December 1, 2010
Following HACSA
Harris Hall Main Floor
APPROVED 1-12-2011

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


Item 5 E. is to be pulled off the Consent Calendar.  Fleenor added 5 B 2  on the Consent Calendar.  


Mark Callahan, Eugene, was opposed to ORDER 10-11-23-8 for the Department of Public Works to conduct a storm water feasibility study by Dan Hurley.  He thought it was a stretch of the rules as to what the road fund money was originally designed for.  He said the Board is attempting to justify to the public to spend $100,000 of public money to do a study that will ultimately cost the public more money in the future in the form of taxes.  He commented that the public doesnít want to be taxed more than they already are. He urged the Board not to approve it.

Dave Van Sickle, Eugene, recalled last year during the discussion of the urban transition agreement, he challenged the Board about showing him the state law that requires annexation.  He said Kent Howe, Land Management, came up later with documents and none stated they must be annexed or to have property subdivided.   He thought they should eliminate the annexation requirement of the Metro Plan.  He indicated there was no state law for this. 

Cindy Land, Eugene, thought the Board should not approve the agenda item that was moved back onto the agenda.  She said it was a waste of time and resources. She said the community is saturated with taxes and fees.  She wanted the Board to protect rural Lane County.

Shaylor Scalf, Junction City, said he is the Lane County Chairman for the America for Prosperities.  He said he represents 1,006 individuals.  He said they cannot afford the study for the stormwater utility fee.  He urged the Board to either postpone it or to cancel it because the people canít afford the money.  He was opposed to the ICLEI program.  He said it will cost the County money. He added that he was against paying dues to an international corporation that takes away the rights of people.

Suzanne Jackson, discussed the importance of the Fairgrounds to the community.  She said if the Fairgrounds was not located where it is that most people would go out of Lane County or vanish.  She said the Fairgrounds provide a venue for small businesses to sell their items or services to the community.  She stated that they have to preserve the Fairgrounds.  She said it is important to take care of the grounds.  She added that the roof of the Exhibit Hall needs to be replaced.  She commented that the buildings bring revenue to the Fairgrounds and will continue to do so as long as they are rentable.  She stated the longer this gets put off, the more damage there is to the buildings.  She asked the Board to vote on this as soon as possible.

Peggy Ward, Eugene, represented Piccadilly Flea Market.  She said her event alone brings in about 5,500 sellers per year and over 26,000 shoppers.  She indicated that a lot of them come out of Lane County and they bring in money for lodging, gasoline and other businesses.

Jim Gillette, Eugene, believed that he has integrity.  He said that the Board believed staff over him.  He wanted proof that he was guilty.

Helen Berg, Eugene, stated that she produces the Home and Garden Shows.  She commented that the Fairgrounds serves every industry and keeps her vendors in business.  She indicated that the roof has needed replacement for a long time.  She noted that the construction of the roof will affect the scheduling of dates.  She urged the Board to vote on the convention center at the next meeting so they donít lose people to another venue.

Karen Ramus, Eugene, said she co-produces the Home Show.  She said the Fairgrounds are important.  She said the facility brings in about $28 million in economic impact to Lane County and supports 700 jobs.  She asked the Board to think about how the facility incubates business.  She urged the Board to put the funding of the Fairgrounds on the next agenda.  She said that Rick Reno needs to block dates out in the dry season.  She asked for a safe facility to invite the public into.

Kevin Matthews, Eugene, spoke as in independent environmental policy analyst.  He supported the Boardís work session on climate planning.  He said there was interest in pursuing ICLEI membership with some ends to be tied up.  He said this could be done on a pro bono or grant funded basis.  He said it would create shared knowledge in the community. He recalled that the Budget Committee approved the dues allocation.

John Sundquist, Coburg, stated he is the chair of VMAC.  He said they have three recommendations for the Board.  He said they want the Board to approve the updated 2010 IVM Program Document; they want the Board to remove the current management prescriptions policy document from the website and policy and that the Board of Commissioners inform the Oregon Department of Agriculture that no permission is granted to anyone to spray pesticides or chemicals in the Lane County right-of-way and to inform the Oregon Department of Agriculture that any spraying occurring is illegal.

Robert Sowdon, Cottage Grove, said the city of Eugeneís climate action plan through ICLEI cost $100,000 just to do the plan and there was another $200,000 set aside to implement the plan.  He didnít believe in the climate process part.  He was against a stormwater fee.


Dwyer discussed his observation about workers losing unemployment benefits at Christmas Time.  He commented that he doesnít like the way the County is going.

Stewart asked if the Facilities Committee reviewed the roof project at the Fairgrounds.

Dwyer responded that they havenít made a recommendation.  He recalled that they had a discussion about the Fairgrounds and what they can afford to do.

Spartz reported that David Suchart, Management Services, is putting together documents.  He indicated it will come to the Facilities Committee and then to the Board.

Fleenor reported that this Board voted 99.9 percent of the time 5-0,  with the exception of five or six votes being 4-1.  He said The Register Guard calling the Board a progressive majority does not sit with the facts. He said this is a non-partisan Board dealing with non- partisan issues.  He doesnít know where the conflict is coming from.

Sorenson addressed the issue of the Lane Event Center and the roof.  He thought the Board should schedule this for action.  He thought the Lane Events Center is important.  He wanted the agenda team to fast track this issue.




A. Approval of Minutes
April 8, 2009, HACSA, 9:00 a.m.
December 3, 2008, Regular Meeting, 9:00 a.m.
April 7, 2009, Regular Meeting, 10:00 a.m.
April 7, 2009, Regular Meeting, 1:30 p.m.
April 14, 2009, Regular Meting, 9:00 a.m.
April 8, 2009, Regular Meeting, Following  HACSA
April 8, 2009, Regular Meeting, 1:30 p.m.
October 5, 2010, Regular Meeting, 9:00 a.m.
October 5, 2010, Regular Meeting, 1:30 p.m.
October 6, 2010, Regular Meeting, 9:00 a.m.
October 26, 2010, Joint Board/Planning Commission, 6:30 p.m.

B. Board of Commissioners

1) ORDER 10-12-1-1/ In the Matter of Appointing Liane Richardson as Interim County Administrator.

2) RESOLUTION & ORDER 10-12-1-6 Transferring $5,000 from General Fund Operational Contingency to Materials and Services within General Expense to Support St. Vincent DePaulís Holiday Basket Program.

C. County Counsel

1) ORDER 10-12-1-2/In the Matter of Award of Bid LCP 2010/11 for a Vote Tabulation System, Software, and Related Services in the Amount of $619,025.

D. Management Services

1) ORDER 10-12-1-3/In the Matter of Extending a 3-Year Plus One Year Contract for Financial Advisory Services to Seattle Northwest Securities (Formerly Regional Financial Advisors) for One Additional Year, Expiring December 31, 2011 at No Additional Dollar Value to Contract.

E.  Public Works

1) ORDER 10-12-1-4/In the Matter of Appointing the Investment Manager of the Oregon State Excess Fund as Attorney-In-Fact for Lane County in a Limited Capacity and Authorizing the County Administrator to Sign the Power of Attorney.

MOTION: to approve the balance of the Consent Calendar.

Dwyer MOVED, Stewart SECONDED.

VOTE: 5-0.


a. Announcements

Spartz received a letter from Springfield Alliance regarding the Martin Luther King Celebration on January 17, 2011.  He asked the Board for $300.  He indicated that was what had been given in the past.  He said they will prepare a  board order.

MOTION:  to approve spending $300 for the Martin Luther King Celebration.


VOTE: 5-0.

b. RESOLUTION & ORDER 10-12-1-5 Order to Support the Production of a Popular Annual Financial Report (PAFR) for FY 09-10 and Transferring $1,000 from Springfield Commissioner Account (County Administration, Fund 124) to Financial Services (Management Services, Fund 124).

Mike Barnhart, Finance, recalled they had a citizen request to request a Popular Financial Annual Report.  He said there was a recommendation to take this to Finance and Audit and they did that.  He said Finance and Audit recommended starting to prepare this report.  He recalled at Finance and Audit, Dwyer offered to fund a part-time position to begin the process of getting this template and shell together so the first year they can get it done.  He said they would transfer money from the commissioners to Finance and hire a U of O graduate student to help them do the document and get the first draft done.  He thought they would begin in January.

Christine Moody, Budget and Finance Manager, reported the amount is $1,000 from  Dwyerís account and they believe it will fund the graduate student.

MOTION:  to approve RESOLUTION & ORDER 10-12-1-5.


VOTE: 5-0.

c. DISCUSSION/Membership to the International Council on Local Environmental Initiatives (ICLEI) Ė Local Governments for Sustainability.

Moody gave the past history of ICLEI.

Judy Williams, Budget Specialist, reported that she did research in trying to go forward with the $2,250 dues.  She stated there was more involved than just giving a check to ICLEI.  She indicated that they have to identify key staff liaisons, elected officials, media and staff liaisons.  She said the second piece of joining ICLEI is to pass a resolution within six months, stating the County will go forward and prioritizing climate mitigation as one of their goals and how they will go forward with climate mitigation policies.  She stated they would also have to work on a set of milestones. She asked for direction. She reported the city of Eugene has joined ICLEI and they have done the Community Climate Action Plan that has cost $100,000 plus $20,000 they paid to a consultant to help them carry this forward.  She added city of Eugene has set aside another $200,000 to make this plan happen.  She stated there are additional costs in addition to the dues. 

Dwyer didnít share the priorities with the city.  He doesnít want to spend any resources on this. He commented that they should not spend money talking about things they canít control.

Stewart shared the concerns about the potential costs.  He heard from Kevin Matthews that this could be done with volunteers. He said this is really about the cost and importance.  He said they passed a resolution and support in following a state law requiring them to do a study on greenhouse gases and that is taking place through transportation plans.  He said they have tried using different biofuels and vehicles at Public Works.  He stated they are trying to do their best with decisions that impact.  He doesnít think spending this money or committing this Board to do a greenhouse gas inventory is the appropriate direction at this time.

Handy commented that climate change and sustainability are intricate parts of their economy moving forward. He wasnít interested in additional costs and he didnít see where they would have additional costs with the proposal before them.  He said developing a plan framework now is important.  He said they should move forward with this now as it will save costs in the long run. He thought Sorenson should be the liaison.  He said they could appoint Amber Fossen for the media liaison.  He said they need the administrator to appoint an initial staff liaison. He believed this was important

MOTION:  to move that Lane County Board of Commissioners approves the proposed board order on ICELI membership and appoints Sorenson as initial elected official liaison to ICELI and to direct the County Administrator to select an initial staff liaison to ICELI and select an internal media contact and to submit the complete membership application to ICELI by December 15, 2010.

Handy MOVED, Sorenson SECONDED.

Dwyer stated that he heard a large sucking sound.  He said they hear a report from their objective staff on what it takes, what other communities have spent and Handy is in denial.  He was suspect of international organizations that have an agenda that he is not sure of.  He was worried about the loss of local control.  He thought this was the tip of the iceberg.  He said if the motion passes, the next Budget Committee will not fund this given the fact they have to right size their government and change the way they do business.  He was a no.

Sorenson thought they should spend the money and move forward with this.  He said it does commit them to do things down the road.  He thought it was an economic development issue  He noted the Board has shown a willingness to keep the issue of climate change moving.

Fleenor commented that based on the discussion on both sides, he was not convinced they need to join ICLEI to commence climate protection.  He said they can work on climate protections without becoming a member.  He thought they could set up a citizen advisory group to explore pro bono and grant opportunities prior to them making the commitment.  He did not want to fund ICLEI but to set up a citizen advisory committee to see how they would fund and maintain this on a long term basis.  He said in order to go forward, he wanted an amended motion without an ICLEI dues payment but an effort to start a work group to review the grant opportunities.  He asked the maker of the motion if he would amend his motion, otherwise he is a no.

Stewart asked if this is supported, what concrete commitment is made if the future Board doesnít want to continue.  He wanted to know if they were bound to do the greenhouse gas emission inventory, or if they would be out the $2,500.

Moody thought they could get out of the organization but they would have to see if they could recover their dues.

Stewart asked what they are bound to if this motion passes.

Spartz understood that ICLEI is a voluntary organization.  He didnít think there was any legal commitment that was made.

Handy said they are bound to appointing a commissioner liaison, a media contact and having someone in the organization identified as a contact.  He said it is a long term frame work with no requirements for timelines or implementation.  He said there is benefit for the community to begin now.

Richardson said they could get out of the organization, but they couldnít get the membership fee back.  She stated they are not just committing to the liaison, they are committing to move towards the five ICLEI planning milestones.  She said if they are going to pay money and join the group it would mean they are committing to those milestones.

Fleenor said before they spend the money, they have to source out the revenue.  He wanted a task force to identify the pro bono and grant opportunities.  He indicated that once those are identified then he sees no reason why any Board would not move forward.  He said due to the economic uncertainty, he thought this would be inappropriate to move forward until they find sources of revenue that will sustain a long term basis.

VOTE: 2-3 (Dwyer, Fleenor, Stewart dissenting).


a. Announcements


Stewart asked that Legal Counsel give a complete report of the current Legal Counsel costs allocated to the administrative department for the last three years, including all lawsuit costs, settlements and any costs incurred. He asked for a list of the current lawsuits in process, the current date to be completed and potential estimated costs.  He was concerned about the fact the administrative costs in this organization are allocated to the different departments.  He said they are self-funded for liability on the insurance side.  He said when they are being sued, the costs are being allocated out to departments to pay back.  He has concerns how they get paid back and the impact to future service that this organization provides.  He thought it could be close to $1 million for costs incurred over that period of time.  He wanted to know how it gets paid back.  He noted the District Attorney was concerned about the pay back.  He thought future services to that department could be reduced.  He asked if there was a future policy the Board should consider when they have a lawsuit or claim against them that could reduce the liability in the future.  He asked for the true costs.

Sorenson thought this should be referred to the agenda team for discussion.

Dwyer stated he had no problem moving this forward.

Handy thought it was a good idea.

Fleenor also thought this should be an agenda item for the future.

Stewart asked if this fit into the new Good Governance Board Order of 60 minutes.  He received e-mails with previous requests. 

Richardson responded that most costs are easy to acquire.  She thought she could work up to the 60 minutes.  She said the questionable part is looking into the future and figuring out full costs.


a. DISCUSSION/190 Notice Preliminary Plan.

Kent Howe, Land Management, recalled that three weeks ago the Board asked for a preliminary plan that would identify various options and outline the actions necessary and resources required to resume responsibility for administering the building and planning information and permit administration functions within the UGB of the Eugene Springfield Metro Plan.  He said there were scenarios discussed.  He said on October 22 the Board decided the appropriateness of the Urban Transition Agreements and the growth policies of the Metro Plan were the larger policy issues the Board wanted to explore with the joint election officials of Eugene and Springfield.  He said the JEO established a subcommittee that resulted in the July 1, 2009 recommendations to incorporate the Countyís larger policy issues and the efforts the two cities were doing to implement HB3337.

Howe said with regard to Scenario 1, (moving the Metro Plan Boundary to the current UGB and amending the Urban Transition Agreement) for Lane County to resume those planning and building permitting responsibilities, both cities of Eugene and Springfield would have to agree to the proposal and the necessary Metro Plan amendments that would be required are detailed in the September 21 packet materials.  He added terminating the Urban Transition Agreements would involve notification to the cities, a public information campaign, post acknowledgement plan amendments to the Metro Plan, acquiring about 15,000 hard copy paper files, training the planning staff to administer the existing land use development codes the cities currently enforce and amendments to Lane Code Chapter 10 for efficiency.  He said the first year costs would be between $750,000 and $1 million and annual costs thereafter of $300,000.  He added that before any resources are dedicated to a work effort in this direction, the Board of Commissioners should investigate the support for moving the Metro Plan boundary with the joint elected officials.

With regard to Scenario 2, (Howe noted to move the Metro Plan boundary and the UGB of the  Eugene Springfield Metro Plan to the current city limits of Eugene and Springfield, and amend the Urban Transition Agreements) for the County to resume the planning and building permit responsibilities, both cities of Eugene and Springfield would have to agree to the proposal.  He said it would limit the cityís jurisdiction and the Metro Plan to properties inside the city limits of Eugene and Springfield.   He added the properties outside the city limits by default would fall under the jurisdiction of the Rural Comprehensive Plan.  He noted the necessary actions to do the implementation would be that once they are designated in the Rural Comprehensive Plan, they would need to apply the Urban Unincorporated Communities Rule, the state rule to those areas of Santa Clara and River Road and North Springfield that are developed at urban densities.  He said they would have to revise the relationship to other plans and policies and fundamental principles and general assumptions and findings of the Metro Plan.  He said they would be picking up the coordination of public facilities and services and transportation for those areas outside the city limits that are now covered by the Metro Plan.  He stated the growth management goals, findings and policies would all have to be revised.  He said they would have to amend the Rural Comprehensive Plan and because they would be adding all of those areas to the Rural Comprehensive Plan, that would involve amendments to the environmental resources, Parks and Recreation facilities, public facilities and services element, transportation element and urbanization element of the Comprehensive Plan.  He added that these work tasks represent a significant work effort for the long range planning program and would consume significant staff resources.  He stated before any resources are dedicated, the Board should investigate the support for this proposal from the joint elected officials.  He stated that it requires Eugene and Springfield to agree.

With regard to the options, Howe explained that the Board could direct staff to work within the existing structure, the Envision Eugene and the Springfield 2030 planning processes, clarifying the issues and providing comment into their processes to implement HB3337 and participate in the new Comp Plan formation with Eugene and Springfield.  He added that Option 2 would be to conduct public hearings to involve citizens in issue identification and problem statements, develop desired solutions, and identify long term vision for governance of the urban growth area.  He noted that Option 3 is to present issues to  the joint elected officials and work collaboratively towards mutually beneficial solutions, or Option 4, send a notice of termination of the Urban Transition Agreements to the cities of Eugene and Springfield.  He stated these actions would totally consume the long range planning program and they recommend if either of the latter are the direction the Board wants to go, they will consider this an item to put on the long range planning program for the Boardís consideration in January on how it would fit.  

Stewart had conversations with John Ruiz, city of Eugene, and he said if they terminated the agreements, the city of Eugene would gladly hand that to the County within a week.  He also heard that from Springfield. He believed the Metro Plan is outdated and it is costly to change.  He said an adjustment would be to move the Metro Plan back to the urban growth boundary.  He thought that was doable and it would solve some problems.  He said they have given the ability to process permits to the cities in the UGB and they committed they would use their city codes if someone wants to do some development.  He asked what it would take to leave the Countyís zones on the properties.

Howe said state laws and Metro Plan policies are what govern and the County has adopted on the Springfield side the Springfield Code to apply inside the UGB outside the city limits and on the Eugene side, the County has adopted the Eugene Code to apply outside the city limits, inside the UGB.  He said the County could amend Chapter 10 that applies in the other 10 small citiesí UGB to be applicable inside the Eugene Springfield Metro Plan.  He stated that it would have to be consistent with the policies of the Metro Plan and would mirror the Eugene and Springfield code. He said the County wouldnít be able to allow anything different than what the Eugene and Springfield codes currently allow because they are governed by the Metro Plan policies and unless the Metro Plan policies are changed, the code provisions that implement those policies have to be the same.  He stated that Eugene and Springfield have to agree before those changes can occur.

Stewart didnít want to just send a letter.  He wanted to sit down with the jurisdictions to work things out.  He feels the frustration of the citizens.  He thought they could get to yes and correct the problems if they can look at adjusting the Metro Plan.

Howe stated the bottom line is Lane County could amend Lane Code Chapter 10 to apply inside the Eugene Springfield urban growth boundary area, but it would have to be consistent with the Metro Plan policies.   He said until the policies are changed, Lane Code Chapter 10 wouldnít be able to allow anything different than what the Eugene or Springfield code currently does, consistent with the Metro Plan policies.

MOTION:  to direct staff to work within the Envision Eugene and the Springfield 2030 Planning inside the UGB, but outside the Springfield city limits, work within Envision Eugene and Springfield planning processes currently underway to address specific neighborhood preservation and growth management issues through establishment of new Metro Plan goals, objectives, policies and or new neighborhood refinement plans.  Bring back a draft action plan on Feb 23, 2011 with a timeline that is coordinated with the city planning process currently underway and to bring this forward in the Land Management Long Range Work Plan for consideration in the new year.

Handy MOVED, Sorenson SECONDED.

Handy said it is time they represent the people in the urbanizable areas.  He thought they could get there by working collaboratively toward the goals and find mutually beneficial solutions.  He said they need objectives and policies in all of the various plans to address the issues they have been stuck on.  He said in response to the questions that he has been receiving in the communities,  he asked where the law is that requires annexation.

Matt Laird, Land Management, reported that in January they will come back to the Board to report on the Long Range Planning and Work Program and the resource list.  He added that they can look at the allocation for staffing for working on the plan.  He said in order for them to participate in the Envision Eugene and Springfield 2030 process and submit the Board comments into that process, they will need at least one work session with the Board so they can clarify the Boardís vision.  He said they also have to identify the resources in January.

VOTE: 5-0.

b. ORDER 10-11-23-8/In the Matter of Approving the Department of Public Works to Spend up to $100,000 from the Road Fund to Conduct a Phase 1 Stormwater Utility Feasibility Study.

Dan Hurley, Public Works, stated the Clean Water Act and Safe Drinking Water Act  requires local governments to manage stormwater and in Oregon it is handled through the Department of Environmental Quality.  He said his job is to advise the  Board of risks associated with actions.  He recalled the Board has had several work sessions where he has informed them about stormwater management requirements existing and looming in the future.  He said the costs are large.  He said on decommissioning UICís or dry wells, they are looking at $10.5 million over the next five years.  He said there are significant risks in not developing funds to address the need.  He said currently stormwater management is funded through the road fund.  He said there is the risk of draining the road fund with these storm water management requirements that would decrease the road fund ability to provide the necessary services.  He noted another risk is penalties.  He noted the DEQ could assess $2,500 per UIC per day for operating a non-authorized UIC.  He said given they have 75 UIC in the River Road Santa Clara area, it equates to $187,000 per day if they take no action to decommission unauthorized UICís.  He added that another risk is third party lawsuits.  He said they need to explore this in more detail to make an informed decision.

Stewart wanted a representative from DEQ to speak to the Board.  He wanted to know if there is any grant funding for this.  He said if Secure Rural Schools goes away in two years they wonít be able to do anything else at Public Works but cut vegetation and fill potholes.  He heard from constituents during the election that they arenít interested in paying any more money.  He said if they have to charge a fee, it would be referred to the voters and it wouldnít pass.  He commented that in the future they will not be able to provide mandated requirements by the state and federal government on the County.  He stated that he would rather have safe roads than invest in a system that appears to be working today but because administrative rules changed, they have higher restrictions that they donít comply  anymore.  He thought there needed questions to be answered first.

MOTION: to approve ORDER 10-11-23-8.

Sorenson MOVED, Dwyer SECONDED.

Fleenor stated these federal and state unfunded mandates represent good intentions but bad timing.  He said they donít have resources to throw at this issue.  He thought the $100,000 should be used to cut vegetation and fill potholes.  He thought they should allow next yearís Budget Committee to prioritize this expenditure and look at the cost benefit as it goes through the entire County budget instead of  passing this today and dealing with the consequences later.  He said he will not support this today.

Dwyer stated that he is looking out for the taxpayers. 

Sorenson said he will vote in favor of the motion.

VOTE: 3-2 (Stewart, Fleenor dissenting).

9. EXECUTIVE SESSION as per ORS 192.660

Per ORS 192.660(2)(h) for consulting with Legal County on litigation likely to be filed.

There being no further business, Commissioner Fleenor recessed the meeting at 12:00 p.m.

Melissa Zimmer
Recording Secretary