BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS'
October 4, 2006
Commissionersí Conference Room
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 would be taking a conference call at 9:30 a.m. regarding Secure Rural Schools. Dwyer announced the Board would be recessing at 9:40 a.m. to go to the John Serbu Center.† He added that Stewart has an appointment at 11:30 a.m.† He said they would then recess the meeting at 9:40 a.m. and return at 1:30 p.m.† Van Vactor noted there was a copying error for the Measure 37 claim and Steve Hopkins would bring the corrected copy.
2. PUBLIC COMMENTS
Cindy Land, Eugene, said she is a concerned citizen about the Fairgrounds.† She stated she was a former 4H mom and former 4H Chairperson of the horse project.† She always enjoyed the fairgrounds.† She indicated she went to the Fair Board meeting.† She thought there was a disconnect between the Fair Board and the staff in that the staff suggested that the Fair Board turn down the YMCAís proposal.† She indicated the Fair Board decided not to do that.† She added in that process, they asked the ďhorse peopleĒ to come back with a proposal that competes with the YMCAís opinion.† She commented that the fairgrounds was created to promote agriculture and horticulture.† She noted its purpose is to bring the country into the city.† She was concerned there would be a ďwhite collar versus redneckĒ scenario. She said when groups are being singled out, they have crossed the line.† She commented that everyone is able to use the fairgrounds as it stands if it is done properly.
Susan Phillips, Eugene, said she has 48 acres of tree farms.† She explained that her land hadnít been partitioned completely as there were conditions that were not approved in a matter 35 years ago.† She distributed information (copy in file).† She noted that last year the state passed House Bill 3081 that attempted to correct problems addressing the issue.† She recommended addressing a number of issues about stewardship of properties.† She wrote a stewardship plan that was approved by the state.† She indicated that Jackson County addressed this and resolving it through a type II review.† She proposed that the plan becomes integrated.
Lynn Negus, Eugene, stated she is a master gardener from Grassroots Garden.† She thanked the Commissioners and County staff who volunteered at the Day of Caring on Thursday.† She distributed pictures that were taken at the Day of Caring.† She requested that the Board again support their greenhouse.
Dwyer requested an appropriation out of the Boardís contingency fund for the Grassroots Garden.
Victor Strathakis, Eugene, announced that on October 21 they are going to celebrate Wayne Morseís birthday.† He knew he could only use the electricity twice a month, but he wanted one more date this month for Wayne Morseís birthday.† He asked if something could be worked out with David Suchart, Management Services.† He wanted to finish the season with a bang because they started with a slow start.
Dwyer asked the Board if there was any objection to Strathakis getting another day to celebrate Morseís birthday.
Green asked if Strathakis sent a request to Suchart.
Strathakis hadnít sent anything to Suchart yet.
Green asked Strathakis to talk to Suchart and if no one had asked for that date, then he could have it.
Amy Pendell, Creswell, stated she was present for the Bernheim Measure 37 claim.† She said the Board was told they had to determine the significance of the option agreement and new evidence that the option had been exercised.† She noted work had begun on the property and they have installed a new bridge.† She said they called County people to try to stop the project.† She indicated they have photos of before and after on the bridge replacement.† She said Mr. Gildae said he was the consultant of the McDougals and took responsibility.† She distributed a card about Measure 37 claims.† She noted that DLCD was involved with this and asked the McDougals to stop the work on the property.† She distributed letters from her neighbors regarding the road and the gravel trucks.† She thought this showed that the McDougal Brothers had exercised their option on the property and they were taking full responsibility for the violations.† She stated that Mr. Bernheim knew nothing about what was taking place.† She thought there was evidence that McDougal exercised his option agreement.
Kristi Holaas, Creswell, stated that she is a witness to the activities progressing at the Bernheim property.†† She said her husband saw the cement being poured into the creek bed for the new bridge, (not a repair of the old bridge) and she witnessed it being removed and replaced. Her husband asked the contractors where their Lane County permits were as they were not posted.† She said they told her they did not need one as it is private property.† She noted there are no shoulders on the road and some neighbors have almost been driven off the road by trucks.† She represented numerous neighbors who called her and ask that she relay this as a safety issue.† She said they need to know what to do to get help to make their roads safe and to control development.† She stated that she heard blasting going on all weekend.
Stewart indicated he received e-mails from Mrs. Ellis and he responded to those.† He indicated staff was looking into the bridge question on whether or not they have jurisdiction.† He recommended talking to the Eastern Lane Oregon Department of Forestry.† He said the McDougals would need an operating permit for the activities on the property.
Sorenson asked if the Board could hold up a Measure 37 permit because they are violating the County ordinance.† He asked what the Board could do to respond to the legitimate requests.
Stewart reported that Kent Howe, Land Management had a large meeting about this matter.† He thought Howe could respond to this.
Dwyer wanted to hold up the Bernheim Measure 37 claim until they did an appropriate investigation.
William Mousuer, Eugene, discussed Veteranís preference for jobs.† He stated the state law said it has to do it and the federal law agreed.† He called the County to see how it works for Veteranís preference and they donít do it in this county.† He had done research and found that there are more Veterans in the Eugene Employment Department than any office in the state.† He noted the last census showed there are 40,000 veterans in Lane County.† He spoke with Benton County and they donít have preference for Veterans either.† He noted that under the Equal Employment Opportunity Act, Veterans are non-discriminated against but they arenít given preference.† He wanted Lane County to consider how they could give preference to Veterans for employment practices.
Dwyer wanted someone to call AOC to see how many Oregon counties provide Veteranís preference as a condition of employment and report back to the Board.† He asked if anything prohibits it.
Van Vactor recommended consulting County Counsel with regard to the charter.
3. INFORMATION SERVICES
a. ORDER 06-10-4-1/In the Matter of Award of Contract for RFPS No. IS2006-5-01 for Area Information Records System (AIRS) Consulting Services, Authorize County Administrator to Executive Contract Documents With Wintellect, L.L.C. in the Amount Not to Exceed $100,000 Including Consulting Fees and All Expenses.
Van Vactor said this might lead to subsequent contracts that are more than $100,000.
Dwyer stated he was prejudiced against this type of an approach to a contract.
Tony Black, Information Services, reported this proposal is for a $100,000 contact to Wintellect LLC, an IT consulting firm to look at their law enforcement needs and provide a scope and risk analysis for continuation and completion of their law enforcement system rewrite.† He recalled they had come in the past with a Motorola contract and implemented the Motorola systems. †He noted this contract is to have Wintellect come in and provide the project plan for the completion of the project in integration with all of the existing and new components.† He indicated this would be the first of two contracts.† He said they would be back to the Board with the results of the scoping exercise and another contract for the rest of the existing design.
Dara Boush, Information Services, recalled that at the request for professional services for the entire project,† (on advice by County Counsel) they are coming back with a smaller contract so they know what they are getting into. She noted that Wintellect had been around for a decade and they are experts in the field of working with Microsoft technology.† She indicated Wintellect had a number of clients which they did reference checks on throughout the country and some international where they were looking at technology issues and ensuring that systems are properly created.† She added that Wintellect wants to make sure Lane County is successful.† She said it was not their intent to be in the project long term, they want Lane County to be self-sufficient.
Dwyer asked if the RFP included the whole project so the people who bid on it had a level playing field.
Boush said the RFP was to provide for consulting services to the AIRS Consortium so AIRS staff could successfully design and build the remaining pieces of the AIRS conversion project.† She said they looked at the entire project for the consulting services to help with several major pieces including the design of the hardware and software and the training.† She said after they chose Wintellect and decided how to go forward, they decided to break this into two contracts.
MOTION: to approve ORDER 06-10-4-1.
Green MOVED, Sorenson SECONDED.
Dwyer stated he wouldnít support it.† He commented that engineers were smart enough to know what the whole package is going to cost.† He didnít think this was in the taxpayerís interest.
VOTE: 3-1 (Dwyer dissenting, Morrison out of the room).
4. COMMISSIONERS' REMONSTRANCE
5. COMMISSIONERS' BUSINESS
Van Vactor noted that Dwyer wanted him to have the Board of Commissioners look at the Fair Board and how it is constituted under the ORS.
6. COUNTY ADMINISTRATION
Van Vactor announced that Lane Countyís charitable contribution campaign starts on Monday.† He said their campaign goal this year is $108,000.† He announced that Hector Rios will be the countywide coordinator.
7. PUBLIC WORKS
a. WORK SESSION/Review Possibility of Cluster Subdivisions For Measure 37 Claims (NBA & PM 7/12/06).
Kent Howe, Land Management, recalled at the Boardís request, there was interest in looking at how the County might provide incentives for development applications that might come to Lane County after land use waivers under Measure 37 have been authorized.† He noted they have large Measure 37 claim locations where the applicant is requesting to subdivide those properties and place dwellings on parcels that would be smaller than what the zoning is.
Dwyer asked if this cluster for subdivisions would only be available for Measure 37 claimants.
Howe responded that was the case as the other land use regulations of the state and Lane County apply where Measure 37 claims had not been authorized.† He said this is for where they have claims they had authorized and determined to be valid claims and where there are large tracts.† He commented the thought is there are some ways (instead of the traditional subdivision development in rural areas using a cookie cutter approach) for conservation and a low impact cluster subdivision to develop land that saves money for the developer. He indicated there would be less road infrastructure, less utility cost and under cluster subdivision they could be sensitive to the terrain.† He said the dwellings could be clustered into areas leaving open space and it allows an opportunity for a win-win situation instead of the traditional spreading the density on the land.
Howe noted that under the existing way they are operating with Measure 37, (even though they hadnít received any land use applications to implement Measure 37 waivers) the thought is the people who come in for a subdivision application will be applying the current subdivision regulations.† He said those regulations point to some land use areas of their policies that were originally addressing the issues of separating the difference from urban and rural development.† He explained if they were to apply their subdivision regulations today, they would have policies that would get in the way if they were to allow cluster subdivisions.† (Copy in file).† He said they have to show the level of development cannot go inside an urban growth boundary.† He added that with Goal 14 exception requirements, the areas would be developed outside developed and committed exception areas.† He noted that Measure 37 claims are not going through land use, they are waiving land use and allowing the development.† He indicated that the statewide planning program prohibits urban levels of development on rural lands because state waivers for valid claims may invalidate the applicability of the statewide planning program whose ownerís date of acquisition predates the statewide goals.† He commented that the issue of urban levels of development on rural lands might be moot.
Howe said if the Board was interested in a lower impact development than a traditional subdivision, it leaves open space and clusters development so there would be less impact and cost to the developer and a win-win situation.† He said they could do minor studies to see how cluster subdivision impact developments might occur.† He said an alternative could be to supplement that study or do a quick survey on rural smart growth initiatives of how other cities are looking at this type of development. He added there might be some financial incentives that could be explored.† He thought there could be low interest loan incentives for development support for watershed enhancements.† He said the DEQ provides those types of low interest loans.† He added they could explore annexation and extension of service options if the developments are within proximity of existing cities.† He noted there were other incentives that they could look at that arenít financial where they could look at Measure 37 developments as conforming uses, if they went through a cluster subdivision as opposed to non conforming uses.† He thought the County could expedite cluster subdivision applications for valid Measure 37 waivers or possibly waive some fees for the applicant.
Howe indicated that this policy had been in existence since 1984 and Lane County had not authorized a cluster subdivision since then.
Green asked how minor the studies would be.
Howe said he would do a study that he would bring back after the first of the year.
Green asked if they did this, what in their work plan would go away.
Howe responded that he didnít know how many additional Measure 37 claims would come in between now and December 2.† He said if it isnít a significant number, they would be able to do a simple survey, review the policy revisions and explore some of the other jurisdictions that have done smart growth and report back after the first of the year.† He added if there is a ramping up of Measure 37 claims, they would have to come back to the Board and revisit the ability to do the report.
Stewart thought they had an opportunity for a new tool to lessen the impact of some of the claims.† His concern was how long it would take as they could possibly lose some opportunities.† He didnít necessary want a full study, but to take advantage of areas that had smart growth and look at their code and then make a recommendation.† With regard to Land Managementís workload, he wanted to know what they would be not getting to if they went with this.
Sorenson thought it would be better to do nothing and come back in January until they know the resources, as they may have a mid-course budget reduction.
Morrison was concerned about the different mechanisms that were put forth and why they werenít exercising those to do some of the other tasks when they went for video lottery dollars.† She didnít want to do a study, but if there were a case study where someone would be willing to work with them, it would be good.† She was not for waiving any fees.† She said she might be willing to give a reduction.† She wanted a pilot project as a test.
Dwyer thought the tools were excellent.† He commented that the decisions are driven by money.† He thought they could possibly expedite those matters.† He wanted it to pay for itself.
Morrison said the direction they would give them is to talk about this concept.
Dwyer said they should ask the property owners if there would be any interest in following this provision of the code if it existed and it provided incentives to protect the environment and allow them to make a reasonable return on their investment.
Van Vactor said if they were going to pursue this they would have to amend some of the policies.† He said they would have to convene the Planning Commission.† He thought they might want to have a joint meeting with the Planning Commission in January or February.
Dwyer thought the Planning Commission would be a good place to start.
Stewart stated that staff would be gathering information on cluster development and smart growth and they would schedule a joint meeting next year.† He agreed with that idea.
Sorenson said since so many of the Measure 37 claims had been waived, they have people coming in asking what additional rights for participation they have.† He said they have the right to submit written comments to the planning director and there is no opportunity for a public hearing under Lane Code with the planning director.† He said people are under the impression that when they leave, their rights are greater than if they learned about it and they could submit information to the planning director.† He said if they are discussing post Measure 37 claim activity they should be contacting the neighbors and what rights there are for additional information or public comment.† He commented that most things have been one-sided up to this point.† He said they have the potential as government to give the people a voice.† He wanted to make sure the people who are adjacent to these areas have a full, open and transparent process to observe these claims.
Dwyer said the people of Measure 37 only cared about the people who were impacted on that date and didnít care about the impact on their neighbors.† He wanted Howe to bring back a policy that requires a public hearing process on all post Measure 37 claims.† He said the people couldnít say they didnít have a way to give their testimony.
Jeff Towery, Land Management, reiterated the Board wanted Land Management to understand the impact of their long range work plan and what is in it for the developers, including:† why someone would want to pursue a cluster development, understanding the component study they have talked about, including the code research drafting policies, the work product that would be coming back to the Board for review, scheduling a joint meeting with the Planning Commission after the first of the year, cataloging the potential of the 120 subdivisions they would end up processing, and identifying the process review with what the subdivision review and development proposal process will be for post Measure 37 claims that address issues of public input appeals hearings.
Green asked when someone is contemplating developing a subdivision, if public hearings were not required.
Howe responded that under current land use regulations it is the planning director approval process.† He said there is a provision in the code where the planning director has the alternative when there is controversy on the proposal to have a planning director public hearing as the first evidentiary hearing if there is an appeal to a hearings official on the record as opposed to another evidentiary hearing before the hearings official.
Dwyer wanted the policy to call for it and take discretion away.
b. ORDER 06-10-4-2/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 (PA05-6581/Bernheim).
Howe explained that the reason this item came back to the Board was because staff inadvertently left out a tax lot from the list of tax lots of the Bernheim claim.† He noted this is an order that includes the one missing tax lot and it makes that correction.
Dwyer asked about the testimony in public comment basing the approval on the fact that there is an option.† He said people are logging, moving land and moving bridges.† He thought the Bernheim claim was bogus.† He wanted to delay this matter and study it further.
Assistant County Counsel Stephen Vorhes recalled the Board approved an order and the only item left out was a question about the ownership of tax lot 100.† He noted the question was answered to the Boardís satisfaction.† He commented if there had been a conveyance to another owner and the Bernheims no longer have an interest in the property, this order would not do any good for the owner.
Sorenson asked if this could be set over for a hearing because there is now a difference of opinion about who the owner is.
Vorhes said the Board could do what they want.† He recalled that the Board held a hearing on the issues at the time and concluded that the ownership was still with the Bernheims.† He added to date he had not seen anything that had been submitted that changed anything.† He noted the current tax records still show Bernheim as the owner of all of the tax lots including tax lot 100. He said they could seek more information.
Stewart asked if the Bernheims were in violation.† He asked if that was in Lane Countyís jurisdiction.
Vorhes said from an enforcement standpoint they could take action.† He said this order might not protect them from what they are doing out there if there are permits that are still required.†† He noted they waive regulations but they still have to apply for and get approval to do development.† He said if there is a requirement for any of the activities that are taking place or in the future, it might be enforceable, but this order would have no effect on it.
Dwyer wanted to roll this tax lot this for three weeks until the information that was omitted from this order was correct.
Stewart wanted staff to see if they were required to get permits on activities from Lane County and if they have jurisdiction and they know what the results are at that time.† He said if they are not abiding by the agreement, then they should know that at the time.
Sorenson asked if they approved this (knowing that the issue of development activities is already going on) if they could approve the order.† He asked what happens if they are in violation.
Vorhes stated that the order says they have to comply.† He said if they approved this, the order would have the same force and effect that the previous order the Board approved has.† He said if they need develop permits or approval, they are subject to enforcement and compliance actions from Lane County to address those issues.
Sorenson wanted to enforce Lane County rules before they approved another waiver.
Vorhes said steps have been taken to explore what is going on and what those activities are in relation to the code requirements in Lane Countyís code currently, irrespective of the waiver that has previously been granted for three of the four tax lots.
Green admitted the error was Lane Countyís error.
8. CONSENT CALENDAR
A. Approval of Minutes:† none.
B. Health and Human Services
1) ORDER 06-10-4-3/In the Matter of Applying for a Northwest Health Foundation Grant in the Amount of $200,000 Over Three Years to Decrease Tobacco Use Among Women During and After Pregnancy.
C. Management Services
1) ORDER 06-10-4-4/In the Matter of authorizing the Sale of Surplus County Owned Real Property to Peter and Rebecca Kovach for $110,000 (Map 18-03-20-00-02001, Adjacent to 5255 West Amazon Dr.)
2) ORDER 06-10-4-5/In the Matter of Authorizing the Sale of Surplus County Owned Real Property to Monte Goldbeck for $7,000 (Map #17-02-34-43-Tax Lots 703 and 704, Adjacent to 6385 Main St., Springfield).
3) ORDER 06-10-4-6/In the Matter of Accepting Bids for Surplus County Owned Real Property Tendered at a Sheriff's Sale on September 11, 2006 and Authorizing the Board Chair to Execute the Quitclaim Deeds and Land Sale Contracts to Convey the Property to the Respective Buyers.
D. Public Safety
1) ORDER 06-10-4-7/In the Matter of Delegating Authority to the County Administrator to Execute Cape Perpetua Communication Site Lease Agreement Between the State of Oregon, Department of Transportation and Lane County.
2) ORDER 06-10-4-8/In the Matter of Delegating Authority to the County Administrator to Execute Intergovernmental Agreement Between Eugene Water and Electric Board, Oregon Department of State Police and Lane County for Joint Use at Blanton Radio Site.
E. Public Works
1) ORDER 06-10-4-9/In the Matter of Accepting a Deed of Land to be Used As a Public Road Easement For County Road No. 265 (West 18th Avenue) (15-04-32-22).
MOTION: to approve the Consent Calendar.
Sorenson MOVED, Stewart SECONDED.
9. CORRESPONDENCE TO THE BOARD
10. COMMISSIONERS' ANNOUNCEMENTS
Morrison reported that she participated in the Portland Marathon.† Her time was seven hours and sixteen minutes.
Dwyer said that Jim Hale had suggested options in making the tax measure fairer.† He said they were going to have a discussion but they thought the less said about it the better off they are.† He wanted to go on record to say that fairness is important and whether something passes or not is not his concern, as they need to be fair about how they treat people.† He thought they were making a bad call.†† He didnít hear any direction from the Board to do it.† He commented they were making a critical error by not being fair.
Green said (having worked on the measure for over a year), he thought it was fair concerning retirements and exempting them and increasing the rate.† He said once they agreed on the package, it would be unfair to change it for people who had supported what they had done.† He commented it wouldnít be reported they are trying to be fair.† He said it would be reported they are already jacking the issue around.† He didnít want to go in that direction.
11. EXECUTIVE SESSION as per ORS 192.660
12. EMERGENCY BUSINESS
There being no further business Commissioner Dwyer recessed the meeting at 9:40 a.m.