minhead.gif (11357 bytes)

Approved 4/25/00

February 9, 2000


Harris Hall Main Floor - following HACSA

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


Sorenson announced that the Fair Board Removal Rules would be moved from February 16 to February 15.

Green asked if moving it to a day earlier would cause a delay for the Fair Board.

Teresa Wilson responded that it causes no delay for the Fair Board. She said it would necessitate having one more reading and hearing in order to make sure that nothing is challengeable about the adoption of the ordinance.

MOTION: to move the Fair Board Removal item from Wednesday February 16 to Tuesday February 15.

Dwyer MOVED, Weeldreyer SECONDED.

VOTE: 5-0.

Sorenson noted there will be another emergency item from Health and Human Services.

Weeldreyer stated that Dwyer made a request for a significant amount of information from the Sheriff’s office and the policy is--if requests for information from an individual commissioner exceeds 15 minutes of staff time--there needs to be Board direction. She questioned if this should be a formal item on Commissioner’s Business.


Ilona Koleszar, 871 W. 11th, Eugene, reported in September she was approached to perform a marriage. She said she called the County to inquire about the process. She noted that she is a lawyer and has been practicing law for 17 years and is a notary public. She noted that she had performed many divorces but she was told that she could not perform a wedding unless she was a minister, County employee or judicial officer. She hoped the Board would consider allowing this function by members of the public.


a. DISCUSSION Appointment of Commissioners to Conduct Weddings.

David Suchart, Management Services, reported that he has been following a policy set in 1995 that is consistent with all other counties in Oregon. He noted that he had granted exceptions for commissioners (at the request of the commissioners) and the mayor of Springfield, to perform a wedding. He added there are no other counties that deputize anyone. He said when it became controversial, he no longer deputized even commissioners, to be fair to everyone. He added he didn’t want to screen people to perform marriages, as there is no staff available. He said he has made the determination to deputize no one but staff to perform civil marriages.

Van Vactor commented that whoever is deputized to perform marriages could have a significant impact on Lane County government.

Green asked what the qualifications were to perform marriages.

Suchart responded that there are statutorial qualifications, including being deputized by a county clerk, a judge or as a member of a certified religious group registered with Lane County.

Annette Newingham, Deputy Clerk, Lane County, the County is mandated by state law, with provisions for churches that are organized in the State of Oregon. She reported that other counties do not deputize staff like Lane County.

Green said that marrying people works well as it is and he was not persuaded to change it.

Weeldreyer requested that there be a provision for current and former county commissioners to marry people, instead of no one at all.

Sorenson stated that Suchart had approved people to perform marriages, including county commissioners, state legislatures, ex-commissioners and mayors. He asked why Suchart was not making exceptions.

Suchart reported that he cleaned up the marriage rules because they were a mess. He noted they had people performing weddings who shouldn’t have because records weren’t kept well. He said he standardized the rules in conformance with the State of Oregon and other county clerks. He noted in the past five years he has deputized eight people. He said he did not want to make the decision about who he deputizes.

Weeldreyer stated she would like the Board to make an exception for current and past commissioners.

MOTION: to direct Suchart to leave the policy the way it is and forego past, present and future commissioners. Suchart will deputize the appropriate people and past, present and future commissioners will not be given a specialized exemption.

Morrison MOVED, Green SECONDED.

Dwyer stated he wouldn’t support the motion.

Weeldreyer stated she would not be supporting the motion for the reasons stated earlier. She noted that Lane County should be flexible and customer-oriented and if the County was to provide the service of marriage ceremonies, she would favor assessing a fee for staff costs.

Green supported the motion. He said people are getting married all the time and having too many people perform marriages poses risks. He wasn’t willing to assume the risk with a different direction.

Sorenson said the Board needs to be responsive to legitimate requests by the public for assistance from government. He said only a few people have asked for the right to perform marriages and the response they receive from Lane County government is no. He said he finds that offensive and there needs to be a proactive approach to make certain that people who have legitimate requests get answered. He said he would not support the motion.

VOTE: 2-3 (Sorenson, Dwyer, Weeldreyer dissenting.) Motion fails.

MOTION: to direct the clerk to follow the statute with the exception of current and former commissioners having the authority to perform weddings.

Weeldreyer MOVED. Motion fails for lack of a second.

Sorenson suggested further discussion on this topic.

b. The Fifteen Minute Rule

Weeldreyer explained that Dwyer (in an E-Mail letter to the Sheriff) requested a number of documents (on the auto impoundment program) that would exceed the 15 minute rule. She noted there were two other commissioners that wanted to have the work done for formalization in today’s meeting.

Green agreed with Dwyer that the information should be readily available.

Sorenson said with regard to the 15 minute rule, if a commissioner wishes to make a request for information or assistance, the commissioner must go through the board meeting for that request.

Dwyer stated there needs to be a policy adopted regarding forfeiture. He added an ordinance needs to be adopted that gives clear direction about what is being seized.


a. RESOLUTION 00-2-9-1 Proclaiming the Week of February 14, 2000 as Family Resource Center Week.

Kathleen Hynes, Senior Program Services, Children and Families, distributed packets to the Board (copy in file.)

Gloria Griffith, Springfield and Marcola School Districts, reported that the Family Resource Center is part of a County project from Children and Families, started in 1995. She said it was a way for the local commission on children and families to create a wellness system for families throughout Lane County. She explained they have been able to leverage new services, and provide safe places and resources for families throughout Lane County. She reported that most of their community centers are staffed part-time, but they envision a 24-hour family resource center.

Peggy Lintula, South Lane School District, said they were excited about the possibility of a family resource center week and invited the Board to visit a center.

Hynes announced that the February 16 meeting of Children and Families will be held at the Howard Family Resource Center at 5:30 p.m.

MOTION: to approve RESOLUTION 00-2-9-1.


Morrison noted that prior to the Board passing the resolution, it was already published in The Register-Guard that the Board had approved the event.

VOTE: 5-0.

5. EXECUTIVE SESSION as per ORS 192.660

To be held at the end of the meeting.


a. Announcements


b. ORAL INFORMATION SHARING Lane County TV and PSA's and Springfield History Book.

Mike Moskovitz, Public Information Officer, reported that a display went up in the Courthouse lobby with the photographs of the commissioners, a map, and the history of Lane County. He showed the public service announcements that were produced by NACO about Lane County.

Green asked what the connection was between the PSA’s and the request that he made several years ago about a video by AOC on the story of Lane County. He said he had never seen that PSA.

Van Vactor recalled that the PSA had never been done.

Moskovitz noted that, because they are free public service announcements, they may not be run, as it is up to individual television stations. He added it doesn’t cost Lane County any money to air the tapes. He said if they want to hire an outside commercial agency to produce another one, the cost would be $2,000 per minute, whereas LCOG would charge $500 to produce it.

Dwyer said the cost was high and it is important to save the money.

c. ORDER 00-2-9-2 Lane County Entering into an Inter-Agency MOU to Establish a Policy of Cooperation and Coordination to Facilitate Construction of a Pedestrian Bridge Below Dexter Dam on the Eugene-to-Pacific-Crest-Trail.

Dick Lamster, Army Corps of Engineers, reported the Corps manages 13 reservoirs and 9 are in Lane County. He noted their main offices are in Lookout Point Dam. He added they manage 45,000 acres of public land and 35,000 acres of watershed. He reported they have about four million visitors per year. He asked the Board to enter into a multi-agency memorandum of understanding to establish a policy of cooperation and coordination to facilitate the completion of a foot bridge over the middle fork of the Willamette River, downstream from Dexter Dam. He noted it will be on Corps of Engineer land and is the missing link in the completion of the Eugene to Pacific Crest Trail. He said work began in 1979 and today less than 85% per cent has been completed on the 108 mile trail. He reported the trail starts at the Ferry Street Bridge in Eugene and ends up at the junction of the Pacific Crest Trail at Waldo Lake. He said the pedestrian bridge is at the 24 mile mark and if completed, would add about four percent to the completion that was already done, by taking out a detour. He added the memorandum would be signed by the Corps of Engineers, the US Forest Service, Oregon State Parks, and the City of Lowell. He hoped that Lane County would support this as well.

Bob Keefer, Parks, noted that he had been aware of the project since 1990. He supports the project and would be willing to lend some professional and technical time that is required from his office. He noted the trail goes through Mt. Pisgah, so there is a connection with Lane County. He urged the Board to support the order.

Stephanie Schulz, Rural Economic Development, reported that this would be a way for people to get to the town of Lowell without the danger of riding on the highway and it would be helpful for the community.

MOTION: to approve ORDER 00-2-9-2.


Morrison stated she was confused as to whether staff would be overworked by taking on this project. She added there are other needs throughout Lane County for road maintenance and capital improvement projects that cannot be done due to lack of funding. She questioned the utilization of money going towards a bridge. She said she will not be supporting this.

Weeldreyer suggested to approve the motion in concept and ask staff to come back with Lane County’s time contribution and purpose. She said there should be a multi-agency application for the federal T-21 funds. She said this is a good concept and would benefit the County and the communities along it. She said she will support it.

Dwyer stated the contract doesn’t obligate Lane County and this is an important project.

Sorenson said the trail is a significant attraction to the community and to have an effective way to get onto the trail is important for Lane County government. He said he will support this and approve of staff time for working on the project.

VOTE: 4-1 (Morrison dissenting).

d. ORDER 00-2-9-3 Establishing the Classification and Salary Range for Intergovernmental Relations Manager in County Administration.

Van Vactor recalled there was a discussion on this and the Board agreed that the position should be a leadership position in County Administration. He added some requirements of the job were changed to have a description that retained as much leadership responsibility as possible, but under the point factor system, developed at a lower level of compensation. He said it calculates to a salary level grade of 44. He recommended the Board proceeding with this order today. He noted this position would be billed through indirect fees.

Green encouraged non-traditional posting of the job including placement into periodicals and publications, with more networking to find the best qualified candidate.

MOTION: to approve ORDER 00-2-9-3.

Green MOVED, Weeldreyer SECONDED.

VOTE: 5-0.


a. ORDER 00-2-9-4 Amending Chapter 18 of Lane Manual to Revise Seasonal Moorage Fees and Campsite Fees at County Parks (LM 18.110).

Bob Keefer, Parks, noted the proposed fee increases are outlined in the Parks 2005 Plan and were approved last January along with the Marina Action Plan that was approved by the Board in 1996. He added the Finance and Audit Committee had reviewed the fee proposals and recommended approval.

Green reported it came before the Finance and Audit Committee and it was supported. He recommended approval.


Dwyer mentioned that not everyone can afford to pay $3.00 to attend the parks. He wanted to discuss giving citizens access to parks.

VOTE: 5-0.


A. Approval of Minutes: January 26, 2000, Regular Meeting, 9:00 a.m.

B. Assessment and Taxation

1) ORDER 00-2-9-5 A Refund to Parkside Properties, LTD and W. Scott Phinney, Attorney in the Amount of $37,804.31.

C. Health and Human Services

1) RESOLUTION AND ORDER 00-2-9-6 Appropriating an Additional $363,484 in Revenue and Expenditures in Fund 86 for Individuals with Developmental Disabilities (RGA #022 to the 1999-2001 Intergovernmental Agreement 20-001).

D. Public Works

1) ORDER 00-2-9-7 Accepting the Offer from the City of Eugene to Purchase the Former West 11th Scale Site for Right-of-Way Purposes.

Morrison stated there were changes in the Minutes of January 26. On the first page, second item, it should be "think government should get involved;" on page 4 under the Motion; there should be added, "of the Youth Council Meeting; " and on page 7 second paragraph, it should be "to OWEB."

Sorenson noted that on page 5 of the January 26 meeting should be "efficiency."

Green said on page 7 it should be from came to come back to the Board.

MOTION: to approve the Consent Calendar with the corrections of the minutes.

Green MOVED, Weeldreyer SECONDED.

VOTE: 5-0.


a. DISCUSSION Lane County Voters' Pamphlet.

Annette Newingham, Chief Deputy Clerk, Lane County, reported that if Lane County has a voters pamphlet, anyone can file in Lane County, but they don’t also have the right to file in the state pamphlet. She added if Lane County doesn’t file a voters pamphlet, then only the cities of Eugene, Springfield and Lane County can file with the state, due to size limitation. She said any money measures for districts cannot be put into the state voters pamphlet, but in the general election, all cities can go forward that are smaller than Springfield, to be placed in it.

Newingham stated that she supports a voters pamphlet. She said Lane County is a large county and is the only county that doesn’t do it. She said it serves a good purpose and she wants the Board to consider doing it, not just for the Board’s issues but for the County as a whole. She said the downside is that it does cost money. She added if money is not an issue, then she would support it.

Green noted that it will cost $45,000 to prepare the voter’s pamphlet for the spring election. He added that the money is not budgeted and will need to come from another source. He suggested that the other districts could participate at a cost.

Newingham responded that Lane County would recoup a portion of the cost back as the City of Eugene would not be doing their voter’s pamphlet. She said it depends on which cities participate. She added there was nothing factored in for FTE for staff and it is a concern.

Dwyer suggested to wait and see what requests come in from other cities.

Van Vactor said that Newingham could relate that Lane County decided not to do a voter’s pamphlet because of financial problems.

Newingham said she has been receiving phone calls from candidates who do not know who to file with when talking about a voter’s pamphlet. She said if Lane County will be doing a voter’s pamphlet it will need to be publicized.

Green said to send out a letter that Lane County has not made a decision but if other cities were willing to absorb the lion’s share it may be possible.

Newingham wanted to suggest not doing a voter’s pamphlet but would encourage people that if they had strong feelings about the County producing a pamphlet and what the cost would be to them, they would communicate that to the Board of Commissioners. She said if she hears something different, she would do an agenda item before the Board.

Sorenson said the best decision to date would be to go with the state voter’s pamphlet because of the financial situation. He said there could be a coordinated voter’s pamphlet to save the County money.

Van Vactor suggested putting in the voter’s pamphlet as an add package for the next budget year.




ORDER 00-2-9-10 Authorizing the County Administrator to Sign Six Grant Applications to the Oregon Office of Alcohol and Drug Abuse Programs for Funding, to Provide Services to Individuals with Clinical Addictions

MOTION: to approve ORDER 00-2-9-10.


VOTE: 5-0.

There being no further business, Commissioner Sorenson recessed the meeting into Executive Session at 11:55 a.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: 11/04/05 URL:
Copyright 1997 Lane County Information Services.  All rights reserved.