Text Size:   A+ A- A   •   Text Only
Find     
Site Image

Meeting Minutes
February 10, 2006
OREGON LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT BOARD
 
February 10, 2006
 
Sunset Center South Conference Room
1193 Royvonne Avenue SE
Salem, Oregon  97302
 
Members Present:
Jim Figurski, Landscape Architect
Paul Kyllo, Public Member
Ron Nichols, Public Member (first meeting)
Mel Stout, Landscape Architect
Gladys I. Biglor, Vice Chair, Public Member
Tim VanWormer, Landscape Architect
 
Board Members Absent:
Andy Leisinger, Chair Landscape Architect (excused)
 
Staff Present at the Board Meeting:
Susanna Knight, Board Administrator
Kyle Martin, Assistant Attorney General, DOJ (10:45 AM to 12:00 PM)
 
Others Present during the Board Meeting:
 
 Applicants for Initial Landscape Architect Registration
(10:00 AM to 10:30 AM)
Tracy Barnett (present at 8:30 AM)
Hilary Dearborn
Jennifer Gardner
Members of Association of Professional Landscape Designers (APLD)
(1:00 PM to 1:45 PM)
Barbara Hilty
Darla McGary
Amy Whitworth
 
The meeting was called to order at 8:35 AM by Vice-Chair Gladys Biglor.  Biglor welcomed Ron Nichols as the new public member of the Board replacing Tony Nitz and asked all Board Members to introduce themselves.
           
1.  MINUTES
 
Kyllo moved to approve the minutes of the December 2, 2005, Board meeting.  Seconded and passed: Biglor, yes; Figurski, yes; Kyllo, yes; Stout, yes; VanWormer, yes.  Nichols did not vote, as he was not present for that meeting.
 
2.  ADMINISTRATIVE MATTERS
  1. Knight reported that she participated in a CLARB Region V Webcast Meeting yesterday, February 9, 2006, from 1:00PM to 2:00PM.  The meeting presented an opportunity for Region V Administrators and Board Members to discuss issues for the upcoming CLARB February Spring meeting in St. Louis.  Knight reported that the current renewal cycle is running smoothly and that staff is currently auditing each registrant file to confirm the registrant’s status.  The January newsletter was issued late, but the hope is to release the April newsletter in a more timely fashion.  The webmaster posted the meeting notice in conjunction with the meeting dates for 2006 on the web.  The newsletters will soon be posted there also.  Board minutes will also be posted on the web.  Knight reported that the Semi-Independent Board Administrator’s (SIBA) meeting was held in the Sunset Center South Conference Room January 24, 2006.  Staff from the Secretary of State Audit’s Division was present to discuss the biennial financial audit to be conducted in the next few months.  A State Library presentation updated SIBA members on the changing requirement of publication documents due to web publication.  Knight attended a state agency Legislative Coordinators met January 23, 2006, to discuss the 2007 Legislative Session.  Knight also reported that the Governor’s office appointed Ron Nichols to replace Public Member Tony Nitz and Landscape Architect David Olsen of Bend will replace Jim Figurski effective 2/13/2006.
  2.  Knight distributed a Revenue/Expense Report for the first quarter of the biennium (7/1/2005 to 12/31/2005) of the Board’s financial information.  A Travel Expense Disbursement Sheet (TEDS) and detailed information to all members for completing the TEDS was also distributed.  Knight reminded them that the 2005-07 budget included in-state travel dollars.  The TEDS should be completed after each Board meeting so that mileage costs can be reimbursed to Board members.  The Board revenue for the first quarter of the biennium exceeded expenses by $26,099.20.  A higher number of licensees renew during October, November and December so this balance will carry the budget through the upcoming low renewal months.   The bank balance is currently $65,909.35.  Knight pointed out the ongoing need for an updated computer, printer and computer programs.  The Budget figures revealed that the expenses in most categories were substantially below budget.  Additional information will be available at the next meeting as budget figures are currently being migrated to a new QuickBooks program.
 
At 9:00AM, Chair Biglor called for a recess in the Board Meeting in order to convene the Public Hearing on Fees.  The Board meeting was reconvened at 9:06 AM following the Hearing.
Knight stated that the Secretary of State’s office is bidding out the contract for the biennial financial audit of the semi-independent Boards.  The Landscape Architect audit will not be included in the bid process, as they are under an ongoing audit with the Secretary of State’s office.  Biglor inquired as to the period of time this audit covers.  The audit covers 7/1/2003 through 6/30/2005.  Part of this period of time is under the new Administrator (12/1/2004 to 6/30/2005), so the Audit’s Division will audit for those additional months with OSLAB staff.  Biglor asked that the Board write a letter to the Secretary of State’s office and request that information about any audit findings be mailed directly to Board Members.
At 9:30AM, Biglor recessed the meeting for a break.    The Board reconvened at 9:45 AM.
Knight distributed a spreadsheet of the activities surrounding the ongoing Secretary of State audit.  All invoices and payments are listed and as of 2/2/2006, the balance due to the Audits Division is $18,808.00.
3.  COMMITTEE REPORTS  
  1. Internal Affairs SubCommittee: 
Biglor reported that the committee is compiling information to respond to the findings of the Otober 2004 Joint Audit Committee.  The draft response will be included in the Board packets for the May 12, 2006, Board meeting.
  1. Licensure Review Committee:  
Van Wormer stated that the application for LA Registration by Reciprocity for Mark S. Tilbe, #589, was issued 11/21/2005.
 
Initial Application for LA Registration by Examination in Oregon:

At 10:00 AM, Vice Chair Biglor welcomed the three candidates for the Board’s Oral Interview, the final step of initial Landscape Architecture registration.  Following introductions by the Board, Hilary Dearborn, Jennifer Gardner and Tracy Barnett introduced themselves.  The candidates and Board discussed various components of continuing education.  The candidates were reminded that they must track their renewal date and keep current; should they move, they must keep their contact information current.  Protocol for stamping drawings was also discussed.  The candidates were invited to remain for the meeting and were reminded that the meetings are always open for their attendance.  Barnett stated that she enjoyed attending the meeting.  VanWormer moved to certify the three candidates as Landscape Architects in the State of Oregon.  Seconded and passed.  Biglor, yes; Figurski, yes; Kyllo, yes; Nichols, yes; Stout, yes; VanWormer, yes.  The candidates each stated before departure that they were quite happy with the service provided by the staff of the Board. 
  1. Administrative Rules Committee:
Figurski led the Board through a discussion of the current Rules under review.
 
Civil Penalty.  After reviewing an Administrative Rule model (LAC 06 01 014 ) with detailed civil penalty information, the Board agreed that the revisions previously approved were sufficient information for the Board’s Administrative Rules and that the Board should rely on the Board’s historical information to remain consistent with penalties and fines over time.
 
AAG Kyle Martin arrive at 10:45 AM.  Biglor read the following statement:

“Per ORS 192.660 (2) (f) and (L), the Oregon Landscape Architect Board will now meet in executive session to discuss information exempt by law from public inspection and to consider information obtained as part of an investigation currently underway by the Board.  Representatives of the news media and designated staff shall be allowed to attend the executive session.  All other members of the audience are asked to leave the room.  Representatives of the news media are specifically directed not to report on any of the deliberations during the executive session, except to state the general subject of the session as previously announced.  No decision will be made in executive session.  At the end of the executive session, the Board will return to open session and welcome the audience back into the room.
 
The Board then entered into Executive Session and returned to the regular session at 12:00 PM.
 
Biglor announced that before the Board break for lunch, she would like to make a special presentation.  Biglor stated that Jim Figurski led the Board through a huge job of moving the regulation of Landscape Architecture from a title act to a practice act here in Oregon.  In presenting a plaque recognizing Figurski’s service from 7/1/1994 to 2/12/2006, Biglor stated that the plaque does not begin to reflect all the work Figurski has done on behalf of the Board.  She shared early experiences they had encountered, as they were both appointed at the same time.  The Board honored Figurski with a standing ovation in appreciation of his multitude of contributions.
Following the lunch break from 12:10 PM to 12:40 PM, Biglor reconvened the meeting.
Business Section.  Additional changes to OAR 804, a new Division titled “business registration” were suggested by our AAG.  A discussion of these changes to Division 35 was held during Executive Session.  Figurski asked Board Members to provide their input to him by February 28, 2006.  He will incorporate all additional recommendations and provide a revised draft back to the Board for the May meeting.  In particular, Figurski requested that members send their definition of “business entity” to him.

The Board also discussed the Administrative Rule review process.  The following was suggested as a procedure in dealing with Administrative Rule Review:  1) the Board begins with a suggestion to look at a rule; 2) the Rules Committee drafts language with a statement of the intent for the rule change; 3) the draft revision is forwarded to the AAG for input; 4) the Rules Committee reviews the AAG input; 5) the final draft language goes to the Board for discussion, revision, and approval.
 
Examination.  The Board concurred that the information in OAR 804-020-0000, Application does not apply to LARE Sections A, B, and D.  The CLARB staff reviews and approves candidates to those sections of the LARE, as CLARB now administers those sections.  This Administrative Rule applies only to those candidates sitting for sections of the LARE administered by the Oregon Board, currently Sections C and E.  VanWormer stated that in carrying out OAR 804-010-0005, there must be a letter in the applicant file identifying the alternate way of being approved by the Board to the examination in lieu of meeting the education requirement.  Figurski stated that if someone was admitted prior to the Administrative Rule changes of December 2004, the Board must assume that an action of the Board admitted that person to the examination.
 
Selection of Board Members.  Knight asked that the Board look at the requirement in OAR 804-001-0014 which states that to be eligible for Board Membership, possible appointees must have lived in the state for five years preceding appointment.  Did this rule intend to mean they must be registered for five years before being appointed rather than living in Oregon five years before appointment?  Following the discussion, Figurski volunteered to draft a rule change for the Board.  Biglor inquired as to whether there should be a quality standard for the Public Member.  The Board concurred that standards for Public Members should be left to the Governor’s discretion.
  1. Continuing Education Committee.   
Stout distributed a report outlining information compiled since the last Board meeting.  He stated that there is still time for questions and options before the continuing education audit process begins.  Stout suggested that staff identify the group of registrants renewing in the July, August and September quarter of 2006.  All names will be placed in a hat, and those drawn out at the next Board meeting will receive a notification of audit.  Stout & Knight will draft the Audit Notification Letter and provide it to the Board for review.  If the Board audits 5% of the registrant list per year, that would be approximately 20 registrants.  Additional input about the process will be prepared for the May Board meeting.
  1. Compliance Committee:
Kyllo reported that the next step in the ongoing review of LAC#05-05-005 is a meeting with the respondent.  The Board will finalize their decision about this case following a report about the meeting with the respondent.  Knight indicated that when preparing to write a closing letter for case LACC#05-02-003, she noted that the LA on record for the business was not current with his registration.  An ongoing effort is underway to establish current registration for the LA.
4.  OLD BUSINESS
  1. The Board needs to select a member to serve as the liaison to the Landscape Contractor’s Board (LCB).  Figurski has been representing the Board.  A Stakeholder’s Meeting is scheduled for Thursday, February 23, 2006.  Vice Chair Biglor asked Stout if he would take on this responsibility on behalf of the Board.  Biglor and Leisinger discussed this prior to the meeting.  Stout agreed to serve in this capacity. [Note: Leisinger will attend the February 23, 2006 meeting, as it is in Salem.  Stout will attend the DHR Rule Hearing in Portland on February 27, 2006 regarding fountain design.
  2. Landscape Designers:  At 1:00 PM, the following three members of the Association of Professional Landscape Designers (APLD) arrived: Barbara Hilty, Board Member of APLD; Darla McGary, APLD Member; and Amy Whitworth, Legislative Advocate for APLD.  McGary stated that APLD is an advocate for both Landscape Designers and for the community.  Hilty stated that in August of 2005, APLD presented a statement to the Landscape Contractors Board (LCB) as to why they should not be registered.  LCB’s low number of disputes with regard to Landscape Designers led Oregon APLD to determine that a better way to address the “licensing” issue was through education.  The Chapters focus is now on public outreach and APLD wants to assure continued protection of the public by building and maintaining open communication between OSLAB and APLD and between LCB and APLD.  Biglor asked if there were issues or problems as the LA Board’s time is limited.  McGary stated that APLD desires to keep back and forth contact with OSLAB.  Figurski inquired if APLD was fine with the line drawn by LCB that creates an exemption after LCB has struggled during their Board’s history with regulation of designers.  Hilty offered yes, but the goal is to educate designers as to what the boundaries are and to keep designers within their scope.  APLD must correctly communicate that boundary in their education outreach.  Kyllo stated that OSLAB has policing responsibility and inquired if APLD has ideas about policing their own.  McGary stated they intend to educate on the standard of the practice but are not policing, but will take action if they see ethical issues.  Whitworth inquired as to where OSLAB sees a problem.  Figurski offered that providing a landscape concept does not cross the line into LA practice, but recommending materials and methods does cross the line.  Knight inquired if a membership roster is available for APLD Oregon.  Upon closing a compliance case, OSLAB could notify APLD of any action against their member.  Biglor stated that APLD would be added to the newsletter list.  Hilty inquired about a joint brochure with APLD, OSLAB and LCB.  VanWormer stated that anything that improves educating the constituents about the practice is valuable.  Figurski suggested looking to associations for money to work in partnership for the brochure and suggested APLD go to ASLA for this project.  If ASLA is interested in regulatory answers, then they should come to OSLAB.  Knight stated that OSLAB is a regulatory Board, not a professional organization.  Stout stated that he appreciates that the group is proactive and, given the growing number of designers, being proactive is good.
The Landscape Designer discussion ended at 1:45 PM and the three guests departed.
5.  CORRESPONDENCE
  1. LAC 05 12 367: The Board stated that refunds cannot be given when candidates fail to show.  Exams must be ordered by a cutoff date and the Board is invoiced for each of those exams.  The Board is obligated to pay for exams once they are ordered.  The Board respects that unexpected events occur, but the exams must be paid for with the money submitted by the candidates.
  2. Notice from CLARB indicates that improvements have been made in the LARE vignettes.  Beginning with the June 2006 administration of the LARE, Section C will have the same allotted time as Section E.  Fewer vignettes will be in the exams which will allow candidates time to complete a quality answer.
 
6.   NEW BUSINESS 
  1. Legislative Concepts are due by April 3, 2006.
The Internal Affairs Committee will work with Knight to evaluate the use of “delinquent” in the statute to determine if a Legislative Concept should be prepared.
 
VanWormer will review the statute that includes planners and email Knight about the issues he views as possible conflicts with respect to registration as an LA. 
  1. Stout will request additional information about the DHS, Rule Hearing on OAR 333-060.  Based on his evaluation, he will determine the need for Board representation.  Figurski will serve as a backup representative to the Hearing if Stout requests.
  2. The Board worked as a group and updated CLARB’s Request to Update Information dated 12/30/2005.  Knight will submit the document to CLARB.
  3. Chair Leisinger attended the Architect Board meeting on January 20, 2006 to inquire about a recent Architect Board Administrative Rule change.  OAR 806-010-0075 placed limitations on architectural services which could affect the working relationship with Landscape Architects.  Chair Leisinger had been contacted by registrants regarding this rule change.  The Architect Board will provide additional clarification about this rule.
  4. Figurski moved to authorize the purchase of a new computer and printer up to $2000 plus or minus $500.  Updated programs are also needed.   Seconded and passed.  Biglor, yes; Figurski, yes; Kyllo, yes; Nichols, yes; Stout, yes; VanWormer, yes.
  5. Figurski stated that if the budget outlook remains good, he would encourage the Board to fund the attendance of the Administrator at the National CLARB Meeting in September 2006.  There are many opportunities for networking and becoming more knowledgeable about the Landscape Architect profession.
  6. Biglor indicted that there is need for more than a half-time person to work with the Administrator.  Knight stated that she would work on that need with the Geology Board, as their budget funds the office staff.  She will update OSLAB as this topic is reviewed.  Biglor also indicated the need for a rainy day fund and an operating budget cushion.  These items will need to be addressed as the 2007-09 budget is developed.
 
7.  ANNOUNCEMENTS
  1. CLARB Spring Meeting, February 22-25, 2006, St. Louis, Missouri.  This is a regional meeting, but all regions meet at the same location to simplify the demand on the CLARB staff.  The Spring meeting is an education meeting; the annual meeting handles resolutions and elections.  The last annual meeting was held in September 2005 in Los Angeles.
  2. The next Board meeting is scheduled for Friday, May 12, 2006, 8:30 AM in the Conference Room of Sunset Center South.
  3. Leisinger dropped a poster by the office and asked that the Board be notified of a new PhD in Landscape Architecture degree approved by the University of Oregon.  Stout indicated that his alma mater, Kansas State, is moving away from the Bachelors degree to the Masters degree for a Landscape Architect.
  4. Biglor reminded the members to submit the TEDS form for reimbursement of the travel cost incurred in attending the meeting.  New Board Member appointment information was reported under the Administrator Report.
 
The meeting was adjourned at 3:12 PM by Vice-Chair Biglor.
 
Respectfully submitted,
Susanna Knight
 

Minutes were approved at the May 12, 2006, meeting of the Board.
May 17, 2006