BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS'

REGULAR MEETING

February 15, 2006

9:00 a.m.

Commissioners' Conference Room

APPROVED 3/15/06

 

Commissioner Bill Dwyer presided with Commissioners Bobby Green, Sr., Anna Morrison, Peter Sorenson and Faye Stewart present.County Administrator Bill Van Vactor, County Counsel Teresa Wilson and Recording Secretary Melissa Zimmer were also present.

 

1. ADJUSTMENTS TO THE AGENDA

 

Morrison wanted to discuss an insert in the newspaper under Commissionersí Business.

 

2. PUBLIC COMMENTS

 

Kathy Buchart, Eugene, stated she lives a half mile from the George Hinnenkamp trust Measure 37 claim.She asked the Board to deny the claim as it is not valid and doesnít follow the criteria for approval.

 

3. EMERGENCY BUSINESS

 

None.

 

4. COMMISSIONERS' REMONSTRANCE

 

None.

 

5. COMMISSIONERS' BUSINESS

 

Letter to Springfield

 

Dwyer indicated that the City of Springfield was in the process of drafting options for a jail and other administrative buildings.He commented that would impact the Central Justice Court.He said they wanted to put the council on notice on how it might affect Lane County and ask them for notice.

 

MOTION: to approve sending the letter.

 

Morrison MOVED, Green SECONED.

 

VOTE: 5-0.

 

Budget Committee Appointment/ORDER 06-2-15-4 Appointing One Member to the Lane County Budget Committee.

 

MOTION: to approve ORDER 06-2-15-4 appointing Tony McCown as a member to the Lane County Budget Committee.

 

Green MOVED, Stewart SECONDED.

 

VOTE: 5-0.

 

Discussion on Insert

 

Morrison spoke with John Bartlett who indicated that in todayís paper there would be a special insert.She thought the insert was one of the challenges around peopleís perceptions. She thought they needed to focus on media education.She noted the awareness level was low on what they really provide in services.She said they contacted the County with questions but because of the 15-minute rule, staff was not able to comply.††

 

MOTION: to allow staff to respond in excess of the 15-minute rule to answer the questions that are posed.

 

Morrison MOVED, Green SECONDED.

 

Green wanted to be proactive to Stantonís position.He didnít want to respond to this.He wanted to provide information only in the context as the point of information piece.

 

Morrison said her motion was not to respond to the insert, but looking aggressively at other areas and what they do. She didnít want to respond specifically to this, but on a countywide basis.

 

Sorenson wanted to know what role Lane County government had in providing information to the publicís understanding.He wanted to know what they could do to provide the information if the voters of western Lane County were to create a county.

 

Van Vactor thought they could hold a work session on what the Oregon process is for the formation of adjustment of county boundaries.He said they could have the key department heads make a presentation on how they perform services in different regions of the county and how the taxes are collected to get some data.

 

Morrison thought by responding to this they would be reacting.She said if they donít get the re-authorization money as they move forward, then people need to understand what the County does that might take place in the future.

 

Van Vactor heard that they should assemble data on how they provide services throughout Lane County in the different regions and a work session on the County formation and amendment of boundaries.He suggested having a broader discussion on a regional basis and have County Counsel give him a memo about the Oregon statutes on county formation.

 

VOTE: 5-0.

 

Morrison recommended taking this to the small cities to explain to them what their services provide.

 

6. COUNTY ADMINISTRATION

 

a. Announcements

 

None.

 

7. PUBLIC WORKS

 

a. ORDER 06-2-15-1/In the Matter of Endorsing Project Applications for Connect Oregon.

 

b. DISCUSSION/Port of Siuslaw's Request for a Letter of Support to Connect Oregon Project.

 

The Board discussed 7. a. and b. together.Dwyer indicated that the motion would be for the letter and the endorsement.

 

Tom Stinchfield, Public Works, reported the applications are due on February 17.He indicated they are in the middle of the Connect Oregon application process.He supplemented the original board packet with materials.He revised the exhibit to the order that removed the City of Florenceís Airport application.He indicated they were not applying for the program this time.He added the Creswell Airport application they learned about after the memorandum was originally submitted.He submitted a sample letter with the supplemental materials and examples of letters that were going to MPC for consideration for the metro area project.He indicated that MPC approved the letters of support for the three metro projects last Thursday.He said the issue that has come up is whether they want to paraphrase the approach in the MPC letters.He added they supported full funding for all the projects.He came up with a letter that was a more measured letter of support.He asked the Board what type of letter they wanted to send.He indicated that this was a first step in the process that would come back to the Board.He expected that the County would be asked to evaluate these over the next few months along with areas in Region 2.He added that ODOT might want to have an all area Region 2 meeting on Connect Oregon in May.He added this would end up at the Transportation Commission for hearings in July.He asked for the Boardís approval.

 

Morrison suggested having a separate letter for each project as they go to a different body at the state level to be ranked.††

 

Green suggested a letter that would have stronger language.

 

Stinchfield indicated he prepared two letters, one based on Exhibit A and one based on the submittal from the applicants.He said if that was the wish of the Board, they could do it.With regard to the three metro projects, he changed the language in the first paragraph to reference that the County Board was in support of that instead of MPC.He said the other two are based on the draft materials that the Port of Siuslaw and the City of Creswell submitted.

 

MOTION:to approve ORDER 06-2-15-1, sending the individual letters project specific regarding the Connect Oregon dollars that are available.

 

Morrison MOVED, Green SECONDED.

 

Stewart wanted to make sure that Lane County strongly supports the projects.

 

VOTE; 5-0.

 

c. ORDER 06-2-15-2/In the Matter of Considering a Ballot Measure 37 Claim and Deciding Whether to Modify, Remove or Not Apply Restrictive Land Use Regulations in Lieu of Providing Just Compensation (PA 05-6100, Bedortha) (NBA & PM 1/18/06).

 

Kent Howe, Land Management, recalled this was in front of the Board†† last month and the claim was inconclusive as to the validity of the claim.He noted this is southeast of Cottage Grove, zoned F2, 101 acres with two tax lots.He said Tax Lot 200 is 63 acres in size and Tax Lot 2300 is 38 acres.With regard to Tax Lot 200, he said they have the deed chain of ownership that demonstrates that the property was acquired by the Bedorthas in 1974.He indicated it was unzoned at that time and they think it is a valid claim from the standpoint of this request.He added that they donít have the ability to track through the deeds and chain of ownership on Tax Lot 2300, on when the Bedorthas acquired the property.

 

Vorhes indicated the board order in front of the Board reversed the acreages.He said the order needed to be changed to reflect the correct lot.

 

Stewart asked what process he would have to file his claim if the applicant could come up with proof of ownership from 1976.

 

Vorhes said the Board could take action on this and leave that portion of the claim opened if the Board wanted to.He said the Board could recognize it, and at the time they get the additional information, they could add that into the order.When and if they get information on the other lot, it would be brought back to the Board for final action.

 

MOTION: to approve ORDER 06-2-15-2 on lot Tax Lot, 200, and to put Tax Lot 2300 on hold.

 

Stewart MOVED, Green SECONDED.

 

VOTE: 4-1 (Sorenson dissenting).

 

d. ORDER 05-11-30-4/In the Matter of Considering a Ballot Measure 37 Claim and Deciding Whether to Modify, Remove or Not Apply Restrictive Land Use Regulations in Lieu of Providing Just Compensation (PA05-5680, George Hinnenkamp Trust) (NBA & PM 11/8/05, 11/30/05 & 1/25/06).

 

Howe recalled that the Board had met on this three previous times.He said this is located at Hamm Road and Territorial near Lorane and is 159 acres in size. He said it is zoned F2 and E-40.He noted it was acquired in 1967 and a trust established in 1996.He said the Board closed the public record and scheduled deliberations for today.He noted that since the record had been closed, nothing else had come in.

 

Green stated he was absent that day.He reviewed the tapes and watched the public hearing.He said there was a question about a resident living on the property and it wasnít established who they were.He thought this was an incomplete application.

 

Stewart didnít believe that Hinnenkamp had ownership.

 

MOTION:move to tentatively deny the Measure 37 claim.

 

Stewart MOVED, Morrison SECONDED.

 

Vorhes requested that this be a tentative decision and to direct him to draft an order that comes back to the Board reflecting that.††

 

Dwyer asked that the order come back on the Consent Calendar.

 

Morrison commented that the name Palmer was on a lot of the ownership papers.

 

Dwyer commented that they try to be fair and give people what they are entitled to.He thought this claim was a stretch.He was going to vote against this.

 

Stewart said it was evident that there was a relationship between Palmer and Hinnenkamp that hadnít been flushed out.He said without having the benefit of Hinnenkamp coming in to talk to the Board, he wasnít comfortable with moving this forward.

 

VOTE: 5-0.

 

e. ORDER 06-2-8-7/In the Matter of Amending Chapter 60 of the Lane Manual to Revise Fees For Land Management Division Planning, Subsurface Sanitation, and Building Program Activities (LM 60.850, 60.851, 60.852, and 60.855), Effective July 1, 2006.

 

Jeff Towery, Land Management, recalled the Board tentatively approved this item and held it over until todayís meeting to give County Counsel the opportunity to draft findings.County Counsel had amended the board order to reflect the findings.††

 

Sorenson asked if they were tracking all of the time they were spending on things.

 

Towery responded that they have a computerized cost accounting system that had been in place for a number of years and they track by activity and project.He said they donít track by specific permits or type of permit.

 

Sorenson asked if people were concerned the department was charging too much.

 

Towery noted that cost accounting shows they are doing a better job recovering costs but are still not recovering full costs.He said they receive other revenue streams in the forms of grants and into long range planning programming.

 

Vorhes explained the initial appeal charge (where a hearing had not been held at all) is set in the proposed order at $250.He noted the first appeal set at $250, is where the planning director had not elected to have a hearing.He added that all of the other on the record appeals of the planning directorís decision to a hearings official on a record is an appeal of a decision the planning director reached after holding a public hearing.

 

MOTION: to approve ORDER 06-2-8-7.

 

Green MOVED, Stewart SECONDED.

 

VOTE: 5-0.

 

8. CONSENT CALENDAR

 

A. Approval of Minutes:

May 21, 2003, Regular Meeting, 1:30 p.m.

July 13, 2005, Regular Meeting, Following HACSA

July 13, 2005, Regular Meeting, 1:30 p.m.

July 27, 2005. Regular Meeting, 1:30 p.m.

January 4, 2006, Public Hearing, 7:00 p.m.

January 25, 2006, Regular Meeting, 1:30 p.m.

 

B. Management Services

 

1) ORDER 06-2-15-3/In the Matter of Readopting Lane Manual 4.020 Relating to Investment Policies.

 

MOTION: to approve the Consent Calendar.

 

Morrison MOVED, Green SECONDED.

 

VOTE: 5-0.

 

9. MANAGEMENT SERVICES

 

a. DISCUSSION/Providing a Status Report Regarding the Work of the Vacancy Review Committee, and Requesting Direction as to Its Future Scope.

 

Greta Utecht, Management Services, explained the Vacancy Review Committee had been in effect for three years.She noted at this point it had become more of a process step than analysis.She said the analysis taking place within the department is filling out the checklist review form and determining whether the need for a vacancy to be filled is real. She indicated that the Vacancy Review Committee had only questioned three positions in the time the committee was in existence and the three positions were part-time AFSCME position that were getting full benefits.She noted there had not been any positions that had been put back.She recommended that the Vacancy Review Committee be suspended, and if they still want the analysis, review and the tracking to continue, they would continue to ask the departments to fill in the checklist.HR would continue to track the position and report on the vacant positions as they go along, but not require the committee to convene every week.

 

MOTION: to approve Option 2, to disband the committee.

 

Green MOVED, Sorenson SECONDED.

 

VOTE: 5-0

 

10. PUBLIC SAFETY

 

a. THIRD READING AND DELIBERATION/Ordinance No. 7-05/In the Matter of Amending Chapter 3 of Lane Code Regarding Regulation of and Reporting by Used Merchandise Dealers and Eliminating the Secondhand Business License Requirement (LC 3.600-3.00) (NBA & PM 1/04/06 & 1/18/06) (Fourth Reading and Deliberation: May 3, 2006).

 

MOTION: to approve a Third Reading and Setting a Fourth Reading and Deliberation for Ordinance No. 7-05 on April 19, 2006, amended from May 3, 2006.

 

Morrison MOVED, Green SECONDED.

 

VOTE: 5-0.

 

11. CORRESPONDENCE TO THE BOARD

 

None.

 

12. COMMISSIONERS' ANNOUNCEMENTS

 

Stewart reported that he and Green had their last Enterprise Zone meeting and the committee made a unanimous decision to move the recommendations to the respective bodies.He said that Eugene would hear the Enterprise Zone criteria on April 10 and Lane County will hear it on April 12.

 

Morrison announced that tomorrow night the Board is meeting with the City of Oakridge.

 

13. EXECUTIVE SESSION as per ORS 192.660

 

Per ORS 192.660 (2)(d) for the purpose of deliberations with labor negotiators and per ORS 192.660 (2)(h) for the purpose of consulting with counsel on litigation.

 

14. OTHER BUSINESS

 

None.

 

There being no further business, Commissioner Dwyer recessed the meeting into Executive Session at 10:20 a.m.

 

 

 

Melissa Zimmer

Recording Secretary