Yamhill County pauses parks-code overhaul after lengthy debate over fees, smoking and weapons rules

Yamhill County commissioners completed a first reading of Ordinance 941 on Feb. 27, a proposed update to the county parks code that would revise parking and fee rules at Wheatland boat ramp and Rogers Landing, add new prohibited conduct provisions and adjust reservation and special-event fees. After extended discussion, the board took no action and directed staff to revise portions of the draft and return with a new proposal.

The board’s discussion focused on several discrete issues that staff and commissioners said need more work: the Rogers Landing launch-fee language and how it interacts with an Oregon State Marine Board maintenance grant; whether the draft’s smoking and tobacco prohibition is overbroad and enforceable; language allowing park managers or other staff to seize weapons; and a new offensive-speech/public-nuisance provision.

Why it matters: changes to the parks code would set conduct standards, civil penalties and fee structure that apply countywide to day-use facilities and reservation systems. Commissioners said they want clearer enforcement standards and to avoid unintended budget and legal consequences before adopting the ordinance.

Travis, a county parks staff member who presented the proposal, told the board the Rogers Landing launch fee is tied to a maintenance grant from the Oregon State Marine Board and that the board had previously capped launch fees to preserve grant funding. "That fee was originally set in balance with the grant dollars we would receive at that point in time," Travis said, adding the county can reopen talks with the Marine Board about fee amounts but must be careful because raising a launch fee above the cap could reduce grant payments.

Commissioner Steer pressed to remove the Rogers Landing fee schedule from the ordinance and to send fee review to the parks board for reconsideration; the draft shows Rogers Landing fees have not been changed since 02/2005. Staff offered three procedural options: keep the fee schedule in the ordinance (like the dog-control code), make it an exhibit to the code that can be updated without re-adopting the whole ordinance, or handle it as a separate county fee schedule or board order. The board agreed to pull the Rogers Landing piece and revisit whether to adopt fees by ordinance or board order.

Commissioners and staff also debated a broad prohibition drafted as "no person shall smoke or use tobacco in any form" in parks. One commissioner called the language "overbroad," citing chew, snuff and nicotine pouches; another said similar prohibitions exist in nearby agencies. Jody, a county staff member involved in drafting, said the provision and the definitions were adapted from another county with a more robust park system and that it could be narrowed. "If we're going to have our own code, we need to have our own code," a commissioner said, urging the drafters to focus on enforceable provisions and to avoid overly broad definitions.

On weapons, the draft currently said a parks manager, law enforcement officer or other authorized person "shall immediately take the weapon into possession" when issuing a citation. The board raised safety and evidentiary concerns. The sheriff and other participants said seizure and chain-of-custody for evidence should be left to sworn law enforcement; a parks manager may not be trained to secure or log weapons. Staff said they would remove the parks-manager language and consider changing "shall" to "may," and recommended instructing parks staff to call deputies when seizure is necessary.

The ordinance also includes a provision banning "obscene or indecent language or gestures in a manner which causes a public nuisance." The sheriff recommended the county can set behavior standards on its property but urged using a clearly defined, higher threshold for "public nuisance"—for example, conduct that creates a reasonable fear for safety—so that enforcement does not run into constitutional or evidentiary problems.

Commissioners asked for clarity around penalties and enforcement: exclusions (temporary bans from park use) are in addition to monetary fines under section 9; staff noted that when conduct rises to criminal levels (for example, boats illegally dumped near waterways), existing state criminal statutes may provide stronger enforcement and higher fines (the sheriff’s office noted a misdemeanor for offensive littering near waterways can carry a maximum fine of $6,250).

Next steps: the board completed a first reading but took no action; members instructed staff to redraft the tobacco and prohibited-conduct sections, remove the Rogers Landing fee piece for separate consideration, and return with a revised ordinance. Staff said they would consult further with the Oregon State Marine Board on Rogers Landing fee caps and report back to the parks board.

The discussion ran through multiple commissioners and staff members and ended with the chair confirming "No action on this one"; staff were asked to allow more time for revisions before a return to the board.

Ending: The board kept the ordinance pending further revision and did not schedule a second reading or vote at that meeting.