November 12, 2008

9:00 a.m.

Commissionersí Conference Room

APPROVED 11/25/2008


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




Sorenson requested item 2 A. to be pulled.




Jim Gillette, Eugene, commented that the land use process can be unfair and it is a bad system.  He asked the Board to end his case.  He said he has been in compliance.  He said he had a hearing and it wasnít a fair decision.  He stated his hearing letter was wrong.  He indicated that Bob never talked to anyone from the County; he talked to a fireman who talked to a County official.  He stated that everything he has said has been true.  He didnít want to go to Court or to spend any more money.  He said he spent $3,000 more for a permit than he should have on the building.  He indicated that he would be willing to drop everything if they could just drop the case.  He wanted to make a fresh start with the County on the plan he has for his property.


Stewart never told Gillette what Bob told him.  Stewart recalled that Bob came in to say he never spoke with him, which was truthful.  Stewart noted that Bob called someone in compliance about target practicing by the National Guard and turned in a report. 


Ann Davies, said she sent out an e-mail about the property line adjustment issue.  She recalled this was before the Board last April and other people dealt with drafting language.  She came in to file a challenge to a legal lot verification.  She encouraged the Board to get the changes through.  She indicated that she is working with Jim Just and Nina Lovinger.  She added that Bill Kloos and Mike Evans agreed to the changes.  She asked the Board to move the changes onto the Planning Commission.


Fleenor encouraged the Board to use the Planning Commission as a sounding board, but not as the final decision maker.


Dwyer said the code change requires a process and the Planning Commission is where it starts.


Bill Kloos, Eugene, said he was involved with litigation in 2007 over property line adjustment at the Court of Appeals.  He recalled there was a legislative fix in 2008 to change the rules and fix the LUBA court case.  He indicated they have a consensus among the major stakeholders that the language drafted is acceptable.  He added that it meets state law and will make the property line adjustment business at the County more efficient.  He said it was true that the County has a different approach to property line adjustments, the County does legal lot verifications. He thought there were inefficiencies.  He commented that the advantage of the County reviewing property line adjustments is they get a more direct review by the County on what a person wants to do.


Stewart recalled that the Board gave direction to Land Managementís work plan.  He said they only had enough money to do two items and it had nothing to do with staffís priority.  He added that the Board had a different priority than staff.  He believed they need to bring their codes up to changes in state law but the Board chose not to do it.  He thought they could ask staff to find out where they are with funding and if there are no funds available, they could look at reserves.


Kloos thought staff was doing a good job.  He also thought staff was making money on legal lot verifications.


Zachary Vishinoff, discussed what is happening with the University of Oregon.   He said they received their conditional use permit for the arena.  He indicated that they have to November 19 at 5:00 p.m. to appeal.  He noted the Fairmount neighbors could appeal  for $1,545 or a single citizen or property owner along Franklin could appeal for $3,090.  He indicated that the Fairmount neighbors were meeting tonight.  He stated that the chairperson for the Fairmount neighbors is an architect for the University of Oregon.  He thought there was a conflict of interest.


Ryan Sissan, Lorane, supported a swap of Territorial Highway for some ODOT alignment.  He presented a letter to the Board that was addressed to Sonny Chickering, Area 5 ODOT Manager, requesting short term maintenance on the stateís alignment on Territorial  Highway.  He noted there are curves and part of the road is falling into ravines near Gillespie Corners. He stated that the Countyís portion is wide and safer than the stateís part of Territorial Highway.  He indicated that school buses are passing loaded log trucks.  He recalled that there have been bad accidents including fatalities between cyclists and log trucks.  He noted that there is increased traffic every year going to King Estate and Chateau Lorane.  He added they have bike races every summer on the alignment.  He commented that the likelihood of fatal accidents occurring is increasing.  He said the opportunity to do a swap means the alignment could be widened.


Dwyer commented that it is an expensive proposition.  He said it has to keep the County whole because he didnít want to go into financial limbo for the swap.




A. Approval of Minutes (PULLED)

October 21, 2008, Work Session, 9:00 a.m.

October 22, 2008, Regular Meeting, 9:00 a.m.

October 29, 2008, Regular Meeting, 9:00 a.m.


B. County Administration


1) ORDER 08-11-12-1/In the Matter of Appointing Two Members to the Lane County Commission for the Advancement of Human Rights.


C. Assessment and Taxation


1) ORDER 08-11-12-2/In the Matter of A Refund to Gateway Hospitality LLC in the Amount of $32,521.46.


D. County Counsel


1) ORDER 08-11-12-3/In the Matter of Appointing a Lay Member to the Law Library Advisory Committee.


E. Public Safety


1) ORDER 08-11-12-4/In the Matter of Amending Chapters 16 and 60 of the Lane Manual to Establish Fees and Revise Certain Department of Public Safety Fees (LM 16.130, 16.430, 16.830; LM 60.830, 60.836, 60.839), Effective December 1, 2008.


F. Public Works


1) ORDER 08-11-12-5/In the Matter of Removing the Load Posting From the Row River Road Bridge (State Bridge ID No. 39C224) Located at MP 16.64.


MOTION: to move the balance of the Consent Calendar.


Dwyer MOVED, Fleenor SECONDED.


VOTE: 5-0.












a. DISCUSSION/Brownfield's Assessment Grant.


Milo Mecham, LCOG, explained that this grant is to get federal money to inventory the abandoned mill sites around the rural areas of Lane County and to start to assess them to find out what type of contamination exists.  He added the next step would be to get clean up money and clean up the sites.  He noted that the EPA has money for this: the inventory and assessment grant portion.  He hoped they could set up a revolving loan fund to help property owners clean up their property.


Fleenor indicated that the local people support this. He thought it was a wonderful opportunity for them to identify the contaminated sites and work toward remediation of the sites for public or industrial use for some time in the future.


Green was supportive of the application.  He asked if these locations were privately owned or if they had been abandoned.


Mecham estimated that there are 40 mills no longer operational.  He said they are still owned by the private property owner, but they have not gone into public ownership.  He added most are sitting empty and no longer operating as mill sites.  He indicated that there is only $200,000 available from the EPA for this round.  He hoped they could get a couple of properties to the point where they could find out what needed to be cleaned up.


MOTION: to approve sending a letter of support


Dwyer MOVED, Fleenor SECONDED.


Stewart supported this but he wanted to make sure there is consent by the landowner to do this.


Mecham stated that LCOG has no authority to force property owners to participate or take action against their will.


VOTE: 5-0.





George Kloppel, LCOG, stated that he had a meeting with Sorenson and Fleenor.  He indicated what came out of the meeting was the sense that more information and communication with the entire Board would be constructive.  He gave a history of LCOG.


Fleenor asked the rationale of LCOGís existence based upon its original mission.


Kloppel commented that good government relies heavily on communication.  He said the process of governmental jurisdiction working with one another on joint ventures is a higher demand and priority for the public now than it was when LCOG was first formed.  He noted that the phone system is now being applied to Douglas and Benton counties, as is planning services.  He commented that the technology has changed but the need for cooperation and collaboration is greater than it was before.


Fleenor stated the perception in the community is that LCOG is a creature of intergovernmental agreements.  He has heard that it is a nebulous government that exists in the background.  He said that LCOG needs to show a higher level of visibility and more transparency.  He said people need to be comfortable with their government.  He thought perception in the community could be changed.


Kloppel said they could always do more to make what they do more visible.  He indicated that their primary constituency is the member jurisdictions.  He said they try to explain what LCOG does in the community.  He indicated that the underlying principle of what LCOG is about is straight forward.  He stated that it is efficient and effective government, helping local government to operate and serve the people.  He added that LCOG has no taxing authority or law making authority.  He said it is voluntary in its relationship to its members.  He said they need to do a better job in telling their story but in many cases the story is one that involves the member jurisdictions directly.


Fleenor indicated that there are many areas that LCOG excels.  He said has problems when they get into urban, regional, natural resource and transportation planning.  He thought they were encroaching on the Countyís territory.  He asked if LCOG was larger than County and who was really in charge.


Kloppel stated that elected officials make public policy.  He added that LCOG board makes few policy decisions.  He said they provide value in discussion and direction, they are not a law making policy board.  He indicated that they work for the County and they have a special relationship.  He said if there was dissolution of the organization, Lane County would be picking up the pieces and absorbing the assets.


Fleenor was more interested on how LCOG affects the entire county instead of municipalities. 


Kloppel indicated that they are doing a number of tasks for member jurisdictions in the area of natural resources.  He recalled that LCOG staffed the West Eugene Wetlands Plan on behalf of the City of Eugene.  He said it became a nationally recognized model for integrating resource protection with economic development.


Fleenor stated that in some instances, the public does not trust Lane County because of its relationship with other organizations. He wanted to make sure that as they move forward, whoever they are working with is on the same page with them to re-establish the public trust and enhance their ability to govern.  He wanted LCOG to help them establish the public trust, working collaboratively and keeping transparency as partners.


Kloppel recalled that last year in working with Commissioner Stewart they made a large investment of time within the agenda to facilitate discussion about the Countyís circumstances.  He agreed there was a trust issue.  He thought a way of addressing the trust issue is through communication.  He said it was important for the mayors to hear from the County what the circumstances are in real time.


Green commented that if LCOG wouldnít perform the services, Lane County would have to find someone to do the services.  He hoped LCOG would develop a process with MPC and the MPO around conflict resolution.


Kloppel said they tried with the LCOG Executive Committee communicating with the MPC in terms of concern over operating procedures.  He said the MPC at that time was not inclined to change the structure under which it operates.


Dwyer asked if there was a provision in the by-laws where Lane County could vote their per capita.


Kloppel said the provision has never been used but it continues as a safeguard.  He hoped it wouldnít be used because it would represent a failure to find common ground and interest.


Sorenson asked what the level of information sharing or cooperation was between the protective services as they go out in the community.  He wanted an e-mail answer.




a. Announcements


Richardson said that she had been informed that MWMC will be issuing bonds.  She added that the time frame is short.


Stewart recalled when Metro Wastewater got final approval to get construction upgrade to meet the stormwater, it was a $160 million project.  He said the Board gave blanket approval for them to get $100 million in bonds.  He explained that this is a phased project and they have only sold $50 million in bonds.  He added they are going for the second $50 million that falls within the approval they gave three years ago.  He indicated this was an update on the phase of the project.




a. ORDER 08-11-12-6/In the Matter of Awarding the Annual Trashbuster Awards.


MOTION: to approve ORDER 08-11-12-6.




VOTE: 5-0.


b. DISCUSSION/Potential Jurisdictional Transfer of a Portion, or All of Territorial Hwy to Lane County.


Stewart stated that he and Fleenor represent a large portion of Lane County where Territorial Highway travels. He had been concerned about the road since he became a commissioner and he has been looking for ways to get it improved.  He recalled that there was a fatal accident two years ago and they have seen little improvement on the road.  He explored doing a jurisdictional transfer with ODOT.  He said there is some energy between ODOT and Public Works to explore this activity.  He was not advocating that they make a transfer at this time, he asked the Board to allow staff to go through the process.  He thought there could be money involved or credits toward future ODOT projects.  He held a meeting at the grange and when he brought this up, all 18 people at the meeting said they want to see the road like Lorane Highway or Fox Hollow where there is a safe place for people to travel by bicycle and to walk.


Bill Morgan, Public Works, explained that Territorial Highway is about a 40 mile stretch of highway that runs north and south.  He said it connects a lot of communities and provides connection to economic development with wineries,  tourism and bicycle routes.  He said if they get permission, they will rely on a handbook about transferring roads.  He said they need to determine which sections of roadway they want to fix.  He indicated that some areas are challenging with vertical and horizontal issues.  He said that this type of road is fourth on ODOTís hierarchy list.  He said the County does a good job on roads like this.  He wanted to determine the economic need for the roadways.  He indicated that some sections of road have no shoulders.  He noted that if it is an overlay, the cost is $200,000 per mile.  He said if it is a shoulder widening, the cost is about $1 million per mile.  He added if it is a major reconstruction where they have to go into a hillside, the cost could be $3 million per mile.


Sonny Chickering, ODOT, indicated that because it is a district highway, it is a lower priority roadway for ODOT.  He said the interstate will come first and Highway 126 would take a priority.  He said the district highways donít get the type of attention that ODOT would like to give them.  He indicated they identified some funds to redirect for Highway 36 and Highway 99.  He said they wonít get more than fresh pavement.  He indicated that it is a matter of priorities.  He stated that Lane County has demonstrated an ability to take care of their two lane road system.  He commented that local match on federal aid projects will be an issue in the future.  He thought Lane County will be challenged in the future for matches based on funding. He indicated that it was mentioned that Delta Highway might be a good facility for ODOT to take over.  He said it is a connection between two existing state facilities and is an expressway in design and construction.  He added that is the only section Lane County is responsible for.  He said it could be considered in a trade.  He noted that cash could be involved in some trades.


Stewart stated that he met with the road crew at Delta and an item they discussed was being able to do this.  He said they were enthusiastic about the potential trade because it showcases what Lane County can do and they were concerned about the safety issues that take place on the small portion of Delta Highway.


Dwyer was skeptical about any agreements where they could expect to come out even.  He wanted to quantify the cost associated with any segment.  He thought they would be looking at a six or seven year project even if they had the money for the road.  He was willing to review options.  He was interested in doing maintenance together.


Sorenson supported a motion to look into a transfer of state highways within Lane County.  He was interested in trading Delta Highway for Territorial Highway.  He thought they could get an IGA pending the formal transfer of either road.  He wanted to keep the fiscal conversation in the forefront.  He asked if they could start working on this.


Green supported Stewartís request to begin the process of a review.  He thought it might not make sense once they examine the projects.  He asked if this could qualify for STIP funding.


Chickering said this would have to compete for modernization dollars.


Fleenor thought it was a good place to put public dollars to enhance public safety.  He asked where Lane County would get the money for an analysis.  He said if they have an IGA they need an indemnification and hold harmless provision.


Stewart supported reviewing the process and making recommendations.


Morgan said they would work on it within their budget.  He said they will have an open process.  He thought this project might give them the ability to compete for bikeway and safety projects and federal investment projects.  He commented that under the right circumstances the County could strike quickly, if given the cash to do spot improvements.


Stewart thought this could be a project to be put on the United Front trip to ask for transportation dollars.



c. REPORT/ODOT Update Report From Area 5 Manager Sonny Chickering.


Chickering reported that there is a postponement in the stateís 10/13 STIP process.  He said they had put out a draft document and held open houses .  He indicated that they were going to move forward next August, but due to changes in the economy and driving patterns, the latest statewide revenue forecast for the 10/13 STIP is substantially lower than estimates that were used by the Oregon Transportation Commission.  He said they wonít be able to build everything that was shown in the program based on the new estimates.  He was given direction to put the STIP process on hold for six to eight months.  He said their hope was for action taken at the state or federal level concerning additional revenue for transportation.   He said when they resume the STIP process, they will honor the public input process they had already laid out and will start over with the public process. He recalled that there was a grant program ODOT administered for $8 million made available for innovative operation systems and Lane County as an applicant received a grant for $1.4 million.


Celia Barry, Public Works, reported Lane County applied for a grant for a variable message sign on Delta Highway.  She said they were successful in obtaining funding and it will go into construction in 2010.  She added at the urging of Rep. Nancy Nathanson, they want to address the safety issues on Delta in the short term and they will be putting up a temporary flasher south of Goodpasture Road to bring more attention to the congestion ahead.  She added that the flasher will be coordinated with the variable message sign.


Chickering announced that it will be put onto the ODOT trip check with a camera so congestion could be avoided.


d. DISCUSSION/Urban Transition Agreements and the Eugene-Springfield Metro Plan Alternative Considerations.


(The following took place in the afternoon)


Kent Howe, Land Management, recalled that they were in front of the Board two weeks ago where the Board further articulated the issues and concerns with the Metro Plan and alternative considerations to the urban transition agreements. 


With regard to the Board hearing process, Howe said they could make process or code amendments like a land use compatibility statement.  He said if the applicant is denied development, they could process the statement, bring it to the Board for a hearing and the Boardís decision could be forwarded the to the city for consideration.  He added another alternative is the waiver process that is in the Florence Comprehensive Plan.


With regard to Metro Plan Description of urban services, Howe noted that the policies were in the packet..  He highlighted the different description of services.  He commented that the Metro Plan was inconsistent.  He said in looking at the Metro Plan, they have a minimum level of key urban services, police protection and health services.  He noted that the cities donít generally provide all the contemplated public safety services and they are not an element of urban level development, they are ongoing County services, provided regardless of the development level.  He added that most contemplated services are different than police protection that the Metro Plan identifies.  He indicated that language could be provided to clarify that police and health services provided by the County does not weaken the position of Eugene and Springfield relative to other growth management policies or the ability to annex land or control the proliferation of growth or related special districts.


With regard to rural reserves, Howe indicated there are items they identified in the Metro Plan that would need to be amended.  He said if the Board was interested in implementing those changes, staff could be directed to begin crafting specific Metro Plan amendments that would address those issues regarding rural reserves.


Howe said under Item 4, the adjusted Metro Plan boundaries, the Board expressed their frustration about the ability of cities to override the County decisions on  land use issues that are outside the urban growth boundaries.  He said they could limit the applicability of the Metro Plan by modifying the boundary so it is co-terminus with the Eugene Springfield urban growth boundary.  He identified some plan policies and what needed to be addressed if they were to do Metro Plan amendments.  He noted another option would be through legislation.


Howe noted that under dispute resolution, the process could be designed so it doesnít allow one jurisdiction to hold equal power over the other partners.  He added that amendment of Chapter 4, policy 7 would be required and the Board could direct staff to initiate amendments to substitute a majority process used with the Public Safety Coordinating Council. 


Fleenor asked if through modification they could change the Metro Plan.  He thought they were dealing with a fundamentally defective product.  He asked if they should start over, as it might be easier.


Howe responded that the Metro Plan is a comprehensive plan and in general the Metro Plan is doing a good job of being the umbrella over the planning efforts dealing with land use, transportation and public facility planning.  He commented that there are some problem areas.  He thought to start over the Metro Plan was a monumental effort.  He noted that the Metro Plan is the Comp Plan for Eugene and Springfield.  He thought the implementation of HB 3337 (where they are dividing the urban growth boundary of the two cities) is a refinement plan process developed to implement the plans for Springfield and for Eugene. 


Matt Laird, Land Management, understood that the Board couldnít unilaterally throw out the Metro Plan.  He indicated there needed to be some dialogue with Eugene and Springfield. 


Stewart asked if it was possible to go to the legislature to separate them out of the Metro Plan and go back to an individual Comp Plan.


Laird thought it could be an option.


Stewart asked if it was cheaper and an easier process to go through.


Howe stated that it would mean the cities would have to come up with developing a new Comprehensive Plan and that puts a burden on the cities.


Steve Vorhes, Assistant County Counsel, thought going to the legislature was an option but he didnít know how successful they would be with their partners.  He thought that by having this conversation, it might position the Board and staff to interact with the cities who are going through HB 3337 to see if there is a way to interject the conversation about the other concerns.  He thought it might lead to separate comprehensive plans.  He recalled that one of the options Springfield has discussed is moving away from having the Metro Plan manage all of the planning in the metro area.  He said part of the reason for this conversation is to focus on the salient issues on changes to the Metro Plan to make it more palatable for Lane County and the cities.


Dwyer commented that it would be difficult to morph out of the Metro Plan without a legislative fix.  He noted that cities canít grow unless they take land and people from the County.  He said they canít preserve farmland under the concept of developed and committed lands.  He spoke with the City of Springfield and they thought Lane Countyís concepts of rural reserves were interesting.  He added that developed and committed lands do not apply lands designated as rural reserve.  He asked how they work together with the cities to make sure the rural reserves they select have meaning and donít conflict with their plans.  He thought they needed to include rural reserves so they could provide the agricultural base for the citizens in the future.  He added that it provides insulation between the citizens, farmland and the gravel extraction.  He said when they do a residential land study, the County could send a letter to tell them about the concepts and if there are any prime 1 through 4 agricultural lands they think might fit into a concept of a rural reserve and they could zone lands that are less productive to meet their residential land needs.


Howe said if there is interest in pursuing that type of change on page 4, regarding rural reserves, they could direct staff to move forward to begin crafting specific Metro Plan amendment policy language and identify areas that might be potential rural reserves and it would start the conversation with the cities.  He added that they would be prepared with the cities coming to the County for the amendments they want to make under HB 3337.


Dwyer wanted to start with the concept of page 4 as a discussion item.


Green believed they had an opportunity under HB 3337 to engage in the discussion or use it as a tool to get to the rural reserves and annexation policies.  He wanted a dispute resolution around the Metro Plan.  He thought things could be resolved amicably if they had a level comity among the elected officials.  He commented that one jurisdiction should not cause another jurisdiction to not go forward.  He thought there should be a level of compromise and some way to resolve the dispute that currently doesnít exist.  He commented that the dispute resolution they currently have doesnít work.  He wanted a super majority model that could help resolve a number of the other issues. He thought this was sufficient to start the conversation and to give staff direction to work on HB 3337.


Fleenor asked if they could separate the two Metro Plans into identical units.   He asked if a transition agreement could be established so they transition through PAPAís to fine tune the individual comp plans over a period of time and initiate new urban transition agreements by separating them.


Vorhes indicated that there is one single urban growth boundary that goes around both cities and that is the direction they are heading.  He thought maybe out of that would come separate comprehensive plans for Springfield and Eugene.


Howe said direction would be predicated on the two cities agreeing and that is where the Board has a problem trying to direct the cities what to do.


Stewart thought it would be easier to go back to the legislature and piggy back with what they did with HB 3337 to separate the Metro Plan. He didnít think all three bodies would agree.  He also thought getting a dispute resolution body would take going to the legislature.  He thought through the direction for long range planning that they have the ability to work on these and the rural reserves in place as the urban growth boundaries are separated.  He thought the Metro Plan boundary should be the same as the urban growth boundary.  He thought they should move forward with that.


Green thought they needed to do it on a dual track.  He thought this should be on the legislative breakfast agenda.  He thought they should present the case with their jurisdictional partners.


Alex Cuyler, Intergovernmental Relations Manager, stated that he lobbied trying to stop HB3337.  He recalled that the City of Eugene refused to do the land inventory.  He thought they needed to exhaust the local possibility before they go to the legislature


Laird said they have identified the right issues including protecting farmland, dispute resolution and jurisdictional autonomy.  He indicated that they will continue to refine those into specific Metro Plan amendments.  He added that they will develop the amendments and bring them to the Board before they file them with the cities as PAPA applications.  He said he will direct his staff to take the next step of  developing the applications with the specific language in it and come back to the Board.   He added if they get no action with the applications with the cities, then Cuyler would be put in the position where he could go to the legislature.


Dwyer stated language around developed and committed lands concept is a critical aspect on the changes they will make.  He added that it takes the County out of the equation.


Spartz recommended that the Board let the legislative delegation know in December they are taking these steps to try to resolve the issues locally and if that doesnít work that the Board will be back in Salem asking for their help.


Fleenor commented that the Board hearing process is key to his satisfaction of this matter as it relates to Florence.  He thought representative government was important and Chapter 10 modification is a moving target.


Howe stated that he heard clear consensus from the Board on items 3, 4 and 5 of the five issues they brought to the Board.


Green thought all five issues were a sufficient list.


Stewart thought the Board wanted to move forward with the five concerns and starting the amendment processes and rural reserves.  He said if the PAPA process stops, then he wanted to move to the second process.


Sorenson was interested in the rural reserves.  He also wanted to know what services are provided within the metro area. He was concerned about the language that states urban services will be provided by city governments.  He didnít think that was true.  He thought police protection and health services in the purview of Lane County government should be acknowledged by the cities.  With regard to the Metro Plan boundary, he said the divorce that Springfield sought from Eugene is final.  He thought they should try to implement a clear separation of the Metro Plan boundary and urban growth boundary between Eugene and Springfield, along the lines that was passed by legislation. 


Dwyer thought if they were going to change the dispute resolution, they need to get into principles and concepts that are associated with resolving the dispute.  He said otherwise a third party has no where to go to make the decision.  With regard to rural reserves, he said he wasnít just talking about the Metro Plan, it is for every city in Lane County.  He indicated that they are all faced with the same problems.




a. FIRST READING AND SETTING SECOND READING AND PUBLIC HEARING Ordinance No. 6-08/In the Matter of Amending Chapter 2 of Lane Code to Delete Obsolete or Redundant County Clerk Recording Fees (Second Reading and Public Hearing: 12/3/08).


MOTION: to approve a First Reading and Setting a Second Reading and Public Hearing on Ordinance No. 6-08 for December 3, 2008 at 1:30 p.m.


Dwyer MOVED, Fleenor SECONDED.


VOTE: 5-0.




Stewart received a letter from the City of Florence asking the County for funding for a rehab project for the Siuslaw Bridge.  He said the City of Florence has committed to $9,500 of lighting fixtures and for electricity.  They asked if the County would be willing to pay 50 percent because half of the bridge is in the County.  He said they asked that it come out of the 2009/2010 budget.


Fleenor said he was contacted last week by the City of Florence. He contacted McKenzie-Bahr who directed staff to apply for grant money and it is moving forward. 


Stewart indicated that Dwyer received a letter from the commissioners of Tillamook County.  He said they made a request that Lane County pay for O & C dues.  He said if there is interest to continue the association with O & C, they have their annual meeting on December 4 and 5 and he presently serves on their Board.  He said that he would continue if they believe there is interest in staying.  He indicated that he has supported their efforts in protecting the 1937 O & C Act rights.  He indicated that it is a large amount of money that comes to the County and he thought they should continue to support those efforts until Congress changes the act and moves into something different.


Spartz indicated the dues to O & C are $40,097 and $7,500 for the share of legal costs.


Fleenor thought they should reinstitute the Budget Committee to see how they are going to move forward.  He said that any money they spend out of the strategic reserve will either result in layoffs next year or they will have to tap the timber payments.  He said they have a board order outstanding that states before they tap the timber payments they are going to reconvene the Budget Committee.  He didnít think the O & C counties would go away and he thought a couple of months would give them the time to review this.


Stewart indicated that these items were funded through the Budget process, but when they had the conversation the day they adopted the budget, the Board chose to look at not funding LRAP, O & C counties and AOC.


Dwyer commented that these organizations rely on partners that have like lands within their jurisdictions and lobby to protect the act that created the money.  He said he doesnít agree with everything they do, but he thought what the organization does is important.


Fleenor said they have the second largest landholding within O & C.  He said they donít have proportionate representation.  He thought their best vote was with their feet and they should get out of the organization.  He said they should send a message that they want change.


Sorenson said he got a report from Benton County and they got out of O & C.  He added that was the only county that has withdrawn.  He thought they were better off listening to Benton Countyís concerns. 


Stewart had a discussion with Linda Modrell of Benton County.  He said that years ago they opted out because of concerns of the direction they were going.  He said that Modrell was going to bring this up again through their budget process to see if they should go back into association with O & C.  He said things have changed since Benton County pulled out.  He said he wanted to continue to serve on the executive board as there were opportunities to make changes.


Green wanted to hear from Douglas County and why they stay in it, as they are the largest beneficiary of  funding.




Stewart announced that in the newspaper there was an article about a project he has been working on.  He invited everyone to attend on Saturday at 10:00 a.m. for Bohemia Park in Cottage Grove.  He said they will be having a planting party, planting 107 trees.  He added they will be giving away bulbs to attendees. 


Dwyer announced that tomorrow the Legislative Committee is meeting at 9:00 a.m.


12. EXECUTIVE SESSION as per ORS 192.660








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



Melissa Zimmer

Recording Secretary