January 6, 2003

3:30 p.m.

Commissioners' Conference Room

APPROVED 1/21/03


Commissioner Bill Dwyer presided until Commissioner Peter Sorenson was elected Chair. Commissioners Bobby Green, Sr., Anna Morrison and Tom Lininger present. County Administrator Bill Van Vactor, County Counsel Teresa Wilson and Recording Secretary Melissa Zimmer were also present.




Dwyer presented Cindy Weeldreyer with a plaque. Weeldreyer presented Sid Davis with an award. Green presented an award to Angel Jones. Morrison presented an award to Teresa Nelson. Sorenson presented an award to Scott Bartlett, III. Dwyer presented awards to Jack Radabaugh, Marie Bell, Ethel Mashaw and the Lane County Animal Regulation.




Morrison nominated Green for Chair. Green SECONDED.


Lininger stated he had done his best to construe the rotation rule. He also said this is the only fair basis to select the Chair. He said he was neutral as to who should be Chair of the board. He believed that person should be chosen on the basis of the principle that all districts should have a fair turn at the Chair position. He said on that basis, he nominated Peter Sorenson for Chair. Dwyer SECONDED.


Morrison observed that on the year ahead there are large challenges and Lane County needs someone with a leadership style to help solve them. She didnít agree with the rotation philosophy. She said everyone had been given opportunities to be Chair. She added some had chosen not to become Chair when it was their rotation. She said it was not the fault of those that were already in line to go forward. She stated with the current legislation, PERS and contract issues, she thought Green was better qualified.


Green stated that Lininger had submitted a letter to the Board on January 2, documenting his reasons. Liningerís letter stated if Green and Sorenson agreed, then he would support whatever they agreed to. Green thought the letter was based on theory. He said the reality was that he should be Chair. He commented it seemed like an effort to change the process. He took Liningerís letter as an insult to his leadership and tenure with the organization. He said it came down to Lininger wanting Sorenson to be Chair so he wonít have more turn as Chair than Sorenson. He thought that was a weak reason. He commented that past practices had worked well and everyone had a chance to be Chair at least one time. He declared it was his term to be Chair and if it doesnít work that way, there has been a change in the process for an unwarranted reason.


Lininger commented he respected Greenís leadership style and thought it was a privilege to serve on the Board at the same time he did. He didnít mean to insult Green, as the only goal he had in making the choice is to maintain a system that fairly distributes the Chair position among the different districts of Lane County. He added all of the constituents deserve to see their elected representative as Chair of the Board. He noted Green was Chair in 1996 and 1999. He added if Green were Chair in 2003, he would have been Chair three times in nine years. He stated that they should each be Chair 20% of the time. He noted Green would have been Chair 33% of the time if he were elected and thought it was too great a deviation from the norm as the rotation rule describes. He thought if Sorenson were Chair this time and Green next year (as his letter indicates was his intention) both candidates for Chair would be closer to the 20% norm. He stated Sorenson had been Chair only once before. He made his decision solely on the basis of what achieves a fair distribution of the Chair position and not out of any disrespect. He said he would nominate Green for Vice-Chair with the expectation that he would be Chair in 2004. He commented that holding the Chair position three times in ten years would tie the modern day record for frequency of service of Chair in the post-1975 era when the board has had five commissioners. He said if this were based on merit, Green would be the strong candidate. He thought Sorenson as Chair would equal things out.


Dwyer thought he should have been Chair. He told Lininger that he would second whomever Lininger nominated because he was comfortable with all of the commissioners. He thought everyone had a leadership style and had something to contribute. He said if he votes no, he was not voting against Green. He said Green knew how Dwyer was going to vote.


Sorenson noted this was the sixth election of Chair that he had been part of and he voted no once. He stated he wouldnít support this motion. He echoed the comments about Greenís service to Lane County.


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


Lininger nominated Sorenson for the position of Chair.



Green stated he wouldnít support the motion. He noted part of the job is to have all the views reflected. He stated there was an article in Saturdayís newspaper quoting Sorenson that he doesnít oppose the concept of rotation, but believes selected officers who accurately reflect the philosophical balance of the Board should carry more weight. He said that on one hand Sorenson discussed merit, but on the other discussed philosophical viewpoint. He thought that spoke of partisanship connected with a job that is non-partisan.


Lininger reported he spent a week trying to broker a compromise whereby Green (with the prior commitment of Dwyer and Sorenson) would become Chair in 2004. His support of Sorenson for Chair is conditional upon the two of them agreeing to make Green Chair in 2004. He thought that was the most equitable means of achieving a balance. He thought there would be balance if Green accepted the Vice-Chair position.


Green noted that Lininger had commitments from Sorenson and Dwyer about something that would happen in the future. He said things change, as they did for Lininger. He appreciated Liningerís efforts, but he said it didnít work today.


Sorenson thanked the Board for the opportunity to be Chair. He noted that Dwyer wrote a letter to the Board explaining why he [Dwyer] should continue to be board Chair. He supported that idea. He noted a factor that goes into being board Chair is rotation. He said that it was significant that as of now, only three times since 1976 had the Chair been from the South Eugene District. He said the rotation rule had been bent in the past. He thought it was important that they have a rotation. With regard to the philosophical balance in the Board leadership, he said he approached Morrison about being Vice-Chair when he was Chair. His philosophy at that time is what it is now, that the balance on the board, whether it is a geographic or partisan balance, needs to be reflected in the two important leadership positions on the Board. He thought that was Liningerís idea of having a balance in the board and Vice-Chair. He thought it was important to retain that balance so when they have items coming to the board, there would be some exposure to the views of the other three commissioners not in that meeting.


VOTE: 3-2 (Green, Morrison dissenting).




Lininger nominated Green for Vice-Chair with the expectation that he would be Chair in 2004. Dwyer SECONDED.


Green declined the nomination and nominated Morrison for Vice-Chair.


Lininger withdrew his motion and Dwyer withdrew his second.


Dwyer SECONDED for Morrison for Vice-Chair.


VOTE: 5-0.




Sorenson presented Dwyer with a gavel.


Morrison left the meeting at 4:30 p.m.




Wilson noted there was a supplemental item on the Consent Calendar from Management Services, item H. 1).


Sorenson noted that item E. 1) was pulled.








John Falzone, 28 S. 6th Cottage Grove, stated he gave the Board an information packet on the Coast Fork watershed. He noted they have a new steering committee. He submitted the new sheet of members.


Etienne Smith, 1126 First St., Springfield, said her support was for watersheds. She wanted the Board to go forward with support for their watershed councils.


Dennis Morgan, 32249 Peele, Springfield, thanked the Board for interviewing the Fair Board members. He noted that the Fair Board also interviewed some of the applicants, which was an improvement over the process. He added he was president of the Horse Animal Livestock Association and they recommended Hal Reed be appointed to the Fair Board.






9. EXECUTIVE SESSION as per ORS 192.660






a. ORDER 03-1-6-1/In the Matter of Appointing A Member to the Lane County Fair Board.


Green explained that he and Sorenson had interviewed several people. He noted that he and Sorenson recommend Bob Zagorin. He added Zagorin was also the recommended choice of the Fair Board. He noted that the expiration of the position is 12/31/05.


MOTION: to approve ORDER 03-1-6-1.




VOTE: 4-0.


b. ORDER 03-1-6-2/In the Matter of Reappointing and Appointing Members to the Lane County Budget Committee.


Dwyer explained that Mary Ann Holser is Sorensonís appointment, with the expiration date of December 31, 2004; Francisca Johnson is Greenís appointment with the expiration date of December 31, 2005; Scott Bartlett is Dwyerís appointment, with the expiration date of December 31, 2005 and Kathy Keable is Liningerís appointment with the expiration date of December 31, 2003.


MOTION: to approve ORDER 03-1-6-2.




VOTE: 4-0.




a. ORDER 03-1-6-3/In the Matter of Accepting the 2003-05 Implementation Plan for Alcohol/Drug Treatment Services and Prevention and Treatment of Problem Gambling.


Rob Rockstroh, Health and Human Services, reported this was a summary of things that had taken place during the year. He reiterated that the Board of Commissioners is the Mental Health authority under Oregon Revised Statutes. He said in Lane County the Mental Health Advisory Committee and the local alcohol and drug committee is the same committee. He said they are broken up into four areas: mental health adult, mental health child, alcohol and drug and developmental disabilities. He said that there are 12 members of the committee and each serves on a subcommittee. He said the drug and alcohol plan is the current plan they have. He added that a large part of it had been cut this year starting last April. He noted that the five youth slots would be shifted to adult spots and the rationale is based on needs determined by the state. He said Lane County was over serving children and under serving adults. He said that SB 914 is forfeiture money and there is penalty for not doing a 914 plan. He added that there is no access to the state funding with no money in the future. He was recommending they do not do SB 914 planning.


MOTION: to approve ORDER 03-1-6-3.




VOTE: 4-0.


Green asked what the Board should focus on.


Peg Jeannette, Health and Human Services, responded that the big impact in Lane County is the cut in outpatient treatment services to adults. She added if Measure 28 doesnít pass, they would lose 11 residential beds. She commented the system was in terrible shape.


b. ORDER 03-1-6-4/In the Matter of Approving the Submission of the Lane County Mental Health Plan - Phase II, to the Department of Human Services, Office of Mental Health and Addiction Services.


Rockstroh explained this was Phase II. He noted the problem with the plan is that it was based on the Mental Health Advisory Worker of the governorís task force that actually put the concepts together when times were good fiscally. He stated the plan did not make sense in times of dire fiscal consequences. He said they included the mental health clients and their families.


C.A. Baskerville, Health and Human Services, reported the guidelines they received from the state based on the severe cuts asked them to pare down. She noted the things that were not optional included getting broader stakeholder participation. She said they held five forums and developed priorities. She stated the state provided them with a mental health logic model that they used. She said they added developing specific staffing budget corresponding to their priorities. She said page 6 shows where they began a work plan that uses the logic model that was presented from the state. She said they added priorities, strategies and the outcomes that were affected.


MOTION: to approve ORDER 03-1-6-4.




Green asked what the level of funding was to fully implement this plan.


Rockstroh stated there is a report done by the state. He said it triples the funding for the state. He said they could still prioritize what was important to the community. He said the plan was visionary and wouldnít be able to be implemented.


VOTE: 4-0.




a. Announcements


Van Vactor stated he had been involved with PERS negotiations. He didnít think anything would come out of their effort. He stated they hadnít been able to come to any consensus. He said they had a good session on Saturday with the legislative delegation. He said they would have to gear up the Legislative Committee and begin a process to review draft legislation and formulate a Lane County position.


Van Vactor reported that asbestos was found in his office.


b. ORDER 03-1-6-5/In the Matter of Officially Recognizing the Coast Fork Willamette Watershed Council.


Peter Thurston, Economic Development, asked if the Coast Fork Willamette Watershed Council should be recognized as the fifth watershed council according to Lane Manual. He said it was the last watershed council in Lane Manual. He asked the Board if they wanted to coordinate reporting from the five watershed councils in a different way and discussing the issues sometime in the future.


MOTION: to move to approve ORDER 03-1-6-5.


Lininger MOVED, Dwyer SECONDED.


Green asked for documentation from the watershed councils to keep the Board apprised.


Dwyer stated that goals and objectives needed to be established so the Board could determine if they were meeting the challenges.

Sorenson said there should be an annual report from each of the watershed councils, stating their problems and how they were able to solve them. He suggested when the commissioners do their road tour that they visit the watershed councils.


Thurston stated he wrote down issues that were raised. He suggested the County collect the sporadic reports from the watershed councils, and decide to hold a session and invite representatives from the councils to resolve any questions the Board might have. He noted at no time in the past had all watershed councils been asked to present the issues that the Board brought up.


Lininger supported receiving reports via e-mail.


Green supported having the watershed councils report. He wanted a letter prepared.


Thurston said he would send out a format to the watershed councils and suggest they report in the format if they have the resources.


Falzone commented that most of the watershed councils in Lane County are funded by the state. He said at the beginning of the fiscal year there is a reporting requirement to the state. He thought that might be a time to send the report to the County.


Dwyer stated he wanted to know where the revenue streams were coming from. He also wanted to see a comparative report on where the money comes from.


VOTE: 4-0.




a. FIRST READING AND SETTING SECOND READING AND PUBLIC HEARING/ Ordinance PA 1186/In the Matter of Amending the Eugene-Springfield Metropolitan Area General Plan Diagram for Property Within the Crescent Avenue Nodal Development Area, with Concurrent Automatic Amendment to the Willakenzie Area Plan Land Use Diagram; and Adopting a Severability Clause.


Jan Childs, City of Eugene, passed out a supplemental memo including the replacement Exhibit A and B to the ordinance, based on the legal review of the material. She noted after review of the material, they discovered some corrections that needed to be made.


MOTION: to approve a First Reading and Setting a Second Reading and Public Hearing for Ordinance PA 1186 for January 22, 2003 at 6:00 p.m.




Sorenson asked why they were doing this.


Childs responded they were looking at the changes to implement the nodal development concept that was adopted through TransPlan. She noted they were looking to apply (within the Eugene urban growth boundary) to eight areas the new metro plan designation to depict areas as appropriate for nodal development. The Eugene City Council was asked to apply an overlay zone to a portion of the areas within the Eugene city limits. She added that two of the eight areas include some unincorporated property. She stated for those areas they are coming to the Board asking for the concurrence to apply the nodal development Metro Plan diagram designation for areas between the city limits and the urban growth boundary. Both the Board of Commissioners and the Eugene City Councilors must approve that under the metro plan amendment procedures.


Green asked if anyone had sent letters of concern outside of 4J.


Childs responded that there were letters of support and concerns from the public hearings before the planning commissions. She added everything was included in the packet.


VOTE: 4-0.




A. Approval of Minutes:

April 16, 2002, Work Session, 1:30 p.m.

April 30, 2002, Work Session, 9:00 a.m.

November 6, 2002, Regular Meeting, Following HACSA

November 7, 2002, Joint Meeting BCC/Oakridge City Council, 6:00 p.m.

November 12, 2002, Joint Meeting BCC/Veneta City Council - 6:30 p.m.

November 26, 2002, Work Session, 9:00 a.m.

December 4, 2002, Regular Meeting, 9:00 a.m.

December 4, 2002, Regular Meeting, 1:30 p.m.

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

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


B. County Administration


1) ORDER 03-1-6-6/In the Matter of Reappointing Justices Pro Tempore for the Oakridge Lane Justice Court Through September 30, 2003.


2) ORDER 03-1-6-7/In the Matter of Amending Chapter 2 of Lane Manual to Revise Provisions Pertaining to the Appearance of the County Logo (LM 2.715).


C. County Counsel


1) ORDER 03-1-6-8/In the Matter of Selecting Newspapers to Publish Ballots, Monthly Statement of Expenditures, Personal Property Tax Warrants, and Notices of Real Property Tax Foreclosures.


D. Health and Human Services


1) ORDER 03-1-6-9/In the Matter of Delegating Authority to the County Administrator to Sign a Contract Amendment with Emerald Peopleís Utility District (EPUD) to Provide Funding for the Reach and ERAP Programs in the Amount of $27,500.


2) ORDER 03-1-6-10/In the Matter of Authorizing the County Administrator to Sign a Grant Application to the Federal Center for Substance Abuse Treatment (CSAT) for up to $500,000 per Year for a Three-year Period to Enhance Services to 129 Adult Offenders on Parole or Probation.


E. Public Works


1) ORDER 03-1-6-11/In the Matter of Constructing Improvements to Marcola Road, MP 10.49 - MP 11.77, Including Assessments and Notice of Pending Lien Against Adjacent Properties.

2) ORDER 03-1-6-12/In the Matter of Reducing the Project Scope and Extending Completion Time for the City of Oakridge Rainbow Street Community Development Road Improvement Assistance Project.


3) ORDER 03-1-6-13/In the Matter of Entering into a Concessionaire Contract With Bob Henderson for Concession Services for Baker Bay Park and Delegating Authority to the County Administrator to Sign the Contract.


F. Lane Workforce Partnership


1) ORDER 03-1-6-14/In the Matter of Appointing a Member to the Lane Workforce Partnership Board of Directors.


G. Assessment and Taxation


1) ORDER 03-1-6-15/In the Matter of a Refund to Health Ventures, PC PTNR dba Oregon Imaging Center in the Amount of $35,973.00.


2) ORDER 03-1-6-16/In the Matter of a Refund to Radiology Associates, PC PTNR dba Oregon Imaging Center in the Amount of $19,541.00.


H. Management Services


1) ORDER 03-1-6-17/In the Matter of Authorizing the Sale of Surplus County Owned Real Property Auctioned at a Sheriff's Sale on December 9, 2002 (Dolbin, Larson, Polito, Johnson, McCarthy, Church).


MOTION: to approve the Consent Calendar as corrected.




VOTE: 4-0.




Dwyer apologized for failing to recognize the elected officials who were present at the State of the County.


Sorenson suggested for next yearís agenda, having recognition of elected officials at the State of the County meeting.




Letter from Springfield School District


Sorenson stated the Board received a letter from the Principal of the Goshen School, Jane Morris, about a sign. He read the letter into the record.


Dwyer said they have to make a differentiation between the public and the commercial aspects of the sign. He thought an exemption could be made for these types of signs. He said they should have facility permits for lighting bridges. He thought they could take a portion of economic development money and have a reserve with a small portion that could be used for these projects. He added the department would be held whole while they utilize the same pot of money. He said the money could be used for signs or trees or bridge lighting. He said they could put a cap of $5,000 on the annual reserve and the money would be there to apply against the reserve. He stated they could amend the code to exempt public entities like school districts for these types of signs.


Lininger preferred to exempt school districts.


Sorenson asked Sheryl Helfrich to come to the Board. He wanted a proposal from Land Management to exempt school districts from the current ordinance that Helfrich doesnít have the authority to waive a fee on. He noted with regard to the broader issue, the fact the County has an ordinance that requires $1,000 to be paid for a sign of this type came from the Land Management Task Force. He wanted a fee structure that considers the economics of improvement to the land.


Green suggested Helfrich come to the Board with a recommendation for a policy without going to the Policy and Procedure Committee, due to timeliness. He didnít want to make this difficult.


Sorenson wanted to approve a board order that stated the school district was exempt.


Wilson stated they would work together with Land Management.


Lininger stated he would contact Morris with the results of the meeting.


Dwyer stated he received a letter from the Mayor of Oakridge regarding inversion from smoke. He said there was a program whereby they replaced wood stoves within the city. He noted that is now gone and he has Peter Thurston working with him utilizing community development block grants, LRAPA and other funds to create a program that would allow the City of Oakridge to get rid of inefficient stoves that are outside the corporate limits but within the urban growth boundary





There being no further business, Commissioner Sorenson adjourned the meeting at 5:55 p.m.


Melissa Zimmer

Recording Secretary