July 25, 2001

9:00 a.m.

Harris Hall Main Floor

APPROVED 10/17/01


Commissioner Anna Morrison presided with Commissioners Bill Dwyer and Peter Sorenson present.  Bobby Green, Sr. and Cindy Weeldreyer were present via telephone.  County Administrator Bill Van Vactor, County Counsel Teresa Wilson and Recording Secretary Melissa Zimmer were also present.








Roxie Cueller, Lane County Home Builders Association, 2053 Laura Street, Springfield, stated she received a copy of the proposal on the parks SDC bond measure and she was disappointed.  She reiterated that the Home Builders wanted to work with the County on this.  She was against this proposal as there were many legal issues that were not addressed.  She suggested the County come up with a bond measure for the parks that they could actively endorse.


3. EXECUTIVE SESSION as per ORS 192.660






a. RECOGNITION AND PRESENTATION/Kelly Lee, National Gold Medal for Artwork at the NAACP Conference in New Orleans.


Dwyer presented Kelly Lee a plague for her getting a National Gold Medal for her artwork at the NAACP conference in New Orleans.


b. PRESENTATION/Scandinavian Festival Participants - Performance Re: Sesquicentennial Celebration.


Community members of Junction City presented information and performed a dance in commemoration of Lane County’s 150th anniversary celebration.


c. UPDATE/Facilities Capital Improvement Projects.


David Suchart, Management Services, reported the mental health facility was going along as scheduled.  He noted that this Friday night they would be replacing the coils in the chiller above County Administration.  He said they were still working on the ADA projects and had code issues for exiting the building after hours.  He said they were doing asbestos abatement work in the Sheriff and District Attorney’s office.  He stated he was working with the Farmers and Saturday Market people on work at the market.  He noted they were working on a cattery and other kennel expansion at Animal Regulation.


With regard to energy consumption, Suchart reported that for the first time, all of their facilities had been underutilized from the previous year with electricity.  On the Child Advocacy Center, he said they have a plan for proceeding, with the exact location to be determined.


d. LCDC Letter


Morrison noted that Kent Howe provided the Board with a letter for LCDC on Friday with regard to the proposed amendments to the Youth Camp Rule.


Dwyer explained the letter was denying local control on choices on site selected basis rather than having an arbitrary number put into the rule.


MOTION: to approve sending the letter.


Dwyer MOVED, Weeldreyer SECONDED.


VOTE: 5-0.




a. Announcements


Van Vactor announced that interviews were conducted of the finalist candidates for the Director of Public Works.  He said they had four candidates that applied and he announced that Ollie Snowden was chosen for the position.




a. EVALUATION SUMMARY/Overview of System and Program Level Evaluations.


Van Vactor explained the Department of Youth Services was able to look at best practices nationally and locally in evaluating Lane County’s own programs.  He stated that this year (due to statewide data complications) they hadn’t been able to complete their annual report.  He said in lieu of that, they were making a presentation.


Lynne Schoreder, Youth Services, noted they were lucky to have a position of a researcher/grant writer.  She said they have a strong commitment to continue their evaluations and keep the community safe.


Linda Wagner, Youth Services, had given the Board written information including the evaluation summary that lists all the evaluations that had been completed.  She added the Board had reports that gave more detailed information on some of the studies. (Copies in the file).  She had also listed the issues and challenges of the evaluations.


Wagner explained she compiled the most frequently asked questions, including information on juvenile crime, both single year and trend analysis.  She noted some crime information was in the wrong category.  She said the total number of crimes and data was correct, but when they analyzed by person and property, some crimes were in the wrong category.  She added they reported it to the state, which is cleaning it up.


With regard to what works, Wagner explained she had been collecting data locally.  She said they had to target intensive responses for youth at risk or for first time offenses and repeat offenders.  She said if they see youth (prior to coming to their department) who have high risk factors, they should be targeted for prevention services.


Dwyer asked how many youth had been identified and how many she intervened for.


Schroeder responded it was difficult for parents who have children who are out of control and not following the rules, but it is not a crime. She noted that about 20 years ago, the legislature decriminalized being a runaway, so they can’t respond to youth as delinquents.  She said their goal was to collaborate with schools and agencies in the community which can intervene.


Green asked what the Board could do to help parents who have kids who are on the brink of becoming criminals, but have not had contact with the juvenile justice system.


Schroeder noted there were local providers who provided intervention, and Looking Glass also works with these youth.


Wagner said their department is looking at programs to identify measurable outcomes and evaluate program efficacy.  She added they would stop what doesn’t work or not start programs unsupported by national research.


Under the summary of outcomes, Green asked if the work included recommendations of specific outcome measures and what would happen as a result.


Wagner responded the report went to the Juvenile Justice Service staff, administration and management team.  She has to repeat the study to see if those modifications had an outcome.


Wagner noted the staff survey was an internal evaluation done by their communication, morale and training group; but the whole department was involved. She said the majority of responses were positive by people working for the department.  She said dedication of staff and the high level of expertise were strengths.  She said  ongoing change and little room for advancement were noted as weaknesses.


Dwyer asked if they had data on kids from their department who went into the adult system of sex offenders.


Wagner responded they need to do research and they have plans on conducting the analysis.


Green asked if Measure 11 accomplished what the voters intended.


Wagner reported that Oregon doesn't send kids right to the adult system.  She said the national study showed that kids who go to an adult system commit crimes 30% more often than youth who are kept with other juveniles.  She said in Oregon juveniles are kept in the state juvenile system and receive more treatment.


On the Pathways evaluation, Wagner reported they had a pre- and post-analysis of kids at six, twelve, twenty-four and thirty-six months including tracking into the adult system.  She noted these youth are high risk and have an average of eight crimes before they go into Pathways. She noted this report had the change in percentages and actual amounts.


Green said it was important to talk to the kids and learn the value of the program and what it means to them.  He noted the only drawback was the program was for boys, and there needed to be one for girls.


Wagner reported that after three years there was a 59.5% reduction in crime.  She said there were 116 youth in the study and the average was 7.9 crimes before Pathways, and an average of 3.2 crimes after the program.


Green asked what percentage of juvenile crime was violent.


Wagner said the crime rate was going up, but she didn’t know the type.


On the contract with the state, Wagner explained that at one point, Lane County sold half of her time to the state for research which returned benefits to the County.  She said she did comparisons on gender issues and this was the only one in the state that was gender specific to girls.  She compared arrest rates with girls to boys.  She noted that girls represent between 20%-25% of all offenders, but their violent crime was growing at a higher rate.


Green asked if the Oregon Social Learning Research Center was involved.  He asked about the crime girls were committing.


Wagner responded they had seen an increase in assaults and fights in school.  She added aggressive behavior is either increasing or being reported more often.  She said that the Oregon Social Learning Center was working on a girl’s study.


Van Vactor suggested including juvenile and youth relative to Lane County in the annual report to see if Lane County is making any changes in state benchmarks.


Dwyer wanted the report to be consistent in each quarter.


Wagner was hopeful increased automation will produce quicker reports.


Morrison said they have to get ahead of the curve and have better results than the state.


Sorenson stated the kind of thorough data-driven analysis from the Department of Youth Services is something the Board and the administration should require of all departments.


Wagner said she is representing the expertise of their department and is proud to be part of it.




a. FIRST READING AND SETTING SECOND READING AND PUBLIC HEARING/Ordinance PA 1163/In the Matter of Naming an Unnamed Private Road, Bud Lane (17-05-20).


MOTION: to approve the First Reading and Setting a Second Reading and Public Hearing for August 29, 2001 at 1:30 p.m. on Ordinance PA 1163.


Dwyer MOVED, Sorenson SECONDED.


VOTE: 5-0.


b. REPORT BACK/System Development Charges (SDCs).


Rich Fay, Parks Director, reported that at the last work session there were concerns about SDCs.  He said there was a concern about the impact to the County’s SDCs on residential housing costs within the incorporated cities as it increased the SDC fee for building a home.  He noted that both Springfield and Eugene expressed interest in working on an agreement to collect the SDC fees in their communities.


Fay said in their analysis, they looked at lowering the SDC fees (as the Board had suggested) with a general obligation bond to supplement the need.  He said the effect of SDCs on affordable housing was another issue and there was language for exemptions for affordable housing.  He stated the Board asked that they calculate the capacity of general obligation bonds to reduce the level of SDC fees.


Fay explained that Plan A would have all SDC fees at the last proposed level of $300 per unit and would give an annual estimated SDC revenue of $324,000, after a 10% administration fee.  He added that the total SDC revenue after 15 years would be $4.86 million, but there would be a shortfall based on the capital improvements projects list of $8.35 million.  He explained they would have the shortfall due to renovation and non-SDC eligible capital projects.


Fay explained under Plan B, they distributed some of the new growth to the general obligation bond and two-thirds to SDC’s in an attempt to lower the SDCs to $225.  He added the administrative costs would be $243,000 and for 15 years, the revenue would be $3.65 million.  He noted they would need $9.65 million in a general obligation bond to pay for the entire $13.21 million with combined projects.


Fay explained that under Plan C, they reversed that by putting two-thirds of the new growth projects in general obligation bonds and one-third in SDCs, raising the revenue to $162,000 for SDCs.  That could be lowered to $150 with a general obligation bond of $10.78 million.


Sorenson asked what was being funded in needed park improvements.


Fay responded they were looking at renovation projects in the 2005 Plan, which would cost $13.2 million.  He added there were infrastructure and renovation repairs that couldn’t be paid with SDCs.


Dwyer favored Option 6, directing staff to continue the development of the charge or a combination of strategies, including the realization concept.  He said this would allow himself and the builders to participate, with Dwyer facilitating the meeting to achieve a common goal.


MOTION: to approve Option 6.


Dwyer MOVED, Sorenson SECONDED.


Sorenson asked if recreation and open space should be included.


Dwyer noted the original committee had interest groups associated with it.He said open space didn’t have that broad of a discussion, and this was on meeting the challenge of growth and development of recreation and park space.


Craig Starr, Public Works, noted the first four times this came before the Board, they considered just the SDCs and the demands that growth placed on the park system.  He said as a result of the Board’s last direction (including general obligation bonds), they expanded that to rehabilitation and renovation of the organization.


Fay explained it was important to interface with other agencies.  He said in the CIP list, they listed revenue generating opportunities.  He said they wanted to strengthen their revenue position for operation and maintenance and carry over larger cash balances at the end of the year to make matching grants easier.


Weeldreyer reiterated that the park system was outstanding and contributes to the high quality of life in Lane County.  She said since there is a need for additional parks as the County continues to grow, and the County doesn’t have any SDCs, it is an opportunity to work with the home builders and other interested groups. She supported Dwyer’s motion and wanted a win-win situation for the County and home builders.


Morrison noted that Option 6 did not specifically include the Home Builders Association.


VOTE: 4-0. (Green not present).


Van Vactor stated that Fay identified in the footnotes that a certain number of capital needs could be met in part by use of the capital side of the transient room tax.  He added they wanted to keep that issue when the fairground proposal comes back, as a way the money could be split.


Weeldreyer asked about the applicability of SDCs in approving management of certain park locations to deal with unsupervised sites.  She asked if they were also able to use SDCs for park management, accommodating more people using the parks.


Dwyer responded they couldn’t use SDCs for operation or maintenance but planning was available.


c. DISCUSSION AND ACTION/Recommending Project Selection Criteria for HB 2142 to the Oregon Transportation Commission (OTC).


Ollie Snowden, Director, Public Works, wanted to schedule time with each commissioner to obtain their view on priorities for Public Works.


Snowden explained that Section 2 described how tax bonds are used.  He noted the Act calls for $400 million in bonds, but it doesn’t specify apportionment.  He added the agreement with the governor was that not more than $200 million would be used for modernization and not less than $200 million for preservation.  He noted that ODOT proposed $50 million would go to preservation and $150 million to bridges.  He said that ODOT was proposing that the bridge money be apportioned based on technical criteria.  He noted the split they are proposing is 73% bridge money going to state bridges and 27% to local bridges.  He didn’t think there were any bridges in Lane County that would get any of the $40 million, but there were two bridges on I-5 that would be candidates for this program.


Snowden said the ACT specifies the type of projects that ODOT has to choose from:  highways that need increased lane capacity, highways and bridges that have weight limitations, state and local bridges, interchanges on multi-lane highways and district highways in cities and counties that require preservation.  He said they wanted to focus on the OTC using a broad definition of  modernization to include passing lanes, and that the OTC uses a fairly liberal interpretation of the financially constrained list.  They wanted ODOT to continue with the legislative intent to use the statutory definition of modernization.


Snowden said that July 27 is the deadline for recommendations on additional criteria.  He said that September 7 is the deadline to submit bridge or preservation highway project requests.  He noted that October 5 is the deadline to submit lane capacity interchange project proposals to ODOT.


MOTION: to move approval to send the letter with corrections.


Dwyer MOVED, Sorenson SECONDED.


VOTE: 4-0.


Tom Stinchfield, Public Works, wanted the Board’s approval to draft a letter to the cities announcing some of the dates and requesting written input from cities on project ideas.


Snowden stated they want to come back to the Board on August 28 or 29 to finalize the preservation list.  He suggested inviting the small cities to that meeting.


MOTION: to send a letter out to the cities regarding the new house bill.


Dwyer MOVED, Sorenson SECONDED.


VOTE: 4-0.




A. Approval of Minutes:

May 2, 2001, Regular Meeting, 9:00 a.m.

May 2, 2001, Regular Meeting, 1:30 p.m.

June 26, 2001, Work Session, 9:00 a.m.


B. Health and Human Services


1) ORDER 01-7-25-1/In the Matter of Accepting an Intergovernmental Agreement in the Amount of $264,912 from the Oregon State Office of Services to Children and Families for the Period 7/1/01 to 6/30/03; Appropriating an Additional $264,912 in Revenues and Expenditures in the Department of Health and Human Services (286) for Services to Individuals with Alcohol and Drug Addictions; and Authorizing the County Administrator to Sign the Document and a Contract Amendment with Relief Nursery in the Amount of $252,566.


C. Public Safety


1) ORDER 01-7-25-2/In the Matter of Amending the FY 01/02 List of Public Improvements and Accepting a Bid for LCP 2000-17 for Lane County Adult Corrections (LCAC) Facility Heating, Ventilation and Air Conditioning (HVAC) Controls Upgrade and Awarding a Construction Contract to Siemens Building Technologies, Inc. in the Amount of $189,549 Including Alternate 1.


D. Public Works


1) ORDER 01-7-25-3/In the Matter of Entering into a Two-Year Intergovernmental Agreement with the State of Oregon, Department of Transportation (ODOT) for Providing Fuel, Maintenance and Repair of ODOT Vehicles and Equipment and Delegating Authority to the County Administrator to Execute and Sign the Agreement and all Subsequent Renewal Agreements and Amendments.


MOTION: to approve the Consent Calendar.


Dwyer MOVED, Sorenson SECONDED.


VOTE: 5-0.




a. ORDER 01-7-25-4/In the Matter of Increasing Appropriations to Create Four 1.0 FTE Developmental Disabilities Specialist Positions and One 1.0 FTE Develop­mental Disabi­lities Supervisor Position.


MOTION: to approve ORDER 01-7-25-4.


Dwyer MOVED, Sorenson SECONDED.


VOTE: 4-0.




a. ORDER 01-7-25-5/In the Matter of Ratifying a (Negotiated) 2001-2003 Contract Agreement Between Lane County and the Lane County Peace Officers' Association, Inc.


MOTION: to approve ORDER 01-7-25-5.


Dwyer MOVED, Weeldreyer SECONDED.


VOTE: 5-0.


b. ORDER 01-7-25-6/In the Matter of Approving Pay Grade Adjustments for Certain Non-Represented Employees in the Sheriff's Office as a Result of LCPOA Contract Ratification and Resulting Salary Compaction.


MOTION: to approve ORDER 01-7-25-6.




Green said there needed to be a separation in pay grade so workers are not making more than their supervisors.  He supported this.


Sorenson asked if there was funding for this.


Dave Garnick, Senior Budget Analyst, responded it was indicated in the file note that the funds they set aside for the agreement had been used up.  He said there wasn’t any additional funding to pay for this.  He said they would have to dip into the general fund reserves.


Sorenson asked if there were sufficient reserves.


Garnick responded they would have to use part of the 5% prudent person reserve.


Van Vactor noted that this increased the non-represented salaries in the same proportions as represented employees to maintain internal equity.


Green asked if County Administration was supporting this item.


Van Vactor responded they were.


VOTE: 5-0.




Sorenson stated on July 11 he sent the Board a proposed letter about the Oregon State Library.  He said if the Board agreed with the letter, he would formally bring it up on July 24.  He noted the state library was the state agency to disburse funds under the Federal Library Services and Technology Act, and since Lane County would benefit from providing public library service to 85,000 people, there would be an excellent chance to receive the funding.  He said it wouldn’t cost Lane County government any money.  He said the proposal was for exploring ways of extending library services to 85,000 Lane County residents.


Dwyer said he had no problem with this as long as it didn’t cost Lane County any money.


Weeldreyer noted it was a follow-up to the study the state library did, determining that Lane County has 90,000 people who are not served by a public library.  She was supportive as long as it included maximizing the existing resources with creative partnerships.  She was not supportive of creating a new library taxing district.


Morrison said the biggest issue was people not wanting to pay for setting up the district.


MOTION: to send the letter that had been circulated to the Board to the Oregon State Library.


Sorenson MOVED, Dwyer SECONDED.


Weeldreyer concurred with Morrison that people would not support higher taxes for a new taxing district in Lane County.


VOTE: 4-0.


Weeldreyer announced the Blackberry Jam Festival in Lowell and the Mary Cole days in Marcola.


Morrison announced the Fern Ridge Barbecue on Sunday.  She thanked the people from Junction City for sharing their culture.






There being no further business, Commissioner Morrison adjourned the meeting at 2:50 p.m.


Melissa Zimmer

Recording Secretary