APPROVED 11/1/95

September 20, 1995
Harris Hall Main Floor -- following HACSA

Chair Ellie Dumdi presided with Steve Cornacchia, Bobby Green, Sr., Jerry Rust and Cindy Weeldreyer present. Sharon Giles, Recording Secretary.


Bill Van Vactor, County Administrator, noted that there will be two Emergency Business items later in the meeting.


Teresa Wilson, County Counsel, noted that all of the people who had signed up for public comment were present to speak regarding the interpretation of the Lane County Rural Comprehensive Plan (Item 7.c.) and whether or not to hear an appeal on a zone change matter (Item 7.d.). She asked that the Board receive advice from Stephen Vorhes, Assistant County Counsel. Vorhes indicated that the Code allows for written material to be considered on topics that deal with the interpretation issue only, and not regarding the facts of specific applications. With regard to public comment, Vorhes indicated that there is the potential for ex parte testimony on specific applications. He recommended that public comment not be accepted on matters that are either on appeal or not in the context of a Board interpretation, unless there is notice and opportunity for all interested parties to be allowed to be involved. Responding to Rust, Vorhes stated that the Grier letter in the packet deals with the interpretation and the policy issue before the Board and does not get into specific applications. Vorhes did indicate that the written material should have been submitted at least five days in advance of the Board's deliberation. Responding to Rust's question about the potential to "clean up" the Code, Vorhes indicated that the Code could be changed at any time, but an application is judged by rules in place at the time of application. Dumdi noted that it appears speakers today desire to speak regarding a specific application; but people could submit written testimony regarding the interpretation of the Rural Comprehensive Plan policy. Responding to Green, Vorhes stated that speakers could be allowed to speak strictly to the interpretation but not any specific applications. Vorhes stated that allowing for comment would raise the issue of what type of notification was given to other parties regarding the ability to do that, noting that the notice given in this matter had specified that this was not a public hearing.

Weeldreyer asked if there was Code language that deals expressly with public comment prior to making an interpretation. Vorhes stated that Lane Code specifies that in this type of proceeding, the arguments/testimony should be presented in writing at least five days before the Board takes up the request. Jim Mann indicated that notice was sent last week, stressing that this is an interpretive issue, not a public hearing. Responding to Rust, Mann stated that the opportunity for written testimony was not addressed. Rust suggested not taking public testimony, then setting this matter over to a subsequent week and allowing opportunity for the public to put in written testimony. Dumdi concurred, indicating that the Board would hear the staff report and then roll this issue over to October 3 for written testimony regarding the interpretation of the Code. Vorhes suggested indicating specifically the date for submittal, with submission being to Land Management. A submission date of September 27 was determined, with publication of the meeting notice being notification, with the observation that it does require knowledge on the part of the public of what the Code says regarding submission of written material. Rust asked if the Board was free to discuss the interpretation of Code with the public. Vorhes observed that that was possible, but warned that it will be difficult to separate the interpretation from applications that are pending and it will be important to disclose those communications. Dumdi summarized that the Board would not take public comment on these issues today, but would discuss the interpretation with staff.


To be held at approximately 10:40 a.m.



5. EXECUTIVE SESSION as per ORS 192.660

Heard on September 19.


a. Announcements


The following items were taken out of order.


c. ORDER 95-9-20-4/In the Matter of an Interpretation of the Lane County Rural Comprehensive Plan, General Plan Policies, Goal 2, Policy 11a.

Jim Mann, Senior Planner, commented that the purpose today is to discuss the interpretation, but not make a decision at this time. Mann read the policy in question (see material on file). He noted that there are seven standards and the one on "public services" is the one under discussion today, referring to the specific interpretation question before the Board. Mann reviewed the detailed background and proposed interpretation (see material on file). He noted that staff is looking for objective ways to address the plan policy. He observed that it is important to consider the policy within the context of the rural comprehensive plan. Mann summarized that staff is recommending that Goal 2, Policy 11a should be interpreted to require an objective demonstration of a compatibility problem between a request for a zoning density increase and "(v.) public services." He continued that an objective demonstration of a compatibility problem which results in a negative evaluation may be mitigated through imposition of conditions or other means. Mann stated that an objective demonstration of a compatibility problem exists where the minimum level of services required by Goal 11 Policy 6.e. or 6.f. are not available to the subject property, noting, however, that Goal 2, Policy 11a shall not be interpreted to require that a determination of the quality of available public services become an issue.

Responding to Rust, Mann stated that "average density" is determined by the existing development pattern and density, measured in terms of 1, 2, 5 or 10 acres. Mann replied to Green that there are two methods/approaches used to quantify the service level: 1) that the service provider will have a service plan that defines the quality that they are trying to achieve, and 2) if the city or county knows the ultimate buildout, there is an attempt to bring the service level into balance with the ultimate buildout. Weeldreyer received clarification that the decision that is made will have countywide impacts, not just something specific for people in any particular region.

With regard to written comments pertaining only to the interpretation regarding "public services," there was consensus that 5 p.m., September 29 would be the deadline, with October 17 as the next presentation before the Board. Mann indicated that written notification would be sent out to parties at the Hearings Official level with that date/time. Rust asked if it would be appropriate to suggest the Board may be looking for a better way of processing/ citizen involvement in determining densities? Stephen Vorhes, Assistant County Counsel, remarked that that may make it more difficult to sort through material submitted and that it might be better to refer the process issue to the planning commission. Rust noted that he would like the data regarding the number of acres developed and committed and the buildout for those acreages. There was consensus that the Board would complete its part of the process and then perhaps make the referral to the planning commission regarding the process issue.


a. ORDER 95-9-20-2/In the Matter of Amending Chapter 21 of Lane Manual to Adopt Regulations to Prohibit the Export of Unprocessed Timber Taken from Lands Owned or Managed by Lane County (LM 21.440).

Bob Keefer, Parks Manager, reviewed the agenda memorandum (see material on file). He noted that the proposed Lane Manual amendments were modeled after those prepared and adopted by Clackamas County, which excludes persons from bidding on County timber sales if they have exported unprocessed timber from County lands within the last 24 months. Responding to Weeldreyer's questions regarding verification, Keefer stated that, in addition to filing the certification, every log is painted/branded that it cannot be exported. Rust observed that in the total context of the log export arena, this is not significant; but he noted that the intent of the public vote was that people don't want public logs exported. He remarked that he likes the Hood River approach because it deals with the concept called "substitution," which makes it possible for a company to export its own logs and then run its mill with public logs. He asked how much trouble it would be to follow the Hood River model? Vorhes indicated that the change would be simple, including the language "and private lands." Keefer commented that this issue is somewhat time sensitive due to a pending sale, with bids being out now and due within a week. Responding to Weeldreyer, Rust remarked that there is no way to determine how many direct jobs will be kept or lost, noting that what is being discussed amounts to about 40 loads of logs. He remarked that the Coos model is broader, while the Hood River model is more purist (no export of private or public logs within the last 24 months). Rust observed that the County may lose a few dollars per thousand if there are fewer bidders, but observed that the timber should still get a good price. Dumdi remarked that the Clackamas model is the "middle road."

MOTION: Approval of an Order following the Hood River model. Rust MOVED. The Motion died for lack of a second.

MOTION: Approval of the Order (which incorporates the Clackamas model). Weeldreyer MOVED, Green SECONDED. Rust noted that traditional bidders would not be prohibited from participating with the Hood River model, but that he will be disappointed if the Board doesn't make a statement on behalf of Northwest industry. Weeldreyer remarked that she supports the staff recommendation as Parks is on its own budget and that this option allows for the largest pool of bidders to get the best price. VOTE: 3-1, Rust dissenting.

b. RESOLUTION AND ORDER 95-9-20-3/In the Matter of Improving Centennial Boulevard From I-5 to Prescott Lane and Aspen Street From Centennial Boulevard to Centennial Elementary School.

Don Maddox, Real Property Manager, reviewed the agenda memorandum (see material on file), noting that it had been pulled from the Consent Calendar. Weeldreyer addressed her philosophical difference with assessments to adjoining property owners on major connector roads, when the traveling public is the major beneficiary, and stated that she will be a no vote for consistency. Responding to Green, Maddox agreed that it is presumable that the construction of curbs, gutters and sidewalks will improve the value of property

MOTION: Approval of the Order. Rust MOVED, Green SECONDED. VOTE:

3-1, Weeldreyer dissenting.

d. ORDER 95-9-20-5/In the Matter of a Determination of Whether or Not to Conduct an On the Record Hearing, as Provided in Lane Code 14.600, for an Appeal of the Hearings Official Decision (PA 4133-94) Regarding a Proposed Development of a 42 Unit Mobile Home Park on a 16.7 Acre Parcel Zoned Suburban Residential (RA) in the Community of Cheshire on Property Described as Tax Lot 900 (portion), Assessor's Map 16-05-10.3.4; Tax Lot 1201, Assessor's Map 16-05-10; and Tax Lot 220, Assessor's Map 16-05-14 (Appellant: John McArthur and Dana & Denise Garner).

Kent Howe, Associate Planner, reviewed the agenda material (see material on file), noting that staff recommends not to hear the appeal as it does not meet the criteria.

MOTION: Approval of the Order. Rust MOVED, Green SECONDED. Dumdi indicated that she knows both parties, but had not discussed this with either party, so would vote not to hear the appeal. VOTE: 4-0.

e. ORDER 95-9-20-6/In the Matter of Electing Whether or Not to Hear an Appeal of a Hearings Official Decision Affirming the Planning Director's Decision Denying a Request to Allow a Dwelling Within an Impacted Forest Land Zone District (PA 1990-92, Bruce Morgan).

Bill Sage, Planner, reviewed the agenda memorandum (see material on file), noting the staff recommendation not to hear the appeal as it does not meet the criteria.

MOTION: To hear the appeal based on the issue of countywide significance and that the issue will reoccur with frequency. Weeldreyer MOVED. She asked that the Board take this appeal not on the merits of this case, but on how does Lane County factors in judicial opinions on real property in the regulatory application process. Weeldreyer asked whether Lane County is holding people to different standards for proving legal access for the purposes of obtaining a building permit. With regard to ex parte contacts, Weeldreyer indicated that she has met with the applicant on two occasions, one for background information/history and another time with the Planning Director to outline options for moving forward. She stated that she does not feel that, due to the issue of the broader scope, this jeopardizes her ability to hear this matter. No other Board member declared ex parte contacts. Rust remarked that he will support the staff recommendation, as he believes it will do both the applicant and the process harm by holding this up. He indicated that the Board could do the participants a favor by allowing this to go to LUBA to be sorted out and receive adjudication. (Weeldreyer's Motion died for lack of a Second.)

MOTION: Approval of the Order detailing the staff recommendation. Rust MOVED, Green SECONDED. Weeldreyer emphasized that she does believe this issue will reoccur with frequency with regard to adequate evidence of legal access. Rust commented that the Board could ask for a report back from staff, on the broad concept, after bumping this particular matter out to LUBA. Green suggested flagging this and the previous item for future (general) discussion, perhaps with the Planning Commission. VOTE: 3-1, Weeldreyer dissenting.

f. SEVENTH READING AND FINAL ACTION/Ordinance PA 1072/ In the Matter of Amending the Rural Comprehensive Plan to Redesignate Land from "Agriculture" to "Rural," Rezoning that Land from "E-30/Exclusive Farm Use" to "RR-5/Rural Residential 5," and Taking Exceptions to State-wide Planning Goals 3 and 4; and Adopting Savings and Severability Clauses (file PA 0229-95; Henton).

Dumdi read this Ordinance into the record. Mike Copely, Associate Planner, provided background on this matter. He observed that the findings were delivered on the 5th of September. Copely noted that staff is recommending approval, with the findings becoming Exhibit "C". Responding to Rust, Copely stated that this deals with the property on Camp Creek Road.

MOTION: Approval of the Ordinance. Weeldreyer MOVED, Green SECONDED. The Secretary polled the Board. VOTE: 3 Ayes, 1 Nay, with Rust dissenting.


b. ORDER 95-9-20-1/In the Matter of Appointing a Citizen Member to the Public Safety Coordinating Council.

Van Vactor distributed a handout detailing a description of this Council and a list of who is on the Council. He observed a letter from the Governor requesting diversity on the Council. Van Vactor recommended adding a second commissioner to the Council, specifically Cornacchia with his AOC expertise, noting that the Order could be amended to do that. Green supported the suggestion, but asked that there be consensus from other members of the Council to make sure they are comfortable with that, from the standpoint of equity. Green indicated that he would make that contact and bring that particular aspect back for later action. Dumdi received clarification that more than one layperson could be appointed. Rust expressed concern regarding the issue of gender balance. Green observed that it would have been easier to have a balloting sheet, rather than this type of discussion. Green, Rust and Weeldreyer indicated support for the appointment of Tom Coley, Denis Hijmans and Tricia Hedin. Dumdi expressed support for Coley, Hijmans, Hedin, J. Jan Gund and George Westergaard. Rust remarked that it is usually better to keep committees smaller to prevent them from being unwieldy, but that there is an opportunity to add citizens members and concurred with Gund and Westergaard.

MOTION: Approval of the Order appointing Coley, Gund, Hedin, Hijmans and Westergaard to the Public Safety Coordinating Council. Rust MOVED, Green SECONDED. Weeldreyer expressed concern that adding five puts the numbers at a high level, noting that it's hard to keep the process moving. Green expressed confidence that the Chair (John Ball) would be able to keep the process together. He noted that the quality of all of the applicants was very good. Weeldreyer observed Don Williams' qualifications, too. Rust suggested that a task for the committee could be to review the option of sworn versus non-sworn officers in the corrections facilities, noting that he is looking for a way to get some analysis done on that. VOTE: 4-0.

Weeldreyer was excused from the meeting at 11:17 a.m.


A. Approval of Minutes:

June 21, 1995, Regular Meeting, Following MWSD

August 23, 1995, Regular Meeting, Following HACSA

August 23, 1995, Regular Meeting, 1:30 p.m.

B. County Administration

1) ORDER 95-9-20-7/In the Matter of Appointing and Re-Appointing Justices Pro Tempore for the Florence Justice Court for One (1) Year.

2) ORDER 95-9-20-8/In the Matter of Re-Appointing a Justice Pro Tempore for the Central Lane Justice Court for One (1) Year.

3) ORDER 95-9-20-9/In the Matter of Re-Appointing Justices Pro Tempore for the Oakridge Justice Court for One (1) Year.

C. County Counsel

1) ORDER 95-9-20-10/In the Matter of Execution of a Quitclaim Deed for Property Located in Linn County to Wayne and Pamela Swango.

D. Health and Human Services

1) ORDER 95-9-20-11/In the Matter of Accepting a Grant from Oregon Department of Administrative Services in the Amount of $280,000 for Outpatient Gambling Addiction Treatment Services; Increasing Appropriations in Revenues and Expenditures in Fund 86 by $70,000; and Delegating Authority to the County Administrator to Sign a Subcontract with Addiction Counseling and Education Services, Inc.

2) ORDER 95-9-20-12/In the Matter of Awarding a Contract to Good Neighbor Care Center for the Operation of an Enhanced Residential Care Facility for the 1995-97 Period; and Delegating Authority to the County Administrator to Sign the Contract.

3) ORDER 95-9-20-13/In the Matter of Accepting Revision #1 to the 1995/96 Intergovernmental Agreement with the Oregon Health Division in the Amount of $112,028; Increasing Appropriations in Revenues and Expenditures in the Amount of $112,028; and Delegating Authority to the County Administrator to Sign Revision #1 and a Subcontract Amendment with HIV Alliance.

E. Human Resources and Management Services

1) ORDER 95-9-20-14/In the Matter of Appointing Sedgwick James as Agent of Record, Awarding a Three Year Contract Not to Exceed $75,000 and Delegating Authority to the County Administrator to Execute the Contract.


1) ORDER 95-9-20-15/In the Matter of appropriating an Additional $2,176,476 in Revenues and Expenditures. (Pulled and Postponed for two weeks.)

G. Public Works

1) ORDER 95-9-20-16/In the Matter of Delegating Authority to the County Administrator to Sign an Easement with Burlington Northern Railroad in Connection with the Irving Road Project.

2) ORDER 95-9-20-17/In the Matter of Accepting a Deed of Land to be Used as a Public Road Easement and County Road for Elkay Drive (17-04-24).

3) ORDER 95-9-20-18/In the Matter of Accepting a Deed of Land to be Used as a Public Road Easement for East 43rd Avenue (18-03-16).

MOTION: Approval of the Consent Calendar. Green MOVED, Rust SECONDED. Van Vactor asked the Board, as the Budget Authority, to ask JTPA for more detail on their item. There was consensus to pull Item F.1. from the Consent Calendar, to be heard this afternoon instead. VOTE: 3-0.

This meeting recessed at 11:21 a.m. to reconvene at 11:30 a.m.


a. FIRST READING AND SETTING SECOND READING AND PUBLIC HEARING/Ordinance No. 9-95/In the Matter of Amending Chapter 4 of Lane Code to Authorize Differential Taxes (LC 4.500-4.510(4)). (Second Reading and Public Hearing: October 4, 1995, 1:30 p.m., Harris Hall Main Floor)

Dumdi read this Ordinance into the record. Teresa Wilson, County Council, reviewed the Ordinance material briefly (see material on file). Van Vactor thanked County Counsel for bringing this matter forward. MOTION: Approval of the First Reading and Setting Second Reading and Public Hearing for October 4, 1995 at 1:30 p.m. in Harris Hall. Green MOVED, Rust SECONDED. VOTE: 3-0.


a. ORDER 95-9-20-19/In the Matter of a Grant From the Steele-Reese Foundation Increasing Appropriations in Revenues and Expenditures in the Amount of $3,000; and Increasing a .50 FTE Nurse Practitioner to a .56 FTE Through June 30, 1996.

MOTION: Approval of the Order. Green MOVED, Rust SECONDED. VOTE: 3-0.

b. PUBLIC HEARING AND ORDER 95-9-20-20/In the Matter of Holding a Public Hearing; Accepting Plan/Amendment Approval Form (PAAF) #007 to the Intergovernmental Agreement #20-001 with the State Mental Health and Developmental Disability Services Division; and Reducing Appropriations of Revenues and Expenditures in Fund 86 by $56,207.

Dumdi opened the Public Hearing. There being no one present who wished to testify, Dumdi closed the Public Hearing. MOTION: Approval of the Order. Green MOVED, Rust SECONDED. VOTE: 3-0.


a. ORDER 95-9-20-21/In the Matter of Discussing the Provisions of Senate Bill 286 and Providing Direction to Staff for Implementation of Said Provisions.

(No Order - Discussion/Direction Only.)

Jeff Turk, Property Management Officer, reviewed his agenda memorandum (see material on file) and his questions included in the packet. He observed that, depending on how Lane County implements the provisions of SB 286, it could have effects on the Property Management Program.

Green remarked that the issue is what is done with the proceeds and how that will be handled by the Board. Van Vactor noted that he had worked on this legislation and there had been concerns in the House. He indicated that he had worked with Representative Luke and had represented to him that Lane County's intent was solely to get the funding for the land to be made available to the National Guard. Van Vactor recommended that the statute should be applied narrowly, to obtain the necessary money and then return to the former policy. With regard to the proceeds from the Bald Knob sale, he recommended that they be distributed in the normal way. Responding to Rust, Teresa Wilson, County Counsel, observed Van Vactor's recommendation that includes the accumulation of all property proceeds, except the Bald Knob sale, until sufficient funds are accumulated for the property acquisition, then returning to the former process. She remarked that that works well if there is sufficient funding in place to operate the Property Management Program.

There was consensus to support Van Vactor's recommendation, with direction for staff to work on language for a Board Order to put the policy in place, returning to the Consent Calendar on October 3 or 4. There was direction that Turk would work with Wilson regarding disbursal on existing/pending items.

b. ORDER 95-9-20-22/In the Matter of Authorizing the Sale of Surplus County-Owned Real Property to the City of Oakridge and Disbursing the Proceeds Pursuant to the Provisions of Senate Bill 286 (Map #21-35-15-00-00600; 21-35-15-00-00600-201; 21-35-15-00-00600-202, the Former Bald Knob Mill Site in Oakridge).

Turk noted that the original offer from Oakridge has been changed, following a fax from Oakridge this morning. He indicated that the reason was that the environmental assessment is still in the hands of DEQ, thus there is still the possibility that DEQ will not give their stamp of approval. Turk stated that there has been a change in the wording of the offer, adding language that it is contingent upon DEQ approval within 60 days. It was noted that a new Order would be necessary. Turk also noted that Oakridge wishes to have a bargain and sale deed in this transaction, with Wilson indicating that she would not advise giving a bargain and sale deed on the improvement accounts until a year from now. There was consensus that this would be brought back at a meeting in October.


a. ORDER 95-9-20-23/In the Matter of Authorizing the Sale of the Broadway Motel/Original Pancake House to Golden Arch Limited Partnership (McDonald's Corporation) and Authorizing the County Administrator, or his Designee, to Execute Closing Documents (Map #17-03-32-23, Tax Lots 400, 500, 600 & 900).

Turk reviewed his agenda memorandum (see material on file). It was noted that this item includes language that the proceeds will be distributed pursuant to SB 286.

MOTION: Approval of the Order. Rust MOVED, Green SECONDED. VOTE: 3-0.

b. ORDER 95-9-20-24/In the Matter of Entering into an Agreement with the Oregon Department of Transportation to Stripe State Highways in Lane County and Authorizing the County Administrator to Execute the Agreement.

MOTION: Approval of the Order. Rust MOVED, Green SECONDED. VOTE: 3-0.

There being no further business, this meeting recessed at 12:09 p.m. to reconvene at 1:35 p.m.

8.     F. JTPA

1) ORDER 95-9-20-15/In the Matter of Appropriating an Additional $2,176,476 in Revenues and Expenditures.

Van Vactor reviewed this item briefly and discussed his File Note (see material on file). He commented that he does not have an issue with where JTPA plans to spend the money, but rather what information the Board should require with regard to this type of appropriation. Wilson explained the SWPIC makes the decisions about how the money should be spent and hires Lane County government to perform the administrative functions, including the budget functions. She commented that the risk is the possibility of audit exceptions. Dumdi noted that SWPIC is more like the Fair Board than HACSA. Following a brief discussion, Dumdi suggested that Chuck Forster, JTPA Director, be asked to meet with Van Vactor to discuss this issue. Dumdi requested to sit in on that meeting. Rust suggested that perhaps a couple of sessions of diplomacy/dialogue regarding why the additional information is needed could get this issue wrapped up and back on track. Green agreed with Rust's approach, with Dumdi noting that this is a long-standing misunderstanding. There was consensus to hold the Order, with Van Vactor to meet with Forster, returning with the Order in two weeks.


Rust discussed the process for evaluating the need for sworn versus non-sworn officers in the corrections operations. Van Vactor recommended that this issue be raised when all five commissioners are present and then he could convey the group consensus to the Sheriff. Dumdi agreed. Green suggested that perhaps the Leadership Team/Budget Committee meetings that are being held every Monday would be the appropriate forum for Rust to broach this question, noting that he (Green) would not be there but would support the request for additional information on this subject.

There being no further business, this meeting adjourned at 2:02 p.m.

Sharon Giles, Board Secretary