May 11, 2010
Harris Hall Main Floor
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.
1. ADJUSTMENTS TO THE AGENDA
Fleenor pulled 5.C.1) off the Consent Calendar. He noted for tomorrow under 2, Public Works, the title will be changed to Fourth Reading, Public Hearing and possible action on Ordinance PA 1270.
2. PUBLIC COMMENTS
David Clyne, City Manager, Junction City, supports the resolution for this afternoon. He supports funding or asking for an IGA to fund priorities for the Junction City facility in the Salem budget consideration for this coming session. He noted the facility is on target to open in 2013. He added the facility in Salem is on target to open in 2011 and when they open their doors, they will be full. He added there will already be a backlog when Junction City opens. He said for the issue of the community based facilities, the patient needs are different. He said there is a need for both types of facilities in Junction City. He asked the Board to continue to endorse the project.
Jim Gillette, Eugene, recalled that last week Dwyer gave a speech. Gillette realized how hopeless his situation is in front of the Board. He thinks he is looked at as a fool or jerk. He said he was tired of it. He asked why County Counsel themselves didnít change the constitutionality of charging people. He thought County Counsel jumps on the public. He said he was convicted without a trial or hearing. He said what has been done to him has been extortion. He said he was going to work hard to publicly prove this.
Kit Bradley, Eugene, spoke on behalf of having Earth Share Oregon. He wanted Earth Share Oregon as one of the organizations the fall fundraising campaigns support with Lane County employees. He commented that United Way does a good job of addressing the social world and Earth Share does a good job in the natural world. He wanted to give the option for the employees.
3. COMMISSIONERS' RESPONSE TO PUBLIC COMMENTS AND/OR OTHER ISSUES AND REMONSTRANCE
Dwyer commented that in the past he thought the process for fining was a flawed process. He said they fixed it to make sure people in the future are not treated the way Gillette was treated. He wanted County Counsel to see if there is a process being violated or a procedure that could be done to better serve the citizens.
Fleenor agreed with Dwyer but he stated it is difficult in practice. He said they hire County Counsel to ensure the Board complies with ordinances and manuals. He noted in this instance there was an ordinance and policy and procedures in place. He said they followed the process correctly and the compliance officer used the information for a compliance action that has led to the circumstances they are currently under. He said to request the County Counsel to advise them of potential changes in a procedure is overstepping their responsibility. He said they make the decisions as to what policies and procedures they are going to follow within the constitutional limits by the state and in this instance they did that. He said he sees a potential lack of interest of past boards but they took the matter into their hands and made the correction. He indicated that they started a process that is going through the judicial system and based on what County Counsel has advised them in public and Executive Session. He noted they now have judgments so they have to go through the process.
4. EMERGENCY BUSINESS
5. CONSENT CALENDAR
A. Approval of Minutes:
May 14, 2008, Regular Meeting, 1:30 p.m.
February 10, 2010, Regular Meeting, 9:00 a.m.
February 23, 2010, Regular Meeting, 9:00 a.m.
February 23, 2010, Regular Meeting,1:30 p.m.
B. Public Safety
1) ORDER 10-5-11-1/Delegating Authority to the County
Administrator to Sign an Intergovernmental Agreement Establishing a Regional Interoperable Radio System.
2) ORDER 10-5-11-2/Delegating Authority to the County Administrator to Sign an Amendment to the Intergovernmental Agreement Establishing a 7-County Regional Interoperable Radio System.
C. Public Works
1) ORDER 10-5-11-3/Approving Parks Five-Year SDC Methodology and Rate Review.
MOTION: to approve the balance of the Consent Calendar.
Dwyer MOVED, Stewart SECONDED.
6. COUNTY COUNSEL
Richardson announced that the ballots are due next Tuesday. She indicated that if they donít get into the mail today, then the ballots should be placed in the drop box.
7. PERFORMANCE AUDITOR
Stewart Bolinger, Performance Auditor, stated that he had health problems and that was why he missed the last session. He noted the Board was waiting for a set of profile qualifications for the auditor replacement. He said he will have a packet to the Board by Thursday. He recalled 18 months ago he alerted the Board that they were missing the opportunity to bill federal grants for IS. He noted that Mike Barnhart, Finance Manager, will be making a presentation to the Board where he will give the details. He indicated they will have a plan for allocating $7 million in IS charges.
Fleenor indicated there is a short amount of time that Bolinger will be with the County. He asked if Bolinger could bring back a list of projects he is working on tomorrow that he considers is of high importance that he could finish by July 1.
8. PUBLIC WORKS
a. DISCUSSION/Update on the Eugene-Springfield Metropolitan Area General Plan (Metro Plan) Joint Elected Officialsí Regional Issues Work Plan.
Kent Howe, Land Management, recalled at the end of 2008 the Board had five issues they wanted the two cities in the Metro Plan to listen to and come up with resolutions. He noted in early 2009 the Joint Elected Officials of Eugene, Springfield and Lane County put together a subcommittee and they reported back to the JEO in June. He noted attachment 1 (copy in file) had the recommendations. He indicated hat Stewart and Handy were the two commissioners from Lane County on the subcommittee. He said the recommendations were forwarded by the JEO to the staff of Eugene, Springfield and Lane County to work on those types of regional issues. He reported back last November and this February to the JEO. He added they will be going to the JEO on June 17. He said the purpose of this meeting is for him to report on what they have accomplished to date, where they are at and what they are going to be taking to the JEO on June 17. He thought that initially work could be done on the five issues the Board of Commissioners had that the JEO endorsed but as they have been working on them, Springfield has been working on their HB3337 implementation and Eugene has been working on their HB3337 implementation and they will require amendments to the Metro Plan. He said they are going to ask the JEO on whether there is an integration that needs to be done of the three or four different areas that will require amendments to the Metro Plan.
Howe gave an update on the five county issues. (Copy in file).
Dwyer thought the real key is the MPC changing the dispute resolution. He said unless that is resolved, under the current process everything goes to MPC. He doesnít want the disagreement to stop the process. He said they want to preserve critical farm land and open spaces. He said they need to know about the soils overlay to see where they are going to expand. He wanted a report on where it is they are expanding and where the conflicts are with the farmland.
Fleenor thinks the Metro Plan is fundamentally flawed and decayed from the inside out. He thought they should separate the cities of Springfield and Eugene into their own comp plans so each one will have their own identifies and move forward individually without having all three bodies determining their fate. He might not support it, but he wants to improve upon the product. He said his issue has been representation with the UGB, outside of the annexed areas. He wanted an appeals process so it doesnít fall on deaf ears at the city council. He wanted to see more of a substantive process by which citizens in the UGB have a right to come in and appeal versus just a discussion.
Howe explained that the main issue is the County and city would be applying the same law. He said they have delegated it to the cities. He said what frustrates the citizens is urbanizing types of development canít occur until the property has been annexed and at that time urban densities are encouraged. He said there is confusion because of delegation of authority
Stewart agreed that they should be working to move the Metro boundary to the UGB and it should be sooner than later. With regard to the urbanizable area representation, he believed they should take back the responsibility of issuing permits within the UGB if those people havenít been annexed into the city. He said they should bring their zoning up to todayís zoning. He said there are areas that have remnant zones from back in the 80ís that donít exist today. He thought they should try to reduce the veto power and make it respective to the jurisdictional boundaries. He didnít think the County should have a veto power because they are partners with both of the entities. He thought for farmland and open space protection, the Board should get the information from Howe on the work that has been done to date, considering how the cities might meet their required needs for buildable lands and the County should make the statement as soon as possible they are concerned about open space, farm and forest lands in the proposals and they want to get involved sooner than later.
Howe said with the urbanizable area, if they took the delegation back they gave to the two cities, the concern is they would then be providing all the advice and hand holding of the citizens who want to do something and when they go to do it, they go to the city, get annexed and pay their fees at the city to develop the property. He added the County doesnít get the financial compensation for providing all of the work. He indicated that the way they have it now, the cities are the ultimate providers of the services in the areas inside the UGB.
Handy wanted to see specific policy language in the Metro Plan updated that will address maintaining the characteristics and the existing qualities of Santa Clara and River Road that have been identified. He added they want to maintain those after annexation. He thought they should take back the planning by having the policy language in the Metro Plan.
Howe commented that the city of Eugene has a challenge with the River Road Santa Clara area. He indicated for state law and Metro Plan policies, the Countyís role is to not allow development in the rural area beyond where they have identified developed and committed exception areas. Allowed. He added the incentives of the state program and the Metro Plan are that inside an urban growth boundary, those are areas that are developed to urban densities so they can protect the rural areas. He said it will be a delicate balancing act because the city of Eugene will be operating as they want to keep large tracts undeveloped but the statewide program is trying to densify those areas to urban densities so they donít need additional urban growth boundary expansions into the rural area. He said sprawl and density is the challenge. He said they have to plan for a 20 year horizon with UGB expansions or redevelopment and density increases and combinations to keep it livable.
Dwyer agreed with Stewart that they are responsibilities they can assume. He said the real key is they put their citizens in a demilitarized jurisdictional limbo. He stated that they donít have the rights that every other citizen has because they canít have redress to their city council. He said something is fundamentally wrong with that concept and that is what they need to focus on. He said they canít force the city or any other government to say what they want their neighborhoods to look like. He said they need to make sure they have a mechanism to be represented. He said they need to take back those responsibilities.
Sorenson agreed with the observation that the Metro Plan needs to encourage early and frequent consultations between the cities and the County. He said the topic of fire districts needs to be addressed. He thought advocates for library districts want to know if they can push a metro library concept. He noted the Metro Plan in the past has had a harsh view on districts. He wanted a Metro Plan policy to reduce the number of taxing jurisdictions.
Stewart doesnít think it is going to make a difference to write into the Metro Plan that these things need to be recognized. He thought if they took back the responsibility in the areas and putting it on the long range work plan, they could put together a guidance policy for the lands they have the authority over. He doesnít see them getting to yes in a timely and possible way. He said if they take control, they put the things in place and once they are established and do a good job of meeting the needs of the citizens, then they as a body start engaging with the cities in having a uniform type of a management for that area.
Fleenor thought in the long run both cities and the county would be better with individual comp plans.
Howe commented that the Board was well prepared for the June 17 joint elected officials meeting. He heard that the Board wanted early and frequent consultations between the cities and the County and on June 17 the Board has the opportunity to make that point.
STATUS REPORT/Work Group for Lane Code/Manual/Comp Plan Revisions Per Adopted Land Management Division Program.
Matt Laird, Land Management, reported that May 10 was the seventh meeting of the Land Use Task Force. He indicated they discussed developed and committed exceptions where they had not reached a consensus to remove the existing code language. He noted there was discussion on demographics and population growth of rural communities and how the population in Oregon is increasing but the student enrollment in the rural schools are decreasing. He stated the primary topic of Mondayís meeting was non-resource land designations. He commented that it didnít appear that the process is broken. He noted they have had five applications in the past ten years. He noted the next meeting they will be discussing F1 to F2 zone changes.
9. COMMISSIONERSí BUSINESS
DISCUSSION/EarthShare of Oregon.
Julie Daniels, Bring, discussed Earth Share. She recommended the Board pass a resolution to hold an annual combined Earth Share and United Way campaign in 2010
Spartz stated that they would need approval of the Board. He thought unless they construe the approvals carefully, they will open the door to numerous other requests that they may need to approve and then they raise the workload.
Richardson noted they only charitable giving is the United Way for Lane County, there is not an APM or Lane Manual requirement. She added that through United Way, even if a program isnít one of the designated programs that show up on United Wayís list, they can still identify a charitable organization to donate to. She recalled that Earth Share came to the Board a few years ago and made the same request and the employees were polled on whether they wanted to have an additional campaign program go on beyond the charitable giving they already do. She stated the answer was no, because of the additional staff load it would create. She said in the past they have always recommended that the charities go to United Way to become one of those organizations. She talked to Finance and there wouldnít be a way for them to add them to be an automatic donation for Earth Share and it would complicate the matters for employees to donate directly to them. She noted there is no legal prohibition to add them at the County level, but there is one at the state level.
Stewart stated that he is on the United Way Board and will be abstain from the vote.
Handy thought it would be good to have a choice, but they should limit it to two organizations. He wants Earth Share for an environmental component.
Sorenson wanted them to have an administrative policy in place where they can have work place giving instead of just United Way. He wanted to see it broadened beyond United Way. He thought if they got into an excess of five charities that there might be a problem. He wanted additional follow up on the complexity of adding another agency. He wanted to bring this back for a work session.
Stewart agreed to have staff obtain more information to bring this back.
Spartz preferred to keep this simple.
Stewart wanted to know what the added cost would be. He indicated that it has been explained that staff is already taxed and this would be additional work. He wanted to make sure if the Board moves forward with this they donít lose volunteerism.
There being no further business, Commissioner Fleenor recessed the meeting at 12:20 p.m.