|Oregon Landscape Architect Board
November 17, 2006
Sunset Center South Conference Room
1193 Royvonne Avenue SE, Salem, Oregon 97302
Members Present: Gladys Biglor, Public Member (departed at 2:30 PM)
Paul Kyllo, Public Member (arrived at 1:30 PM)
Andrew Leisinger, Vice-Chair, Landscape Architect
Ron Nichols, Public Member, Treasurer
David Olsen, Landscape Architect
Mel Stout, Landscape Architect
Members Absent: Timothy Van Wormer, Chair, Landscape Architect
Staff Present: Susanna Knight, Administrator
Lunch Guests Present: Hal Beigley, LA , Former Board Member
Jim Figurski, LA, Former Board Member
Vice-Chair Leisingercalled the meeting to order at 9:00 AM. Leisinger reported that he attended the ASLA meeting on Tuesday evening to update that organization on the work of the Board and he attended the Joint Legislative Audit Committee (JLAC) meeting on November 16, 2006. He was able to update JLAC on the current status of the Board administration compared to the JLAC meeting in October 2004.
1. Meeting Minutes: Biglor moved to accept the August 4, 2006, Board meeting minutes as presented. Olsen shared that he appreciated the completeness of the minutes and noted that the Board covered much ground in a short period (Olsen was absent from the meeting.). Knight asked the Board to provide input if they wish to see changes in the minutes. The motion was seconded and passed: Biglor, yes; Leisinger, yes; Nichols, yes; Stout, yes.
2. ADMINISTRATIVE MATTERS:
1. Knight reported that since the last Board meeting, work has been facilitated with each committee chair. Their updates will occur during committee reports. The October newsletter was released late in the month and included an article from the Continuing Education Committee. Stout stated it was good to see letters being mailed to non-registered individuals using the title Landscape Architect. Stout also recommended that staff request to be on the newsletter mailing list for Washington and California.
2. All Board property has now been tagged and a current log prepared.
3. A new email address with the State of Oregon has been established: firstname.lastname@example.org.
4. Volunteer webmaster Jane Feinberg has asked to be released due to many other obligations. Staff will be locating her replacement.
5. The office will be closed on November 23 & 24 for the Thanksgiving holiday.
1. Balance Sheet: Knight distributed a Balance Sheet as of October 31, 2006, revealing that the current asset balance is $184,774.61.
Budget Update 2005-07 Biennium:
2. Current Biennium Revenue & Expense Report through October 31, 2006: Knight stated that this report of financial activities through the first sixteen months of the biennium reveals that the Board has a net income of $31,789.79.
3. Biennial Revenue & Expense Budget vs. Actual: Knight directed the Board to the report which lists the budgeted amounts for the 2005-07 biennium and the actual expense charges to date broken out by year. This report format was first presented at the August meeting. Olsen requested that a column be added to the future 2007-09 report indicating total amount spent in 2005-07. This would give the Board a relationship point from one biennium to the next. Biglor stated that increases would be revealed to determine if they were authorized or not by the Board.
The Board inquired about any issues that may have arisen since the last meeting. Knight indicated that the sole proprietors continue to take issue with the dual registering of both their LA registration and a business registration. Stout inquired whether the Board was looking at reducing fees. Knight indicated that the 2007-09 draft budget would be under review at the February Board meeting and that would be the time to determine what direction fees should take. Additional discussion followed:
a. Biglor stated that we can finally look at the future: where are we most vulnerable; we need to see the big picture before lowering fees; if we have a buffer, we do not have to raise fees later.
b. Olsen indicated that Washington just reduced fees.
c. Stout informed the Board that fees are based on registration and Washington has tons of new members and are generating many dollars.
Business Registration Update: Knight reported that as staff identifes unregistered businesses, they are informed of the registration requirement. The following fifteen new business registrations have been added since the last Board meeting:
1. Viridian L220 08/08/2006
2. EDAW, Inc. – Sacramento L221 08/11/2006
3. 2.Ink Studio, PC L222 08/11/2006
4. EDAW, Inc. – Seattle L223 08/11/2006
5. John Weber – Landscape Architect L224 08/21/2006
6. IREX, LA, Inc. L225 08/22/2006
7. John Rosenberger L226 08/22/2006
8. Galbraith & Associates L227 08/22/2006
9. HNTB Corp. L228 09/13/2006
10. Walker Macy, LLC L229 09/13/2006
11. CLC Associates, Inc. L230 09/27/2006
12. Sterling Design Associates L231 09/27/2006
13. Harper Houf Peterson Righellis, Inc. -Bend L232 10/11/2006
14. Harper Houf Peterson Righellis, Inc. – Portland L233 10/11/2006
15. Garland Nursery L234 10/23/2006
Emeritus Update: Knight reported that no Emeritus requests were processed since the last Board meeting.
1. James W. Coker, RLA 278
Inactive Registrants Update: Knight reported that the following two requests for inactive registration were processed:
2. Atsuko Tokunaga, RLA 307
3. COMMITTEE REPORTS A. INTERNAL AFFAIRS SUB-COMMITTEE: Biglor reported that she has been researching the investment opportunities for the Board and noted that she is willing to continue working with this even though today is her last day as a Board Member. Leisinger is also serving on the Investment Committee and reported that he had made contacts in the Salem area. Knight reminded the Board that the current bank balance is pushing the amount of the current COP (Certificate of Participation) so it is important that some funds be moved to another investment fund. Nichols moved that Biglor be assigned as an advisory member of the Investment Committee. Biglor stated that she would be willing to do this as she would like to bring this task to completion. Seconded and passed. Biglor, yes; Leisinger, yes; Nichols, yes; Olsen, yes; Stout, yes.
B. LICENSURE REVIEW COMMITTEE:
1. Initial Registration by Examination
a. Leisinger welcomed Justine Lovinger to the Board meeting for an oral interview and stated that the purpose of the Board is to protect the citizens of this state through the regulation of landscape architecture. He stated that the Board is empowered to revoke a license. Ms. Lovinger shared that she completed her BLA at the University of Oregon and her MLA at Harvard University and currently works with her father in Eugene, Oregon. The Board inquired as to the time between her degree and her license. Ms. Lovinger stated that she has been working with her father and often outside the country. She shared that there is a physical reality to the work of a landscape architect and citizens should expect safety from the product produced. She indicated that a landscape architect may choose not to accept a work opportunity due to concerns with the final project. Biglor moved to approve Justine Lovinger for registration as a landscape architect in Oregon. Seconded and passed. Biglor, yes; Leisinger, yes; Nichols, yes; Olsen, yes; Stout, yes. Ms. Lovinger agreed to serve on the Board’s Administrative Rules Committee.
b. The Board discussed the request of John Clifford to consider his application file for registration in Oregon as a landscape architect. Having reviewed all of Clifford’s application documents, Biglor moved to 1) accept Timothy VanWormer’s recommendation to approve Clifford for registration and 2) appoint a Board Member to hold an oral interview so registration can occur prior to the next meeting. Seconded. Stout stated that he would have questioned numerous items in this application before approving the candidate to the examination. The Board discussed the equivalent degree concept and concurred that applicants without a LAAB degree must be brought to the Board for approval before they sit for the examination. Biglor stated that Clifford’s file was evidently approved by the 1997 administrator who was a very thorough individual. Part one of the motion passed: Biglor, yes; Leisinger, yes; Nichols, yes; Olsen, yes; Stout, yes. Part two of the motion passed: Biglor, yes; Leisinger, yes; Nichols, yes; Olsen, yes; Stout, yes. The Board appointed VanWormer to hold an oral interview as the last step in registration. When staff is notified by VanWormer that the oral interview is complete, the registration number may be assigned.
c. The Board discussed VanWormer’s review of the application file of Sarah Whitney. Biglor pointed out that the candidate has an accredited degree and has passed all sections of the examination. However, Biglor was concerned about the failure of the applicant to provide confirmation of direct supervision by a Registered Landscape Architect and that the applicant has not even met the one year minimum supervised experience as required by statute. Olsen stated that Ms. Whitney basically functioned as a landscape architect by contracting for environmental landscape architect projects which is in violation of the Board’s statute. Biglor questioned if the work completed for the City of Eugene was as a landscape architect. Biglor moved to accept the Licensure Review Committee’s definition and understanding of “under direct supervision” and deny Sarah Whitney’s request for licensure. Seconded. Additional discussion was held. Stout is frustrated that people can take the exam when they fail to meet the requirements. Perhaps the Board needs to consider an experience requirement prior to sitting for the Site Design and the Grading and Drainage sections of the LARE. This would prevent a candidate from sitting for those sections without supervised experience under a landscape architect and would prevent future applications such as this one. The motion passed: Biglor, yes; Leisinger, yes; Nichols, yes; Olsen, yes; Stout, yes.
Leisinger excused the Board for a ten minute break (11:00AM to 11:10 AM).
2. Staff directed the Board to Appendix I where the following names of individuals approved by Van Wormer for LA registration by reciprocity since the last Board meeting are listed:
a. Huang, Anyi LA 604 07/24/2006
b. Enroth, Douglas LA 605 08/10/2006
c. Spencer, Jonathan LA 606 08/19/2006
d. Anderson, Jason LA 607 09/23/2006
e. Stock, Jennifer LA 608 09/28/2006
f. Dunlap, Ivy LA 609 10/18/2006
g. Person, Jeremy LA 610 10/22/2006
Olsen raised a question about the approval process by reciprocity having been informed of this during the Governor’s recent new Board Member orientation. Since the Public Meeting Law must be envoked when committees meet to compile recommendations for a Board, how can an individual make decisions outside of a public meeting? The Board directed staff to contact the Board’s Assistant Attorney General and request that he address this concern at the next Board meeting.
4. ADMINISTRATIVE RULES COMMITTEE: Staff shared with Nichols that they have had numerous inquiries about the requirements for emeritus status so he has conducted some research since the last meeting. The Board has also been asked to consider defining conceptual drawings and construction documents. Nichols stated that he met with staff on August 16 to discuss the rules about Registration and Examination.
· Nichols referred the Board to the handout with information about the emeritus title. He suggested that there should be a cutoff age for emeritus and there should be a minimum number of years of landscape architecture practice. Additional discussion about this title followed. Olsen said that the title is bequeathed because someone did something of recognition. Biglor suggested that it honored someone when they left the profession. Nichols stated that he sees it as a stage in life when there are not many other career choices out there, but stipulated that he is prejudiced from his time spent on an academic campus. Stout moved to accept the following criteria as appropriate for an emeritus title: 1) LA has been registered for a minimum of 20 years; 2) the LA is at least 60 years of age; and 3) the LA is retiring from practice. Seconded. Additional discussion ensued. The Board concurred that an applicant is paying to use the title Emeritus Landscape Architect, with no reference to Registered Landscape Architect, as the emeritus cannot practice unless actively registered. Knight stated that there must now be a rule revision to incorporate the emeritus criteria as approved into the definition section. Motion passed. Biglor, yes; Leisinger, yes; Nichols, yes; Olsen, yes; Stout, yes.
Leisinger recessed the Board for lunch at 12:00 PM and stated that today is a day to honor Gladys Biglor for her over twelve years of service to the Board. Joining the Board to celebrate Biglor’s tenure were former Board Members Jim Figurski and Hal Beighley. During lunch, members reminisced about their time and reflected on the journey of the past two years while the fraud audit was conducted. Leisinger presented a plaque to Biglor with the following inscription:
Gladys Biglor, Public Member
Oregon State Landscape Architect Board
In grateful appreciation
For your twelve years and more of faithful service as a member of the Board. and
Your recognition of the responsibility to represent the public citizens of this state;
Your punctuality and faithful presence even with the lengthy distance to travel;
Your thoroughness and “stick-to-it-ness”;
Your attention to detail;
And your assistance above and beyond the call of duty
November 17, 2006
Leisinger reconvened the meeting at 1:10 PM.
· Nichols referred the Board to the draft definitions of conceptual drawings and construction documents. The question is whether defining such terms in the Administrative Rules might help the practice questions that arise. Nichols stated that one Rules Committee member is opposed to defining these terms.
· Nichols directed the Board to the following three rule revisions as presented in the meeting packet: 1) OAR 804, Division 10, Examination Qualifications; 2) OAR 804, Division 15, Registration; and 3) OAR 804, Division 20, Examination Procedures. Discussion centered around the need for supervised experience by a landscape architect before sitting for the LARE Section C, Site Design and Section E, Grading & Drainage. The drafted rules need to be revised to include such a requirement. Following review by the Rules Committee, the rules will come before the Board. The Board also directed staff to contact CLARB via letter and inquire as to admittance procedures for the three on-line exams. The correspondence should be copied to Jim Figurski, President of CLARB; all other CLARB member states; and to the Oregon Board members.
NOTE: Kyllo arrived at the meeting at 1:30 PM.
5. CONTINUING EDUCATION COMMITTEE: Chair Stout distributed a report titled: Audit Report for Those Whose Registration Will Expire in September, October, November and December, 2006. The report informed the Board that the committee met on October 6, 2006, via teleconference. Because the committee would like to be in a decision making mode, future meetings must be noticed. The committee also requests that supporting documents be numbered and tied to activities listed on the log. Ongoing information in the newsletter as well as on the web can assist those being audited.
Stout moved that the Board accept the audit materials of three of the seven candidates and approve the remaining four upon receipt of the requested back-up documentation for support of continuing education units submitted to the Board through the audit process. Seconded and passed: Biglor, yes; Kyllo, yes; Leisinger, yes; Nichols, yes; Olsen, yes; Stout, yes.
Kyllo was appointed to the Continuing Education Committee to replace outgoing Board and Continuing Education Committee member Biglor.
NOTE: Biglor departed for the drive back to Bend. The Board members thanked her again for her many contributions to the Board.
6. COMPLIANCE COMMITTEE: Kyllo referred members to the written report which he distributed.
A case will be opened to notice an Idaho resident about registration requirements for practicing in Oregon. Action will be taken after a response is received.
If any Board Member is contacted by the respondent’s attorney for LACC#05-05-005, they are not to talk with him but rather refer him to the Administrator or to the Board’s Assistant Attorney General. The respondent was noticed for a $5500 fine and the Board is awaiting a response.
Kyllo stated that numerous cases on the distributed list do not have a closed date, as the final letter has not been issued. Kyllo stated that he has been remiss in following up with the Board Administrator in seeing that the letters were issued in a timely fashion.
Stout inquired as to how LACC#06-04-001 was closed. Kyllo indicated that the technical review found no violation, so the case will be closed. Information will be shared with the Landscape Contractor’s Board.
Stout indicated that the California newsletter reports compliance cases. He recommended that staff take a look at their newsletter on the web.
7. OLD BUSINESS
A. Practice questions were raised in correspondence LAC 06 07 164 presented at the August Board meeting which arrived to late for discussion. Board Member Stout has now drafted responses to the questions in that document. Critical to the regulation of the practice of landscape architecture is that non-registered individuals may prepare planting plans and conceptual plans but cannot prepare construction detail. Associated grading plans, details describing installation requirements, drainage structure design, written specifications, and other instruments of construction documents need to be prepared and stamped by a licensed professional (architect, engineer, landscape architect) or be prepared and installed by a licensed landscape contractor.
Knight will discuss this concern with Administrator Snyder of the Landscape Contractor’s Board and provide a written response to the individual.
B. Investment Decisions: Kyllo moved that the Chair, Vice-Chair and Treasurer be empowered to make and implement investment decisions before the next meeting. Seconded and passed. Kyllo, yes; Leisinger, yes; Nichols, yes; Olsen, yes; Stout, yes.
The Budget Committee for 2007-09 will include the Treasurer Nichols and Chair VanWormer.
C. Construction Documents: The Rules Committee needs to research the definition of construction documents from other professionals’ rules, such as the architects and engineers. Are these terms covered there so that they do not have to be addressed in the landscape architect regulation? VanWormer drafted a definition and Stout drafted statements of clarification. Both of these need to be reviewed by the Rules Committee Chair Nichols and the Compliance Committee Chair Kyllo to determine if they meet the need for the enforcement side of the landscape architect statute. The Rules Committee needs to draft a definition for the Board’s review.
D. Exam Proctor Volunteers: Olsen will serve as the proctor for the LARE, Section C on December 4, 2006. Van Wormer will serve as proctor for the LARE, Section E on December 5, 2006. Exams will be conducted at Chemeketa Community College, Salem, Oregon.
A. Request to Approve Continuing Education Offering: Kyllo stated that the Board made it clear during the development of the continuing education Rules that the Board would not be approving courses for credit. Such questions should be referred to ASLA, Oregon. If the course is AIA accredited, it has met the standard. Staff will refer this document to ASLA Oregon.
B. Confusion over Administrative Rule: An out of state individual is seeking clarification of the requirements for admittance to the exam site in Oregon. Staff should provide the following information: applicant must have an accredited degree; registration requires experience under a registered Landscape Architect; and the Board is revising the rules so that a minimum of two years under an LA will be required to sit for Section C and E of the LARE in Oregon.
9. New Business
A. The Board reviewed a draft letter addressed to all Landscape Architect businesses. The intent of the letter is to place businesses on notice about the requirement for registration for any individual practicing landscape architect in their office. Leisinger stated that ASLA Eugene was present at the ASLA Portland meeting on Tuesday and did hear his presentation about businesses and registration. Stout stated that such a letter would help spread the word. The Board concurred that such a letter should be issued.
B. The Board discussed the October 24, 2006, email correspondence from CLARB President Jim Figurski alerting the state regulatory Boards about a company established by a former CLARB employee for prepping examination candidates for the LARE. Following considerable discussion, the Board confirmed that it is time for CLARB to focus on exam development and exam security. Nichols moved that the Board issue a letter to CLARB stating Oregon’s position about focusing on exam development and exam security. Seconded and passed. Kyllo, yes; Leisinger, yes; Nichols, yes; Olsen, yes; Stout, yes. Staff suggested that the Board review the CLARB contract at the next Board meeting.
A. The Board discussed dates for the 2007 meetings and set the calendar as follows: February 9, 2007; May 11, 2007; August 10, 2007; and November 16, 2007. These are all Friday dates and the group concurred that they wished to maintain a Friday meeting date.
B. The LARE exams will be administered by the Board on December 4 & 5, 2006, here in Salem. Volunteers have stepped forward (See 7.D.).
B. The Compliance Committee drew names for the upcoming Continuing Education audit. Names were selected for the months of January through June. This will allow audit names to be selected for the July, August, and September renewal months during the February meeting. Since the audit must be completed before the renewal month comes to a close, it becomes more difficult to close the audit by the renewal date if additional information is required. Staff will work with Stout to develop a plan for convening the Continuing Education Committee on a scheduled basis.
11. ADJOURNMENT: Kyllo moved to adjourn the meeting. Seconded and passed. Kyllo, yes; Leisinger, yes; Nichols, yes; Olsen, yes; Stout, yes. Chair Leisinger adjourned the meeting at 3:35 PM.
Note: Van Wormer was out of the country on holiday.
Susanna Knight, Administrator
Minutes here presented were approved at the February 9, 2007, meeting of the Board.
Susanna R. Knight, Administrator
February 15, 2007