Item 2A - Minutes Approval - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Ms. Ballew asked how the Emerald Peoples Utility District court action regarding service to the area now served by Pacific Gas & Electric affected the proposals before the elected officials. Ms. Heinkel said that staff was aware of the action and would respond to the question in writing after more research. Responding to a question from Ms. Fitch regarding the staff recommendation to insert the objectives, Ms. Heinkel said the planning commissions had not reviewed the change. The staff recommendation to include the objectives was based on legal advice from Lane County's counsel that they provided legislative intent. Mr. Kelly referred to the Energy Section in the Metro Plan and asked why Policy J1, which recommended the coordinated development of a detailed metropolitan energy management plan, was proposed to struck. He thought the exercise would be a valuable one. Ms. Heinkel noted the change was included in the housekeeping items and explained that the effort had been attempted but abandoned due to a lack of interest. Mr. Kelly expressed interest in knowing the opinions of others as he thought the idea had merit. Mr. Kelly asked why the Willamette Greenway study was dropped. Ms. Heinkel said the State legislature passed Senate Bill 920, which set out the mandated periodic work task items and gave local jurisdictions the opportunity to stop work on nonmandated items. The study was in draft form but the work item was removed from the work plan because it was not mandated. The continuation of the study was a separate question from periodic review. In response to a question from Mr. Kelly regarding the elimination of Forest Policy 17 from Exhibit B and where its intent was captured, Ms. Heinkel agreed to follow-up in writing. Mr. Pap~ referred to page II-A-2 of the packet and asked Eugene staff to respond in writing as to whether Policy 6 had constituted the basis for the Lane County Local Government Boundary Commission's recent denial of Springfield' s annexation to the Willakenzie Fire District. Ms. Fitch asked if staff had considered, through the housekeeping changes, developing a clear diagram amendment process in a manner that protected the home rule rights of each jurisdiction. Ms. Heinkel indicated that an early periodic work task had streamlined the process outlined in Chapter 4 but she agreed more work was needed. She thought the effort went beyond housekeeping, and could be a work program item that staff could scope for the elected officials. Responding to a follow-up question from Ms. Fitch, Ms. Heinkel said that periodic review was mandated, and the State-mandated work tasks were outlined in Senate Bill 920. None of the mandated work tasks addressed Ms. Fitch's concerns. Mayor Torrey suggested that none was a good time to get certainty around the question asked by Ms. Fitch. He thought the elected officials should deal with the issue if they could. Ms. Morrison expressed hope that the elected officials would not have to revisit some of the residential lands studies as a result of the statement in II-A-2 regarding population decreases. Ms. Heinkel assured her it did not result in that. She said the number referred to by Ms. Morrison was a clarification of the previous population figure, which was for a study area and did not relate to the urban growth boundary. Mr. Kelly agreed with Mayor Torrey that clarity about such processes were needed. He noted that Eugene had also discussed the potential formation of service districts. He was interested in focusing on the task before the elected officials as he thought the item would require both money and additional effort. MINUTES--Joint Elected Officials February 10, 2004 Page 3 Lane County, Eugene, and Springfield