Agenda Item 4 - UGB Rulemaking <br />December 3-4, 2015 - LCDC Meeting <br />Page 19 of 56 <br />Section (14) is intended to clarify that a city considering a UGB evaluation or amendment under <br />the simplified process must apply its acknowledged citizen involvement program to ensure <br />adequate notice and participation opportunities for the public, and must assist the public in <br />understanding the major local government decisions that are likely to determine the form of the <br />city's growth. The department has proposed this as a way to implement ORS 197A.302, which <br />indicates that "the commission should design the [simplified] methods to assist residents in <br />understanding the major local government decisions that are likely to determine the form of a <br />city's growth." <br />Section (15) repeats a provision in ORS 197A.325(3), which states that "a city that is scheduled <br />to commence periodic review as required by OAR 660-025-0030 is not required to commence <br />periodic review if the city has amended the urban growth boundary pursuant to [the simplified <br />process]". The law indicates that, instead, the commission shall (by rule) specify alternate means <br />to ensure that the comprehensive plan and land use regulations of the city comply with the <br />statewide land use planning goals and are updated over time to reflect changing conditions and <br />needs. The department does not propose such alternate means at this time, as explained below. <br />Before we discuss the new alternate periodic review process, below, we note that the department <br />has suggested adding an additional policy to this section which is not in the statute, but which is <br />within the commission's authority: The proposed rule would state that, if the city has evaluated <br />the UGB need and land supply using the simplified process, "and determined that the current <br />UGB contains sufficient buildable land for a 14-year period, including a supply that is <br />serviceable for a seven-year period and a supply that can be serviceable for a 14-year period," <br />the city is also excused from periodic review. In other words, a city that has evaluated its UGB <br />land supply using the new simplified rules, and determines that no new land is necessary to meet <br />housing and employment needs, may declare that it has a sufficient UGB land supply, in a <br />manner equivalent to a city that actually amends its UGB under the simplified process. <br />Regarding the new alternative process for periodic review, after amendment of a UGB under the <br />new process (or a finding of adequate land supply), ORS 197A requires LCDC to provide an <br />alternate means to ensure that a city's comprehensive plan and land use regulations comply with <br />the statewide land use planning goals and are updated over time to reflect changing conditions <br />and needs. The department has appointed a working group to discuss ideas for this alternate <br />process, but that group agreed that it would be difficult to craft the process until it is settled as to <br />what planning work would be completed as part of the simplified process. In other words, <br />without a final determination (by adoption of the proposed simplified path), it is difficult to <br />determine which work is still required of cities moving forward. The department is therefore <br />recommending that this alternate periodic review process rulemaking be postponed until after <br />January 1, 2016. It is not likely that a city will need to use such process within the first six <br />months of the new process. The draft rules at section (14) are therefore a placeholder, and for the <br />time being they indicate that instead of periodic review, the city shall follow the procedures in <br />OAR chapter 660, division 25, (the ultimate division where the alternate process will reside), <br />even though those rules do not exist at this time. <br />