2026 Oregon Legislative Session Comes to a Close, But More Work Lies Ahead

The Oregon Legislature adjourned Sine Die (a Latin term meaning ending without a plan to reconvene) on Friday March 6th. This short session was a sprint through many bills and a lot of unusual budget work, forced by our state’s revenue shortfall.

We started budget conversations back at the start of fall 2025, with a list of potential reductions released by all state agencies, including the Oregon Department of Human Services. Items on the list reducing our IDD program included a few long-term structural decisions, such as eligibility changes. With incredible advocacy effort from the full IDD community, support from our legislative leaders, and revenue raising legislation, IDD services were able to avoid any changes to our eligibility standards, and also kept much-needed wage increases intact for agencies and DSPs around the state. Reductions to the IDD service system were few, with most coming in the form of an “updated estimate” of cost to implement the Agency With Choice program and closure of SACU homes that were already in plan to shutter. All of ODHS is still on spending restriction, including travel limits and a 90-day wait time to begin the rehiring process for any vacated staff positions.

The overarching legislative goal during this short session was to make some reductions now to save money in the long-run, both to fill the current deficit and also to help with the impacts of the federal government’s HR 1 budget bill. However, we know that HR 1 will reduce Oregon’s federal revenue dramatically, and that means that more budget work is waiting for all of us in 2027.

Of course, budget was not the only thing on legislators’ to-do list. Hundreds of bills were introduced in the week surrounding the February 2nd. We’ll go through a list of the bills we have been following most closely, and touch on a few others from the Capitol halls.

Bill: SB 1505

Position: Opposed with testimony in writing and in person

Summary: Last session, HB 3838 was hotly debated within the IDD community, and the concept is back again in 2026, now with a sole focus on IDD. This bill proposes to establish a Workforce Standards Board specific to the IDD community. It would take processes like rule making and wage setting that currently have many opportunities for public input and participation and put them in the hands of the 11 Governor-appointed members of the Board. We oppose this idea because it consolidates power away from the people who use and rely upon these services.

Outcome: Failed to move. We are almost certain to see another version of this concept in the future, and we hope to work with SEIU and other community members in the meantime to see what changes are possible.

Bill: SB 1576A

Position: Supported with written testimony

Summary: This bill is another concept returning from the 2025 session. It would direct two state agencies, the Department of Consumer and Business Services and the Housing and Community Services Department to set rules for making housing easier to access and use for people with disabilities. We supported SB 1576A because people who use Home and Community-Based Services through Brokerages need more accessible housing.

Outcome: Passed. Congratulations to all the advocates that supported this effort, and especially to our friends at Community Vision for their incredible leadership.

Bill: HB 4040A

Position: Opposed HB 4040 Section 16 with written testimony

Summary: This bill was dubbed the Super Mega Omnibus Bill pre-session, and with good reason—it included dozens of concepts from all around the healthcare sphere. We provided testimony on Section 16, which would modify the IDD system to allow parents paid to support their minor children through the CEN (Children’s Extraordinary Needs) program to provide those services either as a DSP (Direct Support Professional) directly employed by an agency, or as a PSW (Personal Support Worker) directly employed by someone else. Currently, CEN providers need to be employed as DSPs through a state certified agency. This bill does not add funding to the program or change any terms of it other than making the allowance for these services to be provided by PSWs. We oppose this change because we believe that parent providers of minor children should have the outside support of a provider agency to navigate changes in care needs and in the system. Observing these services provided by parents in the adult setting tells us that kids and their families without that outside link risk isolation and services that are less effective at changing with their needs.

Outcome: Passed with the provision that will allow CEN providers the option to operate as Personal Support Workers as well as the Direct Support Professional option they currently have.

Bill: SB 1532A

Position: Supported SB 1532A with written testimony and verbally at the hearing.

Summary: This is an omnibus bill related to changes to the Human Services programs. The section we’re interested in has to the with a proposal to direct the state to develop a different rate specific to providers who are living in the same household as the person to whom they provide services. There are very likely administrative pieces included in the rate model that don’t apply to services in this same-household setting. It’s important that we make sure to align what we are paying for with what is provided. We support SB 1532A because it asks community partners to work with the Office of Developmental Disabilities services to make that alignment.

Outcome: Passed. We will keep our eyes out for rule-making and other policy planning opportunities through ODDS.

Bill: HB 4115A

Position: Supported HB 4115 with written testimony

Summary: HB 4115 changes the law to allow a criminal records check on certain caregivers to last for three years rather than two years. It also requires that certain valid criminal records checks be allowed to be “portable” to other care settings. That means that a worker who passed a criminal history records check for one position may be able to use that criminal history check to apply to a new position, in some circumstances. Currently, the criminal history background check process is overburdened, and can hold up necessary services. We approve these changes as reasonable ways to ease some of the systemic burden, and free people up to receive the care they need.

Outcome: Passed. This is likely to take some time to get into place, but we are pleased to see a move that should remove a little burden on the criminal history background check system.

Other Notes:

• There was no walk-out to stop the legislature from its work, and for that we are grateful. Outside the field of IDD, compromises were made on taxation and funding for transportation. No one is 100% happy, of course, and that means there will be plenty to carry over into 2027’s budgeting session.

• SB 1501 blazed up (ha) midway through session to command attention. This bill authorizes the state to take ownership and control of The Moda Center, and allocates funding to perform upgrades that the Portland Trailblazers are requiring in order to stay in Portland.

• There were a couple of highly controversial bills about legislative process. HB 4018 delays implementation of certain campaign finance reform limits, passed in 2024. This bill was passed this session, despite quite a bit of opposition testimony. HB 4002 sought to limit the number of bills that can be proposed by each legislator during short sessions. This attracted quite a bit of impassioned support and opposition, but was still in committee upon adjournment, and did not pass.

As Oregonians, we have a lot of work ahead of us. As people with a deep connection to the IDD service system and people with IDD, this session allows us to draw a deep breath before we consider that work.