Report 19

Public Testimony: April 8 - May 2, 1992
WEST EUGENE WETLANDS SPECIAL AREA STUDY DRAFT PLAN

SUMMARY OF ISSUES AND STAFF RESPONSES

Prepared For
Eugene City Council
Lane County Board of Commissioners
May 20, 1992

------------------------------

TABLE OF CONTENTS


  1. INTRODUCTION

    1. Summary of Major Issues

  2. HOW TO USE THIS DOCUMENT

  3. INDEX TO ORAL & WRITTEN TESTIMONY

    1. Oral Testimony from April 8, 1992 Public Hearing
    2. Written Testimony Received by May 7, 1992
    3. Written Comments from May 2, 1992 Workshop

  4. SUMMARY OF COMMENTS AND STAFF RESPONSES

    1. Support for West Eugene Wetlands Draft Plan
    2. Comprehensive Wetlands Plan - State Approval
    3. Opposition to the West Eugene Wetlands Draft Plan
    4. Concerns & Questions Raised About the Draft Plan
    5. Specific Recommendations
    6. Citizen Recommendations

  5. SUMMARY OF THE MAY 2, 1992 PUBLIC WORKSHOP

ATTACHMENTS

  1. Handouts Available at the Workshop

  2. Lane Council of Governments:

    General Introduction to the Plan
    Answers to Common Questions
    What is a Wetland?
    Why are Wetlands Important?

  3. Bureau of Land Management (BLM) Brochures:

    "Questions and Answers"
    "The Acquisition Process"

  4. Department of Agriculture Handouts:

    "Before You Drain Any Farmland..."
    "Conservation in the 1990 Farm Bill"
    "General Provisions of the Food Security Act of 1985 and Food,       Agriculture, Conservation, and Trade Act of 1990"

  5. OSU Extension Service:

    "Endangered and Threatened Species: The What, Where and Why"
Previous Report Home Next Report

------------------------------

 

CHAPTER 1

INTRODUCTION

A. SUMMARY OF THE MAJOR ISSUES

There is one major issue which resulted from the elected officials joint public hearing: How should the secondary study area be treated in the West Eugene Wetlands Plan? While there are two or three minor adjustments to the draft Plan which need to be made, more than 95 percent of the comments are directed at the secondary study area and treatment of rural lands. There was positive support expressed toward the draft Plan at the Planning Commission joint hearing in May 1991. There is also support of the Plan expressed as part of this public hearing process. That support should not be lost in the concerns expressed about the secondary area. The challenge at this stage is to find a resolution to the secondary study area issues which can allow the Plan to move forward. Staff will propose a solution that should not delay adoption and implementation of this Plan unduly, and that should address the concerns expressed by the citizens in the secondary study area.

About 130 people attended an open session at Churchill High School on March 30th prior to the joint public hearing; the vast majority of them expressed concerns about the secondary study area. Twenty-seven people testified at the April 8th joint public hearing; the majority of whom spoke to secondary study area issues. About 100 people attended the May 2nd wetlands workshop at Peterson Barn; the vast majority were from the secondary study area. There were 14 comment slips filled out from the workshop; all from citizens in the secondary study area. There were 64 written comments submitted as part of the public record of the April 8th joint hearing; the majority of those dealt with secondary study area issues. That does not count form letters (10) or the mass affidavits (90).

The minutes of the April 8th hearing, the written comments from the workshop, and the written materials received by 5:00PM on May 7, 1992 are all part of the official public record of the elected officials public hearing. Staff has reviewed all these materials, has summarized points and has responded to them in this document. Additional comments received after the May 7th deadline are also included in this document, but were not summarized or responded to by staff.

There were a few additional comments made verbally at the workshop which were not included in this packet. Staff will respond to those few questions by corresponding directly with owners.

Despite staff attempts to answer questions in individual contacts, open question and answer sessions, in a letter, at the workshop, and through distribution of fact sheets, the citizens in the secondary area, as a whole, do not trust the answers or accept the draft Plan as currently crafted.

The focus of the draft Plan was the primary study area. The secondary study area was added to the Plan late in the process to provide additional areas where mitigation might take place in a connected system along the Amazon Diversion Channel, the "A" Channel, the eastern edge of Fern Ridge Reservoir, and lower Coyote Creek. Based on mapped hydric soils, elevations, flood plain maps, and the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service's National Wetland Inventory, areas which were deemed as possibly suitable for mitigation were indicated on the Concept Map, No. 4. It was intended that land acquisition funds appropriated to the Eugene District of the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) would be used to purchase lands from willing sellers to protect existing wetlands, to purchase future mitigation sites, and to provide connections along the waterway systems. The land acquisition areas were shown on Map No. 5. The whole program hinges on successful negotiations with willing sellers to provide a fair market value for the land transaction.

The major issues are summarized as follows:

The testimony and individual contacts make it clear that citizens believe that wetlands have been designated, that zoning and land use planning will be used to reduce land values or to place additional restrictions on allowed uses, that land will be devalued so it can be purchased at below market value, that wetlands willl affect normal farming or forestry pratices on adjacent lands, that some grand scheme exists for Eugene to grow into the lower Amazon region, and that wetlands will cause damage via vectors, more urbanites traveling through the rural area to Fern Ridge, or through introduction of pest weeds that would damage grass crop values.

In response to these concerns, staff developed four alternatives for treating the secondary study area. Those are presented in the cover memorandum to this report. In order to address the citizen's expressed concerns and still meet the objectives of this plan, a new approach is suggested toward the secondary area. This approach would remove specific treatment of the secondary area from Maps No. 4, 5 and 6. The Plan would be amended to make it clear that it deals with the primary study area. Any treatment of the secondary area will be moved to a new section to explain clearly the intent of the Plan and how it relates to the secondary area. That section will also explain what the Plan dos not do in the secondary area.

Copies of the index to testimony, the staff summary of issues and responses, and the workshop summary and handouts were mailed to all those who testified at the hearing or in writing. The complete document with all written comments and minutes was delivered to the City Council, the Board of Commissioners and to the Lower Amazon Basin Landowner's Association. The complete set of written testimony was not provided to each citizen. Furthermore, individual letters were sent to selected citizens who requested a direct response relative to their particular piece of property.

Table of Contents

 

CHAPTER 2

HOW TO USE THIS DOCUMENT

There are indexes of the oral, written, and written workshop testimony provided at the beginning of this document. There is also an index to the summary of issues and staff responses. Following that section is a staff summary of issues and a staff response to those issues. The issues have been organized under topics which reflect themes of the testimony. At the end of this document is a summary of the May 2nd workshop along with copies of the handouts which were available at the workshop.

Table of Contents

 

CHAPTER 3

INDEX TO ORAL AND WRITTEN TESTIMONY

A. Oral Testimony from April 8, 1992 Public Hearing

Name Oral Testimony
April 8, 1992
by page # in minutes		 Written Testimony
Cross-Reference
Ellen Wojahn 2 I
Jim Getten 2 -
Marvin Ringsdorf 3 VV, HHH75
Ruby Ringsdorf 3 N, VV, HHH76
Florence Brown 3 XX
Margaret Powell 3 G
Bob Bodine 3 -
David Bales 3 YY, HHH59
Delores Bales 3 YY, HHH60
Tom Stewart 3 D, Y, HHH89
Carol Fisher 3-4 F
Joyce Lorenz 4 E, X, CC
Robert Smith 4 H
Scott Alldridge 4 K
Doreen Jones 4-5 B
Stephen Lawn 5 -
Brian Bales 5 -
Debbie Oleson 5 HHH38
Scott Bales 5 EEE, HHH2
Sharon Keep 5-6 J, EEE, HHH74
Denise Henning 6 -
Stan Cook 6 -
Fran Gillespie 6 -
William G. Welch 6 -NN5
Jennifer Selliken 7 -
William A. Disher 7 L
Garald Derby 7 -

Table of Contents

 

B. Written Testimony Received by May 7, 1992

Index No. Name
A Robert G. Nielson, 4/13/92
B Doreen Jones, League of Women Voters, 4/8/92
C W. A. Miller, 3/21/92
D Tom Stewart, 4/8/92
E Joyce Lorenz, 4/8/92
F Carol Fisher, West Amazon Basin Landowners Assn., 4/8/92
G Margaret Powell, Thinking Inc., 4/8/92
H Robert Smith, (no date)
I Ellen Wojahn, Eugene Planning Commission, Vice-Chair, 4/8/92
J Sharon Keep, 4/8/92
K Scott AlIdridge, (no date)
L William A. Disher, 4/8/92
M Linda J. Germyn, 4/8/92
N Ruby Ringsdorf, (no date)
0 Allen Jolmson, Johnson & Kloos, Attorneys, 4/8/92
P Kenneth F. Bierly, Oregon Division of State Lands, 4/8/92
Q Elsie B. Peck, (no date)
R Samuel M. Williams, 4/8/92
S B. Brown, 1225 W. 10th #52, Junction City OR, 4/22/92
T Robert A. Wilson, 4/21/92
U Irvin L Whitt, Sr. & Connie J. Whin, 3/16/92
V Dr. & Mrs. Louis L. Schneider, 4/21/92
W Marcia Hudspeth, 4/29/92
X Joyce Lorenz, 4/22/92
Y Tom Stewart (Report on Site # B -10), (no date)
Z Pam B. Homer, Oregon Water Resources Board, 4/8/92
AA Candace & Anthony Fairchild, 4/30/92
BB Anna F. Robinson, 4/28/92
CC Joyce Loreriz, 5/4/92
DD Arthur Farley, Lane Co. Audubon Society, 5/5/92
EE Scott & Sharon Keep, 5/4/92
FF William Castillo, Oregon Dept. of Fish & Wildlife, 5/1/92
GG Raymond Rexius, 5/6/92
HH William Mexander, 5/6/92
II Russ Svingen, 5/5/92
JJ Church of God, The Eternal, 5/5/92
KK Kevin & Susan Jones, 5/1/92
LL James & Wanda Brabham, 5/1/92
MM Walter & Peggy Burgess, 5/1/92
NN1 William & Clorita Cadwalader, 4/27/92
NN2 Irene Fisher, 4/29/92
NN3 Michael Roy Roe, 4/29/92
NN4 Ethel M. Rosenbaum, 4/29/92
NN5 Bill Welch, 4/29/92
NN6 Louise & R.G. Gentry, 4/29/92
NN7 Floyd Fisher, 4/29/92
NN8 Janet Gentry Heard, 4/29/92
NN9 Marcia Hudspeth, 4/29/92
NN10 Anna L. Wobbe, 4/29/92
OO Agnes & Phil Grenon, 4/24/92
PP Art Mancl, 5/5/92
QQ Robert E. Moulton, 5/6/92
RR Scott Keep, 5/5/92
SS Stuart Barr, 4/29/92
TT Susan Rasmussen, 5/3/92
UU Gay Brown, 4/29/92
VV Marvin & Ruby Ringsdorf, 4/20/92
WW Anna J. Robinson, 4/28/92
XX Florence Brown, (received 3/24/92)
YY David & Dolores Bales, 5/4/92
AAA Richard G. Gentry, 4/30/92
BBB James C. Tapp, 5/6/92
CCC Barbara Kelly, Save Our ecoSystems, Inc. (SOS), 5/7/92
DDD Diane E. Shaw, 5/3/92
EEE Scott Bales, 5/7/92
FFF Jane Mathey, 4/26/92
GGG Wayne E. Moodie, 4/26/92
HHH Affadavits, 4/5/92:
1. David Aldridge
2. Scott Bales
3. Archie D. Brown
4. Kathleen Gay Brown
5. Ronald E. & Shirlie J. Brown
6. Glorieta Cadwalader
7. William Cadwalader
8. Barbara M. Calloway
9. Donald A.Calloway
10. Marvin Casey
11. Wendell C. Carpenter
12. Curtis Cogswell
13. Carol J. Davis
14. Richard H. Davis
15. Thomas M. Day
16. Marion I. Elliot
17. Lucille M. Fisher
18. Floyd M. Fisher
19. Irene J. Fisher
20. Roberta Fry
21. William D. Fry
22. Richard & Laura Gentry
23. Linda J. Germyn
24. Fred Germyn
25. Agnes & Philip Grenon
26. Armene Hargiss
27. Floyd Hargiss
28. Marcia Hudspeth
29. Vera Higley
30. Dale Higley
31. Lee Ann Cranford-Hill
32. Brian Hyerstal
33. Keith David Kokkeler
34. Susan M. Kokkeler
35. Betty Linnanto
36. Wayne E. Moodie
37. Gregg Oleson
38. Debbie K. Oleson
39. Jon R. Park
40. William W. Peters
41. Virginia L. Peterson
42. Anna F. Robinson
43. Michael Roy Roe
44. Robert Rookard
45. Ethel M. Rosenbaum
46. Richard A. Slocum
47. Robert L. Smith
48. Connie Whitt
49. Louella F. Wilding
50. William Thomas Wood, Jr.
51. Cecile Wood
52. Tarry R. Wood
53. Carol Schroeder
54. Donald Scheoeder
55. Gerald W. Morris
56. Perry Otis Tomlin III
57. Donald R. Cross
58. William Pyle
59. David Bales
60. Dolores Bales
61. Werner & Gertrude Bartsch
62. Bill Childers
63. Caroline Fisher
64. Family Trust - Flammang
65. Arlo Hamilton
66. Louise Hamilton
67. Leonard Harrington
68. Nancy Harrington
69. Hollis Hausler
70. G. Hausler
71. Randy & Melissa Johnson
72. Kevin Jones
73. Susan Jones
74. Scott & Sharon Keep
75. Marvin Ringsdorf
76. Ruby Ringsdorf
77. Ruth Saylor
78. Donald Schroeder
79. Donald & Anna Smith
80. James Tapp
81. Ara Tapp
82. Claus Wahnsiedler
83. Renate Wahnsiedler
84. James & Anna Wobbe
85. Ronald Bounds
86. Gary Kennedy
87. Cathy Kennedy
87. Melvin Purvis
88. Margaret Purvis
89. Thomas Stewart
III Marcia Hudspeth, 5/4/92
JJJ Elizabeth Stepp, 5/6/92
KKK Ken Bierly, DSL, 5/7/92
LLL Ken Bierly, DSL, 5/7/92

Table of Contents

 

C. Written Comments from May 2, 1992 Workshop

Index No. Name
W-1 Anonymous
W-2 Anonymous
W-3 Marcia Hudspeth
W-4 Anonymous
W-5 Larry & Iris Bingham
W-6 Michael Linick
W-7 Kathy Caley
W-8 Anonymous
W-9 Anonymous
W-lO Wayne Moodie
W-ll Alan Gillespie
W-12 Jeanne Santee
W-13 Kathleen L. Jones
W-14 Barbara Fetherston

Table of Contents

Next Page of this Report

------------------------------

Previous Report Next Report