BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS'
June 25, 2003
Commissioners’ Conference Room
Commissioner Peter Sorenson presided with Commissioners Bill Dwyer, Bobby Green, Sr., Tom Lininger and Anna Morrison present. County Administrator Bill Van Vactor, County Counsel Teresa Wilson and Recording Secretary Melissa Zimmer were also present.
1. ADJUSTMENTS TO THE AGENDA
Sorenson noted that item 7. a. was pulled. He added there would be an oral report from Marc Kardell on the vegetation management ordinances.
2. PUBLIC HEARINGS
a. PUBLIC HEARING AND ORDER 03-6-25-1/In the Matter of Adopting the FY 2002-2003 Supplemental Budget #3 Making, Reducing and Transferring Appropriations.
Dave Garnick, Senior Budget Analyst, explained this is the third supplemental for the current fiscal year. He said it is to make changes to appropriations for things that are unanticipated during the year. He noted because they had several funds where they had changes greater than 10%, they were required by state budget law to have a public hearing.
Commissioner Sorenson opened up the Public Hearing. There being no one signed up to speak, he closed the Public Hearing.
MOTION: to approve ORDER 03-6-25-1.
Dwyer MOVED, Morrison SECONDED.
b. PUBLIC HEARING AND ORDER 03-6-25-10/In the Matter of Holding a Public Hearing and Reducing Appropriations by $654,483 in Revenues and Expenditures in the Fair Board Debt Service Fund (Fund 323) to Reflect a Change in the Reporting of Transient Room Tax Activity.
Garnick reported that as a way of consolidating all the transient room tax dollars, they moved everything over into the special revenue fund. He noted that this part did not get reduced. He indicated that now all of the money is going through the transient room tax to either pay the debt or the fairgrounds as part of the sweep. He said this was the final part that needed to take place to take those appropriations off the books. He added since this is a reduction of an appropriation, they are required to have a public hearing.
Commissioner Sorenson opened up the Public Hearing. There being no one signed up to speak, he closed the Public Hearing.
MOTION: to approve ORDER 03-6-25-10.
Dwyer MOVED, Lininger SECONDED.
3. PUBLIC COMMENTS
Amy Pincus Merwin, stated she is a property owner in Deadwood. She noted that a family that lives on her property is a Pakistani American and they moved there because they were experiencing harassment living in a more populated area. She said they are concerned about the U.S. Patriot Act. She urged the Board to pass the resolution opposing the U.S. Patriot Act.
Charles Warren, 86260 Lorane Highway, stated he has been involved with the Jim Gillette problem. He was present on behalf of over two dozen neighbors who either border or are adjacent to 450 acres owned by Jim Gillette. He asked the Board to enforce the County laws and regulations against this individual who has continued to ignore the County’s citations and makes a mockery out of County rules and regulations. He added in doing so he is jeopardizing their safety and quality of life. He noted that Gillette was cited in 1996 and was fined $600 per day. He said there is a $12,000 lien on his property for renting out mobile home space. He stated Gillette had never paid the lien and continues to rent out mobile home space that he rented out six years ago. He added that Gillette blatantly runs a paintball park and has since 1998 when in November, the Board denied his permit for paintball for fire danger. He stated that Gillette is having an all terrain vehicle training course that he had been conducting for years. He quoted what Gillette said “It doesn’t really matter if I get the permit or not, I am just going to continue to do what I want.” He asked why they pass laws and zoning restrictions if Lane County is not going to enforce them. He added that it makes a mockery out of the whole process. He was informed that on June 18, the County did serve Gillette a citation for the paintball activities he had on June 8. He said if the County doesn’t enforce these laws, it would be the same as lack of enforcement of his mobile home spaces.
Lininger commented that Lane County needs to have a consistent policy of enforcement.
Sorenson suggested using Lane County’s eminent domain so it is protected and available for public use.
Warren thought that would be the ultimate solution. He thought it would make a beautiful natural park.
Dwyer said that they have to enforce the law. He said that Gillette has to pay the fines.
Brian Lessley, 30900 Blanton Road, Eugene, said he is a full-time criminal defense lawyer. He said he met with Gillette. Lessley said that he was convinced that Gillette has no intention of complying with any of the things the County has told him to do. He said that Gillette has every intention of continuing to run his ATV Park, paintball park and having people live on his property in run down shacks. He added that Gillette stated that no one could stop him. He asked the Board for help because the neighborhood has dealt with it for a long time.
Jerry Strand, 86501 Lorane Highway, said he represents the neighbors on Needham Road. He said this had been going on for 20 years. He said in 1985 the neighbors tried having a meeting with Gillette to discuss his illegal activities. He said Gillette had made the same comment after every meeting, that he will have more people back. He said it has been a hardship for all of the neighbors. He said the fire danger is great as there is no other access onto the property. He said the laws need to be enforced to make sure that his illegal activities are stopped.
Hope Marston, 3110 University, recalled on May 14 the Lane County Bill of Rights Defense Committee came before the Lane County Board of Commissioners to ask to pass a draft resolution against the U.S. Patriot Act. She noted they brought more than 4,000 signatures from registered voters in Lane County. She asked the Board to pass the resolution that has been endorsed by more than 30 community groups. She brought a modified version of the draft resolution based on their effort to find a resolution that would satisfy the Board and reflect the stance that Lane County must take in order to protect the residents.
C.T. Folkerson, 85015 Apple Tree Drive, Eugene, stated he was concerned about the activity of the LCARA Task Force and their inability to communicate. He said their concern has been relative to limit laws on responsible dog ownership in the county. He said they think that limit laws jeopardize the responsible people and do nothing to control those who are irresponsible pet owners. He asked that, before the task force makes a final recommendation to the Board, they have an opportunity to provide their input since the task force meetings have not been public meetings. He had a commitment from Scott Bartlett and Mike Wellington to meet with them and their committee at the Kennel Club. He said they have contributed over $20,000 to the Sheriff and Police Department for canine activities, putting over $500,000 per year into the community as a result of their dog activities at the fairgrounds. He thought they were an important part of the community and wanted to participate in the process.
Peter Shabarik, 1188 Beavy Lane, stated he was present on May 21 and submitted written testimony. He asked the Board to pass a resolution to make sure that Lane County resources are not used to violate the Constitution.
Ann Jenson, 1642 N. Danebo, Eugene, stated she was a member of a purebred dog group and she endorsed what Folkerson said. She was upset they weren’t part of the LCARA Task Force. She wanted to work with them and offer their expertise.
Charley Bentz, 28151 Edgewater Dr., Eugene, requested the recommendations from the LCARA Task Force.
Aimee Code, 1273 Jackson St., recalled that last week legal counsel was given the task of creating four ordinances on the roadside vegetation management and last resort plan. She said legal counsel took one of the four ordinances that was a revision of the Bainbridge Island ordinance that she submitted and created four new ordinances. She saw the drafts and on reviewing them, the one submitted by Dwyer represented the goals and objectives of the commission. She added a subcommittee of the Health Advisory Committee was charged with working on roadside vegetation management and they put in some additional language. She said they would be submitted into Dwyer’s ordinance. She said they plan on supporting Dwyer’s ordinance with some additional changes that are in the notification section of the ordinance. She asked that the Board withdraw her submitted proposal as it was meant to be a base and that an ordinance be made with the Health Advisory Committee’s additions.
Clifton Johnson, 896 Hazelnut Lane, Springfield, supported the resolution against the U.S. Patriot Act. He thought this act violates the First and Fourth Amendments to the Constitution.
David Cramsey 88070 7th St., Veneta, commented that judicious uses of herbicides is not only effective in the control of weeds, but it is one of the most cost effective methods of doing so. He commented that in times of decreasing revenues and increasing cost for the County, to saddle the taxpayers with having to share the cost of additional vegetation management programs is unfair. He noted it puts a burden on private landowners who will have to halt the spread of noxious weeds at their property lines where the County right-of-way comes through. He urged the Board to delay their vote until they have the opportunity to fully review toxicology data that supports the safety and track record of the herbicides used by the County and to allow more of the public to become aware that this decision is coming before the board.
Dave Fidanque, Executive Director, American Civil Liberties Union, P. O. Box 5426, Eugene, urged the Board to pass a resolution in support of the Bill of Rights and in opposition to the U.S. Patriot Act.
Mark Hurwit, 1290 Lemory Lane, read a letter about the Patriot Act into the record.
(Copy in file).
Dawn Peebles, 2715 Jefferson, stated she is a political activist against the Patriot Act.
Marion Malcom, 110 Mayfair Lane, stated their freedoms are in jeopardy. She said they need a Bill of Rights that is in full force.
Brook Robertshaw, 89 N. Polk, supported the resolution against the U.S. Patriot Act and urged the Board to pass it.
4. COMMISSIONERS' REMONSTRANCE
Lininger noted he went to the state capitol in support of a proposal that would increase the beer tax by a few cents and commit that money to a narrow set of purposes that are related to the harm that alcohol consumption would cause. He commented Oregon’s beer tax is near the lowest in the country and hasn’t been adjusted since 1977. He also supported the effort to share more road fund monies with the city.
5. EXECUTIVE SESSION as per ORS 192.660
To take place after the meeting.
6. COUNTY ADMINISTRATION
b. ORDER 03-6-25-2/In the Matter of Authorizing the Director of Management Services to Effect an Interfund Loan from the Public Works Motor and Equipment Pool Fund to the Parks and Open Spaces Fund in an Amount Not to Exceed $35,000 for Richardson Park Improvements.
Garnick explained that these three items had been included in the adopted budget. He said they have to have a separate board order for each loan to set out the terms of the loan.
Dwyer asked where the money would come from.
Garnick indicated that this provides the authorization to make the loan; it doesn’t mean that they have to take the loan.
Sorenson asked what the term of the loan was.
Garnick responded that because it is a capital project, the money could be loaned up to five years so that the full amount of the loan would have to be repaid by June 30, 2008 ($8,750 per year).
MOTION: to approve ORDER 03-6-25-2.
Morrison MOVED, Green SECONDED.
c. ORDER 03-6-25-3/In the Matter of Authorizing the Director of Management Services to Effect an Interfund Loan from the Public Works Motor and Equipment Pool Fund to the General Fund in an Amount Not to Exceed $65,230 for a Program Service Coordinator Position in the Sheriff's Office.
Sorenson commented that the Lane County Budget Committee recommended to the Board of Commissioners and in the adopted County budget that the budget authorize this $65,000 amount to be expended in the Sheriff’s Office. He noted it was a position to acquire federal and state grant funds to assist the Sheriff’s Office.
Garnick explained if this is loaned next year, it has to be repaid by June 30, 2005.
MOTION: to approve ORDER 03-6-25-3.
Morrison MOVED, Lininger SECONDED.
Lininger commented that it was a good idea to appropriate this.
d. ORDER 03-6-25-4/In the Matter of Authorizing the Director of Management Services to Effect an Interfund Loan from the Public Works Motor and Equipment Pool Fund to the General Fund in an Amount Not to Exceed $416,027 for an Expanded Sheriff's Office Traffic Team.
Sorenson recalled that the Budget Committee deferred action on this item until such time as the Sheriff’s Office and Garnick could determine the ability of the traffic team to repay this loan. He said the Budget Committee approved the loan in last week’s budget discussion.
Garnick explained that part of this was operational and part was capital because they are buying vehicles for the deputies. He noted that $276,027 in operational expenses would be paid back by June 30, 2005 and $140,000 will be repaid by 2008.
Dwyer noted that this is supposed to be revenue neutral. He wanted to have a full cost accounting, recovery and cost, including the prosecutorial cost.
Garnick explained they used to include the District Attorney’s office as part of the formula for figuring out whether the program is self-sufficient. He said as they add more traffic team officers, it would balance things out.
MOTION: to approve ORDER 03-6-25-4.
Green MOVED, Morrison SECONDED.
Lininger noted the purpose was to address the high rate of traffic fatalities. He added it would be for the short term to patrol the corridors in the rural areas.
Green wanted the minutes from the Budget Committee regarding how this was presented and how the Sheriff made the presentation and what his intent was. He wanted to attach it to the order for his files so when they have the discussion they will know the intent.
7. PUBLIC WORKS
a. ORDER 03-6-25-5/In the Matter of Amending Chapter 21 of the Lane Manual to Add a Delegation of Authority to Approve Conveyance and Recordation of the Instruments of Conveying Title or Interest to Lane County (LM 21.400 through LM 21.410). (PULLED)
b. ORDER 03-6-25-6/In the Matter of Authorizing the Director of Management Services to Effect an Interfund Loan from Fleet Services (Motor and Equipment Pool Fund) to the Parks Division (Parks and Open Spaces Fund) in an Amount Not to Exceed $30,000.
Rich Fay, Parks, reported that the Parks Division is continuing to construct the Richardson Picnic Shelter at Richardson Park and due to weather conditions, they are behind schedule with completion of the project. He said they haven’t been able to receive a reimbursement from the Oregon Department of Parks and Recreation Department of the loan of $75,000. He said this was an item that was placed in their budget and he was asked to come back to clarify it. He indicated it is a $30,000 loan from Fleet Services to the Parks Division to cover this until they can receive their reimbursement. He said they have prepared the reimbursement and it is their intention to pay the loan back with reimbursement dollars. He said they have to repay it by June 2004.
MOTION: to approve ORDER 03-6-25-6.
Morrison MOVED, Dwyer SECONDED.
VOTE: 4-0 (Green out of room).
c. REPORT BACK/Regarding the Withdrawal of County Road Status (But Not the Public Road Status) From a Portion of Duncan Island Road (County Road Number 1357), Which Lies Between the Siuslaw River and the Duncan Slough, Approximately One Mile Southwest of its Connection with Bernhardt Creek Road, and Being Located in Section 15, Township 18 South, Range 11 West of the Willamette Meridian (18-11-15) (NBA & PM 5/8/02, 6/26/02, 8/14/02 & 8/21/02).
Bill Robinson, Interim County Surveyor, explained the issue is whether to withdraw County road status but not public road status from a portion of Duncan Island Road. He said this matter was before the Board on August 14 and 21, 2002. He noted on the August 21, 2003, property owner Donaldson and her attorney Jeff Condit stated they wished additional time to consider any development options for the Donaldson property. He recalled at that time Dwyer suggested that the involved parties report back in three months. He said that staff contacted Condit and he stated that a later date would be more appropriate since they were planning to meet with an engineer. He said the date selected was June 25, 2003. He added that Ms. Phelps (whose property fronts this road) had been recently contacted by the County and stated she supported the status change. He noted the Director of Public Works has recommended to the Board that this status change be approved. He indicated that all legal notice had been provided as required by state law by posting it in the Register Guard.
Dwyer stated this is a public road and he hoped that people didn’t take the liberty of posting or prohibiting people from accessing public roads because they live there. He put the people who live there on notice that he intends to travel the road.
Morrison indicated they were waiting to get information back from Ms. Donaldson. Her concern is that the property owner gets access to their property.
Sorenson asked what the status of the road was at Milepost 1.02 and farther west.
Condit said it is a public road. He said there is a gate on the road.
Sorenson asked if current policy was letting people put gates on the roads.
Snowden replied that they could not put up gates without a permit.
Sorenson requested an e-mail from Snowden on where the gate is located and whether it has a permit or not.
Condit passed out documents (copy in file) that show a map of the Donaldson property. He said the property is directly east of the Siuslaw to tax lot 200. He noted the public road comes into that. He indicated that the property consists of four lots. He said they determined that the 100-year flood elevation is 11 feet. He stated that Donaldson’s property is approximately six to eight feet in the northern area. He said it is potentially developable into the floodplain regulations. He explained the portion that is proposed to be withdrawn is within the Phelps ownership and the portion immediately to the north and east of that would remain a County road. He said the part to the south and west of that through the Donaldson’s property is a public road.
Condit indicated that they have determined that the property is reasonably developable. He said it is possible without creating a hazard for the property owners. He said it was Donaldson’s intention to explore development of at least one house on the property and she intends to gravel the road.
Dwyer was concerned about the conversion of County roads to public road status as it could lock out people from accessing their property. He commented that if this is a public road, to see that it remains public until a time they decide it isn’t a public road. He wasn’t going to take away the County road status. He wants the status to remain the same.
Condit stated that one of the standards in determining whether to take a section out of County road status is whether it has the effect of causing people to think that access is going away. He said the gates on the property prove that that is the case. He believed in retaining that section to County road status.
Marc Kardell, Assistant County Counsel, noted that Snowden requested that the County not maintain this anymore. With regard to access issues, he said something does need to be done about the gates. He stated it was public road along the Phelps’ property until the Donaldson property. He said they were talking about withdrawing about 8/10 of a mile from the Donaldson property. He didn’t think it had a real effect on the Donaldson’s property.
Morrison indicated the Phelps used the gate to control their pasture and cattle. She said it was a convenience for them.
Snowden said they were trying to take the County road status off and their preference was to vacate the entire road provided that Donaldson had a legal easement across the other property. He noted the Board didn’t want that so they decided to reduce it to a public road status to get it off the Lane County maintenance responsibility.
Sorenson asked why Conduit was against making the change for the short segment.
Condit said they are concerned about the significant legal districts between public road and an easement. He said they were concerned about adverse possession. He added that if the County road status is taken away, it has the effect of suggesting that this is a private driveway. He said if the County maintains the extra road, it preserves the appearance and actuality of the public status of the road. He thought that was important.
Dwyer resented that the Phelps knew the road was there and they took it over.
MOTION: to set this for Consent Calendar, maintaining the current Duncan Island Road as a County road.
Dwyer MOVED, Morrison SECONDED.
Snowden reported in the course of their research, it appeared that the Phelps’ were using this as a driveway and they thought the best approach would be to vacate the road, provided there was a legal easement for the Donaldson’s property behind there. He recalled the Board didn’t want to do that and their proposal was to downgrade it to a local access road. He said it means the County doesn’t have any maintenance responsibility for that part of the road. He wanted to remove it from the maintenance system so they wouldn’t incur any future liability for a road that serves two properties.
Condit thought either all of Duncan Island Road should be taken out of the County road system and made a local access road, or none of it should. He thought it would be better for his client if it were in public ownership
Morrison thought it should remain the same as it is now and the County should retain it
Dwyer wanted to leave the road alone. He said the maintenance shows that it is a public road and he wants the gates off the property.
Morrison stated that if Public Works is directed that those gates need to be removed, notice should be sent to Phelps.
8. CONSENT CALENDAR
A. Approval of Minutes: None.
B. Health and Human Services
1) ORDER 03-6-25-7/In the Matter of Accepting Amendment No. 1 to Intergovernmental Agreement No. 99645 in the Amount of $132,456, From the Oregon Department of Human Services, Office for Services to Children, Adults and Families, for Services to Individuals in Treatment for Chemical Dependency.
2) ORDER 03-6-25-8/In the Matter of Accepting an Intergovernmental Agreement with the Oregon Health and Sciences University in the Amount of $50,196 for Support of the CaCoon Program Services.
C. Public Works
1) ORDER 03-6-25-9/In the Matter of Awarding a Contract to 3 Kings Environmental, Inc. in the Amount of $280,637.79 for the Decommissioning of the Existing Fuel System at the Delta Facility and the Construction of a New Fuel System, Contract FY 03/04-01.
MOTION: to approve the Consent Calendar.
Morrison MOVED, Dwyer SECONDED.
VOTE: 4-0 (Green out of room).
9. COMMISSIONERS' ANNOUNCEMENTS
Dwyer reported the Attorney General was in town last night for a public hearing on the McKenzie Willamette conversion from a not for profit to a for profit hospital.
Morrison announced that the Legislative AOC meeting took place on Monday. She passed out the proposed resolution package for 03/05. She said that AOC would want comment from all of the counties.
Lininger reported he took part in a meeting of the Oregon Criminal Justice Commission on Monday. He said the budget would include $30 million for community corrections.
Sorenson stated he testified at the McKenzie Willamette Hospital public hearing. He noted they had an animal welfare meeting and people have called in and written letters about information on the LCARA Task Force.
Morrison reported the NACo conference would take place on July 11. She noted they had until June 27 to submit their delegate to vote at the conference. She said she was going and asked to be the delegate.
Green said there was a beer and wine press conference yesterday. He noted that Oregon still ranks 46th out of the country for beer taxes. He announced from July 9 to 12 there would be a Western Regional Coalition of Juvenile Justice Conference in Portland.
10. COMMISSIONERS' BUSINESS
a. STATUS REPORT/LCARA.
Scott Bartlett, LCARA Task Force, passed out information relating the connection between animal abuse, child abuse, spousal abuse, domestic violence and serious aggravated crime and murder. (Copy in file). He noted since the first meeting in September they had met monthly trying to meet the Board’s request. He recalled the Board asked them to look at licensing, spay and neuter, legal issues, public education, facilities and staffing and funding. He said it was important that the community look at other streams of revenue that are not dependent on state and general funds.
Bartlett stated that Lane County has a progressive system compared to other counties around the country. He noted that Lane County has a differential licensing structure where there is a spread between the neutered and altered animals and non-neutered as an incentive for people to neuter their dogs or cats. He said they need a proactive policy. He said in Lane County they euthanize for space. He said they only have 30 kennels. He noted that LCARA has one field officer for the entire county.
Bartlett said there are 13,000 dogs that are registered in Lane County out of a population of 76,000 dogs and there is currently no cat licensing. He said a key problem is that they have to spay and neuter animals, but it is inadequate to the volume and crisis they have. He said they would be recommending that the County initiate an aggressive expansion of licensing. He thought the optimal number of licenses could be about 70 to 75 per cent and they currently have 23 per cent. He thought that would bring in another $320,000. He added some people have recommended a pet food tax of a small percentage that could yield $750,000. He said they would recommend that veterinarians report rabies vaccinations. He said that public information is important for responsible pet ownership.
Sorenson asked when the timeline for the task force’s recommendation would be public and turned into the Board of Commissioners.
Bartlett responded they are working on a second draft. He hoped they could have the drafts finalized within two weeks but not later than a month.
Green asked what the exact charge of the group was. He wanted to put that charge on the documentation.
Bartlett noted Board Order 02-8-28-14 laid out licensing, spay and neuter, legal issues, public education, facilities, staffing and funding. He said EcoNorthwest is about a proposal they are going to make for funding.
Van Vactor suggested keeping this like an audit where the department puts their comments in so as soon as they get an outline of the draft. He suggested giving it to Management Services and in the agenda packet with the task force report they will get the response.
b. DISCUSSION/Questions about Commissioner Vacancy Applications.
Sorenson wanted to have the application the way it was written, plus the Lane County government application. He wanted to add a second application. He thought it was a more comprehensive application
Lininger thought they should ask what the three most important issues were for East Lane County and the candidates’ position on them.
With regard to the questions that Wilson had passed out, Green thought questions 16 and 18 were not relevant.
Dwyer wanted to ask if the candidate was appointed if they intended to seek the position in 2005 and how they think their positions on these issues will benefit the people in the district.
Sorenson suggested asking items 4, 8, 13, 14, 19 and 20 be added to the supplemental questions.
Sorenson said the deadline will be Monday, July 14 as the deadline to submit the written application and the agenda team will take it up on July 15.
Dwyer said they had to state the boundaries within the district and only those living within those boundaries are qualified to have an interview process.
Morrison suggested taking two weeks to read through the candidates’ applications and identifying five people they want to interview.
Sorenson said the commissioners and the public will get the applications on July 15, the agenda team will review the situation and they will set up a time on the agenda on July 16 to discuss the matter
c. ORAL REPORT/Progress on Vegetation Management Ordinances.
Kardell recalled he was asked to come back with four ordinances in a two week time period. He said there are now seven. He suggested that they try to reduce the number to four to forward to the next meeting. He asked that the IVM Committee, Snowden, the Health Committee and Rockstroh each review the options that are available and determine the one that satisfies each of them. He asked if they could have to next Friday to get the other two packets from the two committees.
Snowden reported that VMAC doesn’t meet until July 9 and they won’t have an opportunity to officially review these. He said they could e-mail them out to VMAC but the committee won’t get together to discuss these. He noted that Option 4 had come out of VMAC. He didn’t think they had enough opportunity to research the implications of the Bainbridge Ordinance that deals with herbicide selection. He said the Bainbridge language is a no-spray ordinance. He noted the herbicide they currently use would be ruled out by the Bainbridge ordinance. He stated they already had a policy document for IVM. He added they also have a standards and guidelines document that was developed with VMAC. His proposal is that they recognize the existence of them in Lane Code and that the Board directs them to periodically update them. He said that sets the framework for the IVM plan. He said they would then put in the last resort language similar to what VMAC had proposed. He said they would take the screening criteria that was in the Bainbridge ordinance that they think would be reasonable to use on the chemicals they would review. He said they have to make sure that what they had written was not a no-spray policy.
Dwyer stated his policy was not a no spray policy.
Snowden stated soil life and mobility in soils are the criteria that tend to screen out the chemicals they use and that was prohibited under the Bainbridge ordinance. He said they could re-examine the IVM program. His recommendation is that they do it comprehensively and involve VMAC and the Health Advisory Committee. He noted the document they brought in April of 1999 took two years to develop
Green asked if there had been any data that had talked about the effectiveness of the Bainbridge ordinance.
Kardell responded it was adopted on May 15.
Green cautioned that they do not take this to be the ordinance without any type of past history.
Kardell noted the Health Advisory Committee was looking at modifying Dwyer’s ordinance. He added what Snowden has in the packet does incorporate the Bainbridge screens they have for the use of chemicals.
Snowden commented that the last page of the Bainbridge ordinance includes a list of products that they defined as non-toxic and there are no traditional herbicides listed.
Dwyer wanted the policy statement that Lane County will only spray if other methods are not feasible. He wanted to use herbicides judiciously as a last resort if it is possible. He added that economics has to be part of it.
Snowden indicated that part of his proposal is to come back to the Board each year with a list of chemicals and the conditions under which they would be used.
Sorenson said they needed to use prevention as a way to avoid problems. He commented that whatever their level of herbicides is, if they establish a goal to reduce the level of herbicides, they have significantly reduced it. He said if they establish that goal, then each year would reduce it. He said they need to emphasize prevention and de-emphasize herbicides.
Sorenson said when the ordinances are ready for a public hearing they will be giving notice of a Public Hearing on July 16.
11. EMERGENCY BUSINESS
There being no further business, Commissioner Sorenson adjourned the meeting at 11:55 a.m.