Oregon Measure 114 Legislation 2023 Session

[E4mafia]

Not entirely sure but i was mostly going by the OSSA claims that no system nor funding is in place for it hence they'd have to pull officers off street duty and put them behind desk duty to comply with it, as they've claimed. Made sense to me. IIRC they stated it would cost in excess of $40m to implement - so this leads me to believe they have to get money from somewhere (general fund etc)

State of Oregon: Blue Book - About Oregon's Legislative Assembly

The official website of the Oregon Secretary of State

sos.oregon.gov

I am going by this which claims:

Functions

The Legislature enacts new laws and revises existing ones, makes decisions that keep the state in good economic and environmental condition and provides a forum for discussion of public issues.

The Legislature reviews and revises the governor's proposed budget and passes tax laws to provide needed revenue. The Oregon Constitution requires that the state must not spend money in excess of revenue.

The Legislature also influences executive and judicial branch decisions. Enacting laws and adopting the budget establish state policy that directs all state agency activity and impacts the courts. The Senate confirms gubernatorial appointments to certain offices. Legislative Counsel Committee reviews state agency administrative rules to ensure that legislative intent is followed.

Maybe the Biennium would be more appropriate I'm not entirely sure, I'm just speculating and really trying to say here that I have 0 trust and faith in the state to have a system up and running and not sticking it to us in the 2A. No idea why anyone would think they'd be inclined to try and allow us after years of hostility towards us tbh.

 

[Stomper]

Now LEVO wants the higher courts to abide by the will of the people ala 50% of the state...

So if 50.1% of "the people" vote to enslave a class of people, should the higher courts abide by, "the will of the people"?


LEVO should should change their name to STFU quick-smart before they FAFO.

 

[Cavedweller]

Not entirely sure but i was mostly going by the OSSA claims that no system nor funding is in place for it hence they'd have to pull officers off street duty and put them behind desk duty to comply with it, as they've claimed

Exactly what I was trying to say.

IIRC they stated it would cost in excess of $40m to implement - so this leads me to believe they have to get money from somewhere (general fund etc)

But it's the local governments that will have to find the money, isn't it? Nowhere does it say the state is going to pay for the added burden on local government.

 

[E4mafia]

Your guess is as good as mine at this rate. Hoping and praying Raschio and co. can rule it entirely unconstitutional and spare us the nightmare entirely, that is 114.

 

[Stomper]

Here's the mentality we're up against…

And you KNOW that I left a whopper of a comment!

 

[Librarian]

Is funding that big an issue for the state? They are going to hire a couple of people (A coordinator and a program manager). They've already advertised those positions, so they must have been funded already. You can't just create a new position in the state system overnight. They are going to buy some additional equipment, and will have to process more background checks, but other than that what do they need money for?

The main burden of this, in terms of workload, is going to fall on the localities (the "permit agents"). It's an unfunded mandate on county and city governments. They are the ones who have to come up with most of the people and the bucks. Wasn't this one of the objections of local LE? I haven't seen anything that says the state is going to raise the money and then dole it out to local government. Please correct me if I'm wrong on this.

The SOS has a document where OSP and others explain what they think they need the money for.

The SOS link page is https://sos.oregon.gov/elections/Pages/committee-meetings.aspx

The financial analysis is at https://sos.oregon.gov/elections/Documents/fec/IP-17-2022-FEC-analysis-draft-updated-for-8-5.pdf "Measure 114 (IP 17) Fiscal Estimate Committee Updated Analysis"

For example

OSP estimates the following staff are necessary to carry out the provisions of IP 17:
• 26 Public Service Representative 4 (PSR 4) positions to process the background investigations and report results;
• 3 Fingerprint Technicians (FP Tech); and
• 2 Operations and Policy Analyst 3 positions to develop and maintain the database, produce annual reports, and manage the permit program. These positions would be hired within the current biennium, assumed March 1, 2023.

and

Based on information received from the Oregon State Sheriffs' Association, the financial impact to local government is estimated at up to $51.2 million in the first year of implementation and up to $47.5 million in subsequent years. The largest component of this estimate includes the hiring of 250 employees to process applications and 25 supervisory employees at the cost of $28.0 million annually. Initial hiring, training, and equipment costs for new employees is projected at $3.8 million in the first year of implementation and $0.8 million in each subsequent year.

 

[Stomper]

The SOS has a document where OSP and others explain what they think they need the money for.

The SOS link page is https://sos.oregon.gov/elections/Pages/committee-meetings.aspx

The financial analysis is at https://sos.oregon.gov/elections/Documents/fec/IP-17-2022-FEC-analysis-draft-updated-for-8-5.pdf "Measure 114 (IP 17) Fiscal Estimate Committee Updated Analysis"

For example

and

Based on prior performance, double and even triple "government estimates" and you'll be closer to fiscal reality……

 

[Yarome]

The SOS has a document where OSP and others explain what they think they need the money for.

There are an estimated 1.9mil gunowners in oregon and about 300,000 CHL holders. The state processes CHL's on the average of 60per day. If purchase permits are similar, and the state can maintain that 60 per day average... it will only take 13.5 years to process.... just the current CHL holders in the state. Or... IOW, 13.5 years to process permits for 16% of the current number of gun owners in the state.

Anyone else see a problem with them calculating expenses and personnel needs based on current requirements for CHL processing?? Dohhhhhh....


Sorry. Didn't mean to drift off topic from these intriguing speculation exercises.... Carry on.

 

[jackrv]

They are going to hire a couple of people (A coordinator and a program manager)

When has Oregon, or any state/fed gov, ever got by with a couple of people?

 

[Danall]

Anybody remember the health care portal fiasco. TV ads were encouraging folks to go on-line to sign up to a non-existent-non-functioning system. Yup, this new permit system will be a quick/efficient/seamless transition...sure.

The OSP has already tried messing with the expected implementation of 114, recall that the 114 regs give a 30 day window from receiving the application for issuing the "permit to purchase" (text below)

3)(a) Within 30 days of receiving an application for a permit under this section, if the permit agent has verified the applicant's identity and determined that the applicant has met each of the qualifications described in paragraph (1)(b) of this section, the permit agent shall issue the permit-to-purchase.

the OSP site that discusses implementation of 114 states they will start the 30 day clock for issuing the permit after the BGC has cleared. That's a big difference as we know how quickly OSP does background checks...essentially that attempted change by OSP gives them an unlimited time to issue your "permit to purchase". Could be 6 months.

 

[Cavedweller]

The SOS has a document where OSP and others explain what they think they need the money for.

"Based on information received from the Oregon State Sheriffs' Association, the financial impact to local government is estimated at up to $51.2 million in the first year of implementation and up to $47.5 million in subsequent years. The largest component of this estimate includes the hiring of 250 employees to process applications and 25 supervisory employees at the cost of $28.0 million annually. Initial hiring, training, and equipment costs for new employees is projected at $3.8 million in the first year of implementation and $0.8 million in each subsequent year."

I haven't seen any information that indicates the state plans to foot the bill for this. So, the counties will either have to raise property taxes or cut other services to make up the difference.

 

[Danall]

"Based on information received from the Oregon State Sheriffs' Association, the financial impact to local government is estimated at up to $51.2 million in the first year of implementation and up to $47.5 million in subsequent years. The largest component of this estimate includes the hiring of 250 employees to process applications and 25 supervisory employees at the cost of $28.0 million annually. Initial hiring, training, and equipment costs for new employees is projected at $3.8 million in the first year of implementation and $0.8 million in each subsequent year."

I haven't seen any information that indicates the state plans to foot the bill for this. So, the counties will either have to raise property taxes or cut other services to make up the difference.

That is totally outrageous.
The current OSP FICS system has 30 employees (funding in 2021 allowed some hiring of additional employees but i don't have those figures).
This new boondoggle "permit to purchase" does essentially noting different than before...it runs a background check like before....but now issues a "permit to purchase". So to issue a number or "permit" takes an additional 250 employees and 50 million??....Hey they are doing nuttin different other than saying after a background check you have a permit....yup they need the program for the permit data entry but don't need 250 folks entering data. This totally stinks.
But then that's right, you still will need to get ANOTHER background check when you choose to actually buy a gun, so they have doubled up on the background checks needed...it is nothing less than bureacracy rum amok.

 

[arakboss]

That is totally outrageous.
The current OSP FICS system has 30 employees (funding in 2021 allowed some hiring of additional employees but i don't have those figures).
This new boondoggle "permit to purchase" does essentially noting different than before...it runs a background check like before....but now issues a "permit to purchase". So to issue a number or "permit" takes an additional 250 employees and 50 million??....Hey they are doing nuttin different other than saying after a background check you have a permit....yup they need the program for the permit data entry but don't need 250 folks entering data. This totally stinks.
But then that's right, you still will need to get ANOTHER background check when you choose to actually buy a gun, so they have doubled up on the background checks needed...it is nothing less than bureacracy rum amok.

The local LEAs will need additional staff to process permits. Somebody at the State will need to handle registration, and notifications of firearm delivery to transferees.

 

[Yarome]

.....(1)(b) of this section, the permit agent shall issue the permit-to-purchase.

That's where they are trying to convince everyone the permits are "shall issue", but the other section allows the pemit agent subjective discretion as to if an applicant meets the criteria of being deemed not a danger to themselves, to others and has not demonstrated any previous history of aggression or violent behaviour.

Basically, if you pass the subjective review of the agent... or in their words... "determined that the applicant has met each of the qualifications", THEN they "shall issue".

Sneaky woke slight of hand BS to try and sell it as a shall issue permit based on fulfilling specific and defined requirements when it is most certainly subjective and "may issue".

 

[PiratePast40]

That is totally outrageous.
The current OSP FICS system has 30 employees (funding in 2021 allowed some hiring of additional employees but i don't have those figures).
This new boondoggle "permit to purchase" does essentially noting different than before...it runs a background check like before....but now issues a "permit to purchase". So to issue a number or "permit" takes an additional 250 employees and 50 million??....Hey they are doing nuttin different other than saying after a background check you have a permit....yup they need the program for the permit data entry but don't need 250 folks entering data. This totally stinks.
But then that's right, you still will need to get ANOTHER background check when you choose to actually buy a gun, so they have doubled up on the background checks needed...it is nothing less than bureacracy rum amok.

It's a different background check. NICS is an instant, or very quick check. An extensive FBI check with fingerprints can take much longer.

 

[Yarome]

It's a different background check. NICS is an instant, or very quick check. An extensive FBI check with fingerprints can take much longer.

That's the crux of it. It's more akin and more extensive than processing and issuing CHL's than it is just an expanded BGC.

 

[CorvallisOr]

The OSP has already tried messing with the expected implementation of 114, recall that the 114 regs give a 30 day window from receiving the application for issuing the "permit to purchase" (text below)

the OSP site that discusses implementation of 114 states they will start the 30 day clock for issuing the permit after the BGC has cleared. That's a big difference as we know how quickly OSP does background checks...essentially that attempted change by OSP gives them an unlimited time to issue your "permit to purchase". Could be 6 months.

This is not an attempted change by the OSP — it has been well known because it is written in the law. The second part of that sentence in paragraph 3 says:

… if the permit agent has verified the applicant's identity and determined that the applicant has met each of the qualifications described in paragraph (1)(b) of this section, the permit agent shall issue the permit-to-purchase.
.

The referenced paragraph (1)(b) of that section is explicit:
(b) A person is qualified to be issued a permit-to-purchase under this section if the person:
(A) Is not prohibited from purchasing or acquiring a firearm under state or federal law, including but not limited to
successfully completing a criminal background check as described under paragraph (e) of this subsection; …

 

[Yarome]

I don't believe there is the slightest chance in hell of them being able to issue permits within 30 days, even after a NCIS. The nature of the process is such that it will be even more time consuming to process that issuing a CHL. If even a tiny fraction of the currently estimated 1.9mil gun owners in the state apply for one the system would be immediately overburdened and backed up for years.

Current figures say that 60 CHL applications are completed daily across the entire state. That system is fully mature. A brand new system... how many can be processed daily? Even if you double the CHL figures for 120 daily it will require more than 2 years if a mere 100,000 people submitted applications. Be crazily optimistic and call it 500 daily... that's still 7 months for 100k and new applicants will be constantly feeding in and keep the queue topped up.

Eventually, say 4 or 5 years from now when the system catches up with the population it may work itself down to 30 days, but I still highly doubt even 60 is possible.

Illinois FOID's are all done electronically, doesn't have nearly the same requirements/scrutiny and doesn't require a scheduled face to face. Their system has been in place for decades and just handling the "noobs" applying now still takes closer to 60 days than 30... and renewals take 3 months. Or rather... they're "supposed to" only take 3 months.

How many people can a permit agent meet with and interview within a given day? That's incredibly different than electronically running names against a database any only requiring human interaction if a name get's flagged for attention or further inquiry.

It's broken out of the gate....

 

[Nick Burkhardt]

Will the Dems close the CHL loophole in 2023?

As it is currently written, BM114 has stricter requirements to get a Permit to Purchase a firearm than the current requirements to get a License to Carry a Handgun in public.

I can see the Dems wanting to close that loophole by requiring all new and renewing CHL applicants to first have a current Purchase Permit, thus forcing all of us into the publicly searchable database.

 

[Yarome]

I can see the Dems wanting to close that loophole by requiring all new and renewing CHL applicants to first have a current Purchase Permit, thus forcing all of us into the publicly searchable database.

You're presuming the current CHL database isn't going to be rolled into the "purchase permit database"? I hate to break the news, but 114 is likely only "legitimizing" the current DB and would simply be further populated to include permit to purchase only holders.