BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS'

REGULAR MEETING

March 18, 2009

following HACSA

Harris Hall Main Floor

APPROVED 4/15/2009

 

Commissioner Pete Sorenson presided with Commissioners Bill Fleenor and Rob Handy present.  Commissioners Bill Dwyer and Faye Stewart were excused.  County Administrator Jeff Spartz, County Counsel Liane Richardson and Recording Secretary Melissa Zimmer were also present.

 

1. ADJUSTMENTS TO THE AGENDA

 

Handy asked if the Golden Gardens item should be taken in Executive Session.

 

Richardson explained that for this topic of allocating money, it does not fit under one of the Executive Session items.  She said if they want to discuss purchasing a property, it could go into Executive Session.  She said they could push the item out two weeks.

 

Fleenor was notified by Public Works that they would like to pull item 5 .D. 4. for a separate discussion.   He said unless they receive information otherwise, they should leave it on the agenda and possibly roll it for a future discussion.

 

Sorenson recommended that the item be rolled for two weeks with an additional briefing from the department.

 

Richardson added a presentation from the Human Relations Staff in Executive Session regarding pending and potential litigation and employee matters; real estate matters and Lindley v. Lane County, a discussion of pending litigation.

 

2. PUBLIC COMMENTS

 

Cliff Kelly, Elmira, had concerns about the 4H program, a program that operates out of a County facility.  He indicated that the Extension Service receives $70,000 from the County for rent.  He said he represents other 4H leaders who were afraid to speak for fear of retaliation.   He was warned not to talk to the Board of Commissioners as it could be undermining and a cause of dismissal.  He said he was dismissed from the program for no justification after he contacted OSU.  He noted the new direction for OSU Extension Service is science, engineering and technology.  He added that nothing was mentioned about agriculture and animals.

 

3. COMMISSIONERS' RESPONSE TO PUBLIC COMMENTS AND/OR OTHER ISSUES AND REMONSTRANCE

 

Fleenor noted that Lane County does provide $70,000 rent forgiveness to OSU Extension.  He didnít believe they had any administrative or governance authority over the OSU Extension Service.

 

Richardson commented that with it only being rent forgiveness, the Extension Service is not part of the County where they would not only have the obligation, but the right to tell them how to run their business.  She indicated they could say they no longer wished to forgive the rent because of concerns they have.  She thought that was the furthest the County could go.

 

Sorenson reported that Oregon, according to the accounting firm of Ernst and Young, conducted a study on state taxation.  He noted that COST is an association of 600 multi- state and international corporations that lobby states on state tax policy.  He said the study is funded by the nationís largest corporations and found that Oregon has the second lowest state and local business taxes among all states and the District of Colombia.  He added that those businesses get a better deal for taxes  they pay in Oregon than anywhere else in the United States.  He said the study said Oregonís state and local business taxes were so low, the state could raise business taxes by $1.6 billion annually and still be in line with state and local business taxes nationwide.    He noted that only North Carolina has a lower business tax than the state of Oregon.

 

Handy recalled that they had a good dialogue with the community that showed up at Centro Latino.  He noted there is an achievement gap for Blacks, Latinos and Native Americans versus whites and Asian Americans.  He said as a society they still have large drop out rates and suspensions for Latinos, Blacks and Native Americans in secondary schools.

 

4. EMERGENCY BUSINESS

 

None.

 

5. CONSENT CALENDAR

 

A. Approval of Minutes:

1) June 13, 2007, MWSD, 9:00 a.m.

2) February 11, 2009, Regular Meeting, 9:00 a.m.

3) February 11, 2009, Regular Meeting, 1:30 p.m.

4) March 3, 2009, Work Session, 10:00 a.m.

5) March 3, 2009, Work Session, 1:30 p.m.

6) March 4, 2009, Regular Meeting, Following HACSA

7) March 4, 2009, Regular Meeting, 1:30 p.m.

 

B. Health and Human Services

 

1) ORDER 09-3-18-1/In the Matter of Amending Chapter 3 of the Lane Manual to Add Citations Regarding the Community Mental Health Advisory Committee, Renaming the Committee to Mental Health Advisory/Local Alcohol and Drug Planning Committee, and Revising the Description of the Committee (LM 3.524, ORS 430.342, ORS 430.630(7), OAR 309-014-0020(3), OAR 309-016-0020(2), and OAR 415-056-0005(10)).

 

2) ORDER 09-3-18-2/In the Matter of Awarding Contracts to ShelterCare and Catholic Community Services for Lane County's U.S. Housing and Urban Development Continuum of Care Grant Services.

 

C. Management Services

 

1) ORDER 09-3-18-3/In the Matter of Authorizing the Sale of Surplus County Owned Real Property to Victor and Jessica Rasmussen for $400 (Map 21-01-36-33-00700, Adjacent to 39921 Brice Creek Road, Culp Creek).

 

D. Public Works

 

1) ORDER 09-3-18-4/In the Matter of Ratifying Applications Submitted by Public Works for Grant Funding Under the National Historic Bridge Preservation Program for Deadwood, Layng, Pengra, Stewart, and Wendling Covered Bridges and Delegating Contract Signature Authority to the County Administrator in the Event of  Successful Applications.

 

2) ORDER 09-3-18-5/In the Matter of Awarding a Contract to Wildish Building Materials in the Amount of $322,238.15, for Pre-Coated Oil Rock Materials, Various Stockpile Sites, Prospective Contract No. 08/09-06.

 

3) ORDER 09-3-18-6/In the Matter of Awarding a Contract to Precision Aggregate Products in the Amount of $181,935, for Un-Coated Oil and Sanding Rock Materials, Various Stockpile Sites, Prospective Contract No. 08/09-07.

 

4) ORDER 09-3-18-7/In the Matter of Appointing Three New Members to the Vegetation Management Advisory Committee (VMAC).

(PULLED)

 

5) ORDER 09-3-18-8/In the Matter of Authorizing Lane County Staff to Apply for a Water Polution Control Facility (WPCF) Permit With the Oregon Department of Environmental Quality for Managing Lane County's Stormwater Drywells.

 

E. Workforce Partnership

 

1) ORDER 09-3-18-9/In the Matter of Appointing Six Members to the Lane Workforce Partnership Board of Directors.

 

MOTION:  to approve the Consent Calendar as amended.

 

Fleenor MOVED, Handy SECONDED.

 

VOTE: 3-0.

 

 

6. COMMISSIONERS' BUSINESS

 

a. DISCUSSION/Precautionary Principle.

 

Dr. Mary Oí Brien discussed the precautionary principle.  She indicated that it is  a statement of intent to try to make choices in favor of the public health and the environment, even when there is reasonable evidence that there could be harm. She recalled the first use was in the 70ís in Germany when their Black Forest was dying.  She commented that while it is a statement of intent, it has no meaning unless it is translated into an action or a process that agencies or governments use.  She said the wording (whether an ordinance or a policy) is derived from the San Francisco precautionary principle ordinance.

 

O Brien indicated that there are five elements that are needed. She said they need an orientation, a commitment that the County has a duty to take action, looking into the future to prevent harm.  She commented that there is the right to know about transparency and because the action is equally government, business, community groups and general public, they canít take precautionary action or know what precautionary action is if they donít have the information.  She said if they are going to make a commitment to take the most environmentally sound decision, that requires they look at their options.  She indicated there is the full cost accounting: when they are looking at the options, to look at the most costly up front. She noted the fifth element is that the process is best done with public participation: seeking from the public and giving the public all the information they have and the dilemmas they are facing in a particular decision.  She added that they are actively asking for what the public sees in terms of alternatives and looking at the costs and benefits of the different options and getting public feedback. 

 

OíBrien said the precautionary principle is not something that brings liability or takes a department of the County to court for not carrying out.  She said it doesnít provide any basis for any judicial relief and is not to be looked at like an ordinance.  She added that it is a commitment and every three years there will be a review.

 

Handy said a question for him is not how much damage is safe, but how little damage is possible.  He said when looking at classic risk assessment, it misses the bigger picture of not only looking at the alternatives and exploring the options, but  to minimize the public health risks and the economic risks with ignoring the public health risks to the communities.  He said the Board is asking staff with each item that is coming to them to explore a range of alternatives and to bring them back options on a policy making level.  He asked how they include all of staff to embrace that transparency including options and involving the public and looking at broader policy considerations.  He added that it is not only important, but benefits the public and could save money in the long run by doing it at the front end.

 

Oí Brien explained that it makes a county commitment as to how they do business.  She didnít recommend jumping into an ordinance, she thought it would be an interesting exercise to ask three people who are interested, to undertake a discussion with various County agency heads.  She said they should be asked about how they seek out alternatives for their decision making and where they have been successful in looking at options, thereby making better decisions or what they found as difficulties.  She thought it could be informative for the Board and if it could be written in a simple format, it could be informative back to all agencies about precautionary decision making.  She envisioned this as a series of interviews and the Board could notify the heads of different agencies

 

Sorenson asked when the ordinance was passed and who they should speak with in San Francisco and in Mendocino County.

 

OíBrien responded that Debby Raphael had done the most with the precautionary principle in San Francisco, as she had implemented it.  She said Linda in Mendocino would like to talk to the Board about what they are doing.

 

Handy wanted to bring this back in front of the Board.  He said enhancing trust was important.  He asked if Spartz could get together three agency heads to look at the successes and challenges, compiling an alternative assessment and how they can move toward next steps.

 

OíBrien thought they could devise a questionnaire and ask the head of those agencies how they enact each question and where they think they could do better. 

Spartz commented that a number of departments are sensitive to the ideas expressed.  He said Public Works is familiar with NIPA and its principles that are parallel to the precautionary principle.  He added that Health and Human Services and Community Health would say they implement those things.  He commented that all departments might not think along those lines.

 

Fleenor asked on page 3, part 5, why they limited information when they could have used utilized traditional peer review science and contemporary economic practices. 

 

Oí Brien responded that sometimes that information is not available.  She said they want to work with the information they have and not appear that it will be a lengthy process.  She added that if the public is participating well, and they did innovative things for getting the most interested people involved, it would bring information they might not be aware of.

 

Sorenson asked staff to set up a phone call with the appropriate people from Mendocino County and Debby Raphael  and to get together a group of staff.

 

 

7. COMMITTEE REPORTS

 

a. ORDER 09-3-18-14/In the Matter of Adopting Positions on Legislative Issues During the 75th Legislative Session

 

Judy Williams, Legislative Analyst, discussed the attached bills. (Copy in file).

 

Fleenor asked about the status of annexation.

 

Williams indicated that she received it after it went to Legislative Committee.  She assigned it to Kent Howe in Land Management.

 

Fleenor thought they needed to move on this right away.

 

For Items 1, 2 and 3, Sorenson wanted to make a consistent statement to monitor the bills with amendments. With Item 4, he wanted  to monitor, and he agreed on Item 5.

 

Handy also supported Item 1, 2 and 3 to monitor, with the message about mandates and the costs to be consistent.    He wanted to oppose HB2864 and  SB 761.

 

Fleenor was concerned about monitoring Item 4.  He wanted to oppose with amendments or monitor with amendments. He thought they needed to be more involved than to allow it to unfold by itself.  For Item 9, he wanted to monitor with amendment based on what determines if a program is unsatisfactory.  For Item 11, he wanted to support with amendment, if the funding is available and if the state provides appropriate funding to develop the water overlay zones. 

 

Sorenson agreed with Item 6 and with everything on page 3. With regard to page 4, he thought they should support the bill requiring local governments, but only with the financials, with an amendment to support.  He wanted to pull HB 2831 until they had a full complement of the Board.

 

Handy  was in agreement with all comments made so far.  He said they should oppose HB 2864, SB 761, SB 944, and mandating an ACT for Lane County. 

 

MOTION: to move the following:  Item 1 to be changed from opposed to monitor with amendment; Item 2, monitor with amendment; Item 3, monitor with amendment; Item 4, monitor with amendment; Item 5 support; Item 6 support; Item 7 support; Item 8 oppose; Item 9 monitor with amendment; Item 10 monitor with amendment; Item 11 support with amendment; Item 12 they pulled to come back in two weeks; Item 13, support, Item 14 neutral; Item 15 support with amendment; and HB 2864 and SB 762 and 924 will come back in two weeks.

 

Fleenor MOVED, Handy SECONDED.

 

VOTE: 3-0.

 

 

b. DISCUSSION/Letter to Governor Kulongoski Regarding Education Funding.

 

Spartz explained that this started as a Board effort to send a letter to the governor to let him know how important the Board viewed education funding in the short term and in the long term.  He recalled that the Board wasnít able to get the letter completed in a session and they asked him to compose the letter.  He and Fleenor added additional language.

 

Fleenor was satisfied with the tone and content of the letter as modified.   He was appalled when he read that 80 percent of Oregon prison inmates are high school dropouts.  He said they need an appropriate balance between the needs of public health and safety and their education system.

 

MOTION to have the chair sign the letter and send it to the governor.

 

Fleenor MOVED, Handy SECONDED.

 

Sorenson wanted to change the letter to put it on Board letterhead. He said he would sign the letter on behalf of the Board.

 

VOTE: 3-0.

 

8. COUNTY ADMINISTRATION

 

a. Announcements

 

Spartz commented that if businesses are taxed, they are then driven away.  He said it doesnít seem to be the case here.  He said there are four critical things that cause a business to locate in a particular state and locality:  access to inputs; access to markets; the need  of a skilled workforce and some businesses locate  in an area because that is where the CEO wants to live.  He received a phone call from the governorís office regarding the Good Governance Resolution and the invitation to the various office holders to visit the Board of Commissioners.

 

b. ORDER 09-3-18-10/In the Matter of Allocating up to $200,000 Annually from Video Lottery Funds for the Purchase of Golden Gardens. (PULLED)

 

c. ORDER 09-3-18-11/In the Matter of Accepting a $1,000,000 Community Development Block Grant Fund for the Row River Water System Improvement Project and Authorizing the County Administrator to Sign the Grant Agreement Documents.

 

Mike McKenzie Bahr, Economic Development, explained that they have been working on this grant application for 18 months with four different coordinators.  He said they submitted this in the final round last year for the rehabilitation of the Row River Valley Water District system and have been awarded $1 million for that project.  He said the project is about $1.5 million and the Row River Water District is putting in the match for the project.  He indicated that this is a formality required by the state.  He recalled there was staff time involved with the application and there will be staff time involved in managing this grant project.   He added that this is labor intensive and the County is not reimbursed for the funds.  He explained the multiple actions on the board order are to accept the grant and to have the Fiscal Department appropriate those funds into a budget line item. 

 

McKenzie-Bahr noted that there are three agreements that this allows them to enter into:  one with the State of Oregon to accept the funds and manage the project as per the guidelines; one with the water district that explains how they are going to be working together and one is with LCOG.  He indicated that there are items that as the grant recipient they cannot do by law, so they have to contract those out.  He added that it designates the County Administrator to sign all of the various grant documents.  He recalled in this past year they didnít have a formal authorization to sign the grant application and they had some grant documents rejected.  He said they had to have Chair Stewart sign the grant.

 

MOTION: to approve ORDER 09-3-18-11.

 

Fleenor MOVED, Handy SECONDED.

 

VOTE: 3-0.

 

12:00 p.m.   (recess)

 

1:30 p.m.   (Harris Hall Main Floor)

 

9. COUNTY COUNSEL

 

a. Announcements

 

None.

 

b. DISCUSSION/Waiver of Conflicts.

 

Richardson reported that they had a request to sign a waiver.  She noted the law firm that represents the city of Florence, Harrang Long, also represents Lane County on one pending litigation matter.  She said the city of Florence asked them if they would craft an IGA that they would bring to the County for the creation of a water quality monitoring program within the Florence urban growth boundary.  She said it constitutes a potential conflict of interest because they represent both entities, but they donít represent the County that would relate to this matter.  She indicated that they donít have to grant the waiver but it makes it cleaner for the law firm if they do.  She asked the Board if they wanted the County Administrator sign it.

 

Fleenor said he would be willing to waive the request.  He didnít think that entering into a water monitoring IGA with the city of Florence is potentially libelous in the event that Harrang Long were to have information that could be used in a manner that might not be in the best interests of the County.  He added that if this were a litigation matter or personnel issues, he would feel different.  He thought for consolidating expenses that this would be in the best interest of the citizens to allow Harrang Long to represent the County for the water monitoring IGA.

 

Handy thought on a common sense level that it didnít pass the smell test.  He commented that when attorneys represent different jurisdictions, there wonít be an energetic defense of a jurisdiction when they are trying to mitigate different concerns.   He recommended enlisting a local firm.

 

Richardson stated that Harrang Long was not asking to represent Lane County,  they represent the city of Florence.  She said the reason they contacted Lane County was because they made the analysis a long time ago with the PERS case that they wanted to use Harrang Longís expertise in that particular area and have them represent Lane County on that case.  She said because the IGA would eventually come to Lane County to sign, they wanted to ensure they were comfortable with them writing the IGA for the city of Florence. She said they are not looking at hiring them.  She said it would save County staff time on crafting the IGA.

 

Handy said they have marvelous talent in the legal profession and his goal is to diversify who they work with so there is a broad range of people involved.  He said when they look at good governance, perception is everything for the public.  He commented that the perception of a conflict could almost be viewed by some as the same.  He didnít want to support the waiver.

 

Spartz thought in the future if they need to hire an outside attorney and they take the ultra cautious approach on a waiver of potential conflicts,  that  it could have an affect on who would want to do business with Lane County.

 

Sorenson thought with their experiencing in hiring outside people, that if they need the expertise, they will get to a level where it is better for them to have a lawyer that does that type of work.  He thought with the PERS litigation being long and complicated, they had partners and it made sense to have one law firm represent everyone.  He said their relationship is legally intact but they are not spending money on the litigation.

 

Richardson said she has copies of the pertinent rules that Oregon lawyers have to follow regarding ethics and representation of clients and when there is a conflict.

 

 

10. PERFORMANCE AUDITOR

 

a. Announcements

 

Stewart Bolinger, Performance Auditor, stated that he will get the draft of the Short Mountain Report to County Counsel.  He said he has been working in tandem with Public Works for the past three weeks on what he is developing.  He said as soon as County Counsel reviews the draft, he will go back to Public Works for a final review.  He thought within two weeks he would have a finished report for the Boardís review.   He said he found no issues with compliance with the agreement.  He said he will meet with the justices to discuss proposals he made for changing the collection practices and getting their input.

 

Sorenson asked about monitoring the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act funds.

 

Bolinger commented that the most important thing he learned was the scrutiny of achieving the performance goals in whatever financing the County is receiving. He said the nexus for tracking and reporting will be the Government Accountability Office.   He said they will consolidate all of the information from local and state auditors.  He indicated that Lane County will be on  their own for scrutinizing compliance in their own performance,  He announced that he will be going to the Association of Local Government Auditorís National Convention in San Francisco and they announced the Western Regional Representative for the Government Accountability Office will give a special presentation explaining what the Countyís responsibility will be.

 

Fleenor asked if they were on track in collecting the backlog of fines.

 

Bolinger responded that the number of case reductions were significant.  He thought they will have a good outcome after working through his proposals.  He indicated that the justice courts will determine what the large pool of money represents so they could realistically look at what is uncollectible versus what is collectable and where the gray areas are.

 

Spartz thought a major problem with the situation is that they do not have adequate enforcement in their collection efforts for potential sanctions on the scofflaws.  He said if the Board was willing to consider putting sanctions in place, they could increase the collection rate.  He added the offset is that they will have to deal with angry constituents.  He thought they should make every effort they can to collect the money that is owed the system.

 

Sorenson asked what it would take to improve the collection rate from $18,000 on $18 million to something closer to $18 million.

 

Spartz thought they could put Denver boots on vehicles.  He said they could impound vehicles, requiring large payments to recover those vehicles and settlement of the fines and indebtedness.  He thought the Board would have to decide what level they could deal with the angry constituents and still endeavor to do a better job of collecting the money than they are currently able to do.

 

Fleenor commented that if they are going to hold people accountable at all levels, they need to be exploring all options.  He was in favor of passing ordinances that stiffen the laws from civil forfeiture like Lincoln County, to putting Denver boots on cars.  He thought they needed to get tough on crime at the beginning.

 

Handy wanted to explore the consequences for civil forfeiture.

 

Bolinger said he wants to clear his audit backlog.  He said he will come back in June with a proposal for another year and it might coincide with how much federal money is significant in Lane County.

 

b. REPORT/Status of Audits.

 

Bolinger said he will have a final draft in two weeks after the technical authorities  review his work.  He added that he will be finishing the Diversity Action Plan.

 

Fleenor asked Bolinger if he could reconcile the amount of euthanasia fluid against the number of animals euthanized during the period he will be looking at to see if there is a correlation.  He didnít know if they have the audit standards necessary to give them an accurate value.  He thought it could be a benchmark they could use for future audits.

 

11. PUBLIC WORKS

 

a. ORDER 09-3-18-12/In the Matter of Certification of Final Assessments for the Replacement of the West Fork Coyote Creek Bridge on Biggs Road (a Local Access Road).

 

Frank Simas, Public Works, explained that the Public Hearing is for the purpose of certifying the final assessment amounts for the replacement of the West Fork Coyote Creek Bridge on Biggs Road.  He stated that this hearing is required pursuant to ORS 371.655 and is the final step in completing the assesment process for this project.  He recalled the construction of the bridge was completed in January 2009 and certified as being completed by both the County Enginner and the Public Works Director.  He noted that the benefiting properties had previously been made subject to a pending lien in an amount to be set by the Board at a later date in February 2009.  He indicated that the benefitting property owners have been notified of todayís hearing.  He recalled that this project was previously determined by the Board to be a separate project instead of a continuing program because it was on a local access road instead of a County maintained road.  He said at that time there were several meetings with the property owners and through that process the Board had determined they would split the cost of the project 50/50 with the benefitting property owners.  He noted there are five property owners.  He said at that time the property owners completed a non-remonstrance agreement based on a projected cost for the project of $150,000.  He stated that would be $75,000 to be divided by the five benefitting property owners or $15,000 per property owner and the property owners had all agreed do that.

 

Simas recalled that an issue that came up in the meetings held with the property owners was the interest rate to be charged on any assessments that were paid off in installments.  He said one of the interest rates discussed was the 11th District Cost of Funds rate and at that time there was more of a disparity between that interest rate and the prime rate and at that time there was a two percent spread between the two interest rates.  He noted that currently the prime rate is within one-quarter of a percent of the 11th District Cost of Funds Rate.  He said standard practice for these assessment projects is to charge an annual rate of interest on the unpaid assessments of the prime rate plus three percent.  He said at the time this material was prepared, the rate was equal to six percent and the prime rate is currently running 3.25 percent.  He said the motion is to certify the final assessments as shown in Exhibit A (copy in file) upon completion of the public hearing.  He said staff recommendation is that the amount of the assessments be certified.

 

Commissioner Sorenson opened the Public Hearing.

 

Lynn Fogus, Veneta, thanked the Board and everyone at Public Works for all the work they did.  She indicated that a good part of the bridge is recycled.   She said the County saved the neighbors so much time and money by doing this for them.  She indicated that there were five property owners.  She thought it was a precedent worth saving.  She thought the road would have been closed without the Countyís help.

 

There being no one else signed up to speak, Comissioner Sorenson closed the Public Hearing.

 

MOTION: to approve ORDER 09-3-18-12.

 

Fleenor MOVED, Handy SECONDED.

 

Fleenor thought the department woked magic and it was one of the best experiences he has had as a commissioner.  He commented that the public was well served.

 

Sorenson thought it was a good example of people working well together.

 

VOTE: 3-0.

 

b. FIRST READING AND SETTING SECOND READING AND PUBLIC HEARING/Ordinance No. PA 1256/In the Matter of Amending the Rural Comprehensive Plan to Redesignate Land From "Rural Residential" to "Rural Commercial" and Rezoning That Land From "RR-5/Rural Residential" to "RC/Rural CommercialĒ; and Adopting Savings and Severability Clauses. Second Reading and Public Hearing April 1, 2009  (File PA 06-5600; Powell).

 

MOTION: to approve a First Reading and Setting a Second Reading and Public Hearing for Ordinance No. PA 1256 on April 1, 2009 at 1:30 p.m.

 

Fleenor MOVED, Handy SECONDED.

 

Handy asked if there was any feedback on the notification of this issue.

 

Jerry Kendall, Land Management, indicated that notice already went out and there was no feedback.

 

Handy asked what the intended future use would be.

 

Kendall responded that he didnít think the applicant knew what he would be doing.  Kendall said the original intent was to expand the farm equipment sales business that is occurring on the property adjacent on the west.  He said they have changed the rural commercial ordinance so there is a more comprehensive review for  occuring new uses..  He indicated that under the plan amendment process and prior to the change, either the applicant had to address the highest and most intent use that could take place in the proposed zone or the Board would have to limit selected use by a site review suffix.  He stated that any new uses under director approval evaluates some of the same capacity issue under the plan amendment phase.  He said they donít have to plan for future needs.  He added when they come in for the new use they will have to go through a Planning Director approval.

 

VOTE: 3-0.

 

 

12. MANAGEMENT SERVICES

 

a. REPORT BACK/A-87 Cost Plan.

 

Kay Blackburn, Finance Manager, explained that any time the County received a federal award in the form of a grant, contract or IGA, they are only allowed to charge the federal government for costs that are in conformity with the principles outlined by the Office of Management and Budget Circular A-87.  She stated that every year Central Finance prepares an A-87 Compliant Indirect Cost Plan for all departments to use.  She stated that IS costs are not included in the indirect cost plan and they shouldnít be because they are not indirect countywide costs, they are considered billed costs and accounted for in an internal service fund.  She said they donít document those on the A-87 plan, but they are chargeable on grants.  She said because some issues have arisen with some of the grants not being able to charge out IS charges, Finance and IS got together and they decided they would review the charging methodology and document that similar to how they do the indirect cost plan.  She said they decided they would use the same software system they use for the indirect cost plan because that way it will have the same layout, structure and terminology that all County departments are used to using in their grants and it will be easily identifiable as a grant cost plan and A-87 compliant.  She anticipated  having this project completed in three to four weeks.

 

Stewart Bolinger, Performance Auditor, reported that yesterday he went through the agreement with the Marshall Service.  He noted there are two provisions that  take the immediate urgency out of getting a final analysis done.  He said when the Board approved the agreement last week for a per diem rate, he found out the rate cannot change for three years.  He said they will get the analysis done,  implement the system and they will have a three year history.  He added that if they learn after they agreed to the rate there is a significant variation in costs, it is not a basis for appealing to get the rate adjusted. 

 

Fleenor asked Blackburn to get to this whenever she has time, as there is no time rush.

 

Sorenson asked if they should have a work plan that allows them to be ready sooner so they could get the additional rate for the Marshallís office.

 

Bolinger responded that as soon as they are able to finish their work, he proposed to meet with the Sheriff and the Jail staff.  He indicated that the system will capture the cost.  He said they will have the data when it is time to renogiate the rate.  He said he would come back the end of June with a report.

 

 

b. ORAL REPORT/Update on McKinstry Essention.

 

David Suchart, Management Services, followed-up on questions from the last time the Board met.  He recalled the Board decided to go ahead with the jail and steam upgrade.  He said the questions centered on photovoltaic panels.  He said that Mr. Bristow (who presented with him) said that individual photovoltaic panel output ranges from 14 to 17 watts per square foot and a photovoltaic array output of an installed system ranged from 5 to 7 kilowatts per square foot per year of available roof area.  He said the other questions centered on the additional study of photovoltaics for the jail complex.  He received an estimate of $9,420 to do a photovoltaic study on the jail.  He said if they were to go ahead with the study, they could do it at the same time they are doing the other work.  He said to make it pay for itself, they will have to try to sell it to someone. He stated that it was important to get off steam.

 

Sorenson asked Suchart what the Board should do.

 

Suchart thought it was worth the risk to start on it.  He said if they start it and it looks like it is going to slow down the process of getting them of off EWEB steam and it wonít have a payoff for them, then the $9,000 is a small risk to take.

 

Fleenor thought before they spend the $9,000 that Suchart question other businesses that have been using the system to see what they are experiencing with real life photovoltaics and report back.

 

Sorenson asked about solar thermal for the jail.

 

Suchart said if this goes forward, he will ask for solar thermal at the same time.

 

Handy supported getting the information.

 

Suchart said he will move forward with this.

 

13. HUMAN RESOURCES

 

a. ORDER 09-3-18-13/In the Matter of Ratifying the Tentative Agreement Between Lane County and the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees Local 2831-General Unit.

 

Spartz explained that this is a negotiated agreement with AFSCME Local 2831, covering the period of July 1, 2008 to June 30, 2011.  He recalled that the negotiations carried on for a long period of time.  He said there were strongly held positions on both sides but after lengthy negotiations, they achieved an agreement that has been ratified by a majority of the AFSCME union.

 

Sorenson described page 2 of the memo.  (Copy in file). He indicated that the total cost of the agreement is $3.5 million, depending on the consumer price index and the additional future service level changes due to statewide budget cuts. 

 

Roland Hoskins, Human Resources, stated his recommendation is for approval of the order.

 

MOTION: to approve ORDER 09-3-18-13.

 

Fleenor MOVED, Handy SECONDED.

 

Handy commented that economically they are in hard times and things are challenging at the state and federal level and it is trickling down to the County.   He said they need to work to make sure that working people have decent and affordable health care and wage increases where they can.  He said they are faced with layoffs at the County and employees are faced with a heavier workload to deliver services.  He said so many people are impacted in the community.  He said it is important at the County that they lead the way to come up with the best contract possible.  He said it wasnít a perfect contract, but he wants to improve things for the County and the labor force.

 

Fleenor thanked both bargaining units.  He said this contact was not perfect but it was the best they could do under the circumstances.  He thought it will be difficult to try to forget the past and think about the future and they should all work together creating a community they are proud of.  He said they need to sacrifice.  He commented that together they stand and that is how he has good working relationships.

 

Sorenson commented that over 300,000 people are affected by this agreement.  He stated that the entire bargaining unit of employees is dedicated.  He said they tried to put together an agreement for employees and taxpayers. 

 

14. CORRESPONDENCE TO THE BOARD

 

Sorenson indicated that he received a letter dated March 6, 2009 from Bobby Mink, Acting Direction of Oregon Youth Authority, stating they are modifying funding to Lane County under the reference IGA, the modification of gang intervention services agreement.  He said it was copied to Lisa Smith, Department of Youth Service, and it is in progress.  He said the Home Builders Association of Lane County is having a work shop today from 2 to 4:30 called How Housing Affects Our Economy.  He sent them a note stating the meeting conflicted with their meeting.  He said that Linda Hamilton, Chair, Martin Luther King, Jr. Celebration Committee, has a written a letter expressing appreciation for continued Lane County support for the annual Martin Luther King, Jr. Celebration.  He recalled that it was held on January 19, 2009 and they are looking forward to next yearís event.  He distributed a letter dated February 27 from Cary Leibman, Co-Chair of LCAS Advisory Committee.  He said they are commenting on the membership of the advisory committee and they wanted to make three recommendations.  He received an e-mail from Karuna Neustadt, Developmental Disabilities.  He said they were having a reception for Developmental Disabilities Awareness Month.  He received a plaque from Greg Evans, Chair of the Committee to Honor Rosa Parks.

 

Handy indicated that there has been discussion about the at-large positions on the LCAS Advisory Committee and how those get filled.  He said there were questions raised by  Scott Bartlett.  He wanted input around that situation.

 

Fleenor said he and County Counsel had discussions about trying to standardize the appointment process and the committee makeup.  He said it was an example of where they want to standardize wherever possible. He indicated that it was County Counselís intent to come back with a proposal that they review Lane Manual, and  to come back with a standardized approach.  He noted in the meantime,  he wanted to hold things in abeyance until they have a standard approach.

 

15. COMMISSIONERS' ANNOUNCEMENTS

 

None.

 

16. EXECUTIVE SESSION as per ORS 192.660

 

Per ORS 192.660(e) for the purpose of conducting deliberations with persons regarding real property transactions and per ORS 192.660(L) for the purpose of discussing pending litigation.

 

18. OTHER BUSINESS

 

None.

 

There being no further business,  Commissioner Sorenson adjourned the meeting at 4:30 p.m.

 

Melissa Zimmer

Recording Secretary