BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS'
May 12, 2009
Harris Hall Main Floor
Commissioner Pete Sorenson presided with Commissioners Bill Dwyer, Bill Fleenor, Rob Handy and Faye Stewart present. County Administrator Jeff Spartz, County Counsel Liane Richardson and Recording Secretary Melissa Zimmer were also present.
1. ADJUSTMENTS TO THE AGENDA
2. EMERGENCY BUSINESS
3. COUNTY ADMINISTRATION
Spartz reported that Chuck Forster, Lane Workforce Partnership, received $2.767 million form the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act funds: $1.35 million for low income youth and $500,000 for low income adults and $900,000 for dislocated workers.
b. COMMENDATION/for David Crowell.
Spartz commended David Crowell for his past work on the Budget Committee. Sorenson read a letter commending David Crowell.
4. COUNTY COUNSEL
5. PERFORMANCE AUDITOR
Stewart Bolinger, Performance Auditor, had no report.
Fleenor indicated that over a period of time the Board of Commissioners generate a lot of board orders. He asked if there was any mechanism by which they are tracking the board orders being executed and to what level. He wanted a report back to the Board as to whether these board orders are followed.
Spartz reported they do not have a high mechanized system. He indicated that staff communiates with the appropriate department and they expect the departments to do their follow up work.
Fleenor wanted to establish something more formal. He wanted to make it part of the Good Governance Board Order to make sure they are being implemented.
Dwyer didnít have concerns about the board orders being implemented. He thought they could do a cursory review on a quarterly basis.
Sorenson thought if there was a way to search the board orders it would be helpful. He wanted the County Administrator to check into this to see what other jurisdictions are doing.
Bolinger said he follows up on implementation of the audit reports. He said if they have compliance and there is no issue, he wouldnít say anything but if there was a dispute over implementation, then he would get back to the Board.
Handy requested Spartz and Sorenson to see if they can do follow up. He said since the time he has been on the Board there have been multiple times of confusion within the organization. He wanted to follow up with the auditor if there is a money board order where the money is going. He wanted to make sure the organization understands that there are consequences if direction is not followed.
Fleenor was concerned that when there were board orders from October of last year when they made certain decisions prior to the financial failure of the economy, that some of the financial constraints are not allowing people to implement the board orders. He wanted to be notified in a timely manner if someone is not going to comply.
6. EXECUTIVE SESSION as per ORS 192.660
7. PUBLIC WORKS
a. WORK SESSION/Lane County/Emerald Peopleís Utility District Short Mountain Landfill Gas Contract.
Patti Hanson, Waste Management, gave a presentation on the current agreement between Lane County and EPUD. (Copy in file).
Sorenson asked how the agreement was working from EPUDís standpoint.
Frank Lamb, EPUD, reported that over the years it has been a positive project for EPUD but in the most recent years (because they were a pioneer in this area) it doesnít qualify to be renewal. He stated they are in a new contract with Bonneville and they are not eligible to receive a lower rate for the next 20 years. He stated it has backfired and they are facing substantial power costs. He said they have four generators and they are struggling to keep three of them running due to recycling. He said they did not get the gas they had hoped. He said it is still a viable plant and he thought the contract was working.
Fleenor thought the experiment was a success between the public agencies and he encouraged EPUD that as they move into the 21st century to exercise options that will provide a win win for all the constitutents. He wants to see forward progress. He wants to create the best utility possible.
Stewart wanted to look at ways the County could improve positions and turn this into a positive. He indicated that as they move forward there will be a point to do something else. He commented that change is difficult and hopefully some day they will make changes.
Dwyer said this is a work in progress. He stated they have a contract. He asked how willing they were to amend the contract to work together to mazimize the facility with the goal of extending the life of the facility.
Fleenor asked if they could both profit and find out where the common interests are, then to see about perfecting a contract. He asked EPUD if they were willing to work with staff to come up with a proposal.
Lamb stated they were willing to work together.
Handy wanted to collaborate and make it more equitable and forward looking. He stated that he sees it as an opportunity to collaborate on ideas they are missing.
Fleenor recommended putting together a joint operating committee and then make recommendations to both entities.
Lamb indicated that they already have an operating committee.
Fleenor asked Lamb and Hanson to come back with a document for a joint committee to be put together.
Handy thought they should take a six month window and then come back.
8. PUBLIC COMMENTS
Mia Nelson, Lowell, commented on the population forecast. She stated she was frustrated on how often the population forecast has been delayed over the past year and a half. She said staff will be presenting ideas for the Board to consider about expediting the process. She indicated that she has been working with staff. She explained that a key to making an expedited process work for this forecast is that it needs to go into the Rural Comprehensive Plan. She said Landwatch, Goal 1 and she have argued for over a year that the forecast must be part of a special purpose plan, while the small cities have insisted that go into the Rural Comp Plan. She indicated that the reason they fought about this was because of the different requirements for initiating and processing those two plan amendments. She added that only the Board can initiate special purpose plans and anyone who asks the Board to do so must offer to pay the cost. She said staff has devised a way to accomplish these things for all future cases, even if the forecast is in the rural part of the Comp Plan. She said because of this they are willing to step aside on the issue so an expedited process can move forward.
Deb Frisch, Eugene, had follow-up comments to District Attorney Alex Gardner and Sheriff Burger about the Budget.
9. COMMISSIONERS' RESPONSE TO PUBLIC COMMENTS AND/OR OTHER ISSUES AND REMONSTRANCE
10. PUBLIC WORKS
a. DISCUSSION/Status of May 19th Joint Board of Commissioners/Lane County Planning Commission Meeting Regarding the Lane County Coordinated Population Forecast.
Matt Laird, Land Management, discussed the Lane County Coordinated Population Forecast and the status of othe May 19 Joint Board with the Board and the Lane County Planning Commissioners. He said the meeting will focus on a policy question on exactly where the population data will be located within the Lane County Comprehensive Plan. He said the meeting has been noticed and will allow the opportunity for the public to comment before the joint Board and Planning Commission. He said questions have been raised as to why this will not be considered at the first evidentiary Public Hearing. He said because the notice to DLCD had not been sent 45 days prior to the meeting date, that would have required the notice to be sent on April 3. He recalled that the process was approximately four weeks behind schedule to provide additional opportunities for citizens to participate in a process. He instructed his staff to wait until after the joint May 19 Board and Planning Commission meeting in order to receive direction from the bodies on how to proceed with the text amendment that they would mail to DLCD for review. He indicated that the 45 day notice for the small city PAPA application has already been mailed and the local notice for the upcoming First Reading and Public Hearing on June 3 He thought there could be possible adoption by June 17. He said if the Board is interested, they could fold the record of the Lane County Coordinated Population process including the Portland State University Draft Report into the record of the small city PAPA application. He explained that this would allow the Board to compare the two sets of population figures and would not be inconsistent because the Portland State University figures have already been discussed in the small city record.
Laird stated that if this path is chosen, the Board could also choose to have additional discussion with the Planning Commission at the May 19 joint meeting. He added in order to clarify the Planning Commission recommendation, (considering the new PSU report that has been issued and the discussed forecast processed and method of adoption) if the Board chooses this option, he would recommend sending a notice to all parties that have been involved with both the Lane County coordinated process and the small city PAPA, inviting them all to participate in the upcoming May 19 and June 3 Public Hearings.
Laird said in response to the comments, they have heard from the city of Springfield and their need for individual population numbers. He thought the Board could direct staff to divide the metro urban area population produced by PSU east and west of I-5, using historic 72 percent, 28 percent ratio between the populations of Eugene and Springfield. He said this would allow staff to include these numbers in any future tables produced by Lane Management. He stated this short time line will be difficult for staff, putting together board orders and legal notices. He added that it can be done but other projects will be placed on hold and all long range resources will be directed at finishing the population projects.
Dwyer wanted to expedite the process to get this resolved. He was willing to make the commitment to the resources.
Fleenor asked if there were any legal problems with this.
Vorhes said if anyone shows up and raises issues they will have to deal with as it comes. He thought it could be done.
MOTION: to 1) Place the PSU report and record into the small city PAPA record where it will be considered by the Board alongside the original proposal and any other testimony that enters the record. 2) Schedule the small PAPA for the First Reading and Hearing on June 3, Second Reading and potential decision on June 17; authorize staff to prepare a table of the PSU numbers including the separation of urban areas east and west of I-5, using the 72 percent, 28 percent rule for the Board to consider as part of the small city PAPA process; hold a May 19 joint Lane County Board and Planning Commission meeting to discuss the forecast process method of adoption; any affect of the PSU forecast, the meeting has been noticed and public comment will be taken. The board can ask if the Planning Commisison wants to be involved further with the consideration of the PSU numbers. 5) Send letters to all cities and other participants in both the PSU and small city PAPA proceedings explaining the current process and inviting them to participate. 6) Hold off initiating a separate adoption process for the PSU forecast, they can reactive in the future if necessary. For a timeline, (May 13 through 15) they should write a proposed ordinance using small city numbers, putting the forecast on page 4 of the RCP, send letters to cities and other participants advising them of the process, a new proposal to DLCD; prepare a board packet that will include the PSU chart that is to be done between May 13 and 15; May 18 the Board packet must be submitted; May 19, joint meeting with the LCPC on forecast, take public ccomment, discussion process for the small city PAPA and the impact to the PSU forecast, June 3, First Reading and Hearing, need to make all substantial changes now to avoid needing to do additional readings beyond June 17, consider written record open seven days, advise continued hearing to ensure staff has time to deal with the materials prior to June 17 meeting and on June 17, Second Reading, deliberation and possible action.
Fleenor MOVED, Dwyer SECONDED.
Fleenor wanted to make a friendly amendment to allow Land Management to reshuffle their work schedule to allow resources and time to allow the small city PAPA.
Dwyer SECONDED the amendment.
11. CORRESPONDENCE TO THE BOARD
12. COMMISSIONERS' ANNOUNCEMENTS
Fleenor reported on May 6 at the Willamalane Adult Activity Center there was an event by the Lane Coalition of Senior Programs honoring older Ameicans.
Handy attended an event at Clearlake Elementary School regarding communities and schools together.
Stewart reported that yesterday he was in Salem and he was asked to speak before Sen. Morrisette, Human Services and Rural Policy Committee, regarding how mental health services are distributed through integrated plans. He said the concern Lane County has is they already have an integrated system and they havenít included Lane County or other counties in the process to come up with a better delivery system. He said they requested to include more people recognizing that the Board of Commissioners is the Board of Mental Health. He also attended AOCís Legislative Meeting.
Dwyer also went to Salem and gave written testimony on a bill they weighed in on.
Fleenor talked about a letter that was published in The Register Guard about comments he made about the Joint Elected Officials Ambulance Summit.
13. EXECUTIVE SESSION as per ORS 192.660
14. OTHER BUSINESS
There being no further business, Commissioner Sorenson recessed the meeting at 12:00 p.m.