SALEM – A Senate committee late Thursday reversed course on a bill that would have banned two destination resorts near Central Oregon’s Metolius River.

The late amendments to Senate Bill 30 allow resort planning to proceed and say only that Jefferson County – which identified the two properties as eligible for resorts – must address questions that are already spelled out in state land use goals.

The original bill, sponsored by Sen. Ben Westlund, D-Tumalo, said no resorts could be built within three miles of the Metolius River Basin.

He angrily voted against the amendments Thursday, saying lawmakers have an obligation to ”keep Oregon Oregon.”

”It is premature for this committee to consider amendments to a bill after a few moments, when they can have an everlasting impact on a timeless river,” he said.

Sen. Vicki Walker, D-Eugene, the chairwoman of the Senate Education and General Government Committee, said she expects the legislation will evolve when it reaches the House of Representatives.

”There are two chambers in this building,” she said. ”If you don’t like this idea, you can change it in the House.”

She said the new language, which says counties must ensure there is no significant impact to cultural, scenic, historical or fish and wildlife, will force Jefferson County to do a more thorough review. ”I don’t think they did their due diligence,” she said.

The county’s resort maps are being appealed to the Land Use Board of Appeals, and the legislation would have no bearing on those cases.

The amendments stunned several Camp Sherman residents who traveled to the hearing to advocate for the resort ban.

”They gave us less protection than we have now,” said Gregory McClarren, the chairman of the board of the Friends of the Metolius. ”They could have stood … but they cowered.”

At least for now, developers who want to build resorts near the world-renowned river will continue with their plans.

But the conversations have evolved about the scale of each of those properties, thanks to the legislation. Spooked by the prospect of a ban, the developers offered to limit their resort plans during negotiations, and Walker said she hopes those talks continue.

Shane Lundgren, of Dutch Pacific Resources, which wants to build an ecologically friendly resort on 640 acres near Suttle Lake, said his intention has always been to address the concerns of his neighbors in the basin – and those thoughts will be part of his plans. He had offered to limit his resort to 200 houses or hotel units.

Rick Allen, the lobbyist for Ponderosa Land and Cattle Co., which owns 30,000 acres to the east of the basin, said he was pleased that the amendments allow resort development to continue – but it was too soon to say whether lawmakers made the process easier or harder.

The owners of that property had agreed only to develop 3,500 acres with a maximum of 2,500 housing units and two golf courses. They also offered to donate 1,400 acres surrounding a creek and enact a conservation easement to maintain 21,000 acres for sustainable timber harvests, but without logging trees bigger than 20 inches in diameter.

Those two resort plans were outlined in separate amendments, but they were not adopted by the committee.

The legislation now must survive the Senate, then the House.

Thursday’s decision came after a public hearing featuring voices that spoke mostly in unison and urged lawmakers to protect the Metolius.

”Families across Oregon take comfort in knowing that the Metolius today is still much like it was when their parents or grandparents first experienced it,” said Mary Christina Wood, whose family has had property in Camp Sherman since 1918.

”You can’t say that about many places anymore.”

At one point, Sen. Rick Metsger, D-Welches, asked why existing residents feel it is so important to protect the basin from new residents.

”There are a lot of things worth protecting,” he said. ”One of the counter points to your argument is that you have an ‘I’ve got mine, but you can’t have yours’ kind of attitude. Why don’t we hear about your impacts?”

Camp Sherman resident Tom Landis replied: ”We have a responsibility to more than just ourselves. Because we live there, we have a better understanding of the unique values – and we are crusaders not just for ourselves, but the thousands of people who come to the river.”