BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS'

REGULAR MEETING

December 4, 2002

9:00 a.m.

Commissioners' Conference Room

APPROVED 1/6/02

 

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

 

1.  ADJUSTMENTS TO THE AGENDA

 

Green requested adding an Item d. under Commissioners Business on the draft ACT guidelines.

 

2.  PUBLIC COMMENTS

 

Kate O’ Donnell, Lane Library League, commented that 90,000 people in Lane County do not have library service.  She said her group sees this as an economic issue and hoped the Board would take it under consideration. She explained that they worked up a proposal to create two library districts and expand the others.  She asked the Board to pass a resolution to authorize staff time to work with their group.  She wanted the Board to put this matter on the ballot, as it was hard to collect the signatures.

 

Green noted that the County in the past had voted against measures for a County library.

 

Morrison was concerned that there wouldn’t be support of the voters if they were to put this on the ballot again.  She thought O’ Donnell should obtain signatures.

 

Weeldreyer thought getting signatures would help go along with educating people on why the library services are so important.

 

Dwyer stated as a taxpayer he didn’t see the advantage to paying for a library on property taxes and then for library services, or double paying.

 

Sorenson suggested inviting O’Donnell back with the other people involved for a work session with the Board.

 

David Hinkley, Chair of Jefferson Westside Neighborhood, discussed the subject of the four County-owned parcels along the Westside of Jefferson Street that runs from 13th Avenue to the Amazon Creek.  He understood the Fair Board came to the Board for permission to sell two of the properties.  He stated at their November neighborhood meeting, the association voted to support the Fair Board in disposing of the property back to private ownership. 

 

Dwyer stated he did not want to sell the properties, he wanted them restored to provide affordable housing as a source of pride for the community.  He wanted a report back from the housing policy board about how best to use the property.

 

Green suggested the properties could be a bed and breakfast. He said there were a multiple range of options.  He thought providing affordable housing would be the most preferable.

 

3.  COMMISSIONERS' REMONSTRANCE

 

None.

 

4.  EXECUTIVE SESSION as per ORS 192.660

 

To take place after the meeting.

 

5.  COMMISSIONERS' BUSINESS

 

a.  UPDATE/Willamette Park and Recreation Comprehensive Plan Update.

 

Bob Keefer, Willamalane Parks, reported he was in front of the Board a year ago and requested support of their comprehensive plan update.  He said they are completing their needs assessment.  He said that Willamalane serves more than just the City of Springfield and includes some of the urbanizable areas.  He stated they want to make this a refinement to the Metro Plan so it has legal standing when it comes to land use.  He commented they are at the needs assessments stage and they are beginning to develop recommendations and actions.  They will go through the citizens advisory committee and a technical advisory committee that includes staff from Lane County.  He added he would bring it back to the Board for consideration.

 

Rebecca Gerhsaw, Willamalane, gave a presentation on the community needs assessment. (Copy in file).  She noted that the Community Needs Assessment Report was the first major product of their Park and Recreation Comprehensive Plan.  She said they have a current level of service of about two acres per 1,000 people and it calculated to needing an additional 52 acres.

 

Dwyer stated that the Board was committed to working with them to provide the services.

 

Keefer noted that the park system goes beyond the boundaries and what they do impacts Eugene, Lane County and its residents.  He wanted to keep the Board informed to make sure they knew what the issues were in Springfield.

 

b.  REPORT/Extension Service Report.

 

Bo Freeman gave a report on the OSU Extension Service. (Copy in file).

 

Morrison commented that the Extension Service put out an excellent article on the large forests and herbicides.

 

Dwyer asked if the Extension Service was working with the fairgrounds on e-coli.

 

Freeman responded he was part of a committee that would be educating people to reducing the risk of e-coli.

 

c.  DISCUSSION/ ORDER 02-12-4-10/Evaluation of County Counsel.

 

Dwyer stated that he doesn’t participate in the evaluation.  He viewed the report as a mutual admiration report.  He said he would participate in the report if County Counsel and County Administrator were “at will” employees instead of being “for  cause.”  He objected to the principle.  He thought the Board should change the contract and have it “at will.”

 

Green disagreed with Dwyer on the value of the evaluation.  He thought it was an important tool.  He reported that on County Counsel’s evaluation, he indicated she should continue to do what she does in protecting the public from the
Board.  He concurred with Doug Harcleroad, District Attorney, that Wilson would be hard to replace.  He rated her at nine, satisfied with Wilson’s work.  He added that the people who work for Wilson are dedicated and loyal to her because she has high expectations.

 

Dwyer appreciated Wilson’s work on the ballot measures.

 

With regard to Wilson’s evaluation, Morrison commented that Wilson was phenomenal around the ballot measures and the timelines they were under in trying to make sure the language was correct.  She said in talking with some of the people who were appointed on the committees to write the measures, the comments were that Wilson’s help was tremendous.  She stated that Wilson headed the statewide legal organization as well and it was an honor to have her other colleagues think she has the ability and integrity to lead the group.  She said overall she had been pleased with Wilson’s performance.

 

Weeldreyer echoed what had been said.  She noted that Wilson had the attitude of always wanting to improve and that spirit sets the tone for her department.   She commented that Wilson was knowledgeable in the areas of law and was able to function in a variety of environments.  She added that Wilson had improved in those skills. 

 

Sorenson stated the Board should have the responsibility of hiring, promoting and supervising more than just the independent auditor.  He noted currently the Board had singled out one person to receive different treatment than the other two.  He thought they would be better off with having people that they are directly supervising and their job performance and the relationship will be a better relationship if the Board determines who are in those positions.  He wanted to have the County Counsel and County Administrator working for the Board of Commissioners and being directly responsive to the Board of Commissioners and not have this imagery about cause.    He thought it was difficult for Wilson to separate policy implications of decisions the Board of Commissioners are making from the legal issues they are advised on.  He praised her on her thoroughness on matters of written work product.  He encouraged her to think about the implications about the policy versus law issue.

 

Van Vactor explained that the timing was different between County Counsel and the Performance Auditor.   He said when Wilson was appointed she was a long-time employee and the contract followed in place, whereas the current Performance Auditor is a recent hire.  He encouraged the Board to have that discussion.

 

Wilson thanked everyone for their comments.  She credited her employees for helping with the good work that comes out of her department.  She said as an attorney, she wants to be working for clients that want her services.  She stated that if at any point she was not filling the Board’s needs, she needs to hear that and welcomes feedback.

 

Dwyer noted that Wilson was a “for cause” employee and he asked if the Board was compelled to renew her contract.

 

Wilson explained the contract she currently has is a two-year contract.  She said it was the middle of the contract.  She said the contract expires at the end of next year.  She noted what was before the Board is a proposal to extend it an additional year.  She said if the Board adopts the Board order and signs the contract, it would expire at the end of 2004.

 

Dwyer stated they needed to have a discussion about equity and how they would deal with it around “for cause” versus “at will” and the benefits of both from an administrative point of view.

 

Morrison suggested moving forward on adopting this motion.  She had no problem with the contract containing the extra year.

 

MOTION:  to approve ORDER 02-12-4-10.

 

Morrison MOVED, Green SECONDED.

 

Dwyer didn’t think they should extend the contract because they would be extending it for another year, prior to having the discussion whether or not they needed to talk about the broader policy implications related to it.  He said the contract renewal had to be separate from the evaluation process.  He voted against the motion.

 

Weeldreyer supported the motion.  She said that Wilson’s evaluations in all of the time that she had been County Counsel under her tenure had been exceptional every year.  She said the honorable thing to do would be to have a contract so there is certainty that she had done a good enough job that they would extend her contract.

 

Sorenson stated he was opposed to voting on this matter today.

 

Weeldreyer said she appreciated Wilson.  She said approving this contract is a stamp of approval for her performance.

 

Dwyer said they have to do research with the counties in Oregon and how many serve at will and how many are for cause and if there were any trends.

 

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

 

Green requested the agenda team have a separate board order for Van Vactor’s evaluation.

 

d.  ACT Guidelines

 

Green explained he received a letter from Stuart Foster, one of the members of the Oregon Transportation Commission about the formation and operation of the area commission on transportation (ACT).  He stated that Ollie Snowden and Tom Stinchfield are prepared to come to the Board on December 18 with other transportation items.  He wanted to add this letter to the agenda for the staff’s perspective on what this would really mean.

 

Dwyer stated they would assign this to staff to bring back on December 18 as to what it means to the structure of the ACT to Lane County’s system.

 

6.  COMMITTEE REPORTS

 

S.A.V.E. Committee

 

a.  ORDER 02-12-4-1/In the Matter of Awarding Non-Cash S.A.V.E. Awards to Vicki Slater, Sheriff’s Office and Vicki Slater, Sheriff’s Office

 

ORDER 02-12-4-9/ In the Matter of Awarding Non-Cash S.A.V.E. Awards to Malinda Dodson, Department of Children and Families.

 

Sorenson presented the S.A.V.E. awards to Vicki Slater and Malinda Dodson. 

 

MOTION: to approve ORDER 02-12-4-1 and ORDER 02-12-4-9.

 

Sorenson MOVED, Weeldreyer SECONDED.

 

VOTE: 5-0.

 

7.  COUNTY ADMINISTRATION

 

a.  Announcements

 

None.

 

8.  PUBLIC WORKS

 

a.  DELIBERATION AND ORDER 02-12-4-2/In the Matter of Amending the FY 03 to FY 07 Capital Improvement Program (CIP) to Include Bernhardt Heights Road; Setting a Date for Public Hearing; Approving a Project Design Concept for the Realignment of Bernhardt Heights Road Based on the Design Concept in Exhibit B; and Authorizing Staff to Prepare a Right-of-Way Plan Necessary to Construct the Road, Pursue all Necessary Planning Actions and Prepare Plans and Specifications for Realignment of Said Road. (NBA & PM 10/30/02 & 11/6/02)

 

Sonny Chickering, Public Works, reported this was the third meeting on this topic.  He said they were trying to come up with a design concept for correcting an earth slide problem on Bernhardt Heights Road and providing a stable road for the residents who live at the top of the hill.  He noted a work session took place on October 30 and at that time the Board was concerned about notice to the residents and asking them for their input and participation that they could contribute to a project.  He said they sent a letter requesting that information on November 6.  He stated the hearing was held as scheduled and there were several residents who attended.  He noted after the hearing, the Board directed staff to pursue and investigate an Option E.  He said that was reflective of the request of the local property owners.  He said they came up with a non-standard roadway by County parameters.  He said it would meet the needs and desires of the locals.  He noted it would be a one-lane road with four turnout locations.  He said the full reconstruction to two lanes was $450,000.  He added to just repair the slide that is in an isolated location along the roadway was $150,000.  He added that option would be between $200,000 and $350,000.  He said the basic road improvements would include the slide and that was $150,000 and they would also improve the road surface.  He said if they pave the road surface, a guardrail be put on there, as there is ice.  He was concerned if people came down a steep hill on a paved surface they would lose traction and go over the edge.  He added if they don’t put the guardrails up, people will leave the road because it is gravel.  He noted that option would cost $350,000.

 

Chickering recalled that Option A was to widen the existing road to two lanes, $450,000; Option B was to use an existing gravel road that is owned by Davidson Industries.   He noted they had the same problem with the sheer drop off and rock wall down to one lane road.  He said if they had a guardrail the entire length of the road, the project would be $80,000 for a guardrail, $20,000 as a retaining wall and $20,000 at the guardrail turn out.

 

Green asked how much the neighbors would pay toward this.

 

Chickering responded there was no financial commitment from the property owners.  He said they have written testimony from the property owners that they would be willing to dedicate the right of way.

 

Chickering noted that Option C was recommended by the Roads Advisory Committee and by staff to use the BPA alignment.  He said Option D repairs the slide where it had failed on the existing road and no further work.  He noted the recommended BPA route was $150,000.

 

Dwyer agreed with the $150,000 repair.

 

Morrison supported Option C, as it was the best solution long-term.

 

Green asked which option increased safety and decreased the County’s liability.

 

Chickering responded Option A addresses the safety issues in the short-term but he was concerned about future sliding.  He stated they would repair the current slide but his experience was that once a slide is fixed, the problem is just moved to another location and another slide occurs.

 

MOTION: to move to adopt Option C.

 

Morrison MOVED, Weeldreyer SECONDED.

 

Chickering noted there were concerns from the homeowners and there were hurdles they would have to clear to make this happen.

 

Sorenson asked what the rationale would be for using eminent domain.

 

Chickering responded that for the sustainability of the road this was the best repair for the long-term if it is to remain a County road.

 

Morrison noted that the neighbors were already using this road when they couldn’t get out their normal way.  She said for public safety, and the long-term sustainability this was the best road to use.

 

Dwyer commented that the power of eminent domain is critical and needs to be reserved for special circumstances that leave no alternative.  He noted the neighbors had already expressed a concern about impacting their wells and there are no voluntary sellers.  He thought the road should be off the table.  He said they need to meet the statutory obligation to provide a safe access the cheapest way they can and keep the community whole.  He was against the motion.

 

MOTION: to move to adopt Option C as a long-term solution.

 

Morrison MOVED, Green SECONDED.

 

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

 

b.  TWELFTH READING AND SETTING THIRTEENTH READING AND PUBLIC HEARING/Ordinance No. 5-00/In the Matter of Amending Chapter 10 of Lane Code to Adopt a Revised and Updated Version of the Eugene Land Use Regulations for Application to the Urbanizable Lands Within the Eugene Urban Growth Boundary; and Adopting Savings and Severability. (NBA & PM 5/16/00, 5/31/00, 10/11/00, 1/31/01, 4/11/01, 5/30/01, 12/12/01, 1/16/02, 1/30/02, 3/20/02 & 6/19/02)

 

MOTION: to approve a Twelfth Reading and Setting a Thirteenth Reading and Public Hearing for Ordinance No. 5-00 on April 9, 2003, at 1:30 p.m.

 

VOTE 5-0.

 

c.  THIRD READING AND DELIBERATION/Ordinance PA 1180/In the Matter of Amending the Eugene-Springfield Metropolitan Area General Plan Diagram to Apply the ND-Nodal Development Designation to Property Within the Chase Gardens Nodal Development Area; Amending The Text of Section 13 of the Willakenzie Area Plan to Replace Pages 71-74; Amending the Willakenzie Area Plan Land Use Map; and Adopting a Severability Clause. (NBA & PM 8/28/02 & 9/18/02)

 

Dwyer asked the Board if they had any ex-parte contacts.

 

There were none from the Board.

 

Kurt Yeiter, City of Eugene, stated the ordinance the Board is asked to approve is one of three that implements the whole nodal development package.  He noted that all three have been approved by the City Council as recommended by both Planning Commissions.  He announced they received a written verification that all three had been appealed to LUBA.

 

Dwyer suggested rolling this until they learn the status of the appeal.

 

Jan Childs, City of Eugene, explained if the appellants had only appealed the ordinance adopting the code amendments she would recommend taking action to go forward, but she said there is a possibility the appellants might chose to withdraw the appeal of the Metro Plan and Willakenzie Plan amendments before they go forward with the process.  She understood their primary issue is with the code amendments that Eugene adopted but she was uncertain.  She suggested they roll this matter.

 

MOTION: to approve a Third Reading and Setting a Fourth Reading and Deliberation on Ordinance PA 1180 for January 15, 2003.

 

Sorenson MOVED, Morrison SECONDED.

 

VOTE: 5-0.

 

d.  THIRD READING AND SETTING FOURTH READING AND DELIBERATION/Ordinance PA 1181/In the Matter of Amending the Eugene-Springfield Metropolitan Area General Plan Diagram to Apply the ND-Nodal Development Designation to Property Within the Royal Avenue Nodal Development Area; and Adopting a Severability Clause. (NBA & PM 8/28/02 & 9/18/02).

 

MOTION: to approve a Third Reading and Setting a Fourth Reading and Deliberation on Ordinance PA 1181 for January 15, 2003.

 

Morrison MOVED, Weeldreyer SECONDED.

 

VOTE: 5-0.

 

e.  FIFTH READING AND DELIBERATION/Ordinance PA 1147/In the Matter of Amending the Rural Comprehensive Plan to Redesignate Land from "Forest Land" to "Non-Resource," Rezone that Land from "F-2/Impacted Forest Lands" to "RR-10/Rural Residential"; and Adopting Savings and Severability Clauses (file PA 98-1953; Cooley). (NBA & PM 2/23/00, 3/15/00, 5/3/00, 9/25/02 & 11/13/02)

 

Dwyer asked the Board for any ex-parte contacts.

 

Morrison responded that there had been people who had tried but they had not gotten through to her.

 

Sorenson reported he received a telephone call on his voice mail

 

Green stated he received a voice mail from Mr. Palmer while he was out of town.

 

Weeldreyer said she received a voice mail encouraging the commissioners to read all of the information.

 

Jerry Kendall, Land Management, reported that the Board had a fourth reading on this item on November 6.  He stated in the interim they had received final signatures on the covenant by which the current owners would agree to vacate the 1950’s plat, turning this into one large 80-acre parcel.  He noted that if the Board approves this,  they would proceed to record the document.  He said if this is approved today, the applicant still has to go through the normal subdivision approval of beaches and dunes preliminary investigation where they will fine tune the lot arrangement and the buildable areas.  He said their recommendation is approval at RR 10.

 

Morrison didn’t think this was F2 forestland and wasn’t opposed to the zone change.  Her concern was the wetland issue and whether or not they would be able to build because there is standing water on the property.  She supported the change.

 

Sorenson asked what the criteria were for making the change from F 2 to RR10 to an area like this on the coast.

 

Kendall responded the applicant’s burden is to show that this land shouldn’t have qualified as resource land.  He said they have to show that it doesn’t meet the definition of farmland as defined in Western Oregon predominance of class 5 through 8 soils on one to eight scale. He said it doesn’t because it has 34 ½ acres of Class 3 and 4 soils with the predominance in the poorer classes.  He added it didn’t meet the definition of forest land that is less than 50 cubic feet per acre per year productivity and their forester reported they have a 7.3 cubic feet per acre average.

 

Sorenson asked if there was any opposition to this.

 

Kendall responded there was opposition to this.

 

Sorenson asked what the basis was with the opposition that the rezoning had been met by the farm and forestland test.

 

Kendall noted there were nearby property owners who sent letters that debates the course of conclusion that states the land is only as productive as the forester states it does.  He said some people are saying the properties will not be septic capable and the presences of the dwellings will cause pollution into the aquifer and draw down the neighboring wells.

 

MOTION: to adopt Ordinance  PA 1147.

 

Morrison MOVED, Green SECONDED.

 

Weeldreyer commented the applicant had made a case convincingly to her that the F2 zone is not appropriate and the fact that the proposal was different than the original one in 1999.  She added the density was up to 10 acres and she would support the motion.

 

ROLL CALL VOTE: 4-1 (Dwyer dissenting).

 

9.  CONSENT CALENDAR

 

A.  Approval of Minutes:

September 11, 2002, Regular Meeting, 9:00 a.m.

September 11, 2002, Regular Meeting, 1:30 p.m.

 

B.  County Counsel

 

1)  ORDER 02-12-4-3/In the Matter of Acceptance of Certificate of Election, Proclamation of Results and Creation of the Hazeldell Rural Fire District.

 

C.  Health and Human Services

 

1)  ORDER 02-12-4-4/In the Matter of Amending Chapter 20 of the Lane Manual to Add Exemptions to Competitive Selection Requirements Where State or Federal Law or Regulation Allows an Exemption and Where Qualified Providers are Unlikely to Participate in Competitive Selection for Certain Client/Patient Services (LM 20.127 and LM 20.128).

 

MOTION:  to approve the Consent Calendar.

 

Morrison MOVED, Sorenson SECONDED.

 

VOTE: 5-0.

 

10.  MANAGEMENT SERVICES

 

a.  ORDER 02-12-4-5/In the Matter of Creating the Classification and Salary Range for Assistant Director of Health and Human Services.

 

Jan Wilbur, Management Services, reported the department brought this request forward and they reviewed it.  She said they found the person performing in the position currently was providing high-level administrative support to the director and was involved in things as an Assistant Director.  She added in looking at equity and the organization, she looked at the other Assistant Directors to see how they were performing and found that this position was having responsibility for union and grievance issues across the programs, process improvement, works on strategic plan initiative and in addition the position is working with the emergency operations and planning and preparedness.  She noted the complexity of the job calls for a higher level of assistance to the director and the position stands in for the director.  She added she performed a point factor analysis and it was equal to the Assistant Director of Public Works.

 

MOTION: to approve ORDER 02-12-4-5.

 

Morrison MOVED, Green SECONDED.

 

Dwyer stated that Karen Gaffney was an asset to the organization and supported the motion.

 

VOTE: 5-0.

 

b.  ORDER 02-12-4-6/In the Matter of Appointing One (1) New Youth Member to the Human Rights Advisory Committee.

 

Laura Yergan, Management Services, introduced Wendall Freeman, who is working with diversity and human rights for Lane County and he is an associate member of the Human Rights Advisory Committee. She noted there were four applications and Theo Halpert was recommended as the Human Rights Advisory Committee’s first youth member.

 

MOTION: to approve ORDER 02-12-4-6.

 

Sorenson requested that on their agenda they bring up the recruitment, involvement and nurturing of this person as a way to show commitment to the issue of a youth’s voice on the Human Rights Advisory Committee.

 

Green MOVED, Sorenson SECONDED.

 

VOTE: 5-0.

 

11.  PUBLIC SAFETY

 

a.  ORDER 02-12-4-7/In the Matter of Accepting a Contract with Woodstock Investments, Inc., to Accomplish Sheriff’s Aviation “Asset for Asset” Exchange and Delegating Authority to the County Administrator to Execute the Contract Documents.

 

Bret Freeman, Sheriff’s Office, reported that this comes with no dollars attached to it.  He explained that due to the age of the aircraft they have run out of spare parts and there are major maintenance costs of $40,000 for next year.  He noted they had located two potential assets they could exchange.  He said the first didn’t work out and they had located a machine and had negotiated contract language and asked the Board to approve this.  He said the dollars attached were maintenance they were going to perform already but to bring the asset values equal with the vendor, they agreed to a $10,000 maximum limit out of the helicopter line item budget to make repairs.

 

MOTION : to approve ORDER 02-12-4-7.

 

Weeldreyer MOVED, Sorenson SECONDED.

 

VOTE: 5-0.

 

12.  WORKFORCE PARTNERSHIP

 

a.  ORDER 02-12-4-8/In the Matter of Presenting a Semi-Annual Report to the Board of Commissioners of Lane County.

 

Chuck Forster, Lane Workforce Partnership, gave his annual report to the Board.  (Copy in file).

 

Morrison requested the next time Forster brings the report to the Board that he shows figures from a year prior regarding employment compared to what is in their actuals so they could study a trend.

 

Forster responded he would give the report to Morrison for this year and last year.

 

13.  COMMISSIONERS' ANNOUNCEMENTS

 

None.

 

14.  CORRESPONDENCE TO THE BOARD

 

None.

 

15.  EMERGENCY BUSINESS

 

None.

 

There being no further business, Commissioner Dwyer recessed the meeting at 12:30 p.m.

 

 

Melissa Zimmer

Recording Secretary