County officials and legislative aides briefed attendees on a package of firearm measures being combined into a single House vehicle and on county operational impacts if new licensing requirements proceed.

One presenter said House Bills 2005, 2006 and 2007 were combined into House Bill 2005, which will carry provisions including local control over ‘‘sensitive locations’’ and specific carve‑outs for certain hunting firearms. The presenter described a proposal that would raise the purchase or possession age to 21 for some firearms while exempting certain hunting weapons for a limited period.

Fee structure and equity: Speakers referenced an initial license fee capped at $150 and an approximate renewal fee of $135 as part of the implementation package; local licensing agents would be allowed to set fees to cover their processing costs. The group flagged equity concerns, with one participant noting the fee could materially affect buyers in economically distressed communities.

Sheriffoperations: Benton County Sheriff Jeff Van Arstall said his biggest operational concern is staffing. He told the room the state police reported a queue of "as many as 300,000 people in the queue that would like to purchase firearms," and said the major backlog risk will be at the state police level. To avoid county delays, Van Arstall said he has temporarily added staff to process concealed‑handgun permits and is seeking one additional full‑time position to manage the expanded workload.

Walmart and statutory complications: The presenters discussed a provision that would raise purchase age with carve‑outs for certain firearms; because Oregon law prohibits age‑based discrimination by retailers, a chain such as Walmart — which prefers a blanket policy not to sell firearms to those under 21 — faces conflicts unless the law permits broader retailer discretion.

Why it matters: The consolidated HB2005 is the central vehicle for several contentious provisions (purchase age, local bans in sensitive locations, ghost‑gun prohibition language initially in separate bills). Passage would require counties to adapt operations and — depending on fee rules or state appropriations — could require new county staffing or state support.

Next steps: Sponsors and stakeholders said they expect more amendments and possible movement through judiciary and ways‑and‑means committees this week; counties and law‑enforcement associations are coordinating with state police to reduce the risk of county bottlenecks.