minhead.gif (11357 bytes)

April 2, 1997
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS' REGULAR MEETING
Harris Hall Main Floor - following HACSA

Cindy Weeldreyer presided with Steve Cornacchia, Ellie Dumdi, Bobby Green, Sr. and Peter Sorenson present. Zoe Gilstrap, Recording Secretary.

1. ADJUSTMENTS TO THE AGENDA

Weeldreyer announced that Doug Harcleroad, District Attorney, and Jan Clements, Sheriff, will discuss the public safety levy fact sheet at 1:30 p.m. She also announced that an item on the Housing Authority’s agenda had been moved to the Board of Commissioners’ agenda. One emergency item was identified.

2. PUBLIC COMMENTS

Reed Fitkin, 85200 Ridgetop Drive, Eugene, distributed material and a map requesting that his neighborhood be evaluated with recommendations and specifications made for improving vehicular safety. He indicated that he and his neighbors would like to put up neighborhood speed signs and at least three speed bumps. Fitkin stated that he belongs to the Fox Point Home Owners Association and maintained they would pay for the improvements and for reasonable costs of the signs. He remarked that it was his understanding that they would need Board approval and requested their input and recommendations. Fitkin asked for an approximate date that he could expect an answer.

Weeldreyer stated that she would work with the Public Works department to bring an oral report back to the Board in two weeks.

Kathryn Henderson, 3551 Mill Street, Eugene, Lane ESD Substance Abuse Prevention Coordinator, spoke in favor of the resolution supporting the Eugene Community Partnership for Tobacco Free Kids campaign. She noted that this is a collaborative effort including Oregon Research Institute, America Cancer Society and local retailers to urge retailers to not sell tobacco to youth. Henderson stressed the need to help the community make healthy choices to protect minors. She stated that this resolution was one piece of an overall comprehensive approach to dealing with this issue.

Camillia Pray, 81622 Needam Rd, Eugene, stated she was here to speak in support of Jim Gillette. She said her mobile home is still parked on his property because it has been impossible to find a place where it could be hooked up properly for living. Pray remarked that she recently found a possible place but needs time to get the bus running to drive it there. She said it may need to be towed but that may result in damage to the bus. Pray asked for 30 days to get it in running condition and off Gillette’s property. She was concerned that she would be fined before that time and asserted that she is doing her best to get off the property.

George Winfield, 86122 Needham Road, Eugene, said he was here on Jim Gillette’s behalf and stated that most of the vehicles have been moved. He commented that he has tried to rent a mobile home space but has been unable to find one that would accept his mobile home. Winfield noted that he can put it on a friend’s property and has requested a permit from the County. Winfield stated that he was told by the County that it would take six months to get a permit, if he qualifies. He remarked that he would like to see lower income people find affordable housing without fighting the County all the time.

Anne Streiter, 280 Baxter, Eugene, stated that she has worked for Gillette since 1991, managing the horse barns. She said she lived in a 25' travel trailer on the property from 1991 to 1995. Streiter noted that she still uses it when she works for warming up, showering and cooking. She asked that the Board consider allowing that as a mobile office unit.

Brad King, homeless, stated that he used to live on Gillette’s property in a converted bus. He noted that he still uses the bus when he works to eat and get dry. King said that he was injured in the military and can only work a few hours at a time and often needs to come in to rest his back. He mentioned that the bus has not been started since 1984 and would take a lot to get running, and he does not have the money to pay someone to tow a 37' bus.

Jim Gillette, 86340 Needham Road, Eugene, stated that Weeldreyer seemed to take delight in catching him helping homeless people. He said the 30% of Lane County is under the poverty level and without a place to live. Gillette said the Board "does not have the guts to stand up to his neighbors that are making the complaints." He remarked that the people living there were not hurting anyone but are made to feel like criminals by the Commissioners. Gillette stated that many of these people are on welfare and using taxpayer money. He commented that his $1,200 fine has never been paid because he does not have the money. Gillette said that he had heard there would be an executive session today to discuss foreclosure of his property.

3. COMMISSIONERS' ANNOUNCEMENTS

Dumdi reported that the City of Florence extends an invitation to their grand opening of the Justice Center on Saturday, April 5, 1997.

Green reported that he would be attending the spring conference of the National Coalition of Black Meeting Planners this week in Mobile, Alabama. He introduced his intern, Jamal Wallace.

Weeldreyer noted that former Sheriff Bob McManus, now security chief of Hyundai, would like to host a tour of Hyundai for the Board. She announced that the McKay Lodge dedication is May 17. Weeldreyer stated that April 14, a lobby day in Salem for Lane County, is also the Association of Oregon Counties, New Realties meeting. She said she attended a Planning Commission meeting last night regarding changes to F1 zoning. Weeldreyer noted that the room was packed and commented that when this item came up for Board discussion, she would like to hold two public hearings instead of one.

4. COMMISSIONERS' BUSINESS

This item was moved from the Housing Authority Agenda.

ORDER 97-4-2-1H/In the Matter of Designating the Use of $441,739 from Lane County Road Funds for the Design and Construction of Road-Fund Eligible Improvements to Assist the Affordable Housing Developments Recommended by the Intergovernmental Housing Policy Board.

Jim McCoy gave an overview of this item, noting that the road fund projects being recommended are located in both Eugene and Springfield and were selected as a result of the competitive process carried out by the Housing Policy Board. He acknowledged that the Housing Policy Board understands that this action would deplete most of the allocation available until 1999 but that, in the face of inflation, it would be best to get the projects built now.

Cornacchia questioned language in the order which stated that the County Administrator would direct Public Works to proceed with implementation of these projects. He explained that a literal reading indicated that Lane County would be doing the projects, from the engineering to the construction, which was different from his understanding of who would be responsible for the engineering and from where the resources would come. He deferred to Ollie Snowden, Engineer, Public Works, to describe the process to accomplish these projects and how the money flows.

Snowden explained that public money used for public improvement has to be implemented by a public agency, noting that some of these projects are private/nonprofit. He stated that road fund monies cannot directly be given to a private/nonprofit agency. He used Woodleaf as an example, indicating that Public Works will put this project out to bid this spring but said it would be engineered by a private firm. Snowden indicated that when these projects come forward, either the project sponsor or HACSA will ask him if Public Works can do the project within a specific time frame. He briefly discussed the CIP process and said they used to have a five-year process where projects could be added in the fifth year. Snowden remarked that has changed because projects seem to have more immediacy to them and tend to get inserted in the middle of the process. He explained that there are projects that have time scheduled in the CIP and later they could not perform on the city’s time frame to the city took it over leaving a gap. Snowden stated that there are other projects that are too big and are now being privately engineered. He said things are more dynamic now and projects like this can be fit in because there is more flexibility to add projects to fill in the holes. He described the projects and his ability to fit them in (see material on file).

Cornacchia asked if the engineering costs were included in the figures requested for these projects. Snowden replied negatively and said he is using capital project money.

Cornacchia summarized that Lane County is taking additional money out of the road fund beyond the designated million dollars.

Green stated that that was consistent with the direction of the Board in terms of setting aside these funds for these projects. He said the Finance and Audit Committee appropriated this amount of money to not include engineering. Green noted that if the Housing Policy Board wanted Public Works Department to do the engineering, there was a direction that timing needed to be lined up with Snowden.

Cornacchia stated that it would be his expectation that capital projects programmed in that CIP would come first before the County engineers’ private sector projects.

Snowden maintained that that assumption was correct.

MOTION: Approval of the Order.

Cornacchia MOVED, Dumdi SECONDED.

VOTE: 5-0.

Weeldreyer stated that the following issue needed to taken at this time.

Weeldreyer announced that the Board received a memo from John Anderson, Administrator’s office in Polk County, regarding Senate Bill 161, a proposal to add counties to the bill dealing with the composition of the public employee bargaining unit (see material on file). She stated this bill was requested by the State Department of Corrections, seeking to add new language in the form of an amendment at the Senate Business Law and Government Committee meeting on Wednesday, April 2, 1992.

David Suchart, Director, Human Resource and Management Services, stated that Ruth Larson, Employee Relations and Benefits, did a quick analysis and that Lane County does have some strike-able employees within LCPOA but not a large number. He said there could be some benefit later if the P&P officers move to the public safety department. Suchart noted that Sheriff Clements was not comfortable with the County joining this proposal and recommended not to get involved at this point.

Cornacchia said he would like more analysis, especially when asked if the county would benefit financially. He questioned if that meant the general fund, residents or employees would benefit. Cornacchia said this has not been a problem in the ten years that he has been here. He remarked that he does not wish to create animosity between the Board and the bargaining units over an item that may not be consequential and would hope that they could see an analysis before they fill this out. Cornacchia suggested submitting information as it pertains to Lane County without taking a position to support or oppose; not answer 2a and b; and to add a comment that Lane County has not had time to do an analysis of the effects of the situations and is not in the position to state an opinion.

Green supported Cornacchia in completing the questionnaire in limited form.

There was agreement to complete the questionnaire as suggested by Cornacchia.

a. ORDER 97-4-2-1/In the Matter of Amending Chapter 3 of Lane Manual to Add Provisions for Watershed Councils.

MOTION: Approval of the Order.

Cornacchia MOVED, Dumdi SECONDED.

Weeldreyer asked Teresa Wilson, County Counsel, about the creation of a local government group.

Wilson responded that a requirement in the statute regarding watershed councils states that the local government group is to consider whether a proposed watershed council consists of a sufficient balance. She said it was her belief that specification was designed to ensure that a group did not have a single special purpose interest but reflects and has governmental support. Wilson noted that watersheds involve all different layers of government.

Weeldreyer also discussed the possible need for a sixth watershed council to serve the mainstream of the Willamette River at Goshen to include the Coast and Middle Forks south to Linn County.

There was consensus to stay at five watershed councils for the present.

VOTE: 5-0.

b. UPDATE/Jail Expansion and Juvenile Justice Center.

David Suchart, Director, Human Resources and Management Services, stated that the jail expansion was moving along. He noted that Lieutenant Paul Sachet has been appointed the project team leader and Lieutenant Bud Spencer, Sergeant Susie Hagar and Jerry Trapp, Corrections Facility Supervisor, have been added to the team to allow involvement of internal staff on the project. Suchart reported that they are continuing to work on the architectural program for the jail and will soon be bringing a report before the Board for approval. He said they have good assistance from KMD architects, who redesigned the structure plans previously submitted to the State, resulting in a number of expenses cut and new additions made to answer operational needs in the jail. Suchart noted that they are still within budget and that the architects are beginning to work with the city on the conditional use permit. He also stated that Captain John Clague is working with the U.S. Marshall’s office which has asked for additional space and is willing to pay for it.

Discussing the Juvenile Justice Center, Suchart reported on continuing work on the schematic design and design development. He said in the last three weeks, there have been intense sessions between the engineers, architects, contractors and county staff on how the building will work, which will lead to value engineering on the internal systems. Suchart stated that will be presented to the Operations Team on Thursday morning. He reported that they should hear from the city regarding the conditional use permit. Suchart commented that they are talking to the National Guard about moving ahead on the LCC property and that there is a site evaluation at the property today. Suchart noted that they are still on budget and that on April 17, two independent estimates will be presented to the Operations Team.

Suchart distributed an amendment to a Board Order adopting the master plan and schematic design in November 1996 and giving authority to complete a contract with KMD. He said due to an oversight, he did not get Board authorization in that order to allow the County Administrator to sign the contract and this amendment addressed that.

RESOLUTION AND ORDER 97-4-2- /In the Matter of Amending Board Order 96-11-13-5 to Allow the County Administrator to Sign the Contract for Architectural Services for the Juvenile Justice Center.

MOTION: Approval of the Order.

Cornacchia MOVED, Dumdi SECONDED. VOTE: 5-0.

5. RESOLUTIONS

a. RESOLUTION AND ORDER 97-4-2-2/In the Matter of Supporting Eugene Community Partnership for Tobacco-Free Kids Campaign.

Rob Rockstroh, Director, Health and Human Services gave a brief overview of this item.

Weeldreyer noted that the word "Commissioners" needed to be included in the third paragraph of the Order.

MOTION: Approval of the Order as modified.

Cornacchia MOVED, Dumdi SECONDED. VOTE: 5-0

b. RESOLUTION AND ORDER 97-4-2-3/In the Matter of Supporting April 7, 1997 as World Health Day.

Rockstroh presented this item and noted that there are several infectious diseases such as a tuberculoses and Hepatitis A emerging again.

MOTION: Approval of the Order.

Cornacchia MOVED, Dumdi SECONDED. VOTE: 5-0.

c. RESOLUTION AND ORDER 97-4-2-4/In the Matter of Proclaiming the Week of April 7-13, 1997 as Public Health Week.

MOTION: Approval of the Order.

Cornacchia MOVED, Dumdi SECONDED. VOTE: 5-0.

6. COMMITTEE REPORTS

a. REPORT BACK/Healthy Start Implementors Group.

Green, as Chair on the Commission on Children and Families, introduced the report. He stated that the Implementors Group tried their best to address the Board’s direction and were successful in that effort. Green recognized the difficult assignment and acknowledged their commitment to designing a system of care for the Healthy Start program.

Pat Rogers, Director, Department of Children and Families, stated that three of the members of the group will make the actual presentation. She noted that through this group there is a different way of providing services to children and families in Lane County, adding that it creates a gate through which services are family driven and family focused, coordinated and flexible. Rogers introduced members of the Implementors’ Group. She recognized the groups’ facilitator, Alicia Hayes, giving her credit for keeping the group focused. Rogers stated the following presentation was made to the Commission on Children and Families at the February 19 meeting, with the commission supporting the recommendations of the Implementors’ Group and moving to carry this report to the Board. She introduced the presenters, Judy Newman, PACE Program, Jan Lubbock, Pearl Buck Center, and Kay Yanit, McKenzie Willamette Hospital.

Lubbock reviewed the material (see material on file). She noted that the tone of the group was very honest throughout and that everything got on the table with the groups meeting once, and sometimes twice, a week since September 1996. Lubbock stated that participants not only looked at the values from the state, but also at services to incorporate into a program that Lane County could be proud of. Lubbock also talked about the importance of having multiple access to systems and services so that a family utilizing the services could move through different program components. She remarked that collaboration was an important issue as far as building on community strengths to build capacity for families. Lubbock explained that they looked at the several components (see material on file).

Newman discussed the issue of multiple providers and noted that there was a consensus that the central clearing house should continue to be at the County. She explained that the central clearinghouse was the referral where the results of assessments arrive and where it is determined what services are needed.

Newman referred to information packets to refusers, noting that this is a new component. She said that they visit families once which may or may not be a good time, and therefore, it is important that the families are left with some information. Newman said this information will be given to them or mailed, consisting of basic information on community resources and the Healthy Start program so that they know where to call and how to get back in. She discussed the universal home visit which consists of a one-time visit from a volunteer, welcoming them and leaving a bag full of goodies for the child and the parents.

Newman reviewed the family support service component which is also new. She explained that the Healthy Start program before was just a home visiting program and the group felt strongly about creating some options. Newman referred to the options (see material on file). She said the idea was to have a constellation of services and to make a good match between the family and the service.

Newman then discussed the coordinating team, which is also new, stating that it is similar to a management team. She said they want to view Healthy Start as one program, even though there will be multiple providers. Newman remarked that the function of the coordinating team would include a representative from each one of the programs, as well as people from the clearinghouse and family support and assessment workers who would come together on a regular basis to make sure that these referrals are linked to the appropriate services and to coordinate the functioning of this program so that it would be integrated and operate as one Healthy Start program.

Newman discussed the Community Advisory Board, stating that there are many early childhood services in the community. She said the Community Advisory Board would bring together all the providers of early childhood services, community participants and parents to determine policy direction and help coordinate an early childhood system for the County. Newman noted that this would be a volunteer group, representative of all programs.

Newman referred to Community Resources, noting that this is not funded by Healthy Start, but which will make referrals and will provide open communication.

Cornacchia asked about the assessment issues and the reluctance at one time of either the Department of Children and Families or Healthy Start to integrate with public health as a partner. He asked if there is more of an inclusion of public health.

Newman deferred to Susie Kent, Public Health Nurse Supervisor.

Kent stated that she worked intensely with Healthy Start and there is much more communication between Healthy Start and Public Health. She said there is a strong connection between the maternal child health nurses and Healthy Start, that they have had a joint meeting and joint training on targeted case management. She opined that the pattern of excluding the Public Health department has completely changed and they are back at the table and committed along with Healthy Start so that maternal child health nurses and Healthy Start paraprofessionals are working close together.

Kay Yanit gave an overview of the process of Healthy Start, starting from the pregnancy. She reminded everyone that this is a voluntary program and they are inviting new families. Yanit explained the form given to expectant mothers and how they are screened for risk factors.

Cornacchia asked the purpose of questions about abortions, miscarriage and the psychiatric system.

Yanit stated that if one of those items is true, there is some weight as far as identified risk factors. She explained that these forms are to see who will receive KEMP assessment and noted that there is a consent form stating that this information will be shared with a physician and Healthy Start. Yanit stated that in the past, Sacred Heart did not have way an accurate way to assess so they guessed which resulted in the KEMP assessment being administered many more times that needed. She said this screening is a way to have more accurate screenings.

Yanit explained that the first screening is prior to birth with the doctor and the second is done in the hospital when it is determined if a KEMP assessment should be done. She said KEMP scores change depending on situations. Yanit noted that there are 16 identified points that tend to be good indicators of potential problems based on research.

Green asked how Lane County was doing.

Rogers responded that there are very specific outcomes and accountability measures, noting that all the providers are enthusiastic about consistency. She said there will be training by the state for accountability and internal controls and that the state commission office has contracted with Oregon State University for a statewide evaluation. Rogers remarked that this whole process has enabled them to take suggestions with what is already in place, with new curriculum developed. She reported that there are joint staff meetings with the provider agencies and joint staff training meeting once a month. Rogers acknowledged the dedication of the Healthy Start staff, noting that they have many more referrals than money and that staff and the many agencies are working together.

Cornacchia stated that the end recipient is the primary focus and he hopes the analysis next year is focused on the end recipient, not the third party or the employees.

Weeldreyer stated that she was pleased with the work and that the program is collaborative as the Board requested. She said she was happy that the program is flexible to meet different needs and challenges.

Dumdi acknowledged the excellent work and materials.

MOTION: To accept the report of the Implementors Group and to direct the Department of Children and Families to further implement Healthy Start.

Dumdi MOVED, Cornacchia SECONDED. VOTE: 5-0.

Weeldreyer and Green distributed Lane County recognition awards to: Joan Duffy, Healthy Start; Chris Shepard, Department of Children and Families; Mary Heard, Healthy Start; Lorraine Boose, Healthy Start; Kathleen Hynes, Parent Partnership; Kay Yanit, McKenzie/Willamette Hospital; Martha Teich, Sacred Heart Hospital, Mary Dutton, AFSCME; Lou Sinniger, AFSCME; Bob Proctor, AFS; Cheryl Hunter, Commission on Children and Families; Susie Kent, Public Health Nurse Supervisor; Peg Peters, Public Health Nurse Supervisor; Jayme Vasconcellos, Centro LatinoAmericano; Alicia Marin, Centro LatinoAmericano, Alicia Hayes, HRMS, Jeannie Benson, Catholic Community Service; Patsey Pitts, Catholic Community Service; Chris Schaefer, Catholic Community Service; Judy Newman, PACE; Jan Lubbock, Pearl Buck Center; Susie Dey, Services to Children and Families; John Seymour, Parent Partnership; Jean Phelp, Relief Nursery; Becky Lamareux; Minalee Saks, Birth to Three and Ann Marie Askew, Birth to Three.

Green asked that copies of this meeting be provided to this group.

7. COUNTY ADMINISTRATION

a. Announcements

None.

8. PUBLIC WORKS

a. FIRST READING AND SETTING SECOND READING AND PUBLIC HEARING  Ordinance PA 1098/In the Matter of Adopting Amendments to the Rural Comprehensive Plan and the Cottage Grove City Plan to Enlarge the Cottage Grove Urban Growth Boundary and Redesignate Affected Land from its Rural Comprehensive Plan Designation to a City Plan Designation, Rezone Affected Land, and Adopt an Exception to Statewide Planning Goal 14; and Adopting Savings and Severability Clauses (file PA 0315-97; City of Cottage Grove) (Second Reading & Public Hearing: April 16, 1997, 1:30 p.m., Harris Hall Main Floor).

MOTION: To set Second Reading and Public Hearing for April 16, 1997, 1:30 p.m. in Harris Hall.

Cornacchia MOVED, Dumdi SECONDED. VOTE: 5-0.

b. FIRST READING AND SETTING SECOND READING AND PUBLIC HEARING  Ordinance 4-97/In the Matter of Amending Lane Code Chapter 2 to Establish the Economic Development Assistance Program (EDAP) Revolving Loan Fund (LANE COUNTY 2.500) and to Adopt a Severability Clause (Second Reading & Public Hearing: April 16, 1997, 1:30 p.m., Harris Hall Main Floor).

MOTION: To set Second Reading and Public Hearing for April 16, 1997, 1:30 p.m. in Harris Hall.

Cornacchia MOVED, Dumdi SECONDED. VOTE: 5-0.

c. FIRST READING AND SETTING SECOND READING AND PUBLIC HEARING  Ordinance 5-97/In the Matter of Amending Lane Code Chapter 15 to Add Provisions for Economic Development Assistance Program (EDAP) Improvement Assessments (LANE COUNTY 15.642), to Make Related Housekeeping Revisions and to Adopt a Severability Clause (Second Reading & Public Hearing: April 16, 1997, 1:30 p.m., Harris Hall Main Floor).

MOTION: To set Second Reading and Public Hearing for April 16, 1997, 1:30 p.m. in Harris Hall.

Cornacchia MOVED, Dumdi SECONDED. VOTE: 5-0.

d. DISCUSSION Determination of the Disposition of the Old Dexter Shop Facility.

Don Maddox, Public Work’s Real Property Manager, gave an overview on the old Dexter maintenance shop site, noting that the normal process was via a sheriff’s sale. He mentioned the significant interest by the Friends of Dexter, who want to utilize the site as a teen center and playground and also Dexter Library for a community library and youth center. Maddox said they have received a joint request to make the property available to them. He addressed the road fund and gave a brief history of the facility (see material on file).

Weeldreyer stated that Hwy 58 cuts off the route to Dexter Park and the purpose for Friends of Dexter and the Dexter Library is to provide a park for kids without having to cross Hwy. 58. She remarked that she talked to Bob Keefer, Park’s Manager, about taking over the park and developing a relationship with one of these groups in the same way the Parks department has done with Mount Pisgah and the Old McKenzie Hatchery. Weeldreyer asked Teresa Wilson, Legal Counsel, if this option would fulfill the public use requirement.

Wilson said it would fulfill the public use requirement but does not address the road fund asset question.

Green asked if the organizations had the assets to engage in a sheriff’s sale process.

Weeldreyer stated that they have been having fund raisers and started a community fund but do not have $77,000. She commented that if it went to sheriff’s sale, the estimate range is between $50,000 and $70,000.

Green stated that he was hesitant about converting road funds.

Wilson concurred that the road fund is problematic and this is an economic issue. She said the public purpose use is probably more resolvable.

Cornacchia stated that there is not any requirement to dispose of the property. He said this is road fund property, and additional work by staff other than a sale to a private sector is inappropriate. He noted that he would like Weeldreyer to explain to the Dexter community that the Commissioners are not interested in being creative with the road fund. Cornacchia remarked that he is not ready to dispose of this property.

Weeldreyer said she has made it clear that this is road fund property and that the road fund has to be made whole at market value. She asked for the opportunity to work with the groups to raise money to make the road fund whole.

Sorenson suggested involving the Parks Advisory Group. Dumdi concurred.

Green said is not interested in anything that does not make the road fund whole.

Cornacchia said direction could be given not to sell to private interests until the community of Dexter has had the opportunity to show they can purchase it from the road fund and to tell Maddox not to spend staff time on the issue on the deed restriction on public use.

Weeldreyer said that there is no time line to dispose of the property and she would like the opportunity to work with these groups and the Park’s department to raise the money needed to make the road fund whole, and to not take away an opportunity this community has been seeking for more than five years.

MOTION: 1. Not to sell to private interest until community of Dexter has had an opportunity to purchase from road funds and not to spend any more time on deed restriction on public use.

Sorenson MOVED, Cornacchia SECONDED.

VOTE: 5-0.

e. DISCUSSION AND ACTION Approving a List of Recommended Strategies as the Guiding Framework for Development of the Draft Transplan.

This item was taken in the afternoon.

Tom Stinchfield, Transportation Planning Engineer, referred to the agenda addendum describing the latest action of the Springfield City Council. He explained that he wanted to get direction for producing a new Transplan with a goal to produce the draft plan by July and have hearings occur in the fall and winter, leading to adoption in the spring of 1998. Stinchfield gave a brief history of this project. He stated that the Transplan Update was released last winter with a joint meeting of all the Planning Commissions and the Roads Advisory Committee in December. Stinchfield reported that the Lane County Planning Commission and the Roads Advisory Committee recommended it without any changes. He noted that the Roads Advisory Committee requested to see more detail when the draft plan comes out. He remarked that the Lane Transit District Board has discussed the report and the strategies which resulted in a letter to all elected officials requesting that more detail about the bus rapid transit systems are added for clarity and to provide direction on what that transit system would be like (see material on file). Stinchfield commented that Springfield City Council discussions resulted in the LCOG summary, commenting on two strategies: 1) land use and, 2) concept of nodal development.

Cornacchia asked for clarification regarding Springfield’s position on Strategy #2.

Tom Schwetz, LCOG, responded that they signed off on the original language.

Stinchfield discussed the idea of transportation demand management (TDM).

Cornacchia asked Stinchfield which of the 14 strategies require further discussion from the jurisdiction. Cornacchia offered that outside Strategies 2, 4, 5, and 14, the other 10 are non-controversial and accepted to and suggested that the Board could dispense with those and deliberate the next four.

MOTION: To accept Strategies 1, 3, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12 and 13 and move on to further discussions among the three jurisdictions.

Cornacchia MOVED, Dumdi SECONDED.

Weeldreyer suggested finding a way to connect the increase in #3 to a better street or transit system related to transportation rather than to a government’s general fund.

Cornacchia stated that he would like to change his motion to not include #1 because there are two different options.

MOTION: To approve Strategies 3, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12 and 13 and move on to further discussions among the three jurisdictions.

VOTE: 5-0.

Regarding Strategy 1, Cornacchia said Springfield’s language allows each jurisdiction to perform its own land use planning by making determinations of where the areas are and using a range of limitations’ options to allow flexibility. He stated his support of the nodal development land use strategy.

MOTION: To support Springfield’s revised language.

Cornacchia MOVED, Dumdi SECONDED. VOTE: 5-0

Regarding Strategy 2, there was consensus to accept the original language.

MOTION: To support the original language.

Cornacchia MOVED, Green SECONDED.

VOTE: 5-0.

Regarding Strategy 4, Cornacchia offered that, in either option, the "and" between "urban standards and address safety" in both sentences be changed to "or to." He clarified that there are times that road improvements for safety and capacity issues are not built to traditional urban standards. Cornacchia also said he did not want committed CIP projects thrown out and questioned the intent of the revision.

Stinchfield explained that staff proposed this change to clarify the terms to simplify the language and remove confusion, not to ignore the CIP but to be more clear.

Cornacchia requested a statement to the effect that "this does not affect existing or future CIPs," leaving each of the three jurisdictions with authority to deal with their resource. He stated that if that is in the record, he is supportive.

MOTION: To support the proposed revisions with the changes of "or to" between "...urban standards and address safety..." and a statement that to the effect that "this does not affect existing or future CIPs.

Cornacchia MOVED, Dumdi SECONDED.

VOTE: 5-0.

Regarding Strategy 5, Sorenson voiced approval of the revised language.

MOTION: Approval of the proposed revision.

Sorenson MOVED, Green SECONDED for discussion.

Cornacchia stated that Springfield’s language took a Bus Rapid Transit system completely out. He said he did not know enough about BRT and the affect it would have on all the road systems. Cornacchia noted that this is a concept being developed which he supports, but he needs to know more about it. He stated that there needs to be a community discussion before the Board buys into a system that they know nothing about. He said he is not arguing substance. Cornacchia suggested using Springfield’s language and requesting more information and education from LTD. He voiced agreement with the concept, but needs to know what it means physically in Eugene and Springfield.

Sorenson stated that, while the strategy is phrased generally enough that the specific elements do not commit the Board or Public Works department to anything specific, he believed there should be development and enhancement of a BRT. Sorenson stated that the LTD revision language would allow the BRT to be pursued further while retaining a conservative position of not committing any funds.

VOTE: 1-4, Cornacchia, Dumdi, Green and Weeldreyer dissenting.

MOTION: To support language in the Springfield revision.

Sorenson stated that this is also a good approach.

Cornacchia MOVED, Green SECONDED.

VOTE: 5-0.

Regarding Strategy 14, there was discussion regarding funding sources.

MOTION: To support the original language.

Cornacchia MOVED, Dumdi SECONDED.

Cornacchia said there will be a need for additional revenue and resources for rapid transit.

Dumdi expressed concern regarding the payroll tax funding source because that tax reaches out to areas where there is very little bus service and she does not think it is appropriate.

Green stated he would support the original language, but is concerned about reference to additional funds and asked if that meant in addition to federal funds, payroll taxes or on self-employed home businesses. He said this sounds likes a tax.

Stefano Regiano, Plan Development Manager, LTD, said to find additional revenue did not necessarily mean a tax. He said the intent was to be limited to federal funding, noting however, that there are also attempts at the state level to secure additional transit funding. Stefano said the language was not specific to any certain type of tax, it just meant to find additional revenue which may be a replacement for a payroll tax or may be additional federal, state or local. He said the LTD board would be very interested in meeting with the Commissioners regarding BRT.

VOTE: 5-0.

9. CONSENT CALENDAR

A. Approval of Minutes: None.

B. County Administration

1) ORDER 97-4-2-5/In the Matter of Delegating Authority to the County Administrator to Sign an Intergovernmental Agreement with L-COG to Staff the Public Safety Coordinating Council.

C. County Counsel

1) ORDER 97-4-2-6/In the Matter of Amending Order No. 97-3-19-14 Regarding an Election for a Lane County One-Year Public Safety Levy.

D. Health and Human Services

1) RESOLUTION AND ORDER 97-4-2-7/In the Matter of Participation in Funding Activities of the Oregon Dispute Resolution Commission.

2) RESOLUTION AND ORDER 97-4-2-8/In the Matter of Appropriating an Additional $39,718 of Revenues and Expenditures in Fund 86 to Support Services to Individuals with Developmental Disabilities (PAAF #68 to the 1995-97 Intergovernmental Agreement 20-001).

E. Public Works

1) RESOLUTION AND ORDER 97-4-2-9/In the Matter of Acquiring Fee or Other Interests in Certain Real Properties or Portions Thereof for the Improvement of Second Street South from Springfield City Limits to Dorris Ranch.

2) ORDER 97-4-2-10/In the Matter of Entering into an Intergovernmental Agreement with the City of Springfield for the 2nd Street South Improvement Project.

F. Human Resources and Management Services

1) ORDER 97-4-2-11/In the Matter of Designating the Exclusive Bargaining Team for Labor Negotiations with AFSCME Local 2831, Teamster Local 57, Public Works Administrative, Professional and Technical Staff, Public Works Association Local 626, Lane County Peace Officers’ Association, Inc. and the Lane County Prosecuting Attorneys’ Association.

G. Youth Services

1) RESOLUTION AND ORDER 97-4-2-12/In the Matter of Approving the Lane County Diversion Plan for the 1997-1999 Biennium.

Cornacchia asked that item E.2) be pulled. Sorenson pulled item C.1)

MOTION: Approval of the balance of the Consent Calendar.

Cornacchia MOVED, Dumdi SECONDED. VOTE: 5-0.

Regarding item E.2), Cornacchia wanted to note that the file note requested action that was not included in the order and with clarification from Legal Counsel, he would move approval.

MOTION: Approval of the Order.

Regarding item C.1), Sorenson asked if Lane Code required the County to designate election days or that election days cannot be designated other than those specifically in the state statute.

Wilson said she was not aware of anything in the Lane Code. She said the order language corrects the language in the order placing the matter on the ballot and ratifies the action of the Chair in picking the May 20th date.

Cornacchia MOVED, Dumdi SECONDED.

VOTE: 5-0.

Cornacchia excused at 4:00, giving his approval of the next three items. 

10. HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

a. ORDER 97-4-2-13/In the Matter of Authorizing the County Administrator to Sign for Concurrence with the Proposed County Plan for Provision of Services to be Funded by the 1997-99 Intergovernmental Agreement 20-001 with the Mental Health and Developmental Disabilities Services Division.

Rockstroh provided an overview and discussed the agenda file note (see material on file).

MOTION: Approval of the Order.

Green MOVED, Dumdi SECONDED. VOTE: 5-0.

b. ORDER 97-4-2-14/In the Matter of Appointing Two Members to Fill Two Vacancies to the Mental Health Advisory Committee.

MOTION: Approval of the Order.

Green MOVED, Dumdi SECONDED. VOTE: 5-0.

11. YOUTH SERVICES

a. ORDER 97-4-2-15/In the Matter of Approving an Intergovernmental Agreement with the Oregon Commission on Children and Families for Research Services, Delegating to the County Administrator Authority to Execute the Agreement, Appropriating to the Budget of the Department of Youth Services an Additional $9,084 in Spending Authority for the Fiscal Year 96-97, and Creating Within the Department of Youth Services a 0.5 FTE Administrative Assistant Position.

Chuck Ryer, Assistant Director, Youth Services, gave an overview of this item.

MOTION: Approval of the Order.

Green MOVED, Dumdi SECONDED. VOTE: 5-0.

12. REVIEW ASSIGNMENTS

Not done today.

13. EMERGENCY BUSINESS

Weeldreyer stated that the application for the Oakridge/Westfir Enterprise Zone from the City of Oakridge is coming as emergency business because the deadline for submitting the application to continue the enterprise zone in the Oakridge/Westfir area is Friday. She noted that Teresa Wilson, Legal Counsel, has worked with Oakridge City Administrator, Mike McGalvedge on the resolution.

Wilson distributed material and said the significant difference in the document she distributed and the document handed out as emergency business yesterday is the elimination of the delegation of City Administration of Oakridge to submit the application for the City of Oakridge, noting that Lane County does not need to make that delegation. She pointed out that the other difference is that the language that commits Lane County to prepare a list or map of local lands and buildings owned by the State or municipal corporations is not a responsibility of Lane County and not essential to this resolution.

Weeldreyer stated that she spoke with the Westfir Mayor who supported this.

Sorenson asked is this could this be extended for a shorter time.

Wilson said that granting an extension is a function of the State and not the County, and Lane County is applying for the extension. She said there is always the opportunity to request termination of an enterprise zone and that is provided by statute.

Sorenson said he is only voting for this because it is being represented as an emergency matter, but to approve something on an emergency level that has a ten year life puts the Board in an awkward position.

MOTION: APPROVAL OF ORDER.

Green MOVED, Dumdi SECONDED. VOTE: 4-0.

There being no further business, this meeting adjourned at 12:27 p.m.

 

Zoe Gilstrap, Recording Secretary

go_to.gif (1155 bytes)Back to Board Notices