 2027.

Why it matters: Proponents told the committee the proposal aims to provide an evidence‑based, voluntary option for people seeking time and distance from firearms during crises — a harm‑reduction approach supporters said can lower suicide risk and prevent impulsive violence while avoiding transfers of ownership.

Presenters and main points
A legislative staff member summarized the bill’s technical elements and the report deadline and sunset dates. Michael Smith, chair of the Gun Owners Caucus of the Democratic Party of Oregon, said \"time and distance between oneself and one's firearm can be the difference between life or death\" and described the proposal as a voluntary, owner‑initiated option that would avoid circumventing background‑check rules. Angela Perry, board member of the Oregon chapter of the American Foundation for Suicide Prevention, told the committee that in 2023 nationwide suicide deaths numbered about 49,316 and that in Oregon 55% of suicides that year were by firearm; she said research shows putting time and distance between a person at risk and a method saves lives. Dwayne Ledford, who identified himself as an FFL owner in Madras and a retired Marine weapons officer, described current local practice at his shop: staff inventory stored firearms and follow federal background‑check and storage procedures, and return voluntarily surrendered firearms to owners. Kerry Spurgeon, president of the Oregon State Shooting Association, said many licensed dealers want to offer storage but need liability clarity and described the bill as enabling a business model that lets owners keep a lock on their property while creating distance.

Policy details and legal protections
Supporters emphasized that the bill would create limited liability protections for FFLs that accept temporary holds, make clear the arrangement is not a transfer of ownership, and require that firearms be locked and stored securely by the owner. Testimony noted the role of ATF rules in how an FFL accepts custody and returns firearms, and proponents said the bill was drafted to avoid creating a loophole around federal transfer or background‑check requirements. Proponents cited similar statutes enacted in other states and referenced CDC data on suicide outcomes as part of the evidence base.

Opposition and concerns
No formal opponents spoke during the time allotted for this hearing; committee members noted the bill had dash bill amendments posted on OLIS that staff had not yet fully summarized. Several witnesses and members asked technical questions about liability language and operational details such as recordkeeping and how returns would comply with ATF rules.

Next steps
Chair Cropp closed the public hearing on HB 3884 and said the committee could reopen the hearing within three days if more testimony was needed. The bill’s -1 amendment and posted materials on OLIS were noted by staff as the working text for further consideration.

Ending note
Witnesses who testified included firearm owners, suicide‑prevention advocates and licensed FFL holders; they framed the proposal as a voluntary, short‑term tool intended to reduce immediate access to firearms in moments of crisis while maintaining federal transfer and background‑check safeguards.","House Committee on Judiciary Chair Cropp opened a public hearing April 3 on House Bill 3884, a bill and -1 amendment that would authorize and protect voluntary, temporary out‑of‑home firearm storage at businesses that hold a federal firearms license (FFL) and direct the Oregon State Police to study whether such \"firearm hold\" agreements reduce firearm risk and report findings to interim judiciary committees by Sept. 15, 2026.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Committee hears hours of testimony on civil‑commitment reform bills HB 2467 and HB 2488; supporters call for clearer standards and more treatment capacity, some

House Judiciary committee hears testimony on HB 3884 to enable voluntary, temporary firearm storage with FFLs