Laserfiche WebLink
<br />The commissioners are not locally elected; <br />? <br /> <br />The process may be slower or more expensive; <br />? <br /> <br />There is little flexibility in their decisions due to their criteria; <br />? <br /> <br />They are strict defenders of the adopted comprehensive plans; <br />? <br /> <br />They are opposed by special districts; and <br />? <br /> <br />The rest of the state gets by without them. <br />? <br /> <br /> <br />The City of Eugene has a history of defending the Lane County Local Government Boundary <br />Commission at the legislature for the following reasons: <br /> <br />The commission provides an impartial non-City/non-County forum for controversial issues, such <br />? <br /> <br />as street annexations and the formation of special districts; <br />Staff believes the commission operates more efficiently than would be possible if the City <br />? <br /> <br />assumed its operations; <br />State law governing non-boundary commission annexations does not allow annexations that are <br />? <br /> <br />not contiguous to the main body of the city limits, which would restrict development, especially <br />in the River Road and Santa Clara areas, or require major revisions to the Metro Plan; <br />If the commission were abolished: <br />? <br /> <br /> <br />-Many duties (e.g., minor boundary changes) would fall to the City, which has resource <br />implications for the City; <br /> <br />-Other duties (e.g., major boundary changes) will be transferred to Lane County, such as <br />the formation/dissolution of special districts; and <br /> <br />-Annexations of properties would require public hearings before the Planning Commission <br />and City Council, which has scheduling implications for both bodies. <br /> <br />A memorandum that outlines the division of duties should the Boundary Commission be abolished is <br />included as Attachment C. <br /> <br />Senate Bill 417 <br />SB 417 was introduced by State Senator Vicki Walker and Representatives Phil Barnhart and Chris <br />Edwards. It would abolish the Lane County Local Government Boundary Commission. There would be <br />no transition period. All records would transfer to the State Archivist. Any remaining state moneys <br />authorized to be expended by the Boundary Commission for the biennium beginning July 1, 2007, will <br />be transferred to Lane County for “equitable distribution to local governments” for paying the costs <br />associated with future boundary changes, including County expenses. <br /> <br /> <br />Representative Edwards addressed the Boundary Commission at its regular meeting on February 1, <br />2007. He said that he was not opposed to specific annexation requests, but he felt that the whole system <br />of annexation in River Road and Santa Clara needed to be fixed, and that was the intention behind SB <br />417. Based on this and other statements made by candidates during the recent elections, staff believes <br />that there is substantial momentum towards abolishing the Boundary Commission in the current <br />legislature. Therefore, it would likely take significant effort to retain the Boundary Commission should <br />the City Council decide to oppose SB 417 and similar bills. <br /> <br /> <br />RELATED CITY POLICIES <br />In the past, the City Council had a legislative policy to support the Boundary Commission. This year the <br />council refrained from adopting any policy until after this work session. <br /> L:\CMO\2007 Council Agendas\M070214\S070214B.doc <br />