CC Minutes - 04/19/05 JEO - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Howe stated the proposed amendment does not weaken the position of Eugene and Springfield relative to other growth management policies or their ability to annex land or control the proliferation of other growth inducing special districts. He noted that most of the public safety services are mandated by statute and the cities do not provide the contemplated public safety services. He said the County is already providing these services in the Eugene Springfield metro area. He indicated the applicable land use criteria for decision on the proposed amendment is that it is consistent with the statewide goals and it will not create an internal inconsistency within the Metro Plan. Howe said the Planning Commissions conducted their public hearings on February 1, had separate deliberations and all Planning Commissions recommended approval, adding that it was consistent with the criteria for the Metro Plan amendment. He noted they had three areas of concern: the "not withstanding exception" language, a single countywide district and with the language of the list of services that would be included. He added it was specifically the language "including but not limited to." He noted the packet materials contain four alternatives that increase in their restrictiveness. Commissioner Anna Morrison opened up the Public Hearing for Lane County. Mayor Kitty Piercy opened up the Public Hearing for the Eugene City Council. Councilor John Woodward opened up the Public Hearing for the Springfield City Council. Bettman commented that the two criteria they are making their decision on for the Metro Plan amendment is that it is consistent with the state goals and that it is internally consistent with the Metro Plan. She said they should be hearing testimony that has to do with state land use goals, the policies in the Metro Plan, the amendment in front of them and all of the land use issues. She noted it is a discrete piece they are considering. Sorenson asked if it was consistent with state goals to create a public safety district within urban growth areas within the State of Oregon. Howe responded that the statewide planning policies are silent on that issue. Green suggested discussing what services are being noted in the special district. He was willing to narrow the focus down to a land use issue. Bill Van Vactor, County Administrator, recalled that in 1982 when they were drafting the language in the Metro Plan, one of the major concerns when the Metro Plan was being worked on, and acknowledged was the unincorporated population of River Road and Santa Clara. He said there was a concern in the community at that time the citizens in that area could form special districts and obtain urban levels of service outside the cities. He said the net effect would encourage growth on the edge of the Metro Plan and violate the compact urban growth policies. He said that is why there is restrictive language in Policy 15 about district formation. He added in 1982 local governments had the option of Page 2 - Joint Elected Officials Meeting - 7:00 p.m. - April 19, 2005 WD bc/m/05043/m