BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
October 13, 2004
Commissionersí Conference Room
Commissioner Bobby Green, Sr., presided with Commissioners Bill Dwyer, Don Hampton, Anna Morrison and Peter Sorenson present.† County Administrator Bill Van Vactor, County Counsel Teresa Wilson and Recording Secretary Melissa Zimmer were also present.
1. ADJUSTMENTS TO THE AGENDA
There will be an emergency business item.
2. PUBLIC HEARINGS
3. PUBLIC COMMENTS
David Eisler, Walton, stated he represented the Siuslaw Stewardship Group.† He said there were e-mails sent out by Cascade Pacific RC & D about funding availability.† He said it spells out the opportunity for watershed restoration.† He said there might be areas the County hadnít thought of for funding opportunities.† He noted they address all types of watershed health issues.† He said they have concerns about noxious weeds and those are things the County could apply for.† He said the first round of funding is completed.† He noted they did more than $123,000 in funding.† He said they had money left over and the $200,000 is rolled over into the next funding opportunity, for October 15.† He noted the total value for projects was $298,000.† He said they had 59% in-kind support beyond that.
Rob Handy, Eugene, asked if it was a good thing for the local jurisdictions and the County to give more control of state highways that pass through the county to ODOT.† He said there were† also concerns in Eugene about how the interface takes place.† He said Mayor Torrey raised concerns about whether ODOT was doing a disservice to the City of Eugene by dragging out decisions about the West Eugene Parkway.† He asked if ODOT had released the West Eugene Parkway re-evaluation report.† He asked if Morrisonís recent letter to Interior Secretary Norton about the land, water and conservation fund properties in West Eugene reflected Board policy.† He thought it was important to maintain flexibility to have local control.† He asked the Board to delay the decision on the freight route until they have answers.
Laurie Segel, Eugene, asked about the process and progress on the planning commission vacancies.† She said staff indicated they would follow up with the Board and get back to someone at the planning commission level.
Dwyer indicated that he and Morrison have a list of applicants and they will conduct interviews.
Morrison stated she had finished her selection two weeks ago.† She noted that Dwyer was ill and out hunting and he was just reviewing his list.
Sorenson stated that normally the Board has had a discussion of who would be on the interview committee.† He thought they would have the discussion.† He said in the past the Board had appointed him or others and he thought this was outside of the normal way they had done it.† He said the commissioners that were doing the interviews were not authorized to do it.† He thought it was important to follow the policy they had before.† He said he is the liaison to the planning commission.† He thought if the Board was going to appoint two commissioners, that the rest of them should have a role in making that decision.† He wanted to make sure they followed previous practice on having the Board nominate who would do the interviews.
Dwyer said he would relinquish his responsibility in doing the interview. He said he didnít volunteer for this and he didnít have any strong feelings about the interview process.
Green said there has not been a board policy, but a board practice.† He said as chair, the planning director came to him and let him know about the vacancy.† He asked Morrison, whom he thought was the planning commission liaison, to ask another commissioner to participate.† She asked Dwyer.† Green said it was at that time the packet was given to Morrison and Juanita Kirkham was made aware of the process and Dwyer was ill at the time.† He said there was nothing inconsistent with how it was done.
MOTION:† to move to have Green and Hampton interview the applicants and report back.
Motion failed for no second.
Hampton wanted Sorenson to do the interviews.
Sorenson wanted Morrison to do it and report back to the Board.† He wanted another commissioner to work with him on it.
Green said they are trying to accommodate citizens.† He commented that Sorenson was trying to take the position that he should pick someone and drag out the selection.† He wanted to take care of the business they need to.† Green said he would help Morrison with the interviews.
4. EMERGENCY BUSINESS
ORDER 04-10-13-12 Scheduling a Hearing on the Appeal of the Sheriff's Recommendation on the Liquor License Application of Lona and Mike Owens (Dexter Lake Cafe).
Green said he received a letter from a Michael B. Owens who was denied a liquor license appeal.† He noted that Rob Rockstroh had agreed to hear the appeal but he is unavailable.† He said in consultation with County Administration and Legal Counsel, it was determined that Jeff Towery would be a good choice.† He noted this was a board order to do this so they could expedite the appeal process.† He noted the appeal is set for October 26, 2005 at 10:00 a.m.
MOTION:† to approve ORDER 04-10-13-12.
Dwyer MOVED, Hampton SECONDED.
5. COMMISSIONERS' REMONSTRANCE
6. COMMISSIONERS' BUSINESS
7. COUNTY ADMINISTRATION
Van Vactor announced that Anette Spickard was awarded the position of Deputy Assessor.† He noted they awarded Tanya Heatonís job to Barry Crook in Texas.† He said he didnít want to replace Spickardís position until they know more about the upcoming budget.† He noted that next week he, Tony Bieda and John Arnold would be traveling to Washington, D.C. for the renewal of the Secure Rural Schools Act.
8. PUBLIC WORKS
a. ORAL REPORT BACK AND ORDER 04-8-25-9/In the Matter of Authorizing the County Administrator to Sign a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) Regarding the West Eugene Parkway (NBA & PM 8/25/04).
Ollie Snowden, Public Works, recalled in August they were in front of the Board with a request from ODOT that the Board of Commissioners authorize Van Vactor to execute a MOU with ODOT and the City of Eugene that would facilitate construction of Unit 1 a of the West Eugene Parkway.† He said the Board declined to take action on September 25† because they wanted responses to Rob Zakoís (1000 Friends of Oregon) questions.† They also wanted to see what the City of Eugene did.† He noted the council discussed the item and the city manager has subsequently executed that agreement for the city.
Snowden asked the Board if they wanted to have the County as a signature to the MOU or not.† He noted the Eugene City Council gave direction that they donít expect the city to be the one who has to pay for construction or maintenance of Unit 1 a.
Green explained the MOU sets the stage for negotiations to discuss the maintenance issue.† He said it is clear that in order for ODOT to maintain or keep it as part of their authority, it needs to meet their policy in terms of the design.† He said they are discussing whether Unit 1 a. should be maintained either by one jurisdiction or both.† He said it might end up that ODOT retains possession of it.
Snowden said the MOU is the notice of the Boardís intention to negotiate in good faith with ODOT over the jurisdiction and maintenance of Unit 1 a. and Unit 1 d.† He noted the binding IGA comes next.† He explained the MOU says that they will sit down at the table with the city and ODOT and they will work in good faith to come up with an IGA that defines roles and responsibilities.† He added that the Board doesnít have to sign the IGA.
Dwyer didnít want to pay for it or maintain it.
Snowden said if the Board doesnít have any interest in accepting jurisdiction of Unit 1 a. or any interest in facilitating construction of the West Eugene Parkway, they should† not sign the MOU.
Dwyer commented he voted to support the West Eugene Parkway, and wasnít opposed to it.† He was opposed to the constant changes that are changing the costs and responsibilities.
Snowden said if the Board is not opposed to the West Eugene Parkway in concept, he thought there would be value in signing the MOU because it brings the Board to the table and it could exert leadership in the discussions if they want to do that.
Green said he would be willing to sign the MOU.† He commented the traffic problems going from east to west are still there.† He wanted to direct staff to advocate that they do not take possession or have maintenance for it.† He thought Lane County should be at the table to talk about the arrangement.† He said the project is now at the federal level and it needs to be worked out with ODOT and the feds, not with Lane County.
Dwyer didnít like the terms and conditions.
Snowden commented that the County does not have to sign the IGA.† He said the MOU said that the County would be sitting at the table and they would discuss the conditions of the IGA.† He said if the County wanted to walk away from the table, he didnít see anything where there would be any adverse consequences.
Dwyer wanted to strike number 2.
MOTION:† to move to not approve this order.
Sorenson MOVED, Dwyer SECONDED.
Sorenson commented the purpose of the MOU is to facilitate the delivery of the project.† He said it would either get delivered to the County or the city.† He said if it is the County, then he was against it.† He said if it is the city, then he didnít think the County should be in the agreement.† He didnít think the County was interested in getting a portion of† the stateís responsibility.
Hampton was against number 2.† He thought discussing this would be for the transfer, and if they are not interested, then why were they interested in sitting down at all?
Morrison supported the MOU.
Dwyer was against this.
Snowden asked the Board how they wanted him to participate in any discussions that the city and ODOT has.
Green said that Lane County shouldnít have a presence.
Snowden explained that they already had an executed IGA from 1978 that stated the County would take the bypass sections of West 11 and Beltline if the western extension were built.† He said at some point the County would have to have a discussion with the state about the existing agreement.† He said from this point forward, any discussions that ODOT has with the city on the West Eugene Parkway, that the Board expects staff not to attend.
Dwyer said the County should not commit any resources.† He was not against the parkway.† †
Sorenson didnít want the board order approved.† He thought Snowden should still attend the meeting.† He didnít think the argument was made for this MOU as presented today, that Lane County have an interest in having a facilitated transfer to the County.† He said if the city wants to enter into the MOU then that is a city issue.
Green recalled these were the same terms and conditions as on August 25.† He noted that Rob Zako submitted questions and they were answered.† He said the hesitancy to sign it back then was because procedurally they wanted the city to go forward and take action.† He noted that all of that had been done.
VOTE: 3-2 (Green, Morrison dissenting).
b. DISCUSSION & ACTION/Road Maintenance Consolidation Audit.
Snowden explained the Board had discussed this over a period of time going back to last year.† He noted the last time they discussed it was in April.† He said at that point most of the cities who were present at the meeting indicated a willingness to participate, non-financially in some review of the efficiency and effectiveness of how they deliver road maintenance services.† He included comments about the road maintenance audit they had in 1997. He said at that time the County hired a company out of Portland to look at specifics about the way they were performing maintenance on Lane County roads, but a part of the study was looking at the feasibility of consolidation of services with ODOT District 5.† He noted that audit cost about $100,000.† He said they ran out of time and money to do a detailed report on the specific efficiencies that could be gained through consolidation.† He said their conclusion was that consolidation with ODOT District 5 had substantial obstacles to it and they were unable to quantify the benefits of consolidation.† He added they went on to say that in the future there would be opportunities for consolidation if there were some potential cost savings.
Snowden recalled in 1988, Jackson County and ODOT did an extensive investigation in looking at consolidation of road maintenance operations.† He said that study concluded that within eight years of consolidation, they would save about 6.6% annually.† He thought there was potential for some savings by consolidating road maintenance operations but there are obstacles.† He added the savings they get would not be such that they wipe out the Eugene deficit they have with maintenance and preservation.† He identified three levels of study that would look at consolidation.† He said that included a work plan and a list of other questions that the Board needs to provide direction on before they move ahead with an RFP.† He said they could have an executive level consolidation scoping where they would hire an engineering or managing consultant that has a background in looking at this type of study on what Lane County would look like.† He hoped they could do the study for less than $50,000.
Morrison said if they go forward with this, she wanted to make sure that they implement the plan.† She thought there were some savings.
Snowden indicated that he only wrote the scope of work for Eugene, Springfield and Lane County.† He asked if all the small cities should be included or just one representative small city.
Morrison wanted two rural cities.
Snowden commented that if the Secure Rural Schools Act funding goes away,† they would face the same difficulties the cities have in trying to get the legislature to deal with the funding problem on a statewide basis.† He said if Lane County is going to look at local option fees, that a study of this type might be a prerequisite to going ahead with a countywide registration fee or gas tax.† He didnít think they would find that there would be inefficiencies.† He commented it was the labor costs over times that are the ongoing savings.
Dwyer said if they are going to do an audit that it would need to lead them to some type of conclusion that would be able to show savings and efficiencies.† He agreed if they are going to do it that they should do it right.† He wanted the executive audit.
Sorenson† commented that audits should be under the authority of their auditor.† He thought this should be a function of Kay Blackburn, Internal Auditor, and what she thinks is appropriate.† He thought this should go through Finance and Audit.† He said that each of the commissioners has to be concerned with the impact of what County government does beyond their district.
Snowden said that an audit has a structured way of approaching the investigation.† He said they have guidelines and the promise is they would get a study that is high on integrity that the auditors are not going to be influenced by people they talk to.† He said they would give an independent analysis.† He noted when they did their audit in 1997, they asked for a true audit and that gave them a smaller pool of consultants to select from.† He said that meant the one they selected had a lot of work to do.
Blackburn stated the advantage of doing a full audit in accordance with government auditing standards is that there are standards for professionalism for the auditors for education, and support for their conclusions.† She said if what they are looking for is more of a high level executive summary scoping study, if they put out an RFP, they are limiting the pool of people who would be eligible to respond. She asked the Board if they wanted a consultant study at more of a high level executive study or the government audit report.
Dwyer and Morrison wanted to go with the executive audit.
Green supported going with the full scoping audit.† He commented they could do this and the work could be done but it takes the political will of the Board and leadership in the jurisdiction to make it happen.
Dwyer thought that resistance would be at other political levels.† He said they are trying to gather the information.† He said they need to take a leadership role.
Green said they could take the data and show the effectiveness and efficiencies, but someone might come to the Board and complain and the Board would then change its policy or direction.
Hampton preferred more of an effort spent on the political will first in trying to assess how much interest the other agencies have in them doing this before they spend the money.
Green indicated the Board wanted to go forward with an audit.
Dwyer thought they needed to test the political will before they spend the money.
With regard to political will, Morrison said they could do the outreach but by the time this comes back, the political will would have changed.† She thought they should first go to the political bodies and then make a decision on which ones they would do.
Green said they should engage the stakeholders in this effort after the first of the† year.
Van Vactor asked if they should put out an RFP and get responses so they have a better defined product they could show.
With regard to the 1997 audit, Snowden explained it took six to eight months to do with a staff of people.† He thought it would be too time consuming a project for Blackburn.
Green wanted Blackburn involved.
Sorenson suggested that Blackburn work on this because if it is going to be an audit it should be under her functions.† He said she could think about the best way to do it and come back and tell the Board what she wants to do.
Snowden thought the Board, as elected officials, should be talking with their colleagues.† He said there was inertia to keep the status quo.
Dwyer said they should draft a letter at the Board level saying they are contemplating designing a way to establish efficiencies that would culminate in an audit and if it could be shown (in an objective fashion) ways to save money or cost effectiveness in efficiencies, then they would be willing to consider it.
MOTION:† to draft a letter at the Board level stating they are contemplating a way to establish efficiencies that would culminate in an audit.
Dwyer MOVED, Sorenson SECONDED.
c. DISCUSSION/Compliance Program.
Jeff Towery, Land Management, said this initially came out of a conversation that occurred at the Board level in June.† He added it also came out of a request for a discussion about greater involvement, better collaboration and better use of Land Management and Waste Management activities and services in an effort to deal with issues of illegal dumping and waste and garbage-related compliance efforts.† He said the initial request was from Finance and Audit to give an update on the status of meth lab properties in Lane County.† He said that existing inventory could be dealt with in the next five months.† He noted they didnít bring their new compliance technicians on board until the first week of September and they thought a six month period of time would be adequate to get certificate of fitness on all of the existing properties.† He said they are working with their staff and IS to do a better job of providing public information about the contaminated sites and placing them on the Countyís website.
Towery noted that over the past five years they had seen a significant increase in compliance related revenue in the program.† He said there is one issue of being able to do double planning and sanitation in the instance of a compliance case.† He said they are forecasting it to be a small impact on the program, $5,000 to $10,000 per year but they have the ordinance and the board order coming up.† He expected that ordinance would come to the board in November.† He thought they should re-visit some issues that the task force addressed when they met.† He said they should focus on protecting citizensí health, life safety and the environment.† He said other goals are achieving voluntary compliance instead of imposing fines, the utilization of realistic and consistent practices using priorities and incentive programs, and the recognition that the County has and is expected to have a limited code enforcement resource.† He said they identified issues for future consideration.
Dwyer said it was helpful to have these policies but they still have a problem in East and West Lane County with garbage.† He said they need a fix and they need to have the resources to do it.† He thought the Board should adopt a 50-cent per load surcharge on dump fees that is dedicated to compliance and clean up.† He said the recovery costs from liens should be dedicated to replenishing that fund, less the cost to recover and the legal fees associated with it.† He wanted to know† how much money the 50-cent surcharge† would bring in.† He wanted to establish a fund that is not out of the general fund but it is from garbage and the clean up that is related.
Morrison asked if there was any timeline DEQ could impose after a property had been identified through law enforcement action.
Towery said it is the Department of Health that issues the certificate of fitness on a property.† He said they decide whether or not the property is clean.
Morrison wanted to become more aggressive with liened properties. She asked why they should go forward with this action if they have no intentions of enforcing the conditions of the Board and staff.
Sorenson commented that the issues of garbage and criminal activity are important to the public safety, livability and health for the community.† He thought it was important they give responses.† He said they have to step up their activities.† He asked what it would take to double the FTE workload for the people who are doing the compliance work.†† He wanted to know what a fee increase would be on a per ton basis so they are distributing the costs across the users of the system.† He didnít think they could have a financial gain with a delay in compliance.† He thought they needed to have a more rigorous examination of the type of liens they are issuing and on a more consistent basis, foreclose on those liens in conjunction with a pilot program.† With complaints versus control, he didnít think they should solely focus on complaints.† He thought patrol had to be part of it.† He thought Lane Countyís policy should be built around a voluntary compliance.† He said they need to have an open friendly atmosphere at the outset.† He commented that a lot of people want to comply, but they donít know what to do.† He said if that is true and they are willing to accept a certain number of wrongdoers as part of that, then they should do it.† He said after the initial time they should move into a more aggressive posture than in the past.† He wanted to see them move in a direction of using the lien dollars to a higher percentage than they are currently doing.† He thought they should empower citizens to enforce Lane Countyís Land Management Division regulations.
Hampton said his number one concern is the speed in which they are enforcing things.† With regard to compliance, he thought if they could have a quick initial contact, they would get a certain percentage of people to comply right away.† He agreed if it doesnít happen in the beginning then they get more aggressive.† He thought that there should be guidelines with realistic time expectations.† He thought there should be someone who would preview the work to make sure that everything is in order so it would go through the whole process.
Green wanted to reinforce 5 a. and thought they could do that with a change in policy.† He thought adding 50 cents a dump load could be an option to get more dollars.† He wanted to strengthen the policies that were already in place to get the compliance that is necessary.
Morrison thought they had already approved the pilot program.
Towery indicated that three of the four sites they identified ended up being cleaned or changed ownership.† He said the one in Alvadore was the one remaining.† He recalled they invested a little of time and money in closing Saginaw Mobile Home park.† He said the issue of the pilot project got set aside for more pressing issues.
Dwyer concurred with what Sorenson said.† He thought they needed the program.† He wanted the money to be generated back to that fund and not the general fund.
d. FIRST READING AND SETTING SECOND READING AND PUBLIC HEARING/ Ordinance No. PA 1218/Adopting the Willamalane Park and Recreation Comprehensive Plan as a Refinement Plan of the Eugene-Springfield Metropolitan Area General Plan (Metro Plan) for Application Outside the Springfield City Limits and Within the Metro Plan Boundary and Adopting a Severability Clause (A Refinement Plan of the Metro Plan, Chapter III-H Parks and Recreation Facilities Element, and Statewide Goal 8-Recreational Needs)† (Second Reading and Public Hearing: October 28, 2004, 7:00 pm, Springfield Library Meeting Room)
MOTION:† to approve a First Reading and Setting a Second Reading and Public Hearing on Ordinance PA 1218 for October 28, 2004 at 7:00 p.m.
Sorenson MOVED, Morrison SECONDED.
VOTE: 4-0. (Hampton out of room).
9. CONSENT CALENDAR
A. Approval of Minutes:† None.
B. County Administration
1) REPORT/County Administrator's Quarterly Report Regarding USA Patriot Act.
C. Health and Human Services
1) ORDER 04-10-13-1/In the Matter of Awarding a Contract to Oregon Psychiatric Partners, LLP to Serve on the Lane County Managed Health Provider Panel for the Period October 1, 2004 Through September 30, 2005.
2) ORDER 04-10-13-2/In the Matter of Delegating Authority to the County Administrator to Sign a Contract with Eugene School District 4J for School Based Health Clinic Service in the Amount of $105,238.
3) ORDER 04-10-13-3/In the Matter of Awarding a Contract to White Bird Clinic in the Amount of $166,130 for a Mental Health Crisis Services for the Period October 1, 2004 Through September 30, 2005.
D. Management Services
1) ORDER 04-10-13-4/In the Matter of Correcting Order No. 04-5-12-17 Creating a Classification and Salary Range for Dental Hygienist.
E. Public Works
1) ORDER 04-10-13-5/In the Matter of Accepting the Offer from Eric A. Eakin and Betty L. Bissell to Purchase the Property Located at 88660 McVay Highway, Eugene, Oregon.
2) ORDER 04-10-13-6/In the Matter of Releasing, Dedicating and Accepting a Parcel of County Owned Real Estate, as a Public Road. (17-04-12) (Helen Street).
3) ORDER 04-10-13-7/In the Matter of Releasing, Dedicating and Accepting a Parcel of County Owned Real Estate, as a Public Road. (17-04-12-34) (Helen Street) (Co. Rd. No. 1613).
MOTION:† to approve the Consent Calendar.
Morrison MOVED, Sorenson SECONDED.
VOTE: 4-0 (Hampton out of room).
10. DISTRICT ATTORNEY'S OFFICE
a. ORDER 04-10-13-8/In the Matter of Approving a Two-Year Contract Amendment in an Amount Not to Exceed $118,750 with Sacred Heart Medical Center to Provide Morgue Services for the Medical Examinerís Office in the Lane County District Attorneyís Office.
MOTION:† to approve ORDER 04-10-13-8.
Dwyer MOVED, Sorenson SECONDED.
VOTE: 4-0 (Hampton out of room).
11. HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES
a. ORDER 04-10-13-9/In the Matter of Establishing One Part-Time (.50 FTE) Temporary Office Assistant 2 Position; One Part-Time (.50 FTE) Temporary Data Entry Operator Position; Two Full-Time (2.0 FTE) Mental Health Specialist Positions; One Full-Time (1.0 FTE) Senior Mental Health Specialist Position for Mental Health Services Effective October 1, 2004 and Appropriate an Additional $169,990 in Revenue and Expenditures for FY 2004-2005 in Fund 286 Department of Health & Human Services.
MOTION:† to approve ORDER 04-10-13-9.
Sorenson MOVED, Dwyer SECONDED.
VOTE: 4-0 (Hampton out of room).
12. LEGISLATIVE COMMITTEE
a. Report on Proposed Rule:† State Elections, Administrative Recount of Ballots.
Tony Bieda, Intergovernmental Relations Manager, reported the Legislative Committee met on an emergency basis because Lane County Elections had been notified that the Secretary of State was in the process of changing rules that would require an administrative recount to occur after the November 2 election, but before the certification, adding an additional resource to County Elections for no apparent gain or immediate need.† He noted Annette Newingham, Elections, had already been engaged in this issue. He stated that Newingham thought they should first see if the Board of Commissioners agreed with the direction that the County clerks were going with the rules.† He said the rules are requiring an administrative recount to occur after the election and before certification of the vote without any of the cost being borne by the state or identifying where those resources would come from.
Bieda noted the Legislative Committee met, reviewed the proposed amendments, and produced a draft letter outlining the basis for the proposed amendments.† That is before the Board today.
Sorenson asked what the cost would be to Lane County.
Bieda said it would be a minimum of $3,500 for additional staff time.
Sorenson said he called Bill Bradbury, Secretary of State, to ask about this item. Sorenson noted that Bradbury said it was an inexpensive way to determine the accuracy of an election.† He added that it would be to the benefit of Lane County.† He said if they were to do it, that they could prove the elections were accurate.† He didnít think it would hurt Lane County to do this.† He was concerned about the Board taking a position opposing these rules when they are intended to give the public greater confidence in the outcome of the election.
Newingham said that cost was a concern.† She noted that Lane County prints their ballots so all the precincts are on the ballot.† She indicated it means they donít have to sort by precincts, they could count the ballots by ballot counters.† She said there is savings on having to sort them manually into the precinct and it means timelier returns† She said if they have to give results by precinct, they would have to sort all ballots and it would take a week to hand count one precinct.† She added the way it is written now, they would have to do it prior to certifying the election results.† She said they donít have all the ballots counted by the tenth day after the election.† She said they would be in conflict with the other ways they audit the results before they certify the results.† She said she would be concerned as an election official that she would be stretching herself thin and that she could possibly make a mistake.
Green said the recommendation is for the letter to go forward.
Newingham indicated the two recommendations are to make the language changes suggested to say ďafter the certification process in a more controlled fashionĒ and then to clarify who was paying for that.
Morrison was concerned about going forward once the rule is in place, that those costs would escalate beyond what they are looking toward and then Lane County would be stuck.† She wanted to find a way to cap the cost within the rule making process.
Sorenson thought this would assure the public that they are getting accurate results from elections.
Newingham said they were being supportive by suggesting the changes.† She thought there might be some misconceptions.† She said that all counties in Oregon do optical scan.† She added if they do a partial recount and there is some change to reflect the voter intent, they might miss something.† She added that anytime an election is within one-fifth of one percent, there is an automatic recount and the counties do have to pay for those.† She said they didnít support this as it could backfire.† She thought the one-fifth of one percent was a definitive way and she was supportive of that.
Green asked if there was support for Green to sign the letter.
MOTION:†† to move to send the letter.
Morrison MOVED, Dwyer SECONDED.
VOTE: 3-1 (Sorenson dissenting, Hampton out of room).
13. MANAGEMENT SERVICES
a. ORDER 04-10-13-10/In the Matter of Creating the Classification and Salary Range for Accountant.
MOTION:† to approve ORDER 04-10-13-10.
Morrison MOVED, Dwyer SECONDED.
VOTE: 4-0 (Hampton out of room).
14. CORRESPONDENCE TO THE BOARD
15. COMMISSIONERS' ANNOUNCEMENTS
Green announced the Junction City jail tour would take place on October 20 at 1:30 p.m.†† He added that they were going to have a meeting with the Coburg City Council on October 19.† He said no one was available for the meeting so they decided to change the date of the meeting.† He noted there is a Budget Committee meeting on October 26.
16. EXECUTIVE SESSION as per ORS 192.660
To take place after the meeting.
17. OTHER BUSINESS
ORDER 04-10-13-13 Settling Claims of Melinda Broome.
Green explained that this came out of Executive Session.
MOTION:† to approve ORDER 4-10-13-13.
Morrison† MOVED, Sorenson SECONDED.
VOTE: 4-0. (Hampton out of room).
There being no further business, Commissioner Green recessed the meeting at 12:05 p.m.