My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Testimony and Legal Arguments by 7-9-18 (updated 7-11-18)
>
OnTrack
>
WG
>
2018
>
WG 18-3
>
Testimony and Legal Arguments by 7-9-18 (updated 7-11-18)
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/11/2018 3:06:37 PM
Creation date
7/11/2018 3:06:09 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
PDD_Planning_Development
File Type
WG
File Year
18
File Sequence Number
3
Application Name
Lombard Apartments
Document Type
Public Testimony
Document_Date
7/9/2018
External View
Yes
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
198
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
In an April 13 guest viewpoint, I said that Lane County is not complying <br />with Goal 1. I submitted testimony to the Board of County <br />Commissioners substantiating this claim for the board’s April 19 review <br />of the Planning Commission’s annual report. I now intend to provide <br />feedback on the presentation made by the manager of the Lane <br />Management Division and two members of the Planning Commission, <br />and the Board of Commissioners’ response. I believe this will illustrate <br />the status of Lane County’s position on citizen involvement. <br />The Lane County code (Order 97-10-21-2) requires an annual plan from <br />the Planning Commission, which also serves as the Citizen Involvement <br />Committee. The plan must “provide an analysis on how well the <br />community’s needs are being met” and “provide a report on citizen <br />participation and suggestions for improvement.” <br />To comply with Oregon administrative rule 660-015-000(1), Lane <br />County must ensure that “adequate human, financial and informational <br />resources shall be allocated for the citizen involvement program.” The <br />annual plan presented on April 19, like those of past years, did not <br />present an analysis, suggestions for improvement or the resources <br />allocated for the citizen involvement program. Even though I submitted <br />testimony to the board in advance, it didn’t even bring up these lawful <br />criteria. <br />Here are some statements about citizen involvement taken from the 27- <br />minute presentation to the board that I believe act as roadblocks to <br />achieving citizen involvement in Lane County: <br />“Public participation is important to us. When we have big projects, we <br />take the time to do outreach.” This sentiment is to be applauded, but it is <br />insufficient. Such sentiments do not take the place of the annual plan of <br />Citizen Involvement Committee. <br />“Our website is fairly robust and includes public meeting agendas, <br />schedules and minutes.” Currently, the Board of County Commissioners <br />and advisory committee calendar of scheduled meetings shows no Lane <br />County Planning Commission meeting for the remainder of 2016. <br />“We could do more if resources were available.” The law requires that <br />adequate resources be allocated for citizen involvement. The amount of <br />2 <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.