BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS'
October 3, 2001
Commissioners' Conference Room
Commissioner Anna Morrison presided with Commissioners Bill Dwyer, Bobby Green, Sr., Peter Sorenson and Cindy Weeldreyer present.† County Administrator Bill Van Vactor, County Counsel Teresa Wilson and Recording Secretary Melissa Zimmer were also present.
1. ADJUSTMENTS TO THE AGENDA
Morrison noted, under Commissionerís Business, the addition of an appointee to the Redistricting Task Force, and the Boardís input regarding the planning process under the second phase of Senate Bill 555.
2. PUBLIC COMMENTS
Steve Lanning, Oregon AFLCIO, 2910 State Street, Salem, supported the item on the agenda about funding the elimination of punch card ballots.† He said, according to their research, the rate of invalidated ballots in punch card versus non-punch card ballots is two to one.† He submitted into the record a resolution that delegates passed that called for the counties that still had punch card ballots to switch to optical scan.† He said they reviewed the options the Board had to vote on, and their first choice was Option 3, short term financing because it could allow the implementation of a new system before the 2002 general election.† He noted their second choice would be Option 2, sending a levy to the voters.† He stated they supported funding to eliminate punch card voting, but not if it jeopardizes County services or jobs.
Steve Romania, 1564 Regency Dr., President of Metro Partnership, said as they became more successful and brought industry and business to Eugene, the funding had actually decreased. He said currently the public sector is funding less than half of the budget of the Metro Partnership, and over the past few years they had been using reserves to sustain funding.† He said they could no longer sustain the funding model of the Metro Partnership.† He noted there was a need to revisit economic development.† He asked the Board to develop a long-term funding model for economic development in Lane County.
Casey Hogan, 3501 W. 25th, Eugene, said he was the president of the Metro Partnership last year.† He was concerned about the level of economic development that is taking place in the community.† He said they are starting to deal with the fallout of September 11.† He noted that locally 2,300 jobs were lost among four major employers in the area.† He said the impact of those jobs was as great if not greater than 30,000 jobs that were lost at Boeing in Seattle.† He said the current model for Metro Partnership is not sustainable to allow them to do things they think need to be done for economic development.
Larry Perry, 1020 Snell Avenue, Eugene, spoke on behalf of Oregon Common Cause, supporting the proposal of the Chief Deputy County Clerk to discontinue punch card ballots.††† He said that Common Cause contends that nothing is more important to a healthy democracy than an election system that encourages participation.† He noted that Lane County was one of seven counties that had a hybrid election process composed of the old computer punch card system and a new mail in ballot system.† He added the systems were not meant to be combined.
Dave Hauser, 2168 Elkhorn, Eugene, represented the Eugene Chamber of Commerce.† He said quality of life in Eugene is based on a strong economy. He noted the public has a concern about their economic future.† He said that the Metro Partnership model is the right one, as it is a cooperative model between the public and private sector and between cities and counties.† He said the communities that are collaborating in that way will out- perform communities that do not.† He noted rural and metro economic development has to be coordinated.† He urged the Board to move forward.
Morrison agreed that rural and urban needs need to be synchronized.
Sid Leiken, 1401 Willamette, Eugene, stated he was interim director for the Eugene Springfield Metropolitan Partnership.† He submitted a letter from Bob Warren, Oregon Economic Community Department, into the record.† He echoed comments about† fostering economic development.† He said they have to find a strong cooperative strategy.† He said the County needed to take a lead role.† He said this partnership should be coming out as a rebirth with a smaller board and more strategies.
Jim Torrey, 2545 Chuckanut, Eugene, stated he had noticed that people are searching for an answer to economic development.† He hoped the Board would take the projected plan, review it and submit it to the four remaining partners of the organization.. He believed this program was needed.† He wanted quality employment in the county.† He said the Board could be the leaders in economic development.† He added the State of Oregon also needed to be a partner.
3. EXECUTIVE SESSION as per ORS 192.660
To take place after the meeting.
4. COMMISSIONERS' BUSINESS
a. PRESENTATION AND RECOGNITION/Bob Straub Plaque.
Took place before the meeting.
b. ORDER 01-10-3-1/In the Matter of Honoring Robert W. "Bob" Straub.
Morrison read the resolution into the record.
MOTION: to approve ORDER 01-10-3-1.
Dwyer MOVED, Sorenson SECONDED.
c. RESOLUTION 01-10-3-2/In the Matter of Supporting the Application of Applied Scientific Instrumentation, Inc. for an Oregon Development Fund (OBDF) Loan.
Steve Dignam, LCOG, stated Applied Scientific Instrumentation, Inc., needed a resolution from Lane County to support its application for the State of Oregon business development loan.† He noted the company is located on Enid Road and has been in business eight years.† He stated they have had growth and planned an expansion.† He said they applied for the loan to act as gap financing to complete the project.† He said the state requires a County resolution to approve the loan.† He noted the resolution must state that the project is consistent with all local plans.† He added they sent this to the City of Eugene, and the Eugene Planning Department sent a letter (copy in file) that indicated this project was in compliance with all locally adopted plans.† He noted there was no financial responsibility on the Board of Commissioners, it is confirming for the state that it is a project that meets needs and compliance.
MOTION: to approve RESOLUTION 01-10-3-2.
Dwyer MOVED, Weeldreyer SECONDED.
d. ORDER 01-10-3-3/In the Matter of Authorizing the County Administrator to Execute a Revised Intergovernmental Agreement for Economic Development Services.
Morrison had everyone mark on the Intergovernmental Agreement that it was a draft. She stated the first correction was on page 3, the amount by the City of Springfield should be $25,000, not $50,000.† She noted in the May quarterly meeting of the Eugene Metro Partnership, this came up and at that time, it was agreed it was important that the partners be brought together to discuss how they would proceed with economic development in Lane County.† She said it was important that Lane County be aggressive in dealing with economic development.† She noted there were differences between rural and urban populations, but in reality they have the same problems and have to work together.
Dwyer was concerned that the lottery money would become an entitlement.† He disagreed that rural and urban problems were the same.† He said that a rural focus needed to be dominated by rural interests.† He had concerns about having the County Administrator sign long term agreements that exceed one year. He noted this was public money that didnít belong to the private sector, and the public has to make the decision as to how the money should be spent.† He wanted to review this.
Van Vactor noted on page 3 of the Intergovernmental Agreement, the current level was $30,000, not $50,000.† He said they have a circumstance happening with the Metro Partnership, and on a separate track, the Board of Commissioners appointed a citizen group to review the video lottery policy. He said they still have to go through a process to confirm which of the County functions funded through video lottery would continue. He noted the Countyís current level for the Metro Partnership was $70,000.† He said if they wanted to increase that by $200,000,† it could be accomplished from a portion of the video lottery funds.
Sorenson asked where the Lane County economic development dollars were going.
Morrison responded the Eugene Metro Partnership is $70,000, and rural community development staff, $99,540.† She said for the regional investment Board, Lane Countyís involvement is with LCOG and through Cascades West.
Sorenson suggested that as they move forward with the Metro Partnership partners that they get direction information on an overview of what Lane County government is doing in economic development. He suggested setting up a collaboration with the cities to get a sense of where they are headed. He wanted Board support for having staff bring back to the Board (as part of continuing work) what Lane County is doing.
Van Vactor agreed it would be good to have a listing of all the comprehensive activities. He suggested developing that agenda item at the Economic Development Standing Committee then bringing it back to the Board.† He noted this was video lottery money that comes to Lane County.
Green stated that, as a former City Councilor of Eugene, he was involved with the funding portion of the Metro Partnership.† He noted in the early 90ís, the allocated amount was $100,000 but that dwindled as the city council didnít see the value in the Metro Partnership.† He said Lane County had always been there and the City of Springfield had always been steady with their contributions.† He said if the Metro Partnership was the right vehicle that should be discussed.† He said if the Board had concerns it was the time to discuss them and delegate the concerns to the committee.†
Dwyer said this is government money and he worries why the private sector is backing off from Metro Partnership and supplementing their contributions with government contributions. He said it needs to go to the Economic Standing Committee for review.† He was not prepared to make a recommendation.
Van Vactor said Economic Development could work with not just the intergovernmental agreement, but a draft RFP that would answer all the detailed questions.
Weeldreyer was frustrated by how this agenda item got to the Board. She said as the Boardís representative of the Economic Committee and the Regional Investment Board, and all the work she did with the state and regional level, she wasnít aware of this.† She said they have to make sure the partners are there with Lane County.† She said Lane County had been a strong leader in economic investment for many years and she wanted it to continue.† She believed there had been internal inefficiency with members of the Board.† She said they need to do more work internally to decide what they would do with the Economic Development Standing Committee.
Morrison wanted maximizing of dollars, because of the limited amounts, and the City of Eugene had consistently decreased their amount over the last year.† She said consolidation would cut administrative costs.† She was also concerned about rural and urban issues.† She noted there was to be one rural city chief elected officer and one rural chief administrator officer to give balance from the urban to the rural perspective.† She said there was urgency around economic development around Lane County.† She said there were determinations made in the past as to who would actually sit on the Lane Economic Committee.† She noted the discussion was the current chair and someone else.
Sorenson said they had a good positive relation between the tourism industry and the Board of Commissioners.† He said if the goal is to target the resources, that they wouldnít create a second mechanism to do that, if one was already working.† He wanted tourism taken out, or a buy-in from CVALCO as to what "tourism" meant in this agreement.† He said they had worked well in bringing public and private concerns together with the work force and good models.† He said there is substantial involvement in the workforce arena.† He said the real problem they are facing is the substantial loss of family wage jobs and all the commissioners should play a role in promoting economic development in the community. He said he would continue to do what he could to make sure there are good quality jobs in the area.
Dwyer wanted to see what their goals and objectives were and how they could best help the companies that are already paying taxes in Lane County.† He also wanted to know who has been contributing to the Metro Partnership and is not contributing now.
Weeldreyer noted the City of Eugene was not taking this up until December.† She said it could take several months for Lane County to put together an internal plan.† She wanted the Economic Development Standing Committee to meet in October and come back to the Board in 30 days with the progress they made at the meeting.
e. Appointing a member to the Redistricting Task Force.
Morrison explained that the person she appointed for the redistricting task force would be out of the country.† She recruited Ellie Dumdi to take Denise Prattís place.
MOTION: to approve RESOLUTION and ORDER 01-10-3-12. Ellie Dumdi taking Denise Prattís place on the Redistricting Task Force.
Dwyer MOVED, Weeldreyer SECONDED.
Morrison noted that last Friday afternoon she received an e-mail from Pam Strimling of Children and Families regarding scheduling a meeting around the future planning of Senate Bill 555.† She wanted a letter to go out from the Board with her signature.† She asked whether the Board wanted to participate and if so, when.
Sorenson wanted to see the letter before he approved it.
Dwyer and Weeldreyer concurred.
Van Vactor explained it was more about scheduling the Board than the content of the letter.
Green noted what was being requested was for the Board of Commissioners to convene a meeting of the mandated stakeholders, as the state had prescribed per Senate Bill 555.† He said the director of the OCCF, Donna Middleton and Becky Eckland of the Criminal Justice Commission, were going around the state talking to all the Boards of Commissioners about the need for having full participation.† He said the request was to have the Board have the meeting so all of the partners know that if they do not engage with each other in a meaningful way, there is funding at risk from the Juvenile Crime Prevention Plan and Phase 2 of Senate Bill 555.
Morrisonís concern was the timing of the letter. She noted that the meeting was scheduled on Tuesday from 1:30 p.m. to 3:30 p.m.
f. Lane Economic Standing Committee
Dwyer wanted to formalize the Lane Economic Development Standing Committee and have Green be the chair with Weeldreyer the Vice Chair.† He said they had discussed it and the research would show that this had not been formalized.
Green was not interested in being on the committee.
Dwyer wanted the committee to have one rural and one urban representative and the chair could decide which urban representative.† He wanted to formalize what he thought they had agreed to.
Sorenson suggested the agenda team discuss this issue.
Dwyer said this would go to the agenda team with the formal opinion as to the minutes and what action they took.
5. MANAGEMENT SERVICES
a. REPORT BACK/Options for Voting Ballots
Annette Newingham, Elections, stated she analyzed all of the undervote studies that had been done.† She said it was true that the undervotes were higher on a punch card.† On the presidential election, she noted a 1.4% undervote for punch cards, and as high as a 9% undervote for the Lane County measure.† She said an optical scan ballot is easier to use. She recommended going to an optical scan ballot because it is simpler and avoids mistakes.
Newingham noted the estimate for the cost of an optical scanner for the software and hardware is $500,000 with an additional $100,000 for printing.† She stated she looked into a centralized ballot counting with precinct counters for cost reductions.† She added the optical scan was not as fast as punch cards.† She said she could continue the study of reviewing other options with an optical scan, or she could put it out as a one-year levy for the voters.† That was her recommendation.† She added they had talked about financing, and Teresa Wilson helped her with certificates to find out about bond funding issues.† She noted that was a possibility, but it would be a general expense item that would need to be budgeted in the next budget process.† She added a levy would be between three and four cents per thousand, for a one-year levy for Lane County.† She stated they could keep things the way they are.
Sorenson favored optical scanners.† He asked about getting together with other counties and making the point with the legislative assembly that counties should be given state assistance.
Newingham responded if they were to wait for the legislature it would be the Summer of 2003. She added that 2006 would be the earliest it could be implemented for a primary or general election year.
Green asked if the current system provided an accurate ballot counting, and why they were looking to fix something that wasnít broken.† He was reluctant about† going to the voters.
Newingham said they were doing everything they could to deliver accurate results with the current system, and they had done a good job, but they could do a better job.† She said by going with the new technology for an all mail election, they could give better service.† She noted the outcome with an optical scanner is† clearer.† She also thought the optical scanner would be easier for the disabled.
Van Vactor thought the current system was accurate.
Dwyer didnít share Newinghamís concerns.† He said it is a mail election and people have three weeks to fill out the ballot.† He said the Countyís money would be well spent to educate the voters about punching the ballots. He said they shouldnít take action before they allow the legislature and federal government to deal with the problem.† He said he didnít want to fix something that wasnít broken.
Morrison noted this was a report back with options given to Newingham for further direction.
MOTION: to move Option 4.
Dwyer MOVED, Green SECONDED.
Sorenson asked if part of the motion could include direction to ask Newingham to contact the larger counties to develop a group approach.
Morrison noted that Option 4 maintained the status quo of punch card ballots until matching dollars are available through the state or federal government and that is where the effort needed to be.
With regard to his motion, Dwyer said he would encourage the Board to make it as part of their United Front agenda when they go to Washington, D.C.† He didnít want a measure that would tax the citizens.
VOTE: 4-1 (Sorenson dissenting).
b. ORDER 01-10-3-4/In the Matter of Appointing Two Pools of Board Members Who May Be Selected by the County Clerk to Sit on the Board of Property Tax Appeals.
Newingham noted they might have to use the second Board again for a limited time.† She said they had the same members for the first Board who are coming back, and it is their intention to use the same Board members as last year for the primary Board.† She said they always try to keep new people in the pool so they can have cross-training.
MOTION: to approve ORDER 01-10-3-4.
Sorenson MOVED, Green SECONDED.
6. PUBLIC WORKS
a. REPORT BACK/System Development Charges (SDCs).
Rich Fay, Parks, reported this was the fifth time they had brought back the System Development Charge issue for a work session.† He said the SDCs are fees charged to new development to help pay for a portion of the cost associated with acquiring and/or building capital facilities to meet the needs of new growth.† He noted the Board directed them to work with Dwyer, the Home Builders Association, and the Parks Advisory Committee to develop a proposal for all the groups involved.† He presented a proposal to collect the SDC fee outside the corporate limits of the cities in Lane County.† He explained it was a $404 SDC fee and the Home Builders Association had agreed not to oppose the proposal.† He noted the Parks Advisory Committee reviewed and approved this proposal as well.
MOTION: to approve going forward with the SDC fee.
Dwyer MOVED, Green SECONDED.
Van Vactor noted this was just a report back and staff was to get more direction.† He noted there was still implementation work to be done.
Dwyer stated his motion was to adopt the recommendation of the Finance and Audit Committee and to implement the process.
Morrison suggested bringing this matter back on the first Wednesday after Thanksgiving.
b. FOURTH READING AND SETTING FIFTH READING AND ACTION/Ordinance PA 1160/In the Matter of Amending the Eugene-Springfield Metropolitan Area General Plan (Metro Plan) to Adopt a New Public Facilities and Services Element, Planned Public Facilities Project Lists and Maps, and Related Changes to the Plan Text; Adopting a New Eugene-Springfield Metropolitan Area Public Facilities and Services Plan as a Refinement Plan to the Metro Plan; and Adopting a Severability Clause.
Celia Barry, Land Management, reported this was a Metro Plan amendment and the Cities of Eugene and Springfield were also adopting this and had given tentative approval pending Board of Commissionersí approval.† She noted due to amendments that needed to be addressed for public comment, there needed to be another reading after this one.
MOTION: to move to approve a Fourth Reading and Setting a Fifth Reading and Action for October 17, 2001 on Ordinance PA 1160.
Dwyer MOVED, Weeldreyer SECONDED.
c. DISCUSSION/Proposed Coburg Power Project.
Kent Howe, Land Mangement, explained there had been a notice of intent for a Coburg power project that had been made to the Office of Energy.
John White, Energy Facility Analyst, Office of Energy, passed out materials (copy in file).† He noted this proposed facility would be located in Lane County and the Board would be the governing body. He added the siting council had no discretion in the matter, it was required to appoint the Board of Commissioners as a special advisory group because it related to the land use decision process.† He added there is an informal communication between the Office of Energy and the local planning director to inform them of what the criteria would be. He said when they get an application for the site, it would be sent to the County along with a memo from their office, requesting the County provide to the office of Energy those applicable substantive land use criteria.
Dwyer asked what authority the Board had.
White responded the Board of Commissioners would not be the group issuing a site certification, it would be the Energy Facility Siting Committee.
Sorenson asked if the Energy Facility Siting Council would hold a public hearing in Coburg.
White said they would hold a public hearing.
Sorenson said that planning staff could answer questions and set up a public process to perform an advisory function.† He asked where the money for this would come from.
White responded the role of the special advisory group is not to get an opinion, but to find out about† regulations.
Green stated they are being asked to act as a special advisory group, but White was only seeking the Boardís opinions.† He noted that staff could have been asked that question.
White noted the legislature had told the siting councils that they shall appoint the governing body of the jurisdiction and it wasnít discretionary.† He added that was all that had been done.† He noted the Board could have input in other ways if they chose.† He explained it was a public process.
Van Vactor said the Board could have Kent Howe prepare an agenda item that lists the zoning and the comprehensive plan.† He said if the Board approved that, then an order could be signed.† He asked if Lane County would receive any compensation for this.
White didnít believe so.
MOTION: to move to direct staff to send a letter to the Energy Facility Siting Council to accept the Boardís appointment as the special advisory committee and request that Howe come back to the Board with a process.
Sorenson MOVED, Green SECONDED.
7. CONSENT CALENDAR
A. Approval of Minutes:
August 7, 2001, 5:00 p.m., Public Hearing
August 15, 2001, 9:00 a.m., Regular Meeting
B. Health and Human Services
1) ORDER 01-10-3-5/In the Matter of Awarding the Mental Health Crisis Services Contract in the Amount of $211,685 for the Period October 1, 2001 - September 30, 2002 to White Bird.
C. Public Works
1) ORDER 01-10-3-6/In the Matter of Releasing, Dedicating and Accepting a Portion of Parcel "A" of Gilham Estates First Addition, a Parcel of County Owned Real Estate, as a Public Road (17-03-08) (Walton).
2) ORDER 01-10-3-7/In the Matter of Accepting a Deed of Land to Be Used as a Public Road Easement for Seavey Loop Road (County Road No. 687) (18-03-13).
C. Public Works
3) ORDER 01-10-3-8/In the Matter of Accepting a Deed of Land to Be Used as a Public Road Easement for Ridgeway Road (County Road No. 314) (189-02-28).
4) ORDER 01-10-3-9/In the Matter of Authorizing the Sale of Surplus County-owned Road Fund Property Located at 91133 Marcola Road to Sean T. McGann.
D. Workforce Partnership
1) ORDER 01-10-3-10/In the Matter of Appointing a Member to the Lane Workforce Partnership Board of Directors.
MOTION: to approve the Consent Calendar.
Dwyer MOVED, Green SECONDED.
8. COMMISSIONERS' ANNOUNCEMENTS
Morrison noted that on October 8 there would be a Joint Board of Commissioners Meeting with the City of Cottage Grove at 6:30 p.m. She announced that next week would be a down week with no meeting next Wednesday.† She stated that this Saturday in Veneta the Veneta Chili Cookoff was taking place.† She announced she was reappointed to the NACo public lands steering committee.
Green stated on October 17, 2001, he was asked to participate in a workshop for Governor Kitzhaber.† He added the following week he would be travelling to New Orleans to attend a conference.
9. COUNTY ADMINISTRATION
Van Vactor stated Dwyer gave him a letter from John Large regarding regulating well water.† He asked for Board direction to have County Counsel review the letter.
Dwyer echoed Van Vactorís concern about getting County Counselí opinion.
10. OTHER BUSINESS
Kardell noted that Sorenson had brought to the table the question on whether or not funds could be used to improve and maintain park roads, because people are charged to use the roads.† He noted there was not a clear answer but in speaking with Rich Fay, Parks, didnít charge to come into the park, they charged a parking fee. He suggested passing the previous order allowing the transfer to County roads and that staff be directed to change Lane Manual, because it presently refers to them as admission fees, instead of parking fees.† He said it would be clearer to state they were parking fees.
Fay explained that no one was cited for entering the park and driving their vehicle through to use the road, the only citations were for staying and parking,† He noted in that case they should have paid the fee to park there.
Dwyer wanted it memorialized that the Board didnít have the discretion to make the determination once they change the road monies and he would be comfortable with that.
Sorenson asked if they blocked a public road in order to collect this parking fee (in the roadway) if that would be endangering a public road.
Kardell responded that it was still a public road, and it was only the summer months when the fee was charged, and it was still a dedicated right-of-way to the public.
ORDER 01-9-26-13/In the Matter of Dedicating a Portion of Park Property Establishing it as a County Road to Serve the Park located within the Boundaries of Armitage Park.
MOTION: to approve ORDER 01-9-26-13.
Dwyer MOVED, Sorenson SECONDED.
Sorenson wanted to include the direction about clarifying that it is a change in policy that would be brought back to state that the parks are open to the public and the money collected is a parking fee.
ORDER 01-9-26-14/In the Matter of Dedicating a Portion of Park Property and Establishing as a County Road to Serve the Park Located within the Boundaries of Hendricks Bridge Wayside.
MOTION: to approve ORDER 01-9-26-14.
Dwyer MOVED, Green SECONDED.
Morrison† discussed a letter that was disbursed regarding the October 9 meeting with the State OCCF and the Coordinator of the Juvenile Crime Prevention Commission.
Sorenson asked if the meeting could take place at 1:30 to 3:30 and be in the Public Service Building.
MOTION: to move approval of the letter with the recommendation that the meeting take place in the Public Service Building.
Dwyer MOVED, Sorenson SECONDED.
Van Vactor explained that on this year's Oregon Needs and Issues Inventory, Peter Thurston discussed it with Management Team, and there would be a focus on the Countyís needs, and it would be broader than last year.
Sorenson explained he held a community meeting in Veneta on the issue of cell phone towers.† He said the people who attended were from Eugene and they wanted to have another community meeting on Eugeneís† ordinances.† He noted he would hold another meeting on October 9 on the cell phone towers.
Green wanted Sorenson to make clear this meeting was separate and apart from the Board direction on cell towers.† He noted the task force appointed by the Board had finished their task and he didnít want the citizens confused.† He asked how the information that comes out of that meeting would be coordinated with the Boardís previous direction.
Sorenson said on the Eugene side of things, they could have a public meeting but he wouldnít do it alone because he wasnít a decision-maker of Eugene.
Weeldreyer stated she only recently found out this meeting was going to take place.† She said the way it is set up now, the Eugene City staff would not be able to attend and to have that meeting follow the planning commission meeting would confuse the citizens.
Kent Howe, Land Management, explained that on October 9, they are having a public information session and it was not dealing with the cell phone tower issue.† He stated they had already had their work session on the cell tower proposal and it was scheduled for a hearing before the Planning Commission on November 6.
There being no further business, Commissioner Morrison recessed the meeting at 12:15 p.m.
Back to Board Notices