BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS'
March 14, 2007
Harris Hall Main Floor
Stewart presided with Commissioner Bill Dwyer, Bill Fleenor, Bobby Green, Sr.,
and Peter Sorenson present. County
Administrator Bill Van Vactor, County Counsel Teresa Wilson and Recording
Secretary Melissa Zimmer were also present.
a. ORDER 07-3-14-11/In
the Matter of Holding the Final Hearing On, and Ordering the Formation Of, the
Row River Valley Water District.
Mike McKenzie Bahr,
Economic Development, said these are the last two action steps in the formation
process of the Row River Valley Water District. He said step one is to hold a final public hearing on the
matter and step two is for the Board to approve the order forming the district.
He indicated the Board of Commissioners has the authority to order a
district formed if a tax rate is not being proposed by the district and they
could order the formation of a district as long as not more than 15 percent of
the electors in the district request an election. He noted that no one had
requested an election.
Stewart opened the Public Hearing.
McKenzie Bahr read
a letter into the record from Stewart Shore.
Dorena, made a statement on behalf of John Kirk.
Harden thanked everyone for
There being no one
else signed up to speak, Commissioner Stewart closed the Public Hearing.
to approve ORDER 07-3-14-11.
the fact that this had been an incredible process to see people work as hard as
they did. He looked forward to the
water getting turned on.
SESSION/Road Fund Service Priorities
Public Works, recalled that they have been directed to do a Budget Number 2 that
assumes no reauthorization of the Secure Rural Schools.
He said they were going through the same service priority process the
general fund did. He said they
needed to review the capital program. He
indicated that half of the revenue in road fund comes from Secure Rural Schools
and if they lose the legislation, they will go from $20 million to $1 million
and they will be back on the old formula.
that they started with the Strategic Plan and road fund priorities.
He discussed Attachment A. (Copy in file).
He noted there is language that if there are any layoffs in 626, or road
fund money withheld from 626 positions, the inmate road crew has to go away.
He said that negotiations took place in the late eighties when the inmate
road crew was created. He indicated
under that scenario they would have a number of road maintenance layoffs.
He added that they would eliminate a grounds keeping position at Delta, a
weighmaster in the Sheriff’s Office and traffic engineer investigator. He
indicated if that happens, they wouldn’t be responding to citizen complaints
against site distance problems or speeding.
He said if the County does no maintenance on the road system, they would
still own the road system and they would need to operate the road system.
He noted the proposal under Budget 2 is that they would eliminate much of
the County maintenance on County local roads that serve either the abutting
properties or serve resource lands. He
indicated it is about half their system and they would stripe and sign the
roads, fix culverts and come out after storm events. He stated that over time
the road surface payment deteriorates and they would eventually lose the
investment in the roads and would have to turn some back to gravel.
that they still intending to maintain bridges and guardrails.
He said they will continue to provide the full range of maintenance
services on arterials and collectors and continue to maintain bridges and
guardrails for the entire system. He
indicated if the packet is accepted by the Board, they would want to come back
to the Board to give revised procedures and standards they intend to use in
maintaining the roads.
Snowden said if the
reductions go through, they were looking at reductions of 48 positions to the
road fund in Public Works. He said
that was one-eighth of the work force.
Sorenson asked why
they don’t start dealing with the reduction in administration,
that even though they are reducing maintenance, the County still owns a road
system of over 1400 miles and 400 bridges.
He said they have to maintain records and operate the system. He said
because there is a fund balance, there are ways the Board could mitigate the one
year effects, spreading the reductions over two years.
He discussed cuts with Option 2. (Copy in file).
the Budget 2 scenario.
Dwyer thought they
needed to fund the commitments they made but not necessarily for next year.
with Green and Dwyer to honor the IGA for the assisted housing roads, but he was
reluctant to proceed on to the other three roads to try to save money for the
to meet the obligations in the yellow column as it relates to the assisted
housing for West Town, Heather Glen, Prairie View and the Bob Straub Parkway and
adding back Bolton Hill and Harvey Road.
Dwyer MOVED, Green
Green said the rest
of the direction is to take this up during the budget session.
He said they didn’t necessarily have to make all of the reductions in
one year, they could phase it in over time.
they should fund the housing projects in the FY 07/08 budget.
He didn’t want to commit to $6 million for the Bob Straub knowing they
would be starting the fiscal year with $34 million under Budget 2.
Snowden noted under
Budget 2, besides a service reduction, things change on the Capital Improvement
Program that will not be built.
they should have a higher confidence level that they will have the federal money
before they sign the IGA. He said
it didn’t mean he was against the project because he voted for it before.
3-2 (Fleenor, Sorenson dissenting).
Dwyer said the
project has been drawn out and ODOT hadn’t been honest.
He wanted Snowden to come to the Board every time an ODOT permit is
required for a project. He said the
City of Springfield’s willingness to accept the road as it is developed to
take the responsibility away from the County is a good idea so Lane County is
not stuck with the cost in the final analysis.
b. DISCUSSION AND
ACTION/Bob Straub Parkway Project Status
Mayor of Springfield, said the City of Springfield understands the serious
problems facing the County if the Secure Rural Schools Act is not reauthorized.
He commented that a way to stabilize Lane County’s revenue situation is
to encourage industrial development as it generates new tax revenues.
He said completing the Bob Straub Parkway Phase 2 to Jasper Road is
essential to making the Jasper Natron area available for development that would
generate tax revenue. He said Jasper Natron is the largest vacant industrial area
within an urban growth boundary left in the State of Oregon.
He said the development has the ability to generate additional family
wage jobs and tax revenue. He said the city is prepared to partner with the County on
the Bob Straub project by taking over jurisdiction of Jasper Road from 42nd
Street to the current UGB as development occurs.
Springfield, supports the partnership between the Board and the City of
Springfield in going forward with the Bob Straub Parkway.
He said it is in his ward and the residents have enjoyed the extension.
He added they are looking for the road to go all of the way through.
He said the relief from traffic the parkway would bring is welcomed. He
supports the city’s decision to partner with the County on taking over the
jurisdiction once the development occurs.
c. FIFTH READING
AND DELIBERATION Ordinance No. PA 1238/In the Matter of Amending the Lane
County Rural Comprehensive Plan to Revise the “Significant Mineral and
Aggregate Resources Inventory”; Metro Plan Redesignation from
“Agriculture” to “Sand and Gravel”; Rezoning from “E30/Exclusive Farm
Use Zone” to “SG/Sand, Gravel & Rock Products Zone”; to Allow Mining
on 72.31 Acres of Land Pursuant to Lane Code 12.225 and 16.252 and the Goal 5
Oregon Administrative Rules (OAR 660-023); and Adopting Savings and Severability
Clauses (file no. PA 05-6151, Delta Property Co.) (NBA & PM 10/18/06,
11/1/06, 12/12/06 & 2/14/07).
that the City of Eugene had done some deliberation, but they haven’t made a
think the City of Eugene concluded their deliberation and thought they should
move this into the future after the City of Eugene votes.
Kent Howe, Land
Management, recalled that this is for a proposed expansion of an existing sand
and gravel operation of about 72 acres into an area currently in the exclusive
farm use zone, outside of the urban growth boundary but it is located within the
Eugene Springfield Metro Plan. He said the post acknowledgement plan amendment
is a process and because it is in the Metro Plan, it requires
multi-jurisdictional review. He
said the City of Eugene and the Board of Commissioners have to adopt identical
ordinances if the change will occur. He
said Lane County and the Eugene City Planning Commissions held their public
hearing, have deliberated and made their recommendations.
He said the Board of County Commissioners in a joint hearing with the
City of Eugene have held their public hearing and are in the process of doing
their deliberations. He recalled
that two weeks ago they were in front of the Eugene City Council and they
started their deliberations. He
said they have a similar proposal for the Board today where they have a process
that will walk the Board through taking actions in this multi step deliberation
process. He noted the City of
Eugene got through the first two steps. He indicated in the deliberation, they
made it clear to staff what their position is on their further deliberations on
this issue. He said County staff
met with Eugene staff and the
County and the City are dealing with the plan designation and if it is going to
change. He added if the plan is going to change, then the County only
will be changing the implementing zoning and identifying any conditions that
would be implemented through the operation plan that will govern how the
extraction occurs at the site. He
said the conditions are important for the City of Eugene to know whether or not
various impacts have been minimized. He
said Eugene thinks they are not able to continue down through the impact
analysis that begins at Step 3 until the County has gone through the steps and
made the determination that the impacts are minimized or if the impacts aren’t
minimized then through an ESEE analysis for those that aren’t.
He asked if it is determined that the resources should be protected, then
what are the conditions that are going to be placed on the operation plan in
that event. He said Eugene wasn’t
interested in receiving this back from the County until the County has done its
full deliberations on the proposal.
Howe explained for
Step 1, the determination of whether the application was complete, it took
awhile for the City of Eugene to determine that fact.
He said they got into a long discussion about the traffic impact analysis
and there was misunderstanding of the completeness step; whether the applicant
has completed everything that was in the application, not whether it is an
answer that gets the application to an approval, but whether everything has been
addressed. He indicated the way the applicant had addressed the traffic impact
is that the County has said that an impact analysis isn’t necessary because
there isn’t going to be a change in the operation, it is an expansion of the
additional resource. He said a
majority of the city counsel was able to say that this is an adequate
application and they proceeded from Step 1 to Step 2.
He added that under Step 2, under significance, they had a tie and the
mayor broke the tie with a vote of 5-4 that it was not a significant
application. He noted that it was a
straw poll, not a final vote. He thought there was confusion with the City on
how the determination of significance is made.
He said if the Board of Commissioners comes to the conclusion that it is
not a significant site, then this process could stop.
they should proceed further working on the application. He recommended the
Agenda Team schedule an afternoon or evening meeting to work through the
questions. He said the owner
deserves to see the process worked through.
Green thought this
should be brought back to the City of Eugene to be worked on.
Fleenor wanted the
City of Eugene to come to a vote on significance.
Stewart indicated a
majority of the Board wanted this to go back to the City of Eugene for them to
finish the process.
Fleenor asked if
there was a possibility of breaking the deadlock by proposing that a second
analysis be done. He said that both
the applicant and a community leader could choose an engineering firm that could
do a scientific analysis that both could commit to. He wanted to make sure there
was a finding of significance that everyone could support..
Sorenson asked if
they did another analysis if it meant opening the record to allow a presentation
Vorhes said if the
Board and the council decided it was a path to take, it would entail reopening
the record for the information and an opportunity for people to comment on the
information as it develops. He said there are procedural ways to accommodate it.
Howe explained that
the sampling that had occurred had been done by a licensed certified Oregon
geologist and the sampling was reviewed by ODOT and ODOT took separate samples
than what EGR (the hired geologist) took and they reviewed them.
He said both of the samplings were reviewed by DOGAMI and DOGAMI came to
the conclusion that they met the ASHTOS standards.
He said OAR for Goal 5 directs how to take the samples and it has been
peer reviewed by ODOT and DOGAMI.
staff to negotiate this.
Vorhes thought the
Board could start negotiating with the councilors. He said it is up to the elected officials where they see the
evidence. He said the City was
interested in staff coming back to the Board and highlighting where they have an
issue of significance, if this Board could convince the council.
He added to have an independent review would take council’s concurrence
that the Board direct a letter to staff to take over to the City of Eugene to
see if they would be willing to accept this process with some certainty to move
forward with processing this application.
Vorhes said if the
Board concludes they think it is significant as it currently exists, they
wouldn’t have to go down the path of an independent analysis and have a
conversation with the council on why they think it is significant and why their
straw vote might want to be reconsidered.
Dwyer said this is
evidence based and they need to decide each issue based on their judgment as it
relates to the evidence in the record. He
said the City of Eugene changed the rules by not acting.
Fleenor said his
proposal was contingent upon all four parties agreeing on an engineering firm
and then abiding by the results. He said if everyone agrees on the engineering
firm then it is a done deal.
Stewart said he
would work out a plan and get back to the Board.
to approve a Fifth Reading and Setting a Sixth Reading and Deliberation for
April 18, 2007 for Ordinance No. PA 1238.
Fleenor announced he was having Coffee and Conversation in Junction City
at the Viking Inn. He said he has a
town hall meeting at the Junction City Hall.
He announced the Daffodil Festival at the Long Tom Range in Junction
Green discussed the NACo newsletter.
Stewart received an e-mail from Paul Biondi. Stewart announced on March 18 from 1pm to 4 p.m. there will
be a benefit featuring young musicians at Cosmic Pizza.
TO THE BOARD
Ordinance 3-07/In the matter of Repealing Ordinance 2-07
Regarding the Lane County Public Safety Income Tax
Wilson explained that Ordinance 3-07 repeals Ordinance 2-07.
She said if the Board completes the process, Ordinance 2-07 is
dead and there would be nothing on the election.
She noted the board order was the matter of placing the referendum of the
Lane County Public Income Tax on the May 2007 ballot.
She said as of noon today, elections had completed an amount of the
statistical sampling they were required to do on the referendum petition.
She said the success rate on the sampling was a 97 percent success rate.
She said it is statistically significant at the level of which they could
be confident that the petitioners have submitted sufficient signatures to have
it placed on the ballot. She said
this order exercises the right to place the matter on the ballot and to place a
referendum on a ballot sooner than the next primary or general election.
She said the order places the referendum on the May ballot with the
referendum ballot title.
Sorenson asked what the authority was of the Board to place a referendum
on the ballot prior to the determination that the number of signatures has been
Wilson said that referendum versus referral was difficult.
She said the Board has the authority to place any measure on the May
ballot until tomorrow. She added that the Board has the authority to place a
referendum with significant signatures on any ballot other than the default
ballot as long as they meet the appropriate timelines.
She noted the Board has working knowledge that sufficient signatures have
Sorenson said until Wilson had the certification with the number of
signatures, they don’t have the power to trigger an election.
Wilson indicated the courts are inclined to be respectful of not
interfering with people’s right to vote.
She thought a court would be supportive as long as they try to enable a
Dwyer didn’t think it was wrong with repealing an ordinance that they
adopted and referring the same ordinance to the people for an election that has
been petitioned for.
Wilson said Ordinance 4-07 is in the packet and it is drafted
contingent on the outcome of an election. She
said it is at 1.6 percent.
Dwyer was in favor of referring the Lane County Income Tax on the May
ballot for a vote. He supported
referring the Charter Amendment as a separate amendment to cap their ability to
raise the tax. He supported
referring another measure to the May ballot that would not be the stop gap
measure, but would resemble the measure the voters rejected, Ordinance 4-07.
Green said they had engaged citizens and elected officials around the
county to help stabilize the organization.
He said they met for over a year and looked at a variety of options
including sales and property taxes and they were rejected.
He said they looked at funding the whole problem versus what they were
losing and that was rejected. He
said the income tax came out of all the meetings.
He said the federal government is not helping the County out.
He wanted to give the people another chance to vote.
He commented that enacting the income tax was the right thing to do.
He believed in local control and government.
He favored a May election and putting the income tax to the voters on
public safety. He supported a cap
on the income tax by charter amendment. He didn’t want to wait until
September. He didn’t want to go
for the extra, he only wants to replace what is lost.
Sorenson said having an election without a voters pamphlet doesn’t help
highlight the issues. He thought
they were skirting the issue. He said the Board of Commissioner enacted an
income tax in February 2007 and that followed an election in November 2006 where
the voters of Lane County rejected a County income tax. He said at the time they enacted the income tax, he didn’t
think the Board was prepared for the firestorm of public opposition to what the
procedure was. He said they have to
try to build trust by repealing the ordinance.
MOTION: to direct staff to set up the procedures to Ordinance 2-07.
Sorenson MOVED, Fleenor SECONDED.
Fleenor indicated there is mistrust in the community and they have to be
careful. He stated they don’t
have an emergency now. He said they
should repeal the enacted income tax and they need to put together citizen
driven focus groups that discuss what citizens of Lane County want to become.
Dwyer said to gain trust by dismantling critical social services, laying
off 300 employees, stop providing for Veteran’s Services, Animal Regulation
and the Extension Service is impossible.
Fleenor stated that not one person had been laid off to date.
He said they have over 100 days before they have to adopt a budget and
hopefully Secure Rural School will be funded by then.
Green commented that if they have to rely on others from the federal
government, and the state, they would never get to be self–sufficient.
He said there is an emergency. He
said they have a demand for service and are obligated to provide the service.
Stewart recalled on February 21 he voted to enact a tax and he believed it
was the correct decision at that time with the knowledge they had.
He said they still don’t have certainty.
He said the vote he took in February was to save the organization and the
services they provide the citizens. He
said with the referral of the income tax and the signatures being placed, his
decision is moot. He wanted
to refer the tax to the ballot.
Green didn’t support the motion as the problem still exists.
He commented that if human services continue to be depleted, that is what
is going to be at risk. He wanted to build trust with the citizens.
VOTE: 2-3 (Green, Stewart, Dwyer dissenting) MOTION FAILS.
ORDER 07-3-14-13 Placing the Referendum of the Lane
County Public Safety Income Tax on the May, 2007 Ballot.
MOTION: approve ORDER 07-3-14-13.
Dwyer MOVED Green SECONDED.
VOTE: 3-2 (Sorenson, Fleenor dissenting)
ORDER 07-3-14-14 Referring to Election a Charter Amendment to Cap Lane County Income Tax
MOTION: to approve ORDER 07-3-14-14.
Stewart wanted the cap lowered to 1.5 percent instead of 2 percent.
Dwyer MOVED, Fleenor SECONDED.
Sorenson said doing this on the last day before the deadline without any
public involvement is not the way that they are doing things properly.
He said if they are going to have a charter amendment that they need a
public hearing. He added they also
need a voter’s pamphlet.
Wilson indicated the charter amendment applies to whatever the income tax
is. She said it would relate if Ordinance
2-07 gets enacted and if it doesn’t get enacted it applies to any future
VOTE: 4-1 (Sorenson dissenting).
Jim Gillette Matter
Van Vactor said the Board had a work session and discussed whether they
wanted to stop the process wherein Thursday next week there would be a Writ of
Execution and it would end the legal proceedings on two of the three items.
He recalled the Board was split on that and they asked Green whether he
wanted to do anything to stop the process.
Green wanted to review the whole meeting.
Stewart said he spoke with Gillette after the meeting and the advice
Wilson mentioned was the process to get into compliance by next Wednesday.
Stewart said Gillette he could make an offer to the Board to try to
settle the fines and liens on the property.
He said it might come back to the Board next Wednesday.
There being no further business, Commissioner Stewart adjourned the
meeting at 5:05 p.m.