BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS’
REGULAR MEETING
March 15, 2011
1:30 p.m.
Harris Hall Main Floor
APPROVED 3-30-2011
Commissioner Faye Stewart presided with Commissioners Jay Bozievich, Rob Handy, Sid Leiken and Pete Sorenson present. County Administrator Liane Richardson, County Counsel Stephen Vorhes and Recording Secretary Melissa Zimmer were also present.
9. COUNTY ADMINISTRATION
a. Announcements.
None.
b. REPORT BACK AND ORDER 11-3-15-18 /Adopting Positions on Legislative Issues During the 76th Legislative Session
Alex Cuyler, Intergovernmental Relations Manager, gave a presentation on the bills that were included in the spreadsheets. (Copy in file).
MOTION: to move HB3380 from recommended oppose to monitor.
Sorenson MOVED, Handy SECONDED.
Bozievich thought the way the bill was written that it would be easier for people to stop paying their taxes. He understood Sorenson’s concerns about the bill, but that was not how the bill was drafted. He said if it was close to passing the way it was written, it would be disastrous for the counties. He was not willing to make a change. He thought if it gets amended, it could come before the Board and Legislative Committee to take another look, but as it currently stands, it is bad legislation.
Stewart didn’t see what they are trying to gain. He said it appears it takes six years for someone’s property to be foreclosed upon and to make it that much longer has no value. He added if someone has property with equity, they could sell it. He doesn’t think the system they have is unfair.
Leiken was okay with monitoring. He thought it was rare to have a piece of property with equity in place and someone not paying the property tax.
Cuyler explained that this measure was scheduled for a hearing and it was pulled off the calendar. He said the committee learned the Board didn’t have a position on the bill. He said the challenge of the measure is that it has come from Lane County. He said they should have a good proposal moving forward that they could get behind. He said there are vehicles there to make it work but people are having problem with the length of time needed to wait.
Richardson said when people are buying tax foreclosed properties the redemption period limits how much money they are wishing to pay for it because they are taking a risk that the person will not redeem it. She didn’t think the County could get as much on its tax foreclosed properties if the redemption period was six years versus two years. She thought they would be seeing lower purchasing amounts if there were a longer time for redemption periods.
VOTE: 3-2 (Stewart, Bozievich dissenting).
MOTION: to move SB 186 from monitor to oppose.
Handy MOVED, Sorenson SECONDED.
VOTE: 2-3 (Bozievich, Leiken, Stewart dissenting) MOTION FAILED.
MOTION: to move SB 192 from support to monitor.
Handy MOVED, Sorenson SECONDED.
Leiken wanted to stay with support for the bill.
VOTE: 2-3 (Bozievich, Leiken, Stewart dissenting) MOTION FAILED.
MOTION: to move SB441 from support to monitor.
Handy MOVED, Sorenson SECONDED.
VOTE: 2-3 (Bozievich, Leiken, Stewart dissenting). MOTION FAILED.
MOTION: to move HB2337 from monitor to oppose.
Handy MOVED, Sorenson SECONDED.
Stewart said it was the opinion of the Legislative Committee that they support this. He said as a rural resident and someone who actually saw a cougar last week he wanted to support this, but to monitor could be more acceptable. He was opposed to the motion.
Handy withdrew his motion. Sorenson withdrew his second.
MOTION: to move HB 2945 from oppose to support.
Handy MOVED, Sorenson SECONDED
Handy said this bill will prohibit a city from requiring consent to annexation in return for providing a County service as a proxy under an IGA. He added that this bill would be a suite of things that would fall into place to help everyone address the River Road Santa Clara issues.
Bozievich said he would be willing to change to monitor. He said there are some problems with HB 2945 in the language and how it is written. He indicated that it would release people from prior contracts with urban service providers and it is not the way to resolve that issue. He said it is cancelling prior agreements in a unilateral fashion. He believes the unintended consequence of this bill would be a refusal to extend any urban services beyond the city limits for any reason unless there is prior annexation. He thought it could be a worse situation. He would support monitoring this bill and monitoring HB 2946.
Leiken was in agreement to change from oppose to monitor.
VOTE: 2-3 (Bozievich, Leiken, Stewart dissenting). MOTION FAILED.
MOTION:: to move HB 2945 and HB2946 to monitor instead of oppose.
Bozievich MOVED, Leiken SECONDED.
Handy wanted to take these up individually so he didn’t support the motion.
VOTE: 3-2 (Handy, Sorenson dissenting).
Handy asked about HB3413.
Spickard recalled when she first sent this in to the Legislative Committee she was neutral because it has no administrative impact to her office. She thought it was a policy discussion for the Board around accountability with urban renewal. She added after the committee discussion, it was moved to monitor. She noted the current bill language talks about a 60 day notice after a certain event occurs. She found a timing glitch with the current wording where that 60 day window wouldn’t work with the way it is worded. She said they have to make sure that if it goes through, that it works as intended.
Cuyler reported there was a hearing on the bill this morning. He noted there was concern expressed by the urban renewal agencies about the 60 day window currently in statute with regards to notification. He said the suggestion was to amend the bill to create a way for the urban renewal agency to report to the assessor for the normal reporting period of July 15. He added that it was designed by the Department of Revenue on a form they currently use. He was invited to a meeting tomorrow about reporting within the existing manner in which urban renewal agencies report their fulfillment to the assessor. He hoped to get agreement to move forward. He said the committee seemed disinterested in moving the bill. He doesn’t know if it will make it to a work session. He said this came out of Lane County and if they have a suggestion to make it easier for the assessor and the urban renewal agencies, they have an opportunity to move it.
MOTION: to support with possible amendments and if there is intention on other language or tweaks he would like to know what they are.
Handy MOVED, Sorenson SECONDED.
VOTE: 5-0.
MOTION: to change SB 178 from oppose to monitor.
Handy MOVED, Sorenson SECONDED.
Richardson said the concerns are that they are already required to pay Oregon prevailing wages that are typically higher. She added that if they were required to pay the federal prevailing wage, it would be higher. She thought an additional requirement to pay the higher of the two would make some Public Works projects prohibitive.
VOTE: 2-3 (Bozievich, Leiken, Stewart dissenting). MOTION FAILED.
MOTION: to move HB 2081 from oppose to monitor.
Handy MOVED, Sorenson SECONDED.
Bozievich commented that this is another case of a good practice being made into a mandate. He said it doesn’t give flexibility.
Richardson said with the idling restrictions, it would prohibit them from adopting or enforcing idling restrictions they have unless they are identical to what the state has. She said it would prevent them from having something more restrictive than what the state adopts. She added it would prohibit them from using safety concerns when purchasing tires.
VOTE: 2-3 (Bozievich, Leiken, Stewart dissenting). MOTION FAILED.
MOTION: to approve ORDER 11-3-15-18 with the changes in Attachment A and D as they were proposed that were not changed.
Bozievich MOVED, Leiken SECONDED.
Handy said it was difficult for him to support this kind of motion when there were a lot of things to support. He wanted to have a motion to approve the recommendation for the individual items and register where the split votes were. He couldn’t support moving the whole order as a package.
Cuyler noted as a result of this action, he will develop a spreadsheet to the local delegation. He indicated there will be a list of bills the Board voted on 5-0 support and a list of bills where the Board was split.
Stewart thought it would be better to take the motion and vote on it so they then have legislative direction.
Bozievich (as the motion maker) did not want to separate the votes on the bill.
Handy disagreed with that approach. He said it was important in the past to have information about how broad the support is. He wanted Cuyler to come back to let them know which legislators want that kind of detail.
Stewart disagreed with Handy. Stewart reported that when Cuyler speaks to the legislator , he hands them a list of what the majority of the Board voted on. It is what the majority of the Board supports as a legislative process.
VOTE: 3-2 (Sorenson, Handy dissenting).
Handy asked Richardson and Cuyler to review this process. He said they had done good work, but there has to be a way to communicate the nuances. He asked when the Legislative Committee next convenes to address this issue and incorporate a tweak to their process that will allow them to address some of the outstanding issues.
Stewart indicated there was not a majority of the Board interested in changing the process.
c. DISCUSSION/Impact of Proposed Cuts on Community Development Block Grants.
Cuyler noted the Board has a letter addressed to Congressman DeFazio. He said it was a letter they reviewed at the Legislative Committee when they last met. He said it is specific to the Community Development Block Grant program. He indicated that it addresses the situation on the budgetary issues the Congressman is struggling with. He said DeFazio made it clear he was supportive of the Community Development Block Grant program, but it is a way for the County to memorialize their position. He added that they discussed a second letter that also dealt with the Community Health Centers, urging the Congressman to protect funding for the Community Health Centers, but they neglected to get it in front of the Board
MOTION: to move approval of the letter on Community Health Centers
Handy MOVED, Sorenson SECONDED.
VOTE: 4-0 (Bozievich excused).
MOTION: to move approval of the letter for the Community Development Block Grant.
Handy MOVED, Sorenson SECONDED.
VOTE: 4-0 (Bozievich excused).
10. ASSESSMENT & TAXATION
a. ORDER 11-3-15-16/In the Matter of Appointing Four Members to the Farm Review Board Advisory Committee.
MOTION: to approve ORDER 11-2-15-16, appointing Denise Ripellino and Randall Hledik.
Handy MOVED, Sorenson SECONDED.
VOTE: 4-0 (Bozievich excused).
11. PUBLIC WORKS
a. ORDER 11-3-15-17/In the Matter of Adopting the Five-Year Parks and Recreation SDC Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) Priorities List for FY 11/12 Through FY 15/16 and Authorizing the Appropriation of $45,000 In System Development Charges (SDC) For Projects In FY 11/12.
Marsha Miller, Public Works, stated the Board is being asked to approve a Five-Year Parks and Recreation SDC Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) priorities list for FY 11/12 through FY 15/16. She added they are also asking for the authorization for $45,000 in SDC funds to put toward the projects. She said SDC’s are collected to fund a portion of Parks’ capital projects and every year Parks presents its priorities annually that go for the review of the Parks Advisory Committee. She added that the Parks Advisory Committee has approved the list. She indicated that it is more of a long term wish list. She noted the only two projects they will be able to do next year is the Hilltop Restroom Renovation at Armitage Park and the Richardson Park Marina Replacement and Expansion. She noted for the Hilltop Restroom Renovation, the cost will range from $150,000 to $300,000, depending on the scope. She added they will only move forward with that project if they are successful in getting the grant funds from the Oregon Parks and Rec Department. She noted the Board approved that application today on the Consent Calendar. She indicated that the Richardson Park Marina will be paid for by revenue bonds.
MOTION: to approve ORDER 11-3-15-17.
Handy MOVED, Sorenson SECONDED.
VOTE: 4-0 (Bozievich excused).
b. FIRST READING / SETTING THE SECOND READING / JOINT PUBLIC HEARING/Ordinance No. PA 1274/In the Matter of Co-adopting the Springfield Residential Land and Housing Needs Analysis and a Diagram Amendment Establishing a Separate Tax-Lot Specific Urban Growth Boundary (UGB) East of I-5, to Implement HB 2007 or Laws Chapter 650 (HB 3337) and ORS 197.295 to 197.314, and Adopting Savings and Severability Clauses. (Applicant: City of Springfield; File No. PA 09-6018) (PM 2/7/11, 2/22/11) (Joint Public Hearing with Springfield City Council: April 4, 2011, 7:00 p.m., in Springfield) (MOVED TO MARCH 16, 2011).
12. CORRESPONDENCE TO THE BOARD
a. Letter from City of Florence re: Ordinance PA 1249.
Stewart reported that he received a letter on March 3 asking the Board of Commissioners to reconsider their decision of December 1, 2010 in the co-adoption of the Florence Realization 2020 Comprehensive Plan. He said there were a couple of items the city of Florence asked the Board to reconsider.
Vorhes said the letter speaks for itself. He said they could consider this in the Board’s long range planning program . He added it could be one of the items working with small cities to move forward on a process that could end up with an ordinance in front of the Board to make additional changes to the Florence Realization 2020 Plan that was adopted by the Board with some language changes the city has suggested. He thought direction from this Board could be that Land Management begins moving this in a process toward consideration by the Board to look at the proposals and to make a decision on whether they want to further change the Florence Realization 2020 Comp Plan.
Bozievich believed there was merit in directing staff to work with the city on coming back to them with a revised adoption of the Florence 2020 Plan to correct the piece of language. He thought Mayor Brubaker and the city could work with outside parties to get the language correct. He explained there is a problem with the language as adopted, as it doesn’t allow for a piece of property that has no electors on it. He thought there needed to be a correction.
Vorhes didn’t think there was problem with the language, he thought it provided an opportunity for debating whether vacant land has any electors. He thought the Board could take up this subject again. He thought the cleanest way to do this is have the proposed language with a staff agenda memo to the Planning Commission first, put notice out similar to the steps they took when the Board previously adopted this; put notice out for the Planning Commission’s consideration for the proposed amendment to the plan; get the Planning Commission recommendation action and move to the Board with an order that would further amend the Realization 2020 Comp Plan to change the language that is proposed and recommended by the Planning Commission and scheduled for a hearing in front of the Board.
MOTION: to accept the letter and comments and to direct staff under the long range planning activities in the small city coordination to try to incorporate the language acceptable with all parties and propose a process and amendment.
Leiken MOVED, Bozievich SECONDED.
VOTE: 5-0.
13. COUNTY COUNSEL
a. Announcements
None.
14. COMMISSIONERS' ANNOUNCEMENTS
Stewart announced that Project Homeless Connect will be taking place at the Fairgrounds on March 17 from 9:00 a.m. to 3:00 p.m.
15. EXECUTIVE SESSION as per ORS 192.660
(Commissioners' Conference Room)
None.
16. OTHER BUSINESS
None.
There being no further business, Commissioner Stewart adjourned the meeting at 5:00 p.m.
Melissa Zimmer
Recording Secretary