BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS'
April 20, 2005
Commissioners' Conference Room
Commissioner Anna Morrison presided, with Commissioners Bill Dwyer, Peter Sorenson and Faye Stewart present. Bobby Green, Sr., arrived at 9:15 a.m. County Administrator Bill Van Vactor, County Counsel Teresa Wilson and Recording Secretary Melissa Zimmer were also present.
1. ADJUSTMENTS TO THE AGENDA
Morrison announced that Green would be late.† She said he requested that they hold item 8. a. until he returned.
2. PUBLIC COMMENTS
Loraine Stills, Creswell, distributed a chart regarding the distribution of dogs that go through LCARA. (Copy in file).
3. EMERGENCY BUSINESS
4. COMMISSIONERS' REMONSTRANCE
Sorenson commented that the special tourism project awards have gone out to different groups.† He said in The Register Guard from April 18, there was an article about the Danceabilty Project and special tourism grant dollars as a result of the Board approving the project.
5. COMMISSIONERS' BUSINESS
a. REPORT/Healthy Forests.
Sue Kupillas, Community for Healthy Forests, gave a presentation on Healthy Forests.† She said the goal is to tell people the story of what is happening in the forested areas.† She noted the other goal is to make changes in the administrative rules and regulations to get people on site quickly to restore the area.† She added that one of the issues is that if they donít get out within the first year, brush takes over and if they do any replanting, it is difficult for the trees to grow.† She noted that the value in the dead trees is gone after a short time.
Dwyer asked if the federal government were to comply with the Forest Practices Act if that would help.
Kupillas responded that the issue was funding.† She said if they went by the Oregon Forest Practices Act it would be an improvement in expediting the process.† She added they had to appropriate the funds to actually do it.† She commented if they had dead trees that were valuable and could remove them to get money to put† into restoration, it would pay for itself.
Morrison explained that Kupillas has a request for a Title III project.† Morrison said she and Dwyer are reviewing it.† She said they are limited because of how they structured the Title III and Title II funds around the Forest Work Camp and Search and Rescue.† She added there were dollars for educational programs and in conservation easements.† She indicated that they have not seen all of the proposals that had come forward this year.† She said they would be evaluating them and making a recommendation to the Board.† She said the proposal that the Community for Healthy Forests had made would be reviewed before it comes to the Board with a recommendation.
Stewart thought it was a process issue.† He wanted to get this out of the court system to do the best they can to manage the forests.
Kupillas thought they could clean up the process and get through some of the issues.† She said it wouldnít solve the forests that had been burned.
b. ORDER 05-4-20-1/In the Matter of Contributing $5,000 for the General Expense Operational Contingency to the Eugene-Springfield NAACP Afro-Academic, Cultural, Technological, Scientific, Olympics (ACTSO) Program to Assist in the ACTSO 2004 National Competition.
MOTION:† to approve ORDER 05-4-20-1.
Dwyer MOVED, Stewart SECONDED.
Morrison read the resolution into the record.
VOTE: 4-0 (Green excused).
c. RECOGNITION/Lisa Payne.
Morrison presented Lisa Payne with an award for her fundraising efforts.
6. COMMITTEE REPORTS
a. Legislative Committee Report
Morrison noted that Tony Bieda, Intergovernmental Relations Manager, was in Salem. She indicated that she attended a Secure Rural Schools Act meeting in Reno.† She said they discussed not being in the budget resolution this year and the challenges regarding the budget deficit, and finding tradeoffs for the funding.
7. COUNTY ADMINISTRATION
8. PUBLIC WORKS
a. REPORT BACK/Legal Lot Verifications, Property Line Adjustments, and Roads Dividing Legal Lots.
Kent Howe, Land Management, explained that a committee composed of attorneys, surveyors and land use consultants worked on this in 1999/2000.† He added the Land Management Task Force had also worked on this issue.† He said it culminated in a recommendation that they send notice when they do legal lot determinations that involve a property line adjustment.† He noted that the Board amended the code for that provision last summer.† He added that part of the Boardís recommendation included a more comprehensive look at legal lot determination as well as property line adjustments.† He said they tried to identify the legal requirements in code and statutes for constituting a legal lot.† He indicated that staff has brought forward a representation of what the majority wanted.† He noted that interpretation was involved and this is trying to clarify how Lane County has for the past 30 years interpreted and applied its policy and practice to a legal lot determination.† He added that the statutes were not clear.
Dwyer asked how other counties were dealing with conflicting statutes.
Howe responded that some counties have adopted legal lot determination processes like what Lane County is proposing.† He added that others do it on a basis that is policy and practice.
Steve Hopkins, Land Management, explained that Exhibit A (copy in file) was the document created by the group and it stated the goal was to create consensus and when they couldnít reach it, they would vote and go with the majority.† He noted what they reached consensus on was to amend the definitions in Chapter 13 and Chapter 16 and bring them up to the current statute.† He said what the document does is codify the past practices of the County regarding legal lot verification and propose a resolution to several issues, including roads that divide properties.† He noted that the document does not propose any regulation of property line adjustments because many members of the group believed that the surveyors would present something to the legislation this year and anything this group did would be nullified or would be useless.† He added it is staffís view that that if they propose regulating property line adjustments, it would open up the County for a Measure 37 claim.† He noted this document doesnít present any new regulations and does not contain any property line adjustment issues.† He said if they want to include the regulation for property line adjustments that would increase the likelihood of a Measure 37 claim.
Morrison was concerned about moving forward with this knowing there is opposition and what it could possibly cost the County.
Howe indicated they are in a situation where there are people who think the decisions the Board is making is not in line with the way they look at what the legal requirements are for legal lot determination.† He said they are receiving appeals.† He noted this is an effort that the Land Management Task Force and the Board of Commissioners will do more work on legal lot determinations and property line adjustments.† He added that they decided to hold the property line adjustments because of pending legislation.† He indicated this is the document that represents the legal lot determination effort.
Dwyer commented that whatever they do it needs to be codified so it is clear and it canít change.† He added they need to have hearings that would affect change.† He noted that the rules donít apply uniformly if they are not codified.† He was in favor of codifying what they had already done.
Stewart was in favor of improving things so people knew exactly what was going to take place.† He asked how they were presently doing things and if they were getting opposition with the current process.
Howe said they work on about 300 legal lot determinations annually.† He noted the appeal rate was low.† He indicated there had been no appeals since the new practice they had been conducting, sending notice to legal lot owners that had been involved in a property line adjustment.
Green commented that given the rate of appeals, he wanted to keep the current practice.† He wanted to take each lot on a case-by-case basis.
Howe said they could get site-specific circumstances on individual appeals but it might make poor broad county policy.† He indicated if there were an appeal, it would not be on a site-specific issue that could have circumstances that wouldnít be replicated countywide.
MOTION:† to move Option 1.
Motion fails for lack of second.
Morrison said they would leave this as they currently have it.
b. ORDER 05-4-20-2/In the Matter of Allowing the Parks Division to Coordinate With Friends of Buford Park & Mt. Pisgah to Submit Grant Proposals and, if Awarded, to Accept Grants for the Purposes of Habitat Enhancements in the South Meadow Area and to Propagate Native Plants and Make Improvements at the Nursery Within Howard Buford Recreation Area; and Delegating Authority to the County Administrator to Sign the Respective Grant Agreements as Necessary.
Todd Winter, Parks, recalled that on December 17, 2002 the Board approved a contract between Lane County and the† Friends of Buford Park to provide grant management services. He noted that under the contract the Friends of Buford Park solicited grant funding enhancement projects that Lane County had previously approved.† He reported on April 21, 2004, the Board authorized the submission of a $500,000 grant application for an additional South Meadow floodplain enhancement.† He noted that OWEB only awarded $75,000 so they had to do a lot less.† He said a portion of this grant is to direct the Friends of Buford Park to submit a smaller request for a project with narrower enhancement objectives.† He indicated on November 6, 2002 they executed an agreement with them to develop a native plant nursery and educate the public.† He said the money for the South Meadow would implement phase 2 of the floodplain.
Winter commented that the benefits enhanced connectivity between the riverís main low flow channel and a floodplain side channel, provisions of critical habitat for the spring Chinook salmon, and other aquatic species.† He said it would be $5,000 in in-kind services for project oversight.† He said that County Parks still has the approval authority and oversight of all projects.
MOTION:† to approve ORDER 05-4-20-2.
Dwyer MOVED, Green SECONDED.
c. ORDER 05-3-30-16 AND CONTINUED DISCUSSION/Approving a Design Concept for the Realignment of Airport Road, the Intersection of Airport Road and Greenhill Road, and Short Sections of Greenhill Road Both North and South of Airport Road, in the Vicinity of the Eugene Airport and Authorizing the County Administrator to Sign an Intergovernmental Agreement with the City of Eugene for the Realignment Project. (NBA & PM 3/30/05).
Bill Morgan, Public Works, reported that the Board kept the record open.† He said there were questions about road designs, driveway access and the overall design concept issue.† He said that yesterday he received a phone call stating that Lentz would not be submitting anything into the record at this time based on materials and the discussion they had.† Morgan noted the design concept is acceptable, knowing there will be further opportunities within the process to work with county staff and the City of Eugene on right-of-way negotiations and access.
MOTION:† to approve ORDER 05-3-30-16.
Dwyer MOVED, Stewart SECONDED.
d. DISCUSSION AND ORDER 05-4-20-3/In the Matter of Authorizing the Board Chair to Sign a Letter to the Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT) Region 2 Manager Endorsing a Region 2 Seaside Project Contingency Plan.
Green explained that Exhibit A is a letter that Morrison is being asked to sign.† He participated in a meeting on March 11.† He said it is a contingency plan in the event there is a vote occurring in Seaside on May 17.† He said if it is a negative vote, Region 2 wanted to be in a position to go to OTC to keep the money in this region.† He said that Lane County would be agreeing to the plan on the way the money is being spent.† He noted what it means to Lane County is that their number one priority is the I-5† Beltline interchange.† He said that would keep the funding of $8.6 million associated with that project.
Ollie Snowden, Public Works, indicated that this is a contingency on how to use the Seaside money, should the project not go forward.† He added† it would backfill the loss of the earmark if it is not approved by congress.† He noted if the Seaside vote were positive, ODOT would come back looking for a contingency for the federal earmark.
MOTION:† to approve ORDER 05-4-20-3.
Dwyer MOVED, Green SECONDED.
e. THIRD READING AND DELIBERATION/Ordinance No. Pa 1211/In the Matter of Adopting a Conformity Determination Amendment to the Rural Comprehensive Plan (RCP) Pursuant to RCP General Plan Policies - Goal 2, Policy 27.a.ii. and Goal 4, Policy 15 to Rezone 34.2 Acres from Nonimpacted Forest Land (F-1, RCP) to Impacted Forest Land (F-2, RCP) for a Parcel Identified on Lane County Assessorís Map 21-01-30 as Tax Lot 300, and Adopting Savings and Severability Clauses. (File: PA 04- 5252, Everett). (NBA & PM 3/16/05 & 3/30/05).
Dwyer thought this was clear.† He commented that this had justification.† He noted there was a house already there and other things were clear and evident to him.† He added the† Planning Commission notes dealt with utilizing common sense approaches to this issue.† He noted the Planning Commissionís vote was unanimous at 7-0.† He thought they should approve this.† He said if they didnít, they would be looking at a Measure 37 claim.
MOTION:† to adopt Ordinance No. PA 1211.
Dwyer MOVED, Stewart SECONDED.
ROLL CALL VOTE: 5-0.
9. CONSENT CALENDAR
A. Approval of Minutes:† April 6, 2005, Regular Meeting, Following HACSA.
B. County Administration
1) REPORT/County Administrator's Quarterly Report Regarding USA Patriot Act.
2) ORDER 05-4-20-4/In the Matter of Appointing Commissioner Faye Stewart as Lane County's Representative on the Fiber South Consortium Board of Directors and the Regional Fiber Consortium Board of Directors.
C. Assessment and Taxation
1) ORDER 05-4-20-5/In the Matter of A Refund to Prado Partners in the Amount of $32,652.61.
2) ORDER 05-4-20-6/In the Matter of A Refund to Firwood Properties, LTD in the Amount of $38,756.46.
3) ORDER 05-4-20-7/In the Matter of A Refund to Emerald Housing in the Amount of $18,023.90.
D. Public Works
1) ORDER 05-4-20-8/In the Matter of Awarding Requirement Contracts to Various Contractors to Establish Unit Prices for Dust Abatement Material (Lignin Sulfonate), Delivery, CRC Distributor and Operator Needs During the Period of June 1, 2005 to September 15, 2005, Prospective Contract No. 05-M&S-50.
MOTION:† to approve the Consent Calendar.
Dwyer MOVED, Green SECONDED.
10. MANAGEMENT SERVICES
a. REPORT BACK LCARA Quarterly Report.
David Suchart, Management Services,† reported that they had completed about half of the items in the report.† With regard to the statistical report, they are making improvements where they think they should be making them.† He said currently the license revenue has begun to level off.† He said in the first quarter they saw the large impact from the new sales.† He said they have seen a leveling off, but County revenues are picking up.† He hoped to see fourth quarter revenue pick up after they do rabies reporting.† He said as they have begun collecting the statistics, they will be able to catch onto trends, which they hadnít been able to do before.† He added that the difficulty is to do a re-write of DL Dog,†† their primary computer program for statistics.† He commented that it wasnít a good reporting tool.† He said they donít have any way of knowing how many licenses are issued for one year or three years in order to do revenue trends.† He said currently they are on track to collect the revenue for this year. He said they are working with IS to re-do the program so they can do the trending.
Suchart indicated that the County has been in negotiations with the City of Eugene about how much they will put into the system next year.† He didnít think the city wanted to continue the amount of service they had because of the cost.† He said if the Countyís animal control program for county services was at a larger level it would be different because they have so few staff that they have an economy of scale.† He said if they donít work together, it means that a County program does not work well given a seven-day a week, 24 hour-a-day operation.† He said they are taking emergency calls from the city and the county and it is affecting them because† Lane County doesnít have the infrastructure to manage it.† He said he was going to convince the city that it was important for them to be involved to make the system work properly.
Green asked if they could bill the City of Eugene for emergencies.† He thought the County might be missing revenue.
Suchart said they figure out what they need for the year and that is built into the budget and into the cityís contract.† He said what they donít do is the reconciliation.† He said an option could be charging for the actual costs.
Green wanted the County to get as much of the actual cost that they are entitled to.
Dwyer wanted actual costs because he didnít want to subsidize what cityís services.† He said they have to make sure it is cost effective and they work collectively.
Morrison commented that as they move forward it is critical that the information be as factual as it could be.† She thought† Suchart† should work with IS as much as they could.
11. EXECUTIVE SESSION as per ORS 192.660
In re: Labor Negotiations, Per ORS.192.660(2)(d) for the purpose of deliberations with labor negotiators.
12. HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES
a. REPORT BACK Community Health Center Progress.
Steve Manela, Human Services, Commission, reported back to the Board on the progress of the Community Health Center.† A slide show was presented.
Elizabeth Midwinter, Human Services Commission, explained that this year they have revenue of about $2.5 million and of that money, $650,000 is a federal grant.† She added that 60 percent of their revenue is income they generate by the services they provide.† She noted that they have five categories of payers.† She said their largest is self-pay who are either underinsured or uninsured.† They receive payment directly from them.† She said everyone pays who goes to the Riverstone Clinic, the minimum being $20 per visit.† She noted that they receive a flat rate of $109 from Medicare because they are federally qualified per office visit.† She added their best payers are Medicaid and FPAP.† She said they receive a flat rate of $235 for every visit.† She noted that the $650,000 grant goes to help subsidize the self-payers and the larger reimbursement by Medicaid.
Midwinter stated the biggest financial issue facing the FQHC is cash flow because the State of Oregon pays them on an eight-month lag.† She indicated at the end of the year they would be showing a loss of about $200,000, but would have a receivable from the State of Oregon of $300,000.† She said they would be in the black at the end of the year on an accrual basis. She added that next year the receivables from OMAP would only be about 90 days behind.
Sorenson had concerns about continuing the clinic.† He asked what the status of the grant was and if it was going to be renewed.
Manela responded that in July they would be entering into their third year.† He said they submitted an application for continuation for the third year of the initial funding.† He noted during that year they will receive a visit from the Bureau of Primary Health Care and will also be submitting a grant for a five-year period.† He added the history has been that the federal government has continued to fund the centers.† He said if the base funding from the feds goes up, it is the same process.† He indicated that the Bush administration has this as their number one domestic program and the likelihood is that it will be funded into the near future.
Dwyer was concerned about pharmaceutical costs.† He hoped they would be able to develop something so County employees could have reduced costs.
Manela commented that with everything they reviewed, they donít see where they were able to reduce costs for County employees who came to the center for services.† He said this is a benefit because it generates income that helps support other patients who are not able to pay for services.† He added they would have to do a longer-term financial analysis to see how to provide a broader benefit.† He said there is interest in providing wellness services similar to what District 4J, the City of Salem and others have provided.† He added that usually there is a cost associated with those services.
Sorenson asked what was happening with the clinic and the Oregon Health Plan.
Manela indicated that 30 percent of their payers are patients who are on the Oregon Health Plan.† He noted in Lane County there has been a reduction of about 2,000 people who were part of the standard program.† He said Medicaid and Medicare are important to make the clinic viable.† He said they have adjusted their goals downward from where they were and with working with LIPA, they are hoping to pick up more patients.
With regard to funding partners (Meyer Memorial Trust, Peace Health, Triad) Morrison asked if those would be ongoing partners forever.
Manela indicated that the discussion they had with the advisory board is that they would like to see corporate citizens and major health care interests in the community make a sustaining contribution.† He said they have a $3.2 million budget and they have to raise $250,000 per year.† He said they have commitments going into the next year from Peace Health and the Springfield School District.
Morrison asked if they would have to devise a way to fundraise if any of the partners pull out.† She wanted those things looked at on a long-term basis.
Manela said there have been other grants that have come and gone but they have been successful with sustaining the programs they are operating and not getting over extended.† He said they have done things to put the operation in a position to be successful.† He said that they looked at ways in which the Community Health Center could be helpful in partnership with other organizations.
13. COMMISSIONERS' BUSINESS
a. ORDER 05-4-20-9/In the Matter of Authorizing the application to the State of Oregon for Designation of a West Eugene Enterprise Zone.
Wilson distributed† a new version of the resolution order that was in the packet for the Enterprise Zone.† She said it conformed with what the City of Eugene did today. She noted the change is at the bottom of the order, additional language to number nine.† She indicated that the new language she added was for job quality standards they were proposing. In addition, no investment within the Enterprise Zone will receive a tax exemption for jobs greater than an amount to be determined before July 1.† She added the other change is what is designated as Exhibit A, which was what was in Eugeneís packet for today as Attachment F.† She said it excludes railroad property.
Denny Braud, City of Eugene, explained there is additional railroad property that might not be owned by the railroad.† He noted that the neighborhood has expressed an interest in not including the seven parcels in the Enterprise Zone boundary until there is a better planning effort with the future of the rail yard and the properties around the rail yard.† He said the 7-1 vote of the council today supported the application resolution.† He said they moved the seven parcels with the expectation that if there was a redevelopment opportunity in the future and the area was better planned, the area could be added to the boundary at a future date.
Morrison asked how Lane County in conjunction with the City of Eugene intends to adopt job quality standards applicable to eligible businesses seeking the Enterprise Zone tax exemption.
Braud explained that if they were successful in getting the zone, they would come back with a recommendation to have a public process to involve stakeholders that would help design job quality standards.† He noted the standards need to be approved by both of the joint sponsors.
Morrison asked what would happen if the city and county were not in agreement.
Braud responded that if they are not in agreement, the city and the county have the opportunity to withdraw the application.† He added if it happens after July 1, they are obligated to adopt some standards.† He noted if there was a stalemate and they didnít reach agreement, there would be no standards or if they adopt the interim standards they propose, those would remain in place until they reach an agreement.† He added that the city and county could opt to withdraw its Enterprise Zone.† He said it really requires the city and the county to reach agreement on the standards to be approved by both.
Morrison asked what the standards were.
Braud said they are job quality standards and the state statute limits the extent to which they could condition a tax exemption.† He noted the limitation must be related to the public purpose of providing employment opportunities.† He said the standards must be related to employment.†† He added no wages or benefits could be part of the conditions.† He said a company would be eligible for 75 percent of the tax exemption by right and the last 25 percent would be conditioned on those types of standards.
Wilson explained that Attachment C was the standards that were used in 1997.† She said they would get more points depending on where they were with new jobs created, the percentage of the average county wage, or if they were above the wage.† She noted the more points they got, the more of the 15 percent of the exemption they would be able to achieve.
MOTION:† to approve ORDER 05-4-20-9.
Dwyer MOVED, Stewart SECONDED.
Dwyer commented that the Enterprise Zone is a tool that they are not sure they would get.† He thought they needed to move forward with the application and if they get it they could negotiate the 25 percent for mutual benefit of the government and businesses.
Sorenson said they need tools for economic development.† He said that effort has been made to capture the benefit of job creation and the payment to the public benefit.
Morrison noted that Green had to leave.† She said that Green would support this but he was not aware of the change in the language in number nine.† Morrison noted that Green asked to convey to Eugene staff that this was the last time he would support an Eugene item if a councilor or the mayor werenít present to support the item.† Morrison commented that Eugene City Councilors donít know how much the county does for the city.† She commented that when they discuss wages, she would not be in agreement if it gets too onerous.† She supported this, but with extreme reservations.
VOTE: 4-0 (Green excused).
Van Vactor asked when the City of Eugene would be back with the interim criteria.
Braud responded that it would be late in June.
Van Vactor was concerned about the information showing up 24 to 48 hours before† the deadline.
With regard to the interim standards, Braud said they have a proposal to adopt the 1997 version, which is their intent.† He added the actual standards would be after July 1 and they could take their time with a process.
14. CORRESPONDENCE TO THE BOARD
15. COMMISSIONERS' ANNOUNCEMENTS
Dwyer announced that tomorrow in Springfield the Northwest Community Credit Union is opening a new branch.
16. OTHER BUSINESS
There being no further business, Commissioner Morrison adjourned the meeting at 3:00 p.m.