minhead.gif (11357 bytes)APPROVED 7/28/99

June 9, 1999


Harris Hall Main Floor - 9:00 a.m.

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


Green reported that Roy Burns would be giving a legislative report.




Concerning revising the advisory board questionnaire, Dwyer noted that it needed to go to the policy review board.

Sorenson noted the agenda team had been strict about not doing too many time certains. He said he wanted a response from the Board because it was frustrating to cut short a discussion because there is a time certain and no one shows up.

Green added that it was the first time he had experienced someone not showing up. He said his basic premise is that if someone is coming from outside the County, or is not part of the organization, that does not warrant a time certain, unless they were bringing people who were private individuals who were taking time off. He added he wanted to accommodate people to the extent that he could. He said when there are more than two time certains, it gets to be too hectic.

Weeldreyer stated she liked no more than two time certains in the morning session. She noted it is the graduation season and said on behalf of the Lane County Board of Commissioners, congratulations to the Class of 1999.


a.  ORDER 99-6-9-1 Ratifying the Metropolitan Wastewater Management Commission (MWMC) Regional Wastewater Program Budget for Fiscal Year 1999-2000.

Morrison stated this was her first experience going through the budgeting process for the MWMC while serving on the committee. She praised the MWMC as one the most well-run groups that she had attended.

Susie Smith, General Manager, Metropolitan Wastewater Management Commission, reported that it was a status quo budget that involved little change from a revenue and expenditure perspective and no changes in operations or levels of service. She noted based on the intergovernmental agreement, the governing bodies created MWMC, bringing annual operating and capital budgets to the governing bodies for ratification. She said that MWMC (after having four budget work sessions and a public hearing) did approve the budget on April 15. She added Eugene ratified the budget on May 10 and Springfield will ratify it in the form of its annual budget adoption process in June. She noted the budget combines the Eugene Wastewater’s Division’s budgets for operation and maintenance of the regional wastewater system and Springfield’s budget for administration services provided to the commission and capital programs. She reported the rate they are projecting for next year is about $11.7 million and they had been conservative because of an economic slowdown. She said with regard to the system development charge revenue, they anticipate $650,000 is fees. She said with the rates and projected revenues, they can fully fund their operating budget, capital programs and make reserve contributions consistent with the commission’s target and policies. She said with regard to the capital improvement projects, major projects for this fiscal year involve completion of construction of their Biosolids dewater facility. (An $8.5 million construction project). She added they are looking for the purchase of a dedicated land application site for Biosolids to grow poplar trees and completing their wet weather flow management plan that will address capital improvements necessary throughout the regional and local systems. She said in addition to the budget document, there is a memo that makes a financial accounting adjustment to the budget to reflect the change in accounting systems in Springfield from a cash to accrual basis. She said it only reflects the materials and services budget, of about $500,000, changing the revenue and expenditure side.

Morrison commented that poplar trees have the potential of producing revenues in the future to offset some of the expenses without having to increase rates. She added it is a creative way of keeping rates at a standardized level.

Sorenson echoed Morrison’s comment about the poplar trees. He asked if it was being done for a particular type of contaminate.

Smith responded the main thing leading industries to look at poplars is the ability to uptake mass quantities of the nutrients that are made available in the Biosolids. She added the hybrid poplars are now exhibiting the same properties of woods used as non-structural in furniture and boxes.

MOTION: to approve ORDER 99-6-9-1.

Morrison MOVED, Sorenson SECONDED.

Green echoed Morrison comments about the well-run operation and administration of the MWMC.

VOTE: 4-0.

b.  ORDER 99-6-9-2 Committing Staff Time to Fiberoptics Consortium Facilitation and Authorizing Signing of Intergovernmental Agreements for Lane County to Become a Member of Regional Fiber Consortiums Comprised of Public/Municipal Organizations Working Together to Facilitate Coordinated Broadband Fiberoptics and Telecommunication Systems Access.

Green stated that it appeared that they will be acting on faith as they have leadership with Weeldreyer’s involvement. He added there is a lot of support for this issue from other cities.

Sorenson asked that if this doesn’t work out, if Lane County had a right to unilaterally withdraw.

Wilson responded that the contract could be terminated with a 90 days notice.

Morrison commented that this is a gamble because there is the capability of satellite fiber optics and within five years, the fiber may be outdated or outmoded. She said she understands the advantages to rural communities and out of all the economic dollars spent, this will show more productivity than in other things. She asked if in a year this issue could be revisited so they would not continue to go forward with the consortium if it was not producing anything of a real value.

Dwyer stated it is the government’s job to provide leadership to help the rural communities that have been impacted by the downturn of logging. He said fiber would be able to condense millions of messages but there is a risk. He suggested to sign a sunset clause, as it would require a review. He said he is convinced that it will be highly beneficial to the community and the most productive per dollar investment that they could make in rural Oregon.

Weeldreyer stated she was proposing that the Lane County Board of Commissioners enter into an intergovernmental agreement with two different consortiums that make up communities from Klamath Falls to North Bend and Coos Bay. She said with the 90 day opt-out clause, she represented the interests and concerns of the Board. She said she would come back in a year and give her honest opinion on whether this concept is working, what the challenges are and whether Lane County should continue it.

MOTION: to approve ORDER 99-6-9-2.

Weeldreyer MOVED, Sorenson SECONDED.

Green stated he supported having an annual review and update.

Sorenson requested the timing of the review to be after the budget is approved.

VOTE: 5-0.

c.  RESOLUTION AND ORDER 99-6-9-3 Adopting the 1999-2000 Overall Economic Development Program (OEDP), for Submission to the Cascades West Economic Development District (WEDD) and Transmittal to the Federal Economic Development Administration (EDA).

Jim Zelenka, Lane Council of Governments, stated they are here to review and adopt a resolution to submit to the Cascades West Economic District Board and the Federal Economic Program. He reported they had been involved with the district program since 1984, serving to unite Lane, Benton, Linn and Lincoln counties in their economic development planning. He noted that every year they prepare an annual review of the accomplishments of the district activities of the previous year and looking ahead to the future with issues facing the district communities, opportunities and barriers they are facing. He stated the Economic Development Administration requested a summary review of the document and the most important parts of the document are the strategic issues and work program area for the upcoming year. He noted there are four issues facing their communities and the work program for the district staff is based upon those issues. He added the document also contains a list of prioritized projects of the communities throughout the four county area, requesting the updates to their priority list. He said the document does not contain the actual numerical listing from each of the communities because the document that goes to the EDA, breaks it down into high priority.

Van Vactor noted on page 9, the length of the program is through December 31, 1999, only six months.

Zelenka responded the reference was to the regional strategies program effort. He said the district staff also staffed the state initiative of the regional strategy program that Lane County is involved with and that program effort is due to terminate at the end of this year. He added it is an ongoing program that is reviewed every year at this time.

Dwyer stated there was a lot of material on this and he would not feel comfortable voting without reviewing the impacts.

Sorenson said with regard to page 33-43 (the list of top priorities) he didn’t understand how they got from the wish list to a list of where the money is actually going to be spent. He wanted to know the significance of the communities within each county.

Zelenka responded the document with the project listings will not be applied against a given pot of money. He said the document is a planning document, based on the assessment of their areas of weaknesses and strengths. He said through the process, they developed a prioritized list from the community’s perspective as to what would help them achieve a better community. He said his responsibility is to respond to those lists and to assist communities to secure funding.

Weeldreyer stated that it is an inventory that was prepared by the respective jurisdictions in a four county region using local processes. She added it is a federal program by which there are federal agencies that won’t fund any projects unless they are on the inventory list. She declared that she would hate for Lane County to be the only County and jurisdiction not to follow the process.

Dwyer stated there are things on the list that are private responsibilities, not the responsibility of government. He said he was not given the opportunity to review the document and was not prepared to approve it. He wanted the staff to review and give him an in depth report as to what this is.

Morrison stated she participated with this at a local level. She said she had no problem with the list, but was troubled by some of the duplication involving some of the projects. She wanted to see all of the lists of committees and the funding streams that pay for the administrative costs. She asked who was paying the economic development district.

Zelenka responded that the district itself--in terms of its operational expenses--is paid through a federal grant through the Federal Economic Development Administration with a match from the participants, the Lane Council of Governments and Cascade West Council of Governments. He noted the total budget is $90,000 for the four counties.

Morrison stated she was confused as to how much was actually going into project development compared to what is going into the projects on the ground. She added that prior to 1984, Lane County was not part of the district. She wanted to know what Lane County did from 1977 to 1984, when the Cascade West Economic Development District was formed.

Zelenka reported the difference between the economic development district was that additional funds for projects was higher amounts for projects (if a project was coming from an economic development district) as opposed to a redevelopment area. He reported that is how the dollars flowed, located within the economic development districts. He noted that areas that were not part of economic development districts could still participate, but at a lower level of funds available to the community projects as well as any assistance. He noted the economic development district itself has no dollars that it can allocate for projects, it is a capacity building tool to work with communities to ensure they have projects that can get funded. He said the district is involved in working to develop fundable projects for the communities located within the district boundaries. He said it has staff capacity to help the communities access what dollars may be available.

Green stated he had seen this document several times and is comfortable going forward.

Sorenson requested to have this item brought back for further consideration.

Morrison agreed with Sorenson.

Green declared there was not support to adopt the resolution, so it will be rescheduled.

Van Vactor suggested to schedule it for a work session.

Weeldreyer stated what the Board is being asked to do is lend their support to a four county planning document, and the other counties’ commissioners are being held for the endorsement of the projects within their jurisdiction.

Van Vactor asked what the time lines were for this document.

Zelenka responded that they were due to submit the document to Economic Development Administration on June 30. He said if they don’t have the document in place, the federal agencies will not look at Lane County’s projects and it places them in jeopardy. He added if this was to be submitted 30 days later, nothing would probably happen, but it doesn’t follow the procedure and could cast a cloud over the process.

Weeldreyer asked if the process required all jurisdictions to approve before it could go forward, or could the other three counties approve it and go forward whether the Lane Board of Commissioners approve it or not.

Zelenka stated it would go forward with the note that Lane County is further reviewing the document.

5. EXECUTIVE SESSION as per ORS 192.660



a.  Announcements

Van Vactor noted he sent the Board an E-Mail two days ago on the possibility of a tax measure and the elements involved. His recommended in the memorandum to suggest that he, Jim Johnson and Mike Kelly get together to recalculate the elements as well as a discussion on revenue sharing.

Green declared that Van Vactor had the support from the Board to go forward.

Van Vactor added that it is important to get a good description as to what the elements are because County Counsel needs it for the language drafted for the ordinance and charter amendment.


a.  PUBLIC HEARING AND ORDER 99-6-9-4 Accepting Plan Amendment/Approval Form (PAAF) #57 to the Intergovernmental Agreement #20-001 with the State Mental Health and Developmental Disability Services Division; Reducing Appropriations of Revenues and Expenditures in Fund 286 by $2,718; and Authorizing the County Administrator to Sign the PAAF.

Green noted they were going to reduce funding, so a public hearing was needed.

Commissioner Green opened up the Public Hearing. There was no one who had signed up to speak, so he closed the Public Hearing.

MOTION: to approve ORDER 99-6-9-4.

Weeldreyer MOVED, Sorenson SECONDED.

VOTE: 5-0.

b.  RESOLUTION AND ORDER 99-6-9-5 Recommending to the Oregon State Health Division a Variance Continuation of the Two-Person Ambulance Crew Requirement for Western Lane Ambulance District.

Rob Rockstroh, Health and Human Services, reported that this is a process issue, that the Board acts as the ambulance service planning authority, making a recommendation to the state. He said it is a reasonable request from the standpoint that it allows not to have two people in an ambulance crew, with the possibility of one person in an ambulance meeting later on with another crew.

Galen Howard, LCOG, stated currently Western Lane Ambulance (because of their tax base and resources), have a first response unit. He said that ambulance has two people in the crew. He added if there is a second call, they have a back-up, a stand-by ambulance crew. He said the second ambulance could leave the district with one staff driver on the ambulance and meet the second person in route or meet the person at the scene. He said it is providing a higher level of service than what they would be able to provide if they went with their existing limited staffing.

MOTION: to approve ORDER 99-6-9-5.

Morrison MOVED, Weeldreyer SECONDED.

VOTE: 5-0.


a.  WORK SESSION Urban Growth Management Agreement Program.

Mike Copely, Land Management, explained this was a project that had been underway for a few months to update a series of planning agreements with the small cities in Lane County. He said he produced a memo for the Board last month, with the prototype language for the type of agreement they would expect to prepare and execute with each of the cities.

Carol Heinkel, Lane Council of Government, Project Manager for the Urban Growth Management Agreement Project (UGMA) noted this program started last fall and the impetus for the project was that the small cities and the county got together and worked on an application to the Transportation and Growth Management Program for a grant to update the urban growth management agreements that are required by administrative rule to implement comprehensive plans. She said that UGMA is a joint planning agreement between Lane County and the nine small cities, and the agreement sets out the process for notification on matters of mutual concern, for land use matters.

Heinkel reported that the documents in the packet entitled: "Negotiation Draft Agreement" is a prototype, and they are trying to get an intergovernmental agreement that is generic that everyone could agree to. She stated the agreement is being put forward to the city councils in the nine cities in work sessions for comment and hopes to put forth the final agreement later this summer for adoption. She said the agreement is a new and improved version of agreements that were adopted in 1979 and 1980, concurrently with comprehensive plans and speculative in nature. She also noted that back then there was no easy way for the cities to identify properties that were inside the areas of interest. She said with this project, the areas of interest will be included in a computer file and County staff will be able to look them up and it will ease administration and make the process more consistently administered. She noted the prototype contained several changes from the agreements adopted in the early 80's, making it consistent with state law and easier to understand, and then modified to reflect the type of notification the cities and the county staff desire. She said the agreement itself involves staff from Lane County Land Management Division, parks and roads. She said that Land Management would notify the cities primarily on matters that would go before the Board or the hearings official. She noted it was a work in progress and if there were obstacles with the agreements or issues, this is the time to talk about them.

Dwyer asked why it was in Lane County’s interest to sign this.

Copely responded that it is always in the County’s interest to facilitate communications between governing bodies that share boundaries. He noted with these agreements, they are handing over no jurisdictional authority, that the agreements are a referral mechanism. He added it is in the interest of one governing body to enhance communications with its neighbor. He said the cities themselves are committed to notify the County of certain things taking place within the city limits.

Dwyer stated he saw nothing about open space.

Copely responded that open space is not subject to permits.

Morrison asked why there was a difference in the response time.

Heinkel noted the 10 day appeal process is for the planning commission or city council decision and the 21 day is for the appeal to the Land Use Board of Appeals and it is consistent with state appeals law.

Sorenson stated there was a concern that was brought up before the Board. He said they had met with a number of the smaller cities in Lane County. He said with regard to Coburg, several of the commissioners had been contacted by the ranchers that live on the east side of Interstate 5 and are affected by an RV development that is on private property. He noted the city councilors had complained that the city boundaries had gone up to or next to the freeway and they were never involved in the decision to site this RV park. He wanted to know if this agreement would deal with that type of problem.

Heinkel responded that this agreement would deal with that and ensure that notifications occur consistently.

Copely noted the RV park had been there a long time and the use permit was back in the 1970's, prior to any of these agreements. He added a proposal of that sort would be subject to this agreement.

Sorenson asked about expansion as the ranch was there before the RV park. He noted the problem is not the existence of the RV park, it is the expansion and the lack of regulation and inability of Lane County government to regulate that facility. He added they were in compliance with all of their pollution permits, but it is a problem on expansion and the enforcement of the existing permit.

Copely responded that there is no existing permit because the park is an allowed use in the zone. He added the sanitation system was the issue and that was taken care of.

Copely noted that the agreements would be coming back to the Board on an individual basis at the conclusion of the negotiations between the staffs. He added they could come back for another work session to discuss the philosophy and structure of the overall agreements.

Heinkel noted the other issues that came up during the process. She added LCOG staff had been familiar with regional issues and proposed a concept, a regional growth management strategy for the Southern Willamette Valley. She said the local governments are working together as partners to address the issues around growth. She noted last April the LCOG Board passed a resolution supporting the strategy in concept. She provided the Board with a copy of the strategy (copy in file). She stated they will be coming back with more information and a work session could be set up for the Board to endorse this regional strategy effort.

Green agreed with Heinkel and thought a work session would be best. He said the item today was to notify the Board about what was going on. He noted at the work session the Board will need to give Copely direction on how to proceed with this issue.


A.  Approval of Minutes: May 12, 1999, Jt. Lunch BCC/BLM Willamette Forest, 12:00 p.m.

B.  Public Works

1)  ORDER 99-6-9-6 Accepting a Deed of Land to be Used as a Public Road Easement For County Road No. 2028 (Calumet Avenue) (17-04-02).

2)  ORDER 99-6-9-7 Awarding a $33,000 (Estimate) Contract to Rexius Forest By-Products, Inc. for Yard Debris Processing and Recycling Services.

3)  ORDER 99-6-9-8 Approving an Intergovernmental Agreement Regarding Cooperative Planning and Urban Services for Fire Services Between the City of Veneta, Lane County and Lane Rural Fire District No. 1 for the Area Within the Veneta Urban Growth Boundary and Authorizing the County Administrator to Execute Said Agreement.

Sorenson stated he had minor corrections on the minutes of the May 12, meeting: on page 1, to add Sue Olson, Public Affairs, Willamette National Forest as being present, page 3, should be Assistant Secretary Jim Lyons and the last page, Sue Olson, Public Affairs, Willamette National Forest.

Dwyer noted on page 3, he disagreed with legislation and extending one more year from 2004 to 2005, putting the management aspect into the forests. He said he didn’t agree with the additional legislation that he talked about.

MOTION: to approve the Consent Calendar with the corrected minutes.

Sorenson MOVED, Morrison SECONDED.

VOTE: 5-0.


a.  ORDER 99-6-9-9 Appointing One Member to the Farm Review Board Advisory Committee.

Jim Gangle, County Assessor, noted the Farm Review is a statutory board that reviews the farm use values that the assessor establishes for all of the farm deferral properties in the county. He added that it meets once a year and reviews the rental study and income information for farm properties, and the results are applied to the farm deferral properties in the county.

Green stated the recommendation is to appoint Charles Stolsig and Bart Edwards. He added their term would expire in 2000. He added that Stolsig will represent the Board of County Commissioners and Edwards will be representing the Assessor’s Office.

MOTION: to approve ORDER 99-6-9-9.

Morrison MOVED, Weeldreyer SECONDED.

VOTE: 5-0.


a.  ORDER 99-6-9-10 Approving Submission of a Grant Application to the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention for up to $3,350,000 for up to Five and a Half Years.

Green reported that when he went back to Washington, D.C. for the United Front, they visited the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention and this grant was mentioned during that meeting. He added that Jamon Kent, Superintendent of Springfield Schools, reported to the PSCC policy group that this was available and Pat Rogers, Director, Commission on Children and Families (CCF) noted that the CCF should be involved and had taken the lead on this as well as the Juvenile Prevention Task Force.

Pat Rogers, Director, Commission on Children and Families, noted that this is the fourth and last grant and there are three others that had been submitted, all independent but connected to prevention strategies with children and youth violence in the schools and the community. She added there is no match required for any of the four grants. She asked the Board for their support and endorsement.

Green said he was confident that the money will be used in an approved and efficient manner.

Rogers noted that it was imperative for the grant design teams to recognize that it is built on what they have and trying to consolidate those and best programs and practices in the County.

MOTION: to approve ORDER 99-6-9-10.

Weeldreyer MOVED, Sorenson SECONDED.

VOTE: 5-0.


a.  ORDER 99-6-9-11 Authorizing the County Administrator to Execute Requirements Contracts with Various Furniture Vendors for the Lane County Juvenile Justice Center Project -- Furniture, Fixtures and Equipment.

MOTION: to approve 99-6-9-11.

Morrison MOVED, Weeldreyer SECONDED.

VOTE: 5-0.


d.  RESOLUTION AND ORDER 99-6-9-12 In Celebration of Home Ownership Month in Oregon and the 65th Anniversary of the Federal Housing Administration.

Manny Lee, Community Builder, Portland Housing Urban Development Office, reported about residents having an opportunity to own their own home. He noted this week marks the third annual celebration of national home ownership week. He added that this year marks the 65th anniversary of the start of HUD’s FHA Home Loan Program that assists home buyers to qualify for mortgage loans by guaranteeing their loans. He said the ability to obtain a mortgage loan is the number one factor in realizing home ownership. He reported that in Oregon alone, to date, the FHA has insured more than 280,000 home loans guarantying over $10.6 billion. He added that FHA loans in Oregon have been successful in 97 times out of 100 loans over the 65 year period. He noted since it began, the FHA Home Loan Program has led to a 50% increase in home ownership in the United States. He said that six out of every ten FHA home loans are to first time home buyers. He said that Lane County working with its partners in the local housing industry and community has an impressive record of achievement in helping the county residents realize their home ownership dreams. He reported that in Lane County, FHA had guaranteed over $1 billion in home ownership loans involving over 31,000 loans. He said the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development applauded Lane County for its outstanding work to promote home ownership. He presented to Green a framed certificate acknowledging Lane County as a member of Oregon’s $100 Million FHA Lending Group.

Green read the proclamation into the record.

MOTION: to approve RESOLUTION and ORDER 99-6-9-12.

Sorenson MOVED, Morrison SECONDED.

VOTE: 5-0.




Roy Burns, Legislative Committee, provided the Board with a summary of information on the PERS system legislation. He said that the item did pass the Senate by a 16-14 vote and is moving onto the house. He noted that there is a proposal through the house where Board action is necessary. He passed out a summary of taxation (copy in file) on vehicles comparing the State of Oregon to other states. He said it is keyed to the implications of getting some additional gas tax through this session. He also passed out a piece of paper explaining that the state legislature wants to bust the state highway trust fund and use some of the money for state police enforcing. He asked the commissioners to contact their delegation and urge that the trust not be busted for that purpose and to oppose that position.

Dwyer agreed and stated the voters had spoken several times on this issue. He said he didn’t think the voters would approve it. He said he would vote to refer this and he is against the issue.

Green stated that Burns could honor the Board’s request by contacting the legislators to let them know the position of Lane County.

Burns stated he was requested to work with Congressman DeFazio’s office to search for funding for an emergency repair problem on London Road. He said he was contacted late yesterday afternoon by Kathy Eastman in DeFazio’s office, and her indication was that there were no special appropriations that could be used for the emergency repairs for London Road. She added their office would do whatever they could to assist Lane County but there were no guaranties for any appropriation. He asked if the Board wanted to advance county monies and if so, it needed to be done quickly.

Ollie Snowden, Public Works, recalled that they hired a consultant with Weyerhauser Corporation to look at the slide that contains two components, an upper slide and lower slide. He stated the consultants came back and saw a two-part fix to it, one part was a series of trench drains on the upper slide and the second part was a rock buttress that would stabilize the lower slide. He said they received word from the Federal Highway Administration and ODOT that this project was eligible for Federal Highway Administration ER money, at 90 cents on the dollar or 10% match. He said they proceeded that way with the understanding that it would go to bid this summer. He said in late May they learned the ER money was exhausted and in order for Lane County to be eligible for any ER money, ODOT needs to bid the project before November, 1999. He added if they go later than July 22, 1999, it is too late to get it built this year. He said last year Weyerhaeuser placed the trench drains on the upper portion of the slide, and based on a monitoring the consultants had done over the last six or eight months, it hadn’t moved much. He said the consultant report said the factor of safety built into the trench drain system is not enough to say there will not be any further failure on the road. He said the fix is the trench drains and rock buttress and if they don’t do the rock butress, it is possible the road may stay like that or with heavy rains, there could be a catastrophic failure that takes the road out. He said the cost is about $1.1 million and they could take an advance on future year’s Service Transportation Act monies that ODOT would pass to the County. He said it would be more than a two year’s advance.

Dwyer stated he would favor pursuing every avenue in terms of getting the money back.

Snowden stated that ODOT has the flexibility when the ER money comes to the state to spend it on the County projects first. He added that this happens on a regular basis and some years congress will make supplemental appropriations to help cover the cost of the projects and this year they didn’t. He said there is about a $400 million backlog in ER projects from 95-98. He added if there is not enough money next fiscal year in 2000, they could get some reimbursement in 2001.

Green stated he had seen the road and the County has responsibility to fix it.

Weeldreyer stated this is important to the community. She encouraged the Board to work with ODOT to get some emergency fund allocations to recover the up-front costs, but to do the project this summer.

Green noted the Board was not taking action today.

Weeldreyer gave a summary of action that the Association of Counties took at their legislative committee meeting on Monday. She said there was a two-page background that was distributed on the AOC’s position with District Attorneys. She noted of their six priorities, the Assessment and Taxation priority passed, and the District Attorney’s funding has a medium-high likelihood of passage. She said in order to kick it into the high category, commissioners were asked to come back to their counties using the background piece to put together some sort of editorial or commentary for their weekly and local regional papers to urge voters to contact their state legislators to support District Attorney funding. She stated she needed direction from the Board as to whether they should direct Commissioner Green, as Board Chair, to work and put together something that could be sent to the public.

Weeldreyer reported the Legislative Committee opposed Senate Bill 1040, the mental health facility siting. She said this bill would limit the County’s ability to site the facilities to step down from the state system to a local system. She noted there were a number of neighborhood groups behind this bill because it is an issue of public safety for their communities. She said the AOC went on record as opposing this senate bill. She added the justices of the peace would like to be included (not in the regular PERS programs) in the Public Retirement Employee System that is for judges. She said it was recommended and the Board supported a motion to oppose that action. She noted in the measure it allows for interest on the trust fund to counties for public health programs.

Burns said that hearings are likely to start next week in the Senate on the issue of transportation funding. He said the senate thinks that six cents is too high and likely to move to five cents, having transferred staff from state to local government. He said Lane County is opposed to conversion of weight-mile to diesel fuel and registration. He said he was not optimistic that there would be a gas tax package through this session.

Dwyer stated he didn’t want the money if it came in violation of the principles that had been addressed in terms of equity and cost sharing.

Sorenson stated he wanted to stick with the Board’s position for cost responsibility and recognition.

Weeldreyer noted that House Bill 2082 B is the current version of the house version of the transportation package. She said in that package it is six cents and there was a deal brokered in which two cents will be bonding capacity to allow ODOT to address the $500 million in unmet financial needs. She said the position she took was that many of those projects that are on ODOT’s needs list are projects that are actually located within Lane County’s region. She said in the two cent bonding authority is improvements to the Beltline I-5 interchange. She recommended to get something instead of nothing and continue to support this. She noted a commissioner from Washington County recommended to take the house package in its current form and allocate out by senate district the amount of money that the cities and the counties in their district would get.

There being no further business Commissioner Green adjourned the meeting at 12:05 p.m.

Melissa Zimmer

Recording Secretary

go_to.gif (1155 bytes)Back to Board Notices

Contact the webmaster@co.lane.or.us Read the Lane County Liability Disclaimer and User Agreement
Updated: 11/02/05 URL:
Copyright 1997 Lane County Information Services.  All rights reserved.