BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS'

REGULAR MEETING

June 11, 2008

9:00 a.m.

Commissioners' Conference Room

APPROVED 6/25/08

 

Commissioner Bobby Green, Sr. presided with Commissioners Bill Dwyer, Bill Fleenor and Peter Sorenson present.  Faye Stewart was excused.  County Administrator Jeff Spartz, County Counsel Teresa Wilson and Recording  Secretary Melissa Zimmer were also present.

 

1. ADJUSTMENTS TO THE AGENDA

 

The agenda cover memo for W.3. E. 1) had an incorrect number in it.  The board order was correct.

 

2. PUBLIC COMMENTS

 

Jim Seaberry, Eugene, recalled in 2006 he turned petitions into the Lane County Boundary Commission.  He noted at the top there was an important subject matter. He said they petitioned as required in ORS 199.505 their objections to the minor boundary change BC File C 06-23-Motherway on River Road, and requested their vote on annexation.  He recalled there were various sets of petitions each addressing a particular street that was affected by the signatures on the petition.

 

John Dotson, Eugene, said he has two letters: one from Paula Taylor of the Boundary Commission and one from Bill Dwyer.  He said the letters were identical in content.  He said the letters stated the electors do not live in streets and rights-of-way. He read the letter into the record.  He asked about the streets and rights-of-way.  He said it had been promoted that no one lives in the streets and therefore there are no electors.  He said in working with streets and rights-of way, the parties involved are defined as stakeholders.  He said the language should state electors and stakeholders.  He said it described the new affected territory as established by the local boundary commission, in the manner in which they have annexed properties and expanding the affected territory, they have assigned both electors and stakeholders to the property owner who first filed for the annexation.  He commented all other stakeholders residing along the streets and rights-of- way to this point have been disenfranchised by the local boundary commission.  He said they submitted proper petitions.  He said no one read the petitions because they would have known it was a problem.  He said they are going to bring the petitions as unfinished business, as the Boundary Commission was told to finish its business by June 30 and if they donít they will bring it to the Board of Commissioners.

 

Ann McLucas, Eugene, recalled that two weeks ago Jim Gillette gave the Board a list of 27 facts concerning the fines against him.  She added at the end of the list it stated if any could be proven untrue, he would drop his complaint against the County.   She said she found inappropriate fines and falsified letters and the lack of hearings promised.  She commented that most stem from the poor action of staff.  She said the promise of a hearing was made by the Board.  She asked the Board what they were going to do about the Gillette case.

 

Green said Gillette had an opportunity to plead his case in Court and he had failed to make the case.

 

Wilson noted at this point the matter is in front of the hearings official on the remand from Circuit Court.  She was aware of a briefing schedule on the amount of the judgment to be entered.

 

McLucas recalled she was present when the Board offered a hearing but none has taken place.

 

Wilson noted that for the first fine, the amount paid was in a settlement and both parties have agreed and it is closed.

 

Green didnít recall the Board stated they would provide a hearing for Gillette.

 

Fleenor asked what a public hearing would provide for the Board and the citizens of Lane County regarding the Gillette matter.   He asked if they were missing an opportunity or if they would be trying to take another run at a topic that is already adjudicated.  He asked what they could learn from a public hearing.

 

Wilson said they have a public hearing every time they have public comment.  She said as a Board they have routinely availed themselves to hear from citizens.  She added that sometimes the Board schedules public hearings on specific matters absent any statutory or legal mandate to have a hearing.  She added that the Board could have a public hearing on any topic they want.  With regard to something that had been adjudicated and closed, Wilson said they would be going beyond what is legally required and potentially opening up matters they had previously settled.  She thought they could be setting up expectations that might be problematic for the future.  She explained that part of the process of adjudication is a binding court decision.  She said the law views it as final.  She didnít know that as a Board representing the citizens that the citizens are well served by introducing uncertainty when the law had provided certainty with finality.

 

Fleenor asked if they had a public hearing, what new evidence the claimant could provide that has not already been provided over the last two years of his coming to the Wednesday Board meetings.

 

Jim Gillette, Eugene, commented that the adjudication had nothing to do with the facts of the case that he presented.  He said it was the fine and he missed his chance to appeal.  He commented that the $16,000 he paid as a settlement was extortion.  He said if he didnít pay the fine, the Board would have sold the property.  He said he was going to keep fighting this.  He said the County stole money from him and if he has to, he will steal it back someday.  With regard to ORS 105.672, he said there is a flaw in the law.  He said he has to open his property to all of the public.  He thought he could have friends over and if someone sues him he is not covered by the law.  He asked if the County would go against state law.

 

Mia Nelson, Lowell, stated that she was pleased the Board is moving forward with the projection.  She was unhappy about how the small cities reacted to the April 30 resolution.  She said it notified the city that the LCOG forecast was not going to be the basis of the Countyís forecast and it stated that if the cities wanted a new forecast, all they had to do was provide the reasons and proposal to share the costs.  She said instead of honoring the Boardís decision, the small cities tried to get back the LCOG forecast by appealing the resolution to LUBA.  She said last week Lowell decided to join the appeal and the Lowell City administrator told Mayor Weathers and the council that the reason for the appeal was to convince the Board to reconsider its decision.  She said it was a bluff to apply pressure to the Board.  She thanked the Board for holding the line and refusing to go back to the LCOG forecast as a starting point. She hoped that County staff does not try to bring the LCOG forecast back and to differentiate the difference between the data and the forecast.  She doesnít want the LCOG forecast coming back because the process does not provide proper citizen involvement and influence.  She was concerned the small cities would lobby the Board.  She said that no one has been invited by staff to participate and hoped that the Board would direct staff to reach out to the citizens and groups that has been involved so far.  She said they have reasonable concerns that can be accommodated and could make the process better.  She stated that urgency is not an excuse for bad process.  She added that adequate funding must be made available to do this properly and a full citizen  involvement plan is needed and she thought communications with the consultant should be done in a transparent manner.  She thought contacts made outside the public arena should be disclosed on the record.  She had no interest in delaying the forecast, but she wanted a fair framework.

 

Fleenor said he has been working with staff to understand the process.  He indicated that  an area of his concern is the willingness with PSU to work with them in a transparent manner.  He didnít think it was their method of operations.  He said they are trying to get a read on what PSU will allow with respect to how they participated in the coordinated population forecast.  He hoped staff would allow opportunity for a commissioner to talk to PSU to understand the process they are going to implement before they contract with them.

 

Sorenson asked Spartz to come back on what has transpired with public involvement or a plan for public involvement.  He wanted to know what the plan was to comply with a citizen involvement process that is part of a land use process.  He said the litigation against the County is that the County engaged in a land use process.  He said if that was true, he asked what staff had been doing to achieve the public involvement goal of the land use process.

 

Fleenor  said they should have the citizen involvement prior to the process of conducting the coordinating population study at PSU.  He didnít want to wait until PSU gave them the numbers and then have a public process.  He commented that data assembled into a forecast doesnít given them wiggle room to ask questions.  He wanted an up front public process before the PSU calculations take place.

 

Wilson indicated that there is a work session on June 25 and that would be an opportunity to hear what staff is proposing.  She said they would have room to design what the Board wanted.

 

3. CONSENT CALENDAR

 

A. Approval of Minutes

 

B. Board of Commissioners

 

1) ORDER 08-6-11-1/In the Matter of Appointing a Member to Fill a Vacancy on the Urban Renewal Agency of the City of Florence.

 

C. Health and Human Services

 

1) ORDER 08-6-11-2/In the Matter of Amending Chapter 60 of Lane Manual to Revise Certain Health & Human Services Fees (LM 60.840) Effective July 1, 2008.

 

2) ORDER 08-6-11-3/In the Matter of Appointing One Member to Fill a Vacancy on the Mental Health Advisory/local Alcohol and Drug Planning Committee.

 

D. Public Works

 

1) ORDER 08-6-11-4/In the Matter of Awarding Requirement Contracts to Various Contractors to Establish Unit Prices for Asphaltic Mix Patching Materials Needs During the Period of 7/1/08 to 6/30/09, Prospective Contract No. 08/09-M&S-53.

 

E. Management Services

 

1) ORDER 08-6-11-5/In the Matter of Authorizing a Capital Interfund Loan for the Charnelton Building in an Amount Not to Exceed $3,100,000 from the Solid Waste Fund and $1,000,000 from the Solid Waste Reserves in the Fleet Fund to the Capital Improvement Fund.

 

2) ORDER 08-6-11-6/In the Matter of Authorizing a Capital Interfund Loan for Area Information Records Systems (AIRS) in an Amount Not to Exceed $900,000 from the Solid Waste Fund to the Capital Improvement Fund.

 

3) ORDER 08-6-11-7/In the Matter of Authorizing the Reimbursement of Expenditures for Area Information Records System (AIRS) with Reimbursement Obligation Proceeds.

 

4) ORDER 08-6-11-8/In the Matter of Delegating Authority to the County Administrator to Execute a Purchase Order to Professional Collection Services in an Amount Not to Exceed $350,000.

 

F. Workforce Partnership

 

1) ORDER 08-6-11-9/In the Matter of Appointing a Lane County Education Representative to the Lane Workforce Partnership Board of Directors.

 

MOTION: to approve the Consent Calendar.

 

Dwyer MOVED, Fleenor SECONDED.

 

VOTE: 4-0.

 

4. EMERGENCY BUSINESS

 

None.

 

5. COMMISSIONERS' REMONSTRANCE  

 

None.

 

6. COMMISSIONERS' BUSINESS

 

None.

 

7. COUNTY ADMINISTRATION

 

a. Announcements

 

Spartz reported that he received an e-mail from Celia Barry, Public Works, indicating that the Board needs to appoint someone to serve on the Beltline Corridor Study.  He said they were hoping to have it done by June 16.  He said a primary and alternate needed to be appointed.

 

Dwyer thought the representative should be someone whose area is adjacent to Beltline, as they are the affected parties.

 

Green stated he had been involved with the project since the beginning.  He wanted to continue to be on the committee as it is in his district.

 

Dwyer thought Green should be the primary representative with Fleenor as the alternate.

 

MOTION:  to have Green the primary representative with Fleenor as the alternative on the Management Oversight Committee for the Beltline Study.

 

Dwyer MOVED, Sorenson SECONDED.

 

VOTE: 4-0.

 

Sorenson thought this committee should be listed on the Board committees. He wanted a report back with the names of the other people.  He was concerned that there were too many commissioner resources going into committees.

 

b. REPORT/Revenue Strategy Proposal.

 

Spartz distributed a memo from Jennifer Inman and Amber Fossen. He said it raised questions about going forward with the Strategy Proposal.  He indicated this came out of discussions Steve Schriver had with the Board and County Administration on where they could go with the idea of developing revenue, now that it is unlikely the federal government would be forwarding the Secure Rural Schools funding.  He said they shouldnít view it as part of their long term future.  He said Schriver had given it thought and put down an outline of a proposal for identifying ways to find new revenue to develop public support for generating new revenues.  He said Schriver has a concept proposal.  He said concerns had been raised by staff in identifying a source of funding to do this type of project and issues around procurement.

 

Steve Schriver reported his proposal and work plan began in early November.  He met with Tony Bieda, Intergovernmental Relations Manager, and he asked if there was any project work available with Lane County.  Schriver recently completed the Save Adoptable Animals Task Force group.  He was looking for doing research and development of a ballot measure.  He met with Spartz and Spartz wanted more revenue sources identified besides ballot measures.  Schriver said he expanded his proposal. Schriver said Spartz told him to meet with each commissioner on the proposals and their level of interest.  He said the response was favorable.  Schriver put together a work plan that outlines the initial steps to be taken.  He said it is a document that is subject to change as more is learned.  He requested the Board fund the proposal to create revenue strategies for Lane County.  He indicated all the commissioners told him they were interested in seeing the solutions come from the community, not from the County.  He thought it would be a major change than what has occurred in the past 15 years in Lane County.

 

Fleenor recalled the Board requested a service stabilization task force report that identified revenue enhancements.  He asked what Schriver would do differently from the task force report.  He said public safety is an essential service the County should be providing.  He asked how they improve the odds of a successful passage of a measure if they donít address the underlying public opinion of the County and how it is actually performing the jobs they have been delegated to do.  He agreed this has to come from the grass roots up.  He asked if a facilitator should be involved or if it was up to the commissioners in their districts to get the support.  He added that they have to work with the Sheriff, District Attorney and Assessor creating a vision of the future and marketing it to the citizens so they will have the likelihood of a successful ballot measure passage.

 

Schriver thought it was going to take a combined effort.  He thought an ongoing dialogue needs to be established for the community and needs to be brought into the decision process.  He said the citizens need to be more knowledgeable about the decisions that are required.  He thought that information should come out of the public information office.

 

Fleenor said the Board had recognized that they need more public outreach.  He thought they were on the right track.  He asked what additional input or items  Schriver could provide that they donít already know about from the Service Stabilization Task Force Report.  He thought they need to go out to the public more and understand what the public wants the Board to do and then they develop the process and procedures around that.

 

Schriver said he would be providing research and analysis on what the various options are and which ones look the best and what support there is in the community for those options.  He said they need to apply criteria against the options.  He added they have to also look for other options like carbon fees.  He thought there were other things that hadnít been talked about.

 

Green was supportive of the concept of having someone look at the opportunities. He said the latest memo they received was significant to him.  He said they need replacement revenue but hadnít identified the funding. He thought if they went with Schriver that it would be performance based for one year and not a solid three year commitment.  He said a contract of this nature would have to be performance based. He said in addition to doing research and analysis, he would have the expectation that there would be more substantive outcomes and action plans that are doable that have aligned with the Boardís already existing goals.  He thought the issue of a competitive bid process was important to see if they want to go beyond the dollar amount that would necessitate an open bid process. He thought what Schriver was proposing was something they should be doing.  He indicated that staff had already done a lot of the work.  He thought it made sense to have someone dedicated to the task.  He also wondered what Schriver would bring to the table that the Service Stabilization Task Force hadnít already suggested.  Green indicated the Board had already implemented recommendations from the task force and proposing a tax was one of them.  He thought Schriver should review the Service Stabilization Task Force Report.  He said they have to determine where the money would come from.

 

Dwyer said if they want to utilize Schriverís services, they have to pay him.

 

Fleenor stated with the public testimony they had heard over the past six weeks about how important public safety is and how difficult it has been to capture the confidence of the citizens of Lane County in helping them fund public safety, he would rather see a more focused and dedicated work plan to talk about public safety and how they can move this forward to get the trust of the community and the outcomes.  He stated that this was the process he was going to initiate in the fall with his town hall meeting to ask his constituents what makes them feel safe and the mechanisms they need.  He thought they needed to have an outcome based plan they could sell to the citizens with a vision of the future.  He said he would support that versus rehashing what they already know.  He added the citizens have consistently voted the measures down.  He said he would rather see Schriverís talents go toward identifying what the citizens would like the County to do in order to provide them with public safety to a level they would feel safe.  He recommended Schriver come back with a plan on the pulse of the community and what they are looking for regarding feeling safe.  He said they donít feel safe but they donít trust if they give the government money that they would feel safer.  He said there is a disconnect.

 

Green said they need to discuss whether they want to retain Schriverís services.  He said then they could describe a work plan.

 

Sorenson said the Service Stabilization Task Force was one of many efforts by the Board that started at the Board level.  He said they used their knowledge and resources to come up with where the problems are with the County. He asked when the agenda team put this on the agenda, what Schriverís expectation was.  He said the memo that was distributed raises serious issues.

 

Green said the intent was for Spartz to bring this to the Board because Spartz wanted to make sure he had Board direction and he wanted clear consensus from the Board that this was something the Board wanted to do.  He said that was why he raised the question about the dollar amount being under the scope of his authority.  He said he didnít hear anyone say they didnít want Schriver to do this.  He said it is about how they do it.  He said they could direct Spartz to take into consideration these comments made and develop a contract for $50,000, as it would keep them out of trouble with the procurement piece and they would have greater specificity on what the goals and outcomes should be.  He indicated that 70 percent of public safety is dedicated to the budget and the idea is to remove public safety off of the general fund so they could provide greater funding for other services. He said the Board was pushing back on this, but they had to address some of the legalities.

 

Fleenor asked what the extent of the Sheriff and District Attorneyís involvement would be in helping them with this financially and articulating to the potential consultant the ideas they may have.  He thought Spartz and Schriver should be communicating with the Sheriff and District Attorney to find out their expectations about how they could proceed forward in a coordinated manner. He said they should ask the public what they expect, how it could be delivered and how they know if they delivered it to the publicís satisfaction.  He said they have to get reconnected with their citizens. He commented that public safety is the biggest issue and that should be the focus of the task, getting money for public safety.

 

Wilson said she didnít think the Board had discussed what they think the Countyís goals are. She said citizen involvement and establishing the Countyís goal is a crucial piece but until they have agreement among themselves based upon what they hear from citizens about where they see the County going, it is hard to push it forward.  She asked if there was a need for a goal setting strategy session among the Board and with staff. She asked if that was needed first then they could discuss  bringing in outside consultants.

 

Fleenor said they might want to pull this together internally. He said they had a joint elected officials meeting with the other County elected officials.  He said they should discuss the public issue and try to come up with a comprehensive strategy as to how they are going to create a new vision and market it to the citizens of Lane County.

 

Green said in the past those were the goals they had as a Board.  He thought it would be in the communityís best interest to determine what their goals are, to do that first and based on what they hear they could base the goals on what the community wants for  Lane County.  He thought there was value in that.

 

Dwyer asked how unsafe the citizens have to feel before they start doing something constructive instead of complaining. He said if a person is victimized they are motivated.  He noted there are more people who are not victimized.  He tried to provide a steady source of revenue that was not onerous that was based on the principal of equity.  He thought about going back to a concept around a serial levy.  He wanted a levy that expires, that has a split rate, one rate for those who live in the city and that part of the levy buys jail.  He added that another rate in the unincorporated areas would be a higher rate because their levy buys jails, patrols and prosecution.  He said it has to be simple that a person understands what they are buying.  He said it would determine how much people would have to buy to feel safe.  He noted if you lock more people up you will have to prosecute more people.  He thought people would pay for jail space, prosecution and the Forest Work Camp in a levy.  He thought the levy should be performance based, based on what that level would do to bring up a personís level of safety.  He thought they would agree to opening up another pod at the Juvenile Justice Center.  He commented that people have to have an understanding as to what is available to them.  He added if there is no performance, it could go away.  He thought it should come from the community but if they donít have an understanding about how to initiate it, he thought it should come from the Sheriff, District Attorney and Youth Services.  He said it has to be narrow focused, performance based and temporary.  He thought at this point in time the citizens might embrace something like that.

 

Green indicated that Dwyer just described Washington Countyís levy that passed.  He said the language was key as it talked about what services they could buy versus which ones they would lose.

 

Fleenor said at his community dialogues he stated the citizens feel that the entire system is broken.  He thought to try to fix it at the local level is hard because it is driven from the federal to the state to the county.  He didnít think they could actually fix the system.  He said they could acknowledge that there is a problem that is not working.  He thought it was essential to ask the elected officials what would be the questions they should be asking the citizens so they work as a unified body to solicit information from the public.  He recommended retaining the services of Schriver for up to 100 hours to try to help them identify a process by which they are going to ask the appropriate questions by interviewing the stakeholders and coming back to bring a proposal that is derived from this type of interaction.  He thought that could give them a base to work off of.  He said he could interview the elected officials to see what could take place.  He added they could also go out to the community and talk to a few community citizens to ask them what they think and come back with a proposal.  He wanted to pay Schriver for his time and thought that 100 hours at $75.00 per hour would cover it initially.  He added if not, Schriver could come back.

 

Sorenson thought Schriver submitted an excellent proposal, but  Sorenson didnít think the Board could originate an idea that would be successful.  He thought the Board should invite ideas from the public including Schriver to see if they could sort the ideas out.  He also thought staff should help sort the ideas out and then they could move forward.  He commented that the effects of this budget on Health and Human Services will be equally as devastating and they will give rise to people asking the Board to do something. He thought there should be an application process to explain how things will get approved.

 

Dwyer said he would agree with Fleenorís recommendations of 100 hours for $75.00 per hour to allow him to meet with the elected officials.  He recommended Schriver going to neighborhood organizations. 

 

MOTION: to approve 100 hours at $75.00 per hour for Steve Schriver to meet with elected officials and neighborhood organizations.

 

Fleenor MOVED, Dwyer SECONDED.

 

Garnick assumed this money would come out of the contingency fund.  He indicated there was some money left from this.

 

Dwyer recommended the money come from this yearís contingency and if not to take some from next  year.

 

Fleenor amended his motion to reflect that.

 

Dwyer SECONDED.

 

Green thought they should have another discussion about what the future of Lane County could be within limited resources, including some of the properties the County has.

 

Sorenson stated that this vote in favor is premised upon that this is not solely a matter of funding the jail, that it is a broader look at the options given the limitation on the motion.  He asked what Schriver could do addressing financial problems of the County and what he could bring back within the scope of the limitations.

 

Green thought it would be between Schriver and Spartz as to reporting back to the Board.  He wanted Spartz to e-mail the Board with a timeline.

 

Dwyer thought it would be helpful when he networks with the neighborhood associations to let them know that he had initiated this proposal to the Board and that the Board directed he speak with the community members.

 

VOTE: 4-0.  

 

8. PUBLIC WORKS

 

a. FIRST READING AND SETTING SECOND READING AND PUBLIC HEARING/Ordinance No. PA 1247/In the Matter of Amending the Eugene-Springfield Metropolitan Area General Plan (Metro Plan) Text, Chapter III, Section D., Policy D.11; Adopting an Exception to Statewide Planning Goal 15, Willamette River Greenway; and Adopting Savings and Severability Clauses. (File No. PA 08-5230). (Second Reading and Joint Elected Officials Public Hearing 6/24/08, 7:30 p.m., Bascom/Tykes Room/Eugene Library)

 

MOTION: to approve a First Reading and Setting a Second Reading and Public Hearing on Ordinance No. PA 1247 for June 24, 2008 at 7:30 p.m.

 

Dwyer MOVED, Fleenor SECONDED.

 

VOTE: 4-0.

 

9. HUMAN RESOURCES

 

a. DISCUSSION/County Counsel Recruitment.

 

Greta Utecht, Human Resources, distributed information in response to the changes the Board requested.  She recommended Option 4 for the salary posting.  The range will be $104,471 to $118,053.  She added if other non-represented positions are granted a COLA, that this position would receive the same consideration.

 

MOTION: to approve Option 4.

 

Dwyer MOVED, Sorenson SECONDED.

 

VOTE: 4-0.

 

Utecht said she would draft questions based on the concepts the Board wants to have in the supplementals.  She said she would send the questions to the Board so she can post the job next Monday.  She said they always try to have a question on diversity or cultural competency.

 

Fleenor noted on the requirement, to add special qualification, with the ďwillingness and abilityĒ  to apply for and obtain admittance.  He added on page 3, deleting broad and adding duties as assigned.

 

Dwyer recommended asking questions about Election Law.

 

Green wanted to ask them about actual experience with clear cases and how they managed it dealing with Boards.

 

Spartz recommended asking the candidates to submit samples of conflict and how they resolved it.

 

Dwyer suggested having Wilson putting together questions about Election Law fundamentals.

 

Fleenor asked Wilson to think of a problem where the Board was involved and how she was able to respond to get to the center of the Board.

 

Dwyer favored a multi-faceted approach, with a simultaneous posting inside the County as a career development opportunity and going outside of the County.

 

MOTION: to move Utechtís recommendations with the recommended changes.

 

Dwyer MOVED, Fleenor SECONDED.

 

VOTE: 4-0.

 

Utecht said she wanted to post the job from June 16 to July 21.  She recommended having the District Attorney screen the applications.

 

Dwyer wanted someone internally screen the applications.

 

Utecht though they could do the selection process at the end of the week of July 28 or the week of August 4.

 

Sorenson wanted Utecht to report back to the Board on July 23.

 

Utecht distributed a board order to have the interviews in Executive Session.  She said to make sure things are not questioned in the future, she will draft a board order that will outline the process that was discussed today and they could approve it on the Consent Calendar next week.

 

Utecht distributed another board order that would employ Wilson after her formal retirement date of June 30.  She said she would bring it back on the Consent Calendar next week.  She stated that Wilsonís preference is to leave in early September.  She noted the date on the board order states December 12.  She explained that is the last pay period she is allowed to work under the 600 hour rule.   

 

10. EXECUTIVE SESSION as per ORS 192.660

 

Per ORS 192.660 (2)(h) for the purpose of consulting with counsel on litigation.

 

11. COMMISSIONERSí ANNOUNCEMENTS

 

Fleenor announced that he will be at Robbieís Window Box for his monthly dialogue on Thursday.

 

Sorenson reported he attended the Fairmount Neighbor meeting last night and had a discussion about public safety problems and concerns about the upcoming Olympic Trials and the affect on the neighborhood.  He said there is a concern about the number of car thefts.  He, Spartz, Commissioner Fleenor and Eugene officials attended a media conference about the swap of Lane County road funds with City of Eugene general fund dollars.  He commented that Congressman DeFazio made a tremendous effort for counties last week to try to get Secure Rural Schools funding.

 

There being no further business, Commissioner Stewart recessed the meeting into Executive Session at 11:50 a.m.

 

 

Melissa Zimmer

Recording Secretary