3 Lane County commissioners accused of corruption

Presenter: Three Lane County commissioners are accused of blatant corruption. During public comment Oct. 20, Oakridge City Administrator James Clevenger:

James Clevenger: Hi, my name is James Clevenger. I’m the Oakridge city administrator, here today to speak on behalf of the city and the Oakridge City Council against the proposed quarry.

Last week, Oakridge City Council voted unanimously to pass resolution 15-2026, which we would like to submit in the record. I’ve already given a copy to staff. This resolution reaffirms the city’s strong opposition to the rezoning.

This is on top of five previous letters of opposition, all passed by unanimous votes, five different times from five different city councils. So 100% across the board since 2021. Your own planning commission also voted unanimously against this rezoning. Why you’re not listening. I don’t know, but I’ll speculate on that later.

This resolution also signals the city’s opposition and prohibition to using any city resources or assets to support mining on TV Butte. That includes not selling any water to them, not leasing or selling any land in the industrial park to mining operations or any businesses supporting those operations, also not allowing the use of city roads or rail lines into the industrial park to transport.

And it also authorizes me to take any necessary steps to oppose the mine.

Why you would vote for supporting this application when nobody wants it? City Council doesn’t want it. The people don’t want it. It befuddles me.

But there are approximately 250,000 reasons you might support it. And I’m referring to the campaign contributions to Commissioners Farr, Ceniga, and Loveall. And frankly, I think this is corruption in plain sight. And you should be ashamed of yourselves. And I have no idea how you sleep at night.

Commissioner Ryan Ceniga: Thank you for your public comment. All right.

Josh Laughlin: My name is Josh Laughlin. I’m the executive director of Cascadia Wildlands, testifying on behalf of our 18,000 members and supporters, a large percentage of which live in Lane County, including business owners and residents up in Oakridge and adjacent to the proposal. Thanks for the opportunity today.

I’d like to reiterate our organizational opposition to the proposal and remind you of the Lane County Planning Commission’s unanimous recommendation in July 2024 to deny rezoning for the area.

I’d like to reiterate the elected leadership of both Oakridge and Westfir, who are here today, who have repeatedly voted to oppose rezoning this area for the myriad reasons you’ve heard, including impacts to water and air quality and overall quality of life.

I’d like to reiterate, the Oakridge Westfir Area Chamber of Commerce, who opposes rezoning of TV Butte, the impacts would have on tourism and other values.

I’d like to reiterate that the last time this issue was in front of you, all the Lane County planning staff stated the application is, quote, inadequate.

I’d like to reiterate, there are unanswered questions about the abandoned hazardous landfill adjacent and impacts potential impacts to the aquifer up there that you heard about today.

You haven’t heard a ton about it today, but I’d like to reiterate: The biologists with the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife have repeatedly told the Lane County Commission that the applicant’s big game mitigation plan for the area is woefully inadequate.

And I’d like to reiterate: This process, like the Jones-McCann debacle upriver, continues to stink of cronyism and that money alone can buy Lane County Board of Commissioners’ decision that benefit the wealthy class.

Commissioner Ryan Ceniga: All right, that’s enough. We’re going to keep this respectful, please. So no clapping so we can get through all our public testimony we have today.

Guen DiGioia: I’m Guen DiGioia and I’m the city planner for the City of Oakridge. I appreciate the letter that everybody has submitted, and I want to add that other things that are happening in Oakridge.

There’s an EPA brownfield assessment. It is reviewing the known contaminants of the Oakridge Industrial Park, and we speculate that many of the same contaminants that are known in the park can be found at the old dump site, given that folks at that time period way back when, were dumping both in the landfill and at the mill.

So we want to make sure that that is known and understood.

Additionally, there is a study going on for a secondary drinking water source that would come from Salt Creek and feed into the ponds. We have unutilized surface water rights for Oakridge, and we know that our aquifers are declining. So we need to be able to access this surface water if we want to have economic growth, housing growth, basically any kind of growth.

So I believe that approving something like this is really only going to stunt the community and have lasting impacts that are not known, at least not in this area, but have been well documented in many other places.

So I urge you to consider those things when reviewing all this application. Thank you.

Sabrina Ratkowski: My name is Sabrina Ratkowski. I am an Oakridge resident. I am also the organizational director of the Save TV Butte movement and the president of the 501(c)(3) nonprofit Oakridge Strong.

I have provided each commissioner with a packet today that covers critical follow-up details submitted since the last meeting two years ago. Multiple speakers will be briefly touching on different sections of this packet during this open testimony and reading from this submission letter.

I want to begin by noting that in prior deliberations, the county stated that no formal request had been made to expand the 1,500-foot impact zone. However, I personally submitted that request in previous hearings. When a detail like that is overlooked, it creates the impression that important testimony is not being fully reviewed or is simply being ignored.

I hope the packet provided today, organized clearly by topic, will help ensure that critical information like this is not missed going forward.

With that in mind, I want to clearly and formally request that the impact zone be expanded here today because impacts to our aquifer can affect every residence or resident who relies on public water. The entire town truly should be included. But if you want a specific figure, let’s call it a 5,000-foot impact zone.

I did previously request 2,500 feet when the record was closed. That letter is included in your packets. But in light of the aquifer study, and because earlier requests were overlooked, I felt it necessary to double that figure to ensure this concern is finally taken seriously.

Meagan Metcalf: I’m Meagan Metcalf in Oakridge, Oregon.

I also want to briefly highlight the aquifer study. The DEQ email and the landfill-related materials in your packet, both the applicant and their specialist, Shannon & Wilson, omitted extremely important details regarding the seriousness of the old landfill.

Details documented by both DEQ and the city of Oakridge show the possibility of hazardous or toxic materials. The applicant had direct knowledge of this and chose not to disclose it. This omission should raise real concerns about what else could have been omitted.

This detail, along with the new aquifer study findings, is why a formal request for emergency review has been submitted to the queue. A copy of that email is included in your packets.

Also, I want to request that the record remain open as long as possible. It has been two full years since the last hearing and we all need adequate time for rebuttal. It is extremely important that vital details are no longer overlooked by this commission.

The Old Hazeldell (Quarry LLC) application relies on assumptions from 2016, but Oakridge in 2026 is not Oakridge in 2016. Tourism has become our primary economic engine. We are now nationally recognized for outdoor recreation, mountain biking, and trail systems. New businesses have moved into the industrial area.

Our population has become more medically vulnerable, due to repeated wildfire smoke seasons. Our EMS system is strained. Our fire risk is dramatically higher. Our hydrological science has changed. Our economic landscape has changed.

Our community conditions have changed, yet the application has not. The applicant has publicly stated that the application ‘has not changed since the last time it was submitted.’

Sharon McCullough: My name is Sharon McCullough, Westfir, Oregon.

To finish what Meagan was reading: This is a direct admission that the proposal does not reflect current conditions, conditions that Oregon land use law requires you to evaluate.

Tourism and Ambulance Strain: Commissioners have repeatedly acknowledged that tourism in Lane County is now a billion-dollar industry, and that Oakridge plays a major role in that success.

In the October 22, 2024 meeting, Commissioner Loveall even highlighted Oakridge as the No. 6 mountain biking trail system in the world, suggesting that recreation could someday help fund our struggling ambulance service.

But the proposed quarry directly undermines both of these realities. It threatens the recreation-based tourism that Oakridge and Westfir have spent more than a decade building, and it adds 86 gravel trucks per day to Highway 58, increasing collision risk and slowing emergency response for an EMS system that is already stretched thin.

We asked the board not to jeopardize the economic gains Oakridge brings to Lane County, and not to place our community at further risk of losing the ambulance service we depend on.

Aquifer study and landfill risks: The University of Oregon’s aquifer study shows that TV Butte is hydrologically connected to Oakridge’s shallow alluvial aquifer, the same aquifer that supplies our drinking water. This is not speculation. It is supported by conductivity data, mineral signatures, and groundwater mixing patterns.

Kelly Brewer: Kelly Brewer, Oakridge, Oregon.

Risks: The study also shows a decline in aquifer transmissivity over the last 30 years. This means our water supply is already under strain.

The old landfill, which DEQ has identified as potentially containing hazardous materials, sits directly within this flow system. No environmental characterization has ever been done, no soil sampling, no groundwater sampling, and no service surface water sampling has been done. The applicant’s consultant confirmed this lack of testing.

Blasting, excavation, and dust suppression water could mobilize contaminants stormwater diversion, but it cannot prevent infiltration. Vibration does not compact soil in a way that prevents leaching. In fact, it can increase preferential flow pathways.

This is why DEQ has asked to conduct the emergency review—the risks are real, documented, and unaddressed.

Vineyard and agricultural impacts: A new vineyard has been planted just outside the applicant’s 1,500-foot impact zone. This high-value agricultural use is sensitive to dust, vibration, airborne contaminants, and water quality. Under Goal 3 and Goal 5, the county must protect agricultural uses from significant interference.

The vineyard is now a conflicting use that must be analyzed. Dust can reduce photosynthesis and alter grape chemistry. Blasting can damage roots and trellis systems. Groundwater changes can affect irrigation and soil health.

Holly Olson: Holly Olson, Oakridge.

This vineyard did not exist when the applicant submitted their materials. It must be considered now. This alone is grounds to expand the impact zone.

Elk habitat and Goal 5 wildlife requirements: The argument that the elk can just go somewhere else is not lawful, scientific, and not supported by evidence. Elk rely on established migration routes, calving grounds, bedding areas and forage zones. These patterns are learned over generations. They cannot simply relocate without harm.

Goal 5 requires site-specific wildlife analysis. It does not allow for speculation. It does not allow assumptions, and it does not allow the county to guess where the elk might go. LUBA has repeatedly rejected that ‘they can go somewhere else’ argument.

During the first application cycle, the applicant claimed Oakridge needed the aggregate for a stadium, a project the city later confirmed never existed. When that was disproven, they shifted to saying that the Forest Service would use it. But the Forest Service already has its own aggregate supply. These early claims show a pattern of changing justifications for ‘local need.’

Kai Botak: Hi, my name is Kai Botak in Oakridge.

By the Jan. 28, 2025 deliberations, it was no longer the applicant making these claims. It was commissioners introducing new rationales the applicant never provided. Commissioner Farr changed his sustainability argument three separate times in that single meeting.

ODOT has since confirmed that Highway 58 projects do include Oakridge Sand and Gravel, as well as Coburg Rock, Knife River, Eugene Sand, and Wildish, and that different projects require different types of aggregate.

Commissioner Farr also stated that aggregate should be sourced within 30 miles. Yet Eugene and Springfield, where most demand exists, are 40-50 miles away.

The applicant’s claim of 86 gravel trucks per day—43 round trips—far exceeds any documented local demand, including ODOT’s.

These new arguments by Commissioner Farr were introduced after the record was closed when the public could not respond. That is why we have submitted follow-up documents, included in the response to Jan. 8 deliberations packet, to correct the record.

The sustainability rationale keeps changing because none of the proposed justifications fit the facts. And when the facts don’t support the need for a quarry, the arguments shift. But the impacts to Oakridge remain the same.

Impact zone expansion: The 1,500-foot impact zone is not a scientific standard. It is a placeholder from older applications. Modern hydrology, dust modeling, wildfire smoke conditions, vibration studies, wildlife science, and new land uses all show that impacts extend far beyond 1,500 feet.

A defensible impact zone is at minimum 3,000 feet, preferred distance of one mile, and the most defensible distance of two miles.

Kathy Holston:  I’m Kathy Holston, Oakridge, Oregon. To continue:

Given the aquifer study, the landfill risks, the vineyard, the impact—the wildlife impacts, and the public health vulnerabilities—a 5,000-foot zone is appropriate.

In closing, we ask the board to keep the record open. Review your packet that was submitted today. Consider the new science, the new land uses, and new environmental realities, and recognize that the application before you is outdated, incomplete, and inconsistent with Oregon’s land use requirements.

For all these reasons, we respectfully request denial or at minimum, a full remand requiring updated hydrologic, agricultural, wildlife, and environmental analysis. Thank you for your time and your consideration.

Presenter: The Oakridge city planner says approving the quarry will stunt the community, but three county commissioners vote to continue the process.