minhead.gif (12878 bytes)

APPROVED 7/12/00



March 29, 2000

9:00 a.m.

Harris Hall Main Floor


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








Paul Reed, Associate Director, East Lane Soil and Water Conservation District, 1600 Valley River Drive, Eugene, reported the completion of the Memorandum of Understanding defining the roles and working relationships of the East Lane Soil and Water Conservation District, the Coast Fork Willamette Watershed Council, the Long Tom Watershed Council, the McKenzie Watershed Council, the Middlefork Willamette Watershed Council and the Mohawk Watershed Partnership.  He read parts of the Memorandum of Understanding.


Tom Veltman, 90376 Shadow Street, stated he was against any further forestry rezoning in the Shadows Drive area. He encouraged a reversal of the previous action of a tentative approval.


Eric Rogers, 39951 Log Creek Road, Marcola, corrected misleading information. He noted that Dwyer said he was backpeddling the neighbors.  He responded that at that particular parcel, there had been offroad activity for 15 years.  He said the noise levels were acceptable to the neighbors up to a couple of years ago and he wanted to bring the noise levels down to acceptable levels.  In response to Sorenson’s question about the noise citation, Rogers said he was led to believe that it was a $1 fine with no effect on him.  He said the original citation was for $240 and he took off two days of work to prepare his defense.  He added he was not given the courtesy of a warning.  He noted there has not been a bike on the track since the citation was issued in October.


3. EXECUTIVE SESSION as per ORS 192.660


Following the afternoon meeting.




Sorenson noted that Weeldreyer worked extensively with Stephanie Schulz and Ms. Schulz is moving to the Oregon Economic and Community Development Department.  Weeldreyer presented Ms. Schulz with a Certificate of Appreciation.




a. Announcements






a. DISCUSSION AND ACTION Oregon Department of Environmental Quality Mutual Agreement and Order.


Ken Kohl, Waste Management, reported that the Short Mountain Landfill was first opened in 1976.  He said it was constructed by excavating into the clay soils and included a lechate collection system that was state of the art and a clay lined leachate storage lagoon.  He added in 1978, a second lechate storage lagoon was constructed containing 29 million gallons that was clay lined and in 1983 some of the first ground water monitoring walls were installed.  He said in November, 1991, there was the first detection of a volatile organic compound (VOC) that was considered a pollutant, a chemical that is commonly found in mouthballs and was last detected in December, 1993.  He added in 1993, there was another VOC detected and it was commonly used to make plastic products and was last detected in December, 1993.  He said in September of 1994, they detected a new VOC that is a common gasoline additive and it continues to be detected. 


Kohl noted that in March, 1995 Lane County was sued by the Friends of the Coast Fork under the Clean Water Act for the potential discharges of contaminates from the landfill, the leachate storage lagoons and for spray irrigation of lechate from 1978 to 1995.   He recalled in September, 1995 they ceased irrigation of lechate and in November 1995, they completed construction of the first composite lined landfill cell.  He said they started storing lechate in that landfill cell to have a protected storage area that was required for the DEQ.


Kohl noted in 1997, regarding the Friends of the Coast Fork lawsuit, the Court found that Lane County had violated the Clean Water Act and a contaminate from the landfill was getting to surface water. He said in May 1997, the DEQ required that Lane County perform a remedial investigation and feasibility study to determine the potential risk to human health and the environment and to evaluate possible mitigation measures.  He noted at that time they discussed entering into an agreement to make the process flow. He said that the DEQ agreed and they have been negotiating the terms of it ever since.  He said that in 1997,  Lane County submitted a permit application to the state to allow discharges from the landfill to the surface water.  He said the DEQ denied that permit stating there wasn’t any indication that the groundwater was actually discharging to surface water and it was practical for Lane County to implement other measures to prohibit it from happening.


Kohl noted in November, 1998, they constructed a permanent lechate storage lagoon and in December, 1999 they submitted a detailed workplan proposal that outlined the elements of what Lane County was going to do to accomplish the work. He said in January 2000, the DEQ approved the proposal for the work plan and subsequent to that, in March they submitted a more detailed work plan that specified the elements of the investigation.


Kohl noted the key point in the memorandum is that the DEQ views it and the process as a model for other landfills to use in the future with other contamination problems.  He added it is not uncommon, as there are other jurisdictions and landfills that have had this problem.  He added the memorandum only addresses the investigation and analysis of potential mitigating remedies and once that is completed, there will be a decision on implementing mitigation measures.  He noted the whole process will take two to three years to gather all the data and estimated costs are $350,000 and $1.2 million, for the engineering and investigation costs.  He said the memorandum provides for a partnership between Lane County and the DEQ to complete the process.  He noted the terms in the memorandum were over what Lane County negotiated in a partnership with the DEQ and they do have the ability to issue a unilateral consent order that would be on their terms.


Dwyer asked if the DEQ had any recommendations.


Kohl responded that the DEQ has agreed to the terms in the Memorandum of Agreement.


Morrison asked if the unilateral consent order is at DEQ’s mercy and if so, what the amounts would be.


Kohl noted in the agreement itself, the only cost that Lane County pays to the DEQ is either a fine for not complying with the schedule or charges for additional technical assistance for departments not within Solid Waste.  He said the costs would be limited to $50,000.


Trina Laidlaw, Assistant County Counsel, indicated the issue for the Board is if the terms and conditions are acceptable.  She noted that the Board will see this again after it goes through the public notice and comment process on the $1,000 penalty only.  She noted the $1,000 penalty addresses actual or potential continuing violations and it is a continuation of the Friends of the Coast Fork.  She said it was a way to hold off on any other federal Clean Water Act suits filed private citizens while Lane County is in the process of working with the DEQ.


Green suggested to accept the staff’s recommendation to proceed with the MAO.


MOTION: to approve staff recommendation to send a letter to proceed with the MAO.




Wilson noted the actual adoption of an order delegating the authority to the County Administrator to execute the agreement will occur after DEQ runs through its public comment period.


Dwyer said the problem will not go away and Lane County needs a way not to impact the environment.  He added Lane County needs to be proactive and this is a good way of doing it.


VOTE: 5-0.


b. ORDER 00-3-29-1 Increasing the Authorized Amount of Engineering Services Under Requirement Contracts with EMCON and EGR & Associates for the Waste Management Division by $600,000.


Ken Kohl explained that the Board has authorized approximately $1.1 million since January, 1998 for engineering services for the Short Mountain and the Florence landfills.  He noted that since January 1998, $900,000 had been spent, leaving $200,000.  He added they have identified about $800,000 worth of projects over next year and they are asking for an increase of $600,00 to the amount authorized to cover the projected costs.


Green hoped there was a ceiling on the engineering costs.


Kohl responded if the landfill will be present for the next 50 years, there will be engineering costs.  He noted for this year the ceiling is $800,000.  Kohl added the miscalculation had to do with the total number in one of the board orders, adding the number that was already authorized by the Board plus the increase.  He said there was a math error of $30,000 in the $1.1 million.


Green was frustrated with tracking dollars on the project.  He said the project never goes away.


Wilson noted that as a landfill is operated, there needs to be technical engineering resources to expand the landfill as part of its normal operation and to engage in meeting the requirements imposed by DEQ.  She said the Board could choose to manage the costs of authorizing the engineering in-house or through contract.  She stated it is a cost of running a landfill. 


Morrison noted the ongoing costs are being driven by the Clean Water Act, and the MAO with the DEQ is appropriate to keep Lane County out of trouble.


Ken Sandusky, Waste Management, noted things have been done to control costs as they are ongoing and substantial.  He said they hired an engineering associate to do in-house work.  He added they have two engineering firms on retainer.  He said they will be doing work on their Phase 4 new cell for the future and engineering dollars will be paying that off for a number of years.


Green stated he will be support it.


MOTION: to approve ORDER 00-3-29-1.


Green MOVED, Morrison SECONDED.


VOTE: 5-0. 


c.  FIRST READING AND SETTING SECOND READING AND PUBLIC HEARING Ordinance PA 1148 Amending the Rural Comprehensive Plan to Redesignate Land from “Agricultural” to “Rural”, Rezone that Land from “E-25/Exclusive Farm Use” to “RR-2/Rural Residential”, Adopting an Exception to Statewide Planning Goals 3 and 4; and Adopting Savings and Severability Clauses (File PA 98-1240; Stauffer)


Jerry Kendall, Land Management, noted this was a pro forma item setting the Second Hearing.


Sorenson asked why the Board has to set this hearing for this particular time.  He asked if it was a discretionary.


Kendall responded it was policy and convenience to all people involved as it is a public  hearing and notice has to be given.


Sorenson asked why the Board had to take it up.


Steve Vorhes, Assistant County Counsel, responded the reading requirement comes from the charter provisions on ordinances.  He said if the Board wants to discuss the sequence of events, it could be discussed.  He noted as a matter of practice the First Reading has been prior to the Public Hearing.  He added the Second Reading and Deliberation and action are set for at least two weeks after the First Reading.  He said there needs to be two readings at least 13 days apart with the ordinance in its form before adoption.


Kendall noted that the Second Hearing has been changed to May 10.


MOTION: to approve First Reading and Setting Second Reading and Public Hearing on May 10, 2000 at 1:30 p.m. at Harris Hall.


Morrison MOVED, Weeldreyer SECONDED.


VOTE: 5-0.


d. FOURTH READING AND DELIBERATION Ordinance PA 1138 Amending the Rural Comprehensive Plan to Redesignate Land from “Agricultural” to “Rural”, Rezone that Land from “E-40/Exclusive Farm Use” to “RR-2/Rural Residential” and Adopt an Exception to Statewide Planning Goals 3 and 4; and Adopting Savings and Severability Clauses (file PA 98-1782; Waymire).


Jerry Kendall stated this is a deliberation of the First Public Hearing held on October 6, 1999 and the findings have gone through revisions and this is the latest product.  He said, in staff’s view, it meets all of the legal gaps that were cited in his February 15 memo to the Board.  He noted that Land Management still maintains it is a set of physical circumstances that don’t warrant approval or may not pass an appeal to LUBA.  He added the findings in today’s memo fill in the legal gaps of missing criteria.  He stated staff thinks it reflects the Board’s 3-2 tentative approval voted on October 6, 2000.


Weeldreyer said the property had a water right.  She noted if the water right had not been used or sold back to the state to maintain it within the last five  years, they no longer have the water right.  She asked if it was left in resource land (as staff recommends) without a water right, if it makes it impractical for agriculture.


Kendall responded that staff views the application as weak because there is no direct evidence supporting different crops that could be grown on the property.  He noted the file contains a memo from a soil scientist saying that deep rooted crops are not suitable for this property.  He noted the record indicates three crops were not practicable, but not a more exhaustive list.  He  wanted in the file record an indication from an agricultural expert to counter the previous memo.


Dwyer said he views this as bad and the beginning of the end for the Mohawk Valley if it is rezoned to two acre plots.  He thought the intention of the owner when they bought the property was to figure out a way to subdivide it.


Regarding the two acre minimum, Kendall responded that is what is proposed, but when it comes to partition or subdivision time of application, the owner will have to address Goal 14.


Weeldreyer noted the property is adjacent to a rural residential neighborhood that is a developed and committed in the Mohawk Valley.  Her concern is that the rezones are in close proximity to a developed and committed urbanized area (in rural Lane County in an area like the Mohawk Valley, where the Mohawk River is not regulated for flow) and the more they allow development of houses in the floodplain, the greater the damage to the houses in that area.  She shared staff’s concern that there isn’t additional expert testimony on the impracticability of using the property for farming.  She was ready to move forward and adopt the findings.


MOTION: to approve Ordinance PA 1138.


Weeldreyer MOVED, Green SECONDED.


Sorenson stated that to him it is a bad decision that the Board will be making.  He said it is incremental land use planning and worsening a situation of livability.


Green stated this ordinance will be challenged.  He noted the commissioner of the district has struggled with it.  He said he will vote for it but the Board will see it again.


Morrison had problems with the finding of facts and said it will be challenged.  She said she will hold with her original decision to go forward, but had reservations.


ROLL CALL VOTE: 3-2 (Dwyer, Sorenson dissenting.)


e. DISCUSSION FIRST READING AND SETTING SECOND READING AND PUBLIC HEARING Ordinance PA 1107 Amending the West Eugene Wetlands Plan by Adopting New or Revised Wetland Designations for Various Sites Within the Plan Boundary and Related Policy and Text Amendments, and Adopting a Severability Clause.


Celia Barry, Land Management, reported it is a First Reading and Work Session on Ordinances PA 1107, PA 1108, PA 1109.  She noted they would give wetland designations to two specific sites and other various sites under the Eugene Wetlands Plan.  She said this would bring closure to what had been going since 1992.  She noted the most recent Board action was on November 23, 1999 with the adoption of Ordinance PA 1133.  She added in that action the Board adopted new and revised criteria.


Neil Bjorklund, City of Eugene, stated his remarks would address the ordinances as group.   He said the major task they have been involved with since November, was to apply the criteria that was adopted to all of the planning commission recommendations.  He said there were recommendations from the Eugene Planning Commission and Lane County Planning Commission for a group of sites.


Bjorklund noted the exceptions fall into four categories: (page 4 of the memo dated March 15).


Bjorklund noted on page 4, the first group of sites that are not consistent with the planning commission recommendations are sites that had been filled.  He reported they were part of the planning commission recommendations.  He said each of the six sites were recommended to be filled and the property owners got into the process before they were designated.  He added it was legal and the sites were permitted and filled.  He said that included about three acres of wetlands over six sites.  He noted the second group are three new sites, two of which were not wetlands at the time the planning commission review occurred.  He said they were wetlands that have been restored on public land.  He reported the third site had not been mapped and staff is recommending development.


Bjorklund noted they evaluated a site with the planning commission recommendation and arrived at a different recommendation. He said there are eight.  Regarding acreage, he said the bulk of them were sites that were designated in the plan and in a protected category.  He said the planning commissions recommended moving them to a different protected category.  He reported they thought the changes were not consistent with the new criteria.  He noted in Table 3, the amendments numbered 13, 16, and 48 were sites that were designated.  The planning commission recommended moving them from protection to restoration and those changes were not consistent with the new criteria.  He recommended leaving them as is.


Bjorklund explained the first three sites (3, 5 and 11) are small sites that were in the former alignment of the parkway.  He noted that the planning commission had recommended changing them to protection but those three sites do not meet the protection criteria.  He said they are recommending leaving them as they are in the plan.


Bjorklund stated in Table 4, the utility corridor policy was new and they didn’t have time to evaluate sites that would fit under that policy.  He added that this table shows what sites those corridors would be applied to.  He said the corridors are protected acres where there is an existing utility that needs to be maintained and repaired and this designation allows it to happen.


Sorenson asked what the timeline was for the submission of material into the record.


Bjorklund responded that with each of the public hearings for the West Eugene Plan, there have been requests to extend the public record from one to two weeks beyond the hearing.  They have supported those requests.  He said that notice was out more than 20 days in advance of the hearing and the materials are available on the City’s website and in county offices.  He said ultimately it will be the elected officials who decide whether or not to extend the public record beyond the hearing.  He recommended keeping it open for two weeks.


MOTION: to approve the First Reading and Setting Second Reading and Public Hearing Ordinance PA 1107.


Dwyer MOVED, Morrison SECONDED.


VOTE: 5-0. 


f. DISCUSSION FIRST READING AND SETTING SECOND READING AND PUBLIC HEARING Ordinance PA 1108 Amending the West Eugene Wetlands Plan by Adopting New and Revised Wetland Designations for Site H2, Referred to as the Speedway Site, and Related Policy and Text Amendments, and Adopting a Severability Clause.

MOTION: to approve the First Reading and Setting Second Reading and Public Hearing Ordinance PA 1108.

Weeldreyer MOVED, Dwyer SECONDED.

VOTE: 5-0.

g. DISCUSSION FIRST READING AND SETTING SECOND READING AND PUBLIC HEARING Ordinance PA 1109 Amending the West Eugene Wetlands Plan by Adopting New Wetland Designations for Site HG, Referred to as the Hyundai Site, and Related Text Amendments, and Adopting a Severability Clause.

MOTION: to approve the First Reading and Setting Second Reading and Public Hearing Ordinance PA 1109.


Dwyer MOVED, Morrison , SECONDED.


VOTE: 5-0.



A. Approval of Minutes:    February 15, 2000, Regular Mtg., 1:30 p.m.

B. Health and Human Services

1) RESOLUTION AND ORDER 00-3-29-2 Increasing Appropriations of Revenue and Expenses by $60,289 in Fund 286 in the Department of Health and Human Services (34) for Public Health Services (OHD Revision #6 and #2).

C. Public Works

1) ORDER 00-3-29-3 Amending the FY 99/00-FY 03/04 Capital Improvement Program (CIP); and, Amending the FY 99/00 List of Public Improvements; and, Awarding a Contract to Western Oregon Excavation, Inc. in the Amount of $183,000.00 for Grading, Basing, Paving, and Structure – Sears Road Bridge (Bridge No. 20-3W-14), Prospective Contract No. 99/00-05.


2) ORDER 00-3-29-4 Accepting the Director's Report for Estimated Assessments for Coburg Road (County Road Number 1043) Between M.P. 3.27 and M.P. 4.02.


3) ORDER 00-3-29-5/In the Matter of Accepting a Deed of Land to be Used as a Public Road Easement for County Road No. 957 (Lost Creek Road) (19-01-33).


D. Workforce Partnership


1) ORDER 00-3-29-6/In the Matter of Appointing a Member to the Lane Workforce Partnership.


2) ORDER 00-3-29-7/In the Matter of  Appointing Members to the Youth Council in Cooperation with the Lane Workforce Partnership.


MOTION: to approve the Consent Calendar.


Morrison MOVED, Dwyer SECONDED.


VOTE: 5-0.




a. DISCUSSION FIRST READING AND SETTING SECOND READING AND PUBLIC HEARING Ordinance No. 1-00 In the Matter of Amending Chapters 1, 3, 5, 6, 7, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 15, and 16 of Lane Code to Modify Code Enforcement and Animal Control Provisions, to Repaginate Sections of LC Chapters 5, 9, and 11, to Perform Housekeeping Changes and to Declare an Emergency.


Marc Kardell, Assistant County Counsel, reported that SB 20 was passed in October requiring changes to be made.  He noted some of the changes are repeated throughout the chapter.  He said there are approximately 232 pages of  recommended changes.  He said they are recommending that the forfeiture provision be removed because it is no longer enforceable and is covered by state law.  He noted they have had input from every department affected by the suggested changes.


Kardell stated that in the memorandum he tried setting forth selling of liens.  He said what might be controversial is dealing with the fines.  He said the recommendation is that the County dovetail into the state system a set fine schedule for violations.  He said the base fines allowed can be reduced up to 50% by the justice courts (where Parks and dogs would be transferred) and some may find that controversial.  He said it retains the Eugene hearing system.  He added they are including abatement procedures and other items for incorporation and not anything that would be controversial.


MOTION: to approve a First Reading and Setting Second Reading and Public Hearing Ordinance No. 1-00.


Morrison MOVED, Green SECONDED.


VOTE: 5-0.




a. DISCUSSION Location for Medical Examiner.


Rob Rockstroh, Health and Human Services, reported they received notice from the state medical examiner requesting a transfer from Health and Human Services to the District Attorney’s office.  He explained it made sense because (statutorily) if an autopsy is made, the judgment is between the DA and the medical examiner.


Larry Lumin, Medical Examiner, reported the old coroner system was abolished by the State of Oregon in 1958, and the modern medical examiner was established that year.  He added the current law was written in 1971.  He said at that time there was a state medical examiner system applied throughout the state, and the state provides the forensic pathology services while the county provides the investigative and facility services.  He noted that in 1971 it was established within the health divisions because the doctors were there.  He added over the past 30 years they have been moving from the health departments to the medical examiners officers, and then to the DA’s office.  He said stability is the primary reason plus better support with the District Attorney’s office. He stated the state office is strongly in support of the move and it’s going on statewide.


Doug Harcleroad, District Attorney, noted the logical time for the move of the  departments is July 1.


Dwyer asked about the budget.


Harcleroad responded it is a function they do at the County, but whether they are performing it in the health department or the DA’s office, it is the same.


Rockstroh stated the department is spending about $150,000 and they can pay for it out of death records.  He said the commitment would be $75,000 per year for five years.  He said the people who generate this funding are his administrative staff and they get no funding for this.  He noted Lane County is the only County in the state that can issue death certificates.  He said a portion of funding goes to the Deputy Medical Examiner because the County only pays a portion.  He said it would be split between the County general fund and Health and Human Services for five years.  He added after five years it would fall back to the County general fund.  He said it is the least negative impact to the County general fund for a certain period of time.


Harcleroad stated if it is not transferred to the DA’s office, Health and Human Services would pay for it anyway.  He suggested moving the funding to the DA’s office.


David Garnick, Senior Management Analyst, noted the amount of revenue being transferred is flat over the five year period, so if it is transferred to the DA, he would have to find the additional cost of the general fund to cover any COLA’s or  other cost increases.  He said the County Administrator was supportive, but is concerned about the budgetary impact.


Green asked what the significant difference would be to the public.


Rockstroh said the public won’t notice it in the beginning but as the case load increases, it affects his department.  He noted that the DA has back-up investigators while he doesn’t.  He said they are relying on Frank Ratti as the Chief  Deputy Medical Examiner and a contract of $30,000 a year to do 24 hours, 7 days a week for thousands of deaths every year.  He added the part the County has is  investigation.  He said the medical examiner determines the cause of death and he works for the state.  He said there is a separation of duties.


Lumin stated when the cases come in, they don’t know if they are criminal or not.  He said ruling out homicide is a large portion of what the medical examiner does.


Sorenson asked what was the advantage of transferring.


Lumin responded the advantage is stability, as an investigation of deaths is mandated by state and county government.


Sorenson asked where Lane County was in comparison to other counties in spending on the medical examiner function.


Lumin responded that Lane County is the lowest in the state.  He said it is chronically underfunded and the program has been subsidized indirectly by pathology consultants the County wasn’t paying for.


Harcleroad said he will bring a memorandum back to the Board.


b. ORDER 00-3-29-8 Establishing a 1.0 FTE Nurse Practitioner Position in the Department of Health and Human Services.


Dwyer said it is one of the most efficient uses of public health monies.


MOTION: to approve ORDER 00-3-29-8.


Weeldreyer MOVED, Morrison SECONDED.


VOTE: 5-0.




Weeldreyer reported the Finance and Audit Committee met and looked over the work plan for the internal auditor and the information will be passed onto the board.  She added they will have external auditors come to the board for a review of their audit.


Green said there was a comment about Dean Stephens’ evaluation.  He said they don’t know when to recommend the evaluation to the Board because Stephens has not done an audit.


Weeldreyer reported that Fiber South and the Lane Klamath board will jointly make final additions or changes by the end of the month to the request for proposals to light the regional fiber optic infrastructure.  She announced she was re-elected to the Oregon Public Network Board.


Sorenson distributed Census 2000 T-shirts to the Board from the Lane County Complete Count Committee.






There being no further business, Commissioner Green recessed the meeting at 12:10 p.m.


Melissa Zimmer

Recording Secretary


go_to.gif (1155 bytes)Back to Board Notices