Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Sb 1590 Public Lands topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
’Public Lands Promise’ bill would bar state help for federal land sales; supporters cite conservation, critics flag ambiguity
Summary
SB 1590 would prohibit Oregon public bodies from using state or local resources to assist federal agencies in selling or transferring certain federal lands to private parties, with narrow conservation and recreation exemptions and a proposed extension of the repeal date. Conservation groups backed the bill; some legislators and stakeholders raised concerns about ambiguous drafting and possible impacts on co‑management, wildfire mitigation and county PILT payments.
Senator Anthony Broadman, the sponsor, told the committee SB 1590 is intended to prevent Oregon agencies from collaborating in federal efforts to transfer public lands to private parties. "This law simply says that state and local governments aren't going to help collaborate with the federal government in selling off public land to private entities," Broadman said, stressing exemptions for conservation and transfers to public entities.
Supporters, including Senator Courtney Nieron Mislan and conservation groups, described local examples such as refuge visitor programs and the cultural and economic value of federal public lands. Fiona Noonan of Central Oregon Land Watch urged the committee to keep national public lands in public hands for recreation, wildlife habitat and climate benefits.
Opponents and some senators flagged ambiguous language in the bill about what constitutes a "sale or transfer" and warned that unintended consequences could affect co‑management arrangements, good‑neighbor authority for wildfire mitigation, or counties' Payment‑in‑Lieu‑of‑Taxes (PILT) revenue. Senator David Brock Smith said the bill could interact with the Department of Forestry's budget and with Habitat Conservation Plan provisions; he proposed a dash‑2 amendment to address HCP concerns and fiscal impacts.
Broadman said he would propose further clarifying amendments (including changing the sunset/repeal date) to avoid implying the measure targeted a single presidential administration. The committee took no action on the bill that day and invited written testimony.
Next steps: Sponsor indicated additional amendments and the committee will accept written comments through OLISS; no vote was taken on SB 1590 during the Feb. 3 hearing.
