BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS REGULAR MEETING

September 29, 2004

following HACSA

Commissioners’ Conference Room

APPROVED 1/19/05

 

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

 

1. ADJUSTMENTS TO THE AGENDA

 

Item 9. C. 3) is pulled.

 

2. PUBLIC COMMENTS

 

Hugh Sherwood, Corvallis, stated he represents the family members of Marguerite F. Sherwood for the Munsel Lake Boat Landing.  He said they wanted the opportunity to meet with staff to explore other alternatives in the condemnation proceeding.  He thought it was possible to reconfigure the area in a way that would increase the parking and still leave the family with the expanded parking area.  He said the staff referred to a gated easement.  He noted the deeded boat ramp was expanded by the 2001 easement to be used as additional parking.  He said the area in dispute is the expanded area, approximately 25 feet by 108 feet. He said the family would honor that in a new easement by the original boat ramp area covered by the original preliminary partition plat of 1981.  He added the new easement would also include encroachment of a newly built dock in 2002 that extends beyond the boat ramp outside of the area to be deeded.  He noted the said easement would be granted without payment of monetary consideration.  He indicated a week ago his legal counsel was able to arrange a meeting with county staff, scheduled for October 14.  He noted it would be the first opportunity for negotiation.  He said Lane County’s legal staff has been provided with the proposal that would answer staff’s concern with adequate parking places and not require their additional property.  He said they wanted to work on a solution that would be beneficial to both the County and the family about sufficient parking and allowing them to keep their property.  He noted it is a complex issue, one that the Board should have input.  He said his parents have held the property since 1960 for the future benefit of their children and grandchildren.  He said they had spent six years on the two-parcel partition.  He requested the Board to broaden the order as suggested by his attorney to authorize County staff to negotiate a resolution for something similar that was provided to legal counsel.

 

Cleve Dumdi, 29535 Dane Lane, Junction City, asked the Board for county involvement for predator management or they would lose $25,000 of state and federal funding.  He noted the Board provided them $12,000 last year and asked for something similar.  He noted that Linn and Coos Counties have fully-funded predator management people and they had taken their money out of the timber receipts that come to the County. He commented if they lose the trapper there wouldn’t be service for trapping.  He thought it was an economic development program.

 

Debbie Jeffries, 3800 N. Delta Highway, Eugene, discussed Site E-76 of Goal 5.  That concerns her because it is her property with a man made farm pond.  She reminded the Board that the County approved the inventory about this site and it was acknowledged that it did not fit the definition. She stated the Board went ahead and adopted it with the understanding that it would be a simple process for her to personally appeal to DLCD and that site would be removed.  She noted the path is the ESEE process that has been going on since May.  She noted the previous farm owners of the property support the fact that it was a man made farm pond.  She noted the city was representing the County and they were representing themselves. She said it was frustrating to her that she sat through the process and there was an understanding of how to administratively handle this in the best interest of the County’s economics. She said being in the urban growth transition area, she looked to the County as her local government.  She said she needed help with this.

 

Green requested sending this to the agenda team to talk about the Debbie Jeffries matter.

 

Mike Wolf, DEQ, noted in the meeting the Board will hear from the Property Management Division to go ahead with development of an EPA grant application for clean up of a site that the County has through tax foreclosure.  He said that DEQ is standing by to help to the greatest degree possible with the grant proposals.

 

3. EMERGENCY BUSINESS

 

DISCUSSION/In the Matter Providing Preliminary Authorization for Property Management Staff to Proceed with applying for a Grant for The EPA to provide funding for remediation of County Owned Tax Foreclosed Properties.

 

Jeff Turk, Management Services, reported the County has acquired some properties through tax foreclosures that contain hazardous materials.  He noted the property at 267 Van Burien would cost about $50,000 to $60,000 for clean up.  He said they don’t have a redeveloper for that property.  He noted the other property on McVay Highway is a former gasoline station and that property has significant contamination.  He said the Bio Fuels Company contacted him as they were interested in the property and they want to go into a partnership with the County and the DEQ to contribute money to the clean up and purchase of the property.   He said it would require agreements between three parties.

 

Morrison was in support of this.

 

Turk noted the EPA grant is up to $200,000, the maximum that could be awarded.   He added the grant requires a 20% match from the applicant so the County has to come up with 20%. He said they could go ahead with the grant without a third party involvement. He commented from the DEQ’s past experience  the grants have a better chance of being awarded when they have a development identified.

 

Wilson asked if the property were to sell at the Sheriff’s sale if they would have the opportunity to pull the grant application.

 

Turk announced the grant wouldn’t be awarded until May or June.

 

Sorenson agreed to go forward.

 

Hampton was also in agreement to go forward with this.

 

4. COMMISSIONERS' REMONSTRANCE

 

Hampton said he and Van Vactor attended a meeting concerning access to health for Lane County and how agencies could work together.  He said the bad news was closing the psychiatric hospitals and the clinics were pulling out of the rural towns.  He met with two of the three health care providers in Oakridge and they made significant progress on being able to take over some of things the County was doing.

 

Sorenson said they completed 45 months in the state of Oregon of where the job creation had dropped.  He said they are looking at a 5.8% rate of growth in working age people in Oregon since that time.  He said if the job growth had kept up with working age population, they would have 114,000 more people employed than what are employed now.  He said there is a challenge for everyone to work together to turn around Oregon’s economy.

 

5. RESOLUTIONS

 

a. RESOLUTION AND ORDER 04-9-29-1/In the Matter of Proclaiming the First Week of October 2004 as Head Start Awareness Week in Lane County.

 

Green read the resolution into the record.

 

MOTION: to approve RESOLUTION AND ORDER 04-9-29-1.

 

Hampton MOVED, Sorenson SECONDED.

 

VOTE: 4-0.

 

6. COMMISSIONERS' BUSINESS

 

None.

 

7. COUNTY ADMINISTRATION

 

a. Announcements

 

Van Vactor announced that Lane County launched its charitable contribution campaign.

 

b. ORDER 04-9-29-2/In the Matter of Awarding Contracts for Economic Development Strategic Investment Projects and Deciding Lane Metropolitan Partnership Protest of Evaluating Committee Recommendations of Contract Awards.

 

Peter Thurston, Economic Development, reported for the past three years, the Board of Commissioners has allocated and distributed economic development dollars for projects that create jobs and train the work force for higher paying job opportunities.  He said they completed a review of the first year’s results.  He noted 130 jobs resulted from those proposals, four businesses were started and 403 were trained.  He noted the process is now in place as part of their RFP process to do this annually.

 

Thurston indicated that before the board are two questions, will the projects that have been recommended by the economic development standing committee be awarded  for this cycle and should the appeal that Lane Metro Partnership has brought forth in this process be accepted or denied.  He noted the appeal process is described in detail in the RFP and in Lane Manual.  He said staff analysis of the appeal is included in the memorandum with the recommendation that the appeal be denied.

 

Thurston explained the economic development project rating and ranking summary is shown in Attachment D, the  committee’s recommendation on scoring for each of the projects.  He said the Economic Standing Committee recommended the three top ranked projects:  Lane Micro Business at $60,000, Eugene Area Chamber of Commerce Business Retention Expansion Development Programs at $30,600 and the McKenzie Chamber of Commerce Eagle’s Pride Project for $15,500.  He stated they total $106,100.  He added there was a balance left of $93,900.

 

Thurston noted that Lane Economic Standing Committee was asked to review and comment on these projects and their recommendation from their meeting is to fund the three projects and to not fund the Lane Metro Partnership Project that is fourth on the list up to the total of $200,000 for all projects.   He noted that leaves $93,900 uncommitted and unexpended in that line item.  He noted the order that is in the packet is written to award the three projects that were awarded by the Economic Development Standing Committee and to deny the appeal.  He stated the steps of the appeal process are to be completed.

 

Green noted a typo at the last bullet.

 

Hampton noted that Dwyer was absent at the last committee meeting so his score was not recorded.

 

Jack Roberts, Lane Metro Partnership, 1401 Willamette, Eugene, explained they are not challenging the grants with the other applicants.  He reported the grant is about to continue an effort they started back a year and a half ago.  He said when he was selected the Executive Director in 2003, they had a $175,000 grant from these funds to do an outreach to do a better job of outreaching and marketing the community for economic development.  He said when he came in they undertook some analysis on what they had to do for their marketing plan.  He noted they delayed the marketing until they had done their plan without taking money from the grant to do that.  He said when they started purchasing ads, they wanted to be strategic to make sure they got the best use of the funds so at the end of the grant period they could still turn back money to Lane County they hadn’t expended.  He noted at the time they made the original application, all the estimates of job creation and job growth were based on three years because it was understood from the beginning that they were going to try to maintain it separate for three years to see what type of results they would get.  They think it is important to continue their effort.  He said they scaled back their request from $175,000 the first year to $100,000 this year.  He said there is no overhead included in the grant and they aren’t paying for operations.  He said all of the money would go into outreach.  He said there was some money designed for the local outreach.  He noted last year’s recommendation was to save as much money as they could to have it available when they have the chance for businesses to expand as well as attract new businesses.  He thought they should do this if it is possible.  He recommended funding the ones that were already recommended, but that they deny the appeal with the invitation to them that they could make an appeal in an open process that would be available for the remaining money or they could ask for the money for an opportunity that would be more beneficial.

 

Hampton concurred with Roberts.

 

Morrison stated she had no problem with the Eugene Chambers’ contact program.  She thought that had proven beyond their expectations.  She would honor their request to come back with a different use that would be more acceptable.  She had concerns with the Lane Micro Business training and development.

 

MOTION: to approve ORDER 04-9-29-2.

 

Sorenson MOVED, Hampton SECONDED.

 

Morrison commented she would be more flexible this time around the Lane Micro Business and will support it.  She noted there were questions raised by the subcommittee and she wanted to have those addressed regarding contractual issues and who would be really receiving the money.

 

Shawn Rios, OUR, noted the question he had with the committee dealt with the OUR contractual arrangement.  He said they offer individual development accounts for their low-income individuals who are in their program.  He said it is a matched savings account.  He said they had good success.

 

Sorenson supported the motion.

 

VOTE: 4-0.

 

8. PUBLIC WORKS

 

a. STATUS REPORT/OR 126 Expressway Management Plan Update.

 

Tom Stinchfield, Public Works, said he had been working on this plan (funded by Region 2 Planning Funds) since the summer.  He noted it is scheduled to be completed by June 2005.

 

Tom Boyatt, ODOT, reported in the year 2000 the Oregon Transportation Commission designated this facility from I-5 to Main Street as an expressway that goes on top of its national highway statement of high statewide significance.  He said the expressway designation is there to place the highway in a category where the higher importance is to move freight, cars and people back and forth and the lower importance is access to property, development and shorter trips.

 

Boyatt said what the expressway designation means is that there is a slightly different standard for congestion, turning radius, lane width and interchanges.  He noted the project had been under the oversight of a project management team and Tom Stinchfield and Bill Morgan represent Lane County.   He indicated there are three phases to the project and they are wrapping up the first phase of data gathering.  He said the second phase would look at the 2004 baseline condition and the year 2025 and the congestion problems projected in the future.  He said they are hoping to do an in depth alternative analysis for the two at grade intersections.

 

Sorenson asked if this would be a federally funded project.

 

Boyatt indicated the planning work is paid through federal planning and research dollars that ODOT has discretion over.  He added there is also state funding from gas taxes.

 

Stinchfield explained there is an interchange included in the TransPlan future projects list at Main Street and has been identified as a new interchange but it is not funded and it is not on the constrained list. He noted that one was in the County’s interest as the problems at Main Street affect the development of the Jasper Road Extension project.  He hoped the study would help them resolve that issue.

 

Boyatt said the Refinement Plan is necessary before investments could be made before they could choose a preferred alternative.  He noted the product format would be a web-based product in a geographic information system so the County could make a decision about what information to display on the web and how to order the information.  He said they are focusing on when the congestion would be bad enough that something would have to be done.

 

b. ORDER 04-9-29-3/In the Matter of Declaring October 8, 2004 as “Put the Brakes on Fatalities Day” in Lane County.

 

Sonny Chickering, Public Works, asked the Board to grant a proclamation declaring October 8, 2004 as “Put the Brakes on Fatalities Day in Lane County.”  He noted last year was their first event.

 

Green read the resolution into the record.

 

MOTION: to approve ORDER 04-9-29-3.

 

Sorenson MOVED, Morrison SECONDED.

 

VOTE: 4-0.

 

c. DISCUSSION/Improvements to the Public Works Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) Process.

 

Chickering reported they have a five month capital improvement program adoption process that begins with the staff analyzing prior years’ program, determining which projects have been completed and which projects needed to be moved on to another year.  He indicated they provide a draft to both the Roads Advisory Committee and the Board of Commissioners for review.  He noted that during that process the Roads Advisory Committee and the Board are asked to make decisions about competing projects.  He recalled that last year they asked the Board to do something they hadn’t before, to make certain that any projects that are added, an equivalent cost of projects would need to be cut from the program.  He commented that exercise was difficult for both the Roads Advisory Committee and the Board without having personal knowledge of those projects.  He said it was requested that there be improved information about projects and the relative merits, benefits and disadvantages of each of the projects so they could make the best decision.

 

Chickering indicated they prepared a Board packet as a description of the process as it works today.  He added they had described some past efforts for prioritization systems.  He noted they had tried different methods to prioritize projects and the latest the Board came up with was the formulation for the CAPP program and there were some criteria that were listed.  He thought the Board was happy with that criteria.  He noted that ODOT will come to the Board for recommendations on STIP funding and they use a comparison system that is based on how well a project meets planning criteria and adopted documents.  He indicated they have their Transportation System Plan that has goals and policies and staff recommends they look at the projects to see if they are meeting the stated goals and objectives of the TSP.  He said he would be back to the Board in December with a proposed method for scoring projects that they could implement in January for the next round of the CIP.

 

Hampton suggested taking citizen involvement up front before they put the project on the list.

 

Chickering responded they had adjusted their system to do that.

 

Sorenson thought the scoring on the safety of the project was important.  He asked if they could tie capital improvement to the structure of Lane County’s roads to their economic development and land use activities.  He wanted data on the economic need of the project.

 

Morrison commented the TSP was a good step.  She was concerned because there were some comments where the public supports it and they have had projects where the public didn’t support it. She thought there needed to be balance.  She supported this recommendation to move forward and set the next round of projects. She was concerned they would not be putting money into rural roads.

 

Green said they needed to develop an explicit policy that shows when there are projects that don’t merit full support, then the money would go to a program that could benefit the urban areas. He asked what happens if the federal authorization funds cease.  He said they need to document all the public drop in sessions and public comments and include them in the packet.

 

9. CONSENT CALENDAR

 

BEGINNING OF CONSENT CALENDAR * * * * 

 

A. Approval of Minutes:

March 17, 2004, Regular Meeting, Following HACSA

March 31, 2004, Regular Meeting, 1:30 p.m.

June 2, 2004, Regular Meeting, 9:00 a.m.

June 9, 2004, Joint Board, LTD, 12:00 p.m.

August 25, 2004, Regular Meeting, 9:00 a.m.

September 1, 2004, Regular Meeting, 9:00 a.m.

 

B. Management Services

 

1) ORDER 04-9-29-4/In the Matter of Authorizing the Sale of Surplus County Owned Real Property to Marda Cloutier for $20,000 (Map #17-11-30-40-02300, Adjacent to 06697 Mercer View Drive, Florence).

 

C. Public Works

 

1) RESOLUTION AND ORDER 04-9-29-5/In the Matter of Authorizing Acquisition of Real Property or Interests Therein for the Munsel Lake Boat Landing, Including Authority to Commence and Prosecute any Necessary Proceedings for the Condemnation of Said Real Property if a Settlement Cannot be Reached by Negotiation.

 

2) ORDER 04-9-29-6/In the Matter of Approving a Construction Claim Settlement with Delta Construction Co. in the Amount of $77,120.63 for Costs Associated with Reconstruction of Irvington Drive (Contract No. 02/03-10).

 

3) ORDER 04-9-29-7/In the Matter of Ordering Repair of a Sidewalk on River Road Adjacent to Tax Lot 17-04-11-12 1100, and Authorizing the Filing of a Notice of Pending Lien for the Cost of Repairs.

 

END OF CONSENT CALENDAR * * * *

 

MOTION: to approve the  balance of the Consent Calendar with item  9. C.3) pulled.

 

Sorenson MOVED, Morrison SECONDED.

 

VOTE 4-0.

 

10. CORRESPONDENCE TO THE BOARD

 

None.

 

11. COMMISSIONERS' ANNOUNCEMENTS

 

None.

 

12 EXECUTIVE SESSION as per ORS 192.660

(Commissioners' Conference Room)

 

To take place after the meeting.

 

13. OTHER BUSINESS

None.

 

There being no further business Commissioner Green recessed the meeting into Executive Session at  11:40 a.m.

 

 

Melissa Zimmer

Recording Secretary