BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS'
REGULAR MEETING
December 4, 2002
9:00 a.m.
Commissioners' Conference Room
APPROVED 1/6/02
Commissioner Bill Dwyer presided with Commissioners Bobby Green, Sr., Anna Morrison, Peter Sorenson and Cindy Weeldreyer present. County Administrator Bill Van Vactor, County Counsel Teresa Wilson and Recording Secretary Melissa Zimmer were also present.
1. ADJUSTMENTS TO THE AGENDA
Green requested
adding an Item d. under Commissioners Business on the draft ACT guidelines.
2. PUBLIC COMMENTS
Kate O’ Donnell, Lane Library League, commented that 90,000
people in Lane County do not have library service. She said her group sees this as an economic issue and hoped the
Board would take it under consideration. She explained that they worked up a
proposal to create two library districts and expand the others. She asked the Board to pass a resolution to
authorize staff time to work with their group.
She wanted the Board to put this matter on the ballot, as it was hard to
collect the signatures.
Green noted that the
County in the past had voted against measures for a County library.
Morrison was
concerned that there wouldn’t be support of the voters if they were to put this
on the ballot again. She thought O’
Donnell should obtain signatures.
Weeldreyer thought
getting signatures would help go along with educating people on why the library
services are so important.
Dwyer stated as a
taxpayer he didn’t see the advantage to paying for a library on property taxes
and then for library services, or double paying.
Sorenson suggested
inviting O’Donnell back with the other people involved for a work session with
the Board.
David Hinkley, Chair of Jefferson Westside Neighborhood,
discussed the subject of the four County-owned parcels along the Westside of
Jefferson Street that runs from 13th Avenue to the Amazon
Creek. He understood the Fair Board
came to the Board for permission to sell two of the properties. He stated at their November neighborhood
meeting, the association voted to support the Fair Board in disposing of the
property back to private ownership.
Dwyer stated he did
not want to sell the properties, he wanted them restored to provide affordable
housing as a source of pride for the community. He wanted a report back from the housing policy board about how
best to use the property.
Green suggested the
properties could be a bed and breakfast. He said there were a multiple range of
options. He thought providing
affordable housing would be the most preferable.
3. COMMISSIONERS' REMONSTRANCE
None.
4. EXECUTIVE SESSION as per ORS 192.660
To take place after
the meeting.
5. COMMISSIONERS' BUSINESS
a. UPDATE/Willamette Park and Recreation
Comprehensive Plan Update.
Bob Keefer,
Willamalane Parks, reported he was in front of the Board a year ago and
requested support of their comprehensive plan update. He said they are completing their needs assessment. He said that Willamalane serves more than
just the City of Springfield and includes some of the urbanizable areas. He stated they want to make this a
refinement to the Metro Plan so it has legal standing when it comes to land
use. He commented they are at the needs
assessments stage and they are beginning to develop recommendations and
actions. They will go through the
citizens advisory committee and a technical advisory committee that includes
staff from Lane County. He added he
would bring it back to the Board for consideration.
Rebecca Gerhsaw,
Willamalane, gave a presentation on the community needs assessment. (Copy in
file). She noted that the Community
Needs Assessment Report was the first major product of their Park and
Recreation Comprehensive Plan. She said
they have a current level of service of about two acres per 1,000 people and it
calculated to needing an additional 52 acres.
Dwyer stated that
the Board was committed to working with them to provide the services.
Keefer noted that
the park system goes beyond the boundaries and what they do impacts Eugene,
Lane County and its residents. He
wanted to keep the Board informed to make sure they knew what the issues were
in Springfield.
b. REPORT/Extension Service Report.
Bo Freeman gave a
report on the OSU Extension Service. (Copy in file).
Morrison commented
that the Extension Service put out an excellent article on the large forests
and herbicides.
Dwyer asked if the
Extension Service was working with the fairgrounds on e-coli.
Freeman responded he
was part of a committee that would be educating people to reducing the risk of
e-coli.
c. DISCUSSION/ ORDER 02-12-4-10/Evaluation
of County Counsel.
Dwyer stated that he
doesn’t participate in the evaluation.
He viewed the report as a mutual admiration report. He said he would participate in the report
if County Counsel and County Administrator were “at will” employees instead of
being “for cause.” He objected to the principle. He thought the Board should change the
contract and have it “at will.”
Green disagreed with
Dwyer on the value of the evaluation.
He thought it was an important tool.
He reported that on County Counsel’s evaluation, he indicated she should
continue to do what she does in protecting the public from the
Board. He concurred with Doug
Harcleroad, District Attorney, that Wilson would be hard to replace. He rated her at nine, satisfied with Wilson’s
work. He added that the people who work
for Wilson are dedicated and loyal to her because she has high expectations.
Dwyer appreciated
Wilson’s work on the ballot measures.
With regard to
Wilson’s evaluation, Morrison commented that Wilson was phenomenal around the
ballot measures and the timelines they were under in trying to make sure the
language was correct. She said in
talking with some of the people who were appointed on the committees to write
the measures, the comments were that Wilson’s help was tremendous. She stated that Wilson headed the statewide
legal organization as well and it was an honor to have her other colleagues
think she has the ability and integrity to lead the group. She said overall she had been pleased with
Wilson’s performance.
Weeldreyer echoed
what had been said. She noted that
Wilson had the attitude of always wanting to improve and that spirit sets the
tone for her department. She commented
that Wilson was knowledgeable in the areas of law and was able to function in a
variety of environments. She added that
Wilson had improved in those skills.
Sorenson stated the
Board should have the responsibility of hiring, promoting and supervising more
than just the independent auditor. He
noted currently the Board had singled out one person to receive different
treatment than the other two. He
thought they would be better off with having people that they are directly
supervising and their job performance and the relationship will be a better
relationship if the Board determines who are in those positions. He wanted to have the County Counsel and
County Administrator working for the Board of Commissioners and being directly
responsive to the Board of Commissioners and not have this imagery about
cause. He thought it was difficult
for Wilson to separate policy implications of decisions the Board of
Commissioners are making from the legal issues they are advised on. He praised her on her thoroughness on
matters of written work product. He
encouraged her to think about the implications about the policy versus law
issue.
Van Vactor explained
that the timing was different between County Counsel and the Performance
Auditor. He said when Wilson was
appointed she was a long-time employee and the contract followed in place,
whereas the current Performance Auditor is a recent hire. He encouraged the Board to have that
discussion.
Wilson thanked
everyone for their comments. She
credited her employees for helping with the good work that comes out of her
department. She said as an attorney,
she wants to be working for clients that want her services. She stated that if at any point she was not
filling the Board’s needs, she needs to hear that and welcomes feedback.
Dwyer noted that
Wilson was a “for cause” employee and he asked if the Board was compelled to
renew her contract.
Wilson explained the
contract she currently has is a two-year contract. She said it was the middle of the contract. She said the contract expires at the end of
next year. She noted what was before
the Board is a proposal to extend it an additional year. She said if the Board adopts the Board order
and signs the contract, it would expire at the end of 2004.
Dwyer stated they
needed to have a discussion about equity and how they would deal with it around
“for cause” versus “at will” and the benefits of both from an administrative
point of view.
Morrison suggested
moving forward on adopting this motion.
She had no problem with the contract containing the extra year.
MOTION: to
approve ORDER 02-12-4-10.
Morrison MOVED,
Green SECONDED.
Dwyer didn’t think
they should extend the contract because they would be extending it for another
year, prior to having the discussion whether or not they needed to talk about
the broader policy implications related to it.
He said the contract renewal had to be separate from the evaluation
process. He voted against the motion.
Weeldreyer supported
the motion. She said that Wilson’s
evaluations in all of the time that she had been County Counsel under her
tenure had been exceptional every year.
She said the honorable thing to do would be to have a contract so there
is certainty that she had done a good enough job that they would extend her
contract.
Sorenson stated he
was opposed to voting on this matter today.
Weeldreyer said she
appreciated Wilson. She said approving
this contract is a stamp of approval for her performance.
Dwyer said they have
to do research with the counties in Oregon and how many serve at will and how
many are for cause and if there were any trends.
VOTE: 3-2 (Dwyer, Sorenson dissenting).
Green requested the
agenda team have a separate board order for Van Vactor’s evaluation.
d. ACT Guidelines
Green explained he
received a letter from Stuart Foster, one of the members of the Oregon
Transportation Commission about the formation and operation of the area
commission on transportation (ACT). He
stated that Ollie Snowden and Tom Stinchfield are prepared to come to the Board
on December 18 with other transportation items. He wanted to add this letter to the agenda for the staff’s
perspective on what this would really mean.
Dwyer stated they
would assign this to staff to bring back on December 18 as to what it means to
the structure of the ACT to Lane County’s system.
6. COMMITTEE REPORTS
S.A.V.E.
Committee
a. ORDER 02-12-4-1/In the Matter of
Awarding Non-Cash S.A.V.E. Awards to Vicki Slater, Sheriff’s Office and Vicki
Slater, Sheriff’s Office
ORDER 02-12-4-9/
In the Matter of Awarding Non-Cash S.A.V.E. Awards to Malinda Dodson,
Department of Children and Families.
Sorenson presented
the S.A.V.E. awards to Vicki Slater and Malinda Dodson.
MOTION: to approve ORDER 02-12-4-1 and ORDER 02-12-4-9.
Sorenson MOVED,
Weeldreyer SECONDED.
VOTE: 5-0.
7. COUNTY ADMINISTRATION
a. Announcements
None.
8. PUBLIC WORKS
a. DELIBERATION AND ORDER 02-12-4-2/In
the Matter of Amending the FY 03 to FY 07 Capital Improvement Program (CIP) to
Include Bernhardt Heights Road; Setting a Date for Public Hearing; Approving a
Project Design Concept for the Realignment of Bernhardt Heights Road Based on
the Design Concept in Exhibit B; and Authorizing Staff to Prepare a
Right-of-Way Plan Necessary to Construct the Road, Pursue all Necessary
Planning Actions and Prepare Plans and Specifications for Realignment of Said
Road. (NBA & PM 10/30/02 & 11/6/02)
Sonny Chickering,
Public Works, reported this was the third meeting on this topic. He said they were trying to come up with a
design concept for correcting an earth slide problem on Bernhardt Heights Road
and providing a stable road for the residents who live at the top of the
hill. He noted a work session took
place on October 30 and at that time the Board was concerned about notice to
the residents and asking them for their input and participation that they could
contribute to a project. He said they
sent a letter requesting that information on November 6. He stated the hearing was held as scheduled
and there were several residents who attended.
He noted after the hearing, the Board directed staff to pursue and
investigate an Option E. He said that
was reflective of the request of the local property owners. He said they came up with a non-standard
roadway by County parameters. He said
it would meet the needs and desires of the locals. He noted it would be a one-lane road with four turnout
locations. He said the full
reconstruction to two lanes was $450,000.
He added to just repair the slide that is in an isolated location along
the roadway was $150,000. He added that
option would be between $200,000 and $350,000.
He said the basic road improvements would include the slide and that was
$150,000 and they would also improve the road surface. He said if they pave the road surface, a
guardrail be put on there, as there is ice.
He was concerned if people came down a steep hill on a paved surface
they would lose traction and go over the edge.
He added if they don’t put the guardrails up, people will leave the road
because it is gravel. He noted that
option would cost $350,000.
Chickering recalled
that Option A was to widen the existing road to two lanes, $450,000; Option B
was to use an existing gravel road that is owned by Davidson Industries. He noted they had the same problem with the
sheer drop off and rock wall down to one lane road. He said if they had a guardrail the entire length of the road,
the project would be $80,000 for a guardrail, $20,000 as a retaining wall and
$20,000 at the guardrail turn out.
Green asked how much
the neighbors would pay toward this.
Chickering responded
there was no financial commitment from the property owners. He said they have written testimony from the
property owners that they would be willing to dedicate the right of way.
Chickering noted
that Option C was recommended by the Roads Advisory Committee and by staff to
use the BPA alignment. He said Option D
repairs the slide where it had failed on the existing road and no further work. He noted the recommended BPA route was
$150,000.
Dwyer agreed with
the $150,000 repair.
Morrison supported
Option C, as it was the best solution long-term.
Green asked which
option increased safety and decreased the County’s liability.
Chickering responded
Option A addresses the safety issues in the short-term but he was concerned
about future sliding. He stated they
would repair the current slide but his experience was that once a slide is
fixed, the problem is just moved to another location and another slide occurs.
MOTION: to move to adopt Option C.
Morrison MOVED,
Weeldreyer SECONDED.
Chickering noted
there were concerns from the homeowners and there were hurdles they would have
to clear to make this happen.
Sorenson asked what
the rationale would be for using eminent domain.
Chickering responded
that for the sustainability of the road this was the best repair for the
long-term if it is to remain a County road.
Morrison noted that
the neighbors were already using this road when they couldn’t get out their
normal way. She said for public safety,
and the long-term sustainability this was the best road to use.
Dwyer commented that
the power of eminent domain is critical and needs to be reserved for special
circumstances that leave no alternative.
He noted the neighbors had already expressed a concern about impacting
their wells and there are no voluntary sellers. He thought the road should be off the table. He said they need to meet the statutory
obligation to provide a safe access the cheapest way they can and keep the
community whole. He was against the
motion.
MOTION: to move to adopt Option C as a long-term
solution.
Morrison MOVED,
Green SECONDED.
VOTE: 3-2 (Dwyer, Sorenson dissenting).
b. TWELFTH READING AND SETTING THIRTEENTH
READING AND PUBLIC HEARING/Ordinance No. 5-00/In the Matter of Amending
Chapter 10 of Lane Code to Adopt a Revised and Updated Version of the Eugene
Land Use Regulations for Application to the Urbanizable Lands Within the Eugene
Urban Growth Boundary; and Adopting Savings and Severability. (NBA & PM
5/16/00, 5/31/00, 10/11/00, 1/31/01, 4/11/01, 5/30/01, 12/12/01, 1/16/02,
1/30/02, 3/20/02 & 6/19/02)
MOTION: to approve a Twelfth Reading and Setting a
Thirteenth Reading and Public Hearing for Ordinance No. 5-00 on April 9,
2003, at 1:30 p.m.
VOTE 5-0.
c. THIRD READING AND DELIBERATION/Ordinance
PA 1180/In the Matter of Amending the Eugene-Springfield Metropolitan Area
General Plan Diagram to Apply the ND-Nodal Development Designation to Property
Within the Chase Gardens Nodal Development Area; Amending The Text of Section
13 of the Willakenzie Area Plan to Replace Pages 71-74; Amending the
Willakenzie Area Plan Land Use Map; and Adopting a Severability Clause. (NBA
& PM 8/28/02 & 9/18/02)
Dwyer asked the
Board if they had any ex-parte contacts.
There were none from
the Board.
Kurt Yeiter, City of
Eugene, stated the ordinance the Board is asked to approve is one of three that
implements the whole nodal development package. He noted that all three have been approved by the City Council as
recommended by both Planning Commissions.
He announced they received a written verification that all three had
been appealed to LUBA.
Dwyer suggested
rolling this until they learn the status of the appeal.
Jan Childs, City of
Eugene, explained if the appellants had only appealed the ordinance adopting
the code amendments she would recommend taking action to go forward, but she
said there is a possibility the appellants might chose to withdraw the appeal
of the Metro Plan and Willakenzie Plan amendments before they go forward with
the process. She understood their
primary issue is with the code amendments that Eugene adopted but she was
uncertain. She suggested they roll this
matter.
MOTION: to approve a Third Reading and Setting a
Fourth Reading and Deliberation on Ordinance PA 1180 for January 15,
2003.
Sorenson MOVED,
Morrison SECONDED.
VOTE: 5-0.
d. THIRD READING AND SETTING FOURTH READING AND
DELIBERATION/Ordinance PA 1181/In the Matter of Amending the
Eugene-Springfield Metropolitan Area General Plan Diagram to Apply the ND-Nodal
Development Designation to Property Within the Royal Avenue Nodal Development
Area; and Adopting a Severability Clause. (NBA & PM 8/28/02 & 9/18/02).
MOTION: to approve a Third Reading and Setting a
Fourth Reading and Deliberation on Ordinance PA 1181 for January 15,
2003.
Morrison MOVED,
Weeldreyer SECONDED.
VOTE: 5-0.
e. FIFTH READING AND DELIBERATION/Ordinance
PA 1147/In the Matter of Amending the Rural Comprehensive Plan to
Redesignate Land from "Forest Land" to "Non-Resource,"
Rezone that Land from "F-2/Impacted Forest Lands" to
"RR-10/Rural Residential"; and Adopting Savings and Severability
Clauses (file PA 98-1953; Cooley). (NBA & PM 2/23/00, 3/15/00, 5/3/00,
9/25/02 & 11/13/02)
Dwyer asked the
Board for any ex-parte contacts.
Morrison responded
that there had been people who had tried but they had not gotten through to
her.
Sorenson reported he
received a telephone call on his voice mail
Green stated he
received a voice mail from Mr. Palmer while he was out of town.
Weeldreyer said she
received a voice mail encouraging the commissioners to read all of the
information.
Jerry Kendall, Land
Management, reported that the Board had a fourth reading on this item on
November 6. He stated in the interim
they had received final signatures on the covenant by which the current owners
would agree to vacate the 1950’s plat, turning this into one large 80-acre
parcel. He noted that if the Board
approves this, they would proceed to
record the document. He said if this is
approved today, the applicant still has to go through the normal subdivision
approval of beaches and dunes preliminary investigation where they will fine
tune the lot arrangement and the buildable areas. He said their recommendation is approval at RR 10.
Morrison didn’t
think this was F2 forestland and wasn’t opposed to the zone change. Her concern was the wetland issue and
whether or not they would be able to build because there is standing water on
the property. She supported the change.
Sorenson asked what
the criteria were for making the change from F 2 to RR10 to an area like this
on the coast.
Kendall responded
the applicant’s burden is to show that this land shouldn’t have qualified as
resource land. He said they have to
show that it doesn’t meet the definition of farmland as defined in Western
Oregon predominance of class 5 through 8 soils on one to eight scale. He said
it doesn’t because it has 34 ½ acres of Class 3 and 4 soils with the
predominance in the poorer classes. He
added it didn’t meet the definition of forest land that is less than 50 cubic
feet per acre per year productivity and their forester reported they have a 7.3
cubic feet per acre average.
Sorenson asked if
there was any opposition to this.
Kendall responded
there was opposition to this.
Sorenson asked what
the basis was with the opposition that the rezoning had been met by the farm
and forestland test.
Kendall noted there
were nearby property owners who sent letters that debates the course of
conclusion that states the land is only as productive as the forester states it
does. He said some people are saying
the properties will not be septic capable and the presences of the dwellings
will cause pollution into the aquifer and draw down the neighboring wells.
MOTION: to adopt Ordinance PA 1147.
Morrison MOVED,
Green SECONDED.
Weeldreyer commented
the applicant had made a case convincingly to her that the F2 zone is not
appropriate and the fact that the proposal was different than the original one
in 1999. She added the density was up
to 10 acres and she would support the motion.
ROLL CALL VOTE: 4-1 (Dwyer dissenting).
9. CONSENT CALENDAR
A. Approval of Minutes:
September 11, 2002,
Regular Meeting, 9:00 a.m.
September 11, 2002,
Regular Meeting, 1:30 p.m.
B. County Counsel
1) ORDER 02-12-4-3/In the Matter of
Acceptance of Certificate of Election, Proclamation of Results and Creation of
the Hazeldell Rural Fire District.
C. Health and Human Services
1) ORDER 02-12-4-4/In the Matter of
Amending Chapter 20 of the Lane Manual to Add Exemptions to Competitive
Selection Requirements Where State or Federal Law or Regulation Allows an
Exemption and Where Qualified Providers are Unlikely to Participate in
Competitive Selection for Certain Client/Patient Services (LM 20.127 and LM
20.128).
MOTION: to
approve the Consent Calendar.
Morrison MOVED,
Sorenson SECONDED.
VOTE: 5-0.
10. MANAGEMENT SERVICES
a. ORDER 02-12-4-5/In the Matter of
Creating the Classification and Salary Range for Assistant Director of Health
and Human Services.
Jan Wilbur,
Management Services, reported the department brought this request forward and
they reviewed it. She said they found
the person performing in the position currently was providing high-level
administrative support to the director and was involved in things as an
Assistant Director. She added in
looking at equity and the organization, she looked at the other Assistant
Directors to see how they were performing and found that this position was
having responsibility for union and grievance issues across the programs,
process improvement, works on strategic plan initiative and in addition the
position is working with the emergency operations and planning and
preparedness. She noted the complexity
of the job calls for a higher level of assistance to the director and the
position stands in for the director.
She added she performed a point factor analysis and it was equal to the
Assistant Director of Public Works.
MOTION: to approve ORDER 02-12-4-5.
Morrison MOVED,
Green SECONDED.
Dwyer stated that
Karen Gaffney was an asset to the organization and supported the motion.
VOTE: 5-0.
b. ORDER 02-12-4-6/In the Matter of
Appointing One (1) New Youth Member to the Human Rights Advisory Committee.
Laura Yergan,
Management Services, introduced Wendall Freeman, who is working with diversity
and human rights for Lane County and he is an associate member of the Human
Rights Advisory Committee. She noted there were four applications and Theo
Halpert was recommended as the Human Rights Advisory Committee’s first youth
member.
MOTION: to approve ORDER 02-12-4-6.
Sorenson requested
that on their agenda they bring up the recruitment, involvement and nurturing
of this person as a way to show commitment to the issue of a youth’s voice on
the Human Rights Advisory Committee.
Green MOVED,
Sorenson SECONDED.
VOTE: 5-0.
11. PUBLIC SAFETY
a. ORDER 02-12-4-7/In the Matter of
Accepting a Contract with Woodstock Investments, Inc., to Accomplish Sheriff’s
Aviation “Asset for Asset” Exchange and Delegating Authority to the County
Administrator to Execute the Contract Documents.
Bret Freeman,
Sheriff’s Office, reported that this comes with no dollars attached to it. He explained that due to the age of the
aircraft they have run out of spare parts and there are major maintenance costs
of $40,000 for next year. He noted they
had located two potential assets they could exchange. He said the first didn’t work out and they had located a machine
and had negotiated contract language and asked the Board to approve this. He said the dollars attached were
maintenance they were going to perform already but to bring the asset values
equal with the vendor, they agreed to a $10,000 maximum limit out of the helicopter
line item budget to make repairs.
MOTION : to approve ORDER 02-12-4-7.
Weeldreyer MOVED,
Sorenson SECONDED.
VOTE: 5-0.
12. WORKFORCE PARTNERSHIP
a. ORDER 02-12-4-8/In the Matter of
Presenting a Semi-Annual Report to the Board of Commissioners of Lane County.
Chuck Forster, Lane
Workforce Partnership, gave his annual report to the Board. (Copy in file).
Morrison requested
the next time Forster brings the report to the Board that he shows figures from
a year prior regarding employment compared to what is in their actuals so they
could study a trend.
Forster responded he
would give the report to Morrison for this year and last year.
13. COMMISSIONERS' ANNOUNCEMENTS
None.
14. CORRESPONDENCE TO THE BOARD
None.
15. EMERGENCY BUSINESS
None.
There being no
further business, Commissioner Dwyer recessed the meeting at 12:30 p.m.
Melissa Zimmer
Recording Secretary