1990-36804-Minutes for Meeting November 14,1990 Recorded 12/7/19901443
9~-36804
MINUTES ;J. 0FILIAE0
ew
INII
r DESCHUTES COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS !_5
November 14, 1990
mow'
Chair, -Throop convened the meeting as the Governing Body for the
Deschutes County Extension and 4-H Service District. Board members
in attendance were Dick Maudlin, Tom Throop and Lois Bristow
Prante. Also present was Rick Isham, County Legal Counsel.
1. RESOLUTION 90-104 TRANSFERRING APPROPRIATIONS
Before the Board was signature of Resolution 90-104
transferring appropriations within the Deschutes County
Extension and 4-H Service District Budget.
PRANTE: Move signature.
MAUDLIN: Second.
VOTE: PRANTE: YES
THROOP: YES
MAUDLIN: YES
There being no further business to come before this body, the
meeting was adjourned.
Chair Throop convened the meeting of the Deschutes County Board of
Commissioners. Board members in attendance were Dick Maudlin, Tom
Throop and Lois Bristow Prante. Also present were: Kevin
Harrison, Planner; Rick Isham, County Counsel; Lauren Lezell,
Planner; Mike Burton, COIC; and Mike Maier, County Administrator.
2. CONSENT AGENDA
Consent agenda items before the Board were: #1, signature of
Order 90-159 ordering Twin Bridges Road to be surveyed by the
Public Works Department; #2, signature of Order 90-162
correcting LID Assessment for Cheyenne Road and Comanche Lane
LID; #3, signature of Order 90-161 completing transfer of
County road to City of Bend; #4, signature of Resolution 90-
102 amending Snow and Ice Plan; #5, signature of Department
of Public Works Alcohol and Drug Safety Policies and
Procedures; #6, signature of Declaration of Dedication for 30
feet of right-of-way on portion of Rickard Road; #7, signature
of plan for proposed bridge on Yew Avenue for new interchange
on Highway 97 south of Redmond; #8, chair signature of
Intergovernmental Agreement between Deschutes County, the
Oregon Traffic Safety Commission, and the Judicial Department;
#9, chair signature of October reimbursement from CSD for
l'uputcHFU,
PAGE 1 MINUTES: 11-14-90
'SEC 10 1990
105 - 1444
Mental Health Therapist, Public Health Nurse, and Volunteer
Coordinator; #10, approval of Amendment #19 to the 1989-91
Mental Health Intergovernmental Agreement; #11, signature of
Order 90-152 changing a portion of Barr Road to Becker Road;
#12, chair signature of contract with Public Financial
Management Inc. transferring paying agent to new trustee; #13,
approval of waiver of building permit fees for Four Rivers
Vector Control District; #14, signature of Tax Refund Order
90-160; #15, signature of Development Agreement for a
landscape management plan with Raymond Krulic; #16, signature
of Order 90-163 transferring cash within various funds of the
budget; and #17, signature of Resolution 90-103 transferring
appropriations within various funds of the budget.
Rick Isham said there had been some last minute changes in the
Ice and Snow Plan on pages 12, 13 and 18 indicating that the
County's response would be based upon the availability of
personnel and equipment.
PRANTE: Move consent agenda with amendment on Snow and Ice
Plan.
MAUDLIN: Second.
VOTE: PRANTE: YES
THROOP: YES
MAUDLIN: YES
3. PUBLIC HEARING ON REVIEW OF MANUFACTURED HOUSING ORDINANCE
Kevin Harrison said that George Read the Planning Director
had recommended that this public hearing be continued to
January 9, 1991.
Chair Throop opened the public hearing. There being no one
who wished to testify, the public hearing was continued to
January 9, 1991, at 10 a.m.
4. DECISION ON REPLAT OF THREE LOTS IN SUNRIVER
Before the Board was the decision on an appeal of the Hearings
Officer's approval of TP-90-732, a replat of three lots in the
Sunriver Planned Community. The public hearing had been held
on November 7, 1990.
Commissioner Prante asked the attorneys for the applicant and
the appellant if they had complete agreement on a compromise.
Dave Jaqua, attorney for appellants, said no, and Win Francis,
attorney for applicants, agreed. Win Frances said where the
parties were in agreement was on the limits of an approval if
the Board decided to approve the setbacks. That agreement
PAGE 2 MINUTES: 11-14-90
105 -a 1445
included a 10 foot setback change on each end lot and a 10
foot setback from the house on the middle lot, but they could
use the 10 feet only as indicated on the plans which had been
submitted, and the middle lot was only to have an upper level
deck which wouldn't be closed in.
Commissioner Prante asked how the one lot owner had been
allowed to build into the setback in the first place. Win
Frances said the home had been built by the previous owner,
and he had no knowledge of it.
Dave Jaqua said Sunriver was not proposing that the Board
change the set backs. Their concern was that there be an
independent evaluation, and that a process be developed to
deal with these types of requests. Their only position was
if the proposal they requested initially wasn't acceptable,
this agreement would be adequate as long as it met with the
testimony of the independent expert.
George Read said any property owner could request to change
the set back on their plat which could ultimately be appealed
to the Board's level. Each case would start from the
beginning and would have to go through the whole process.
There had been three or four variance applications on these
lots, of which one or two were approved and one or two were
denied. He did not feel that the first variance set a
precedence for the second, since they had to be looked at on
an individual basis based upon the variance criteria.
Commissioner Throop felt that setbacks were important, and
when the subdivision was originally established, there were
setbacks. If they had originally intended to allow
encroachment into the setback, a procedure would have been
established to do so, i.e. a conditional use. He did not want
a constant barrage of applicants requesting that the County
roll back the setbacks which were part of the original plat.
He did not want to support this application.
Commissioner Prante said errors had been made in putting the
plan together because there were issues that were not
addressed which had to be changed over time. She said there
needed to be a time and place to readdress these issues to be
make them more realistic or appropriate.
Commissioner Throop said he had a problem with people building
their dwellings as close to the setback as possible and then
requesting to expand the dwelling into the setback. If they
wanted to build onto the front of the dwelling, they should
have allowed room between where they built the dwelling and
the setback for expansion. He felt this same issue could come
up on every river front lot in Sunriver.
PAGE 3 MINUTES: 11-14-90
105 1446
Commissioner Prante said she did not feel that this kind of
issue should come to the Board every time someone wanted to
add on a deck.
Commissioner Maudlin said that people were going to have to
be able to come to the Board with these issues, because there
had to be a process to give people the opportunity to make a
change. He felt these property owners were paying taxes on
50 feet of property which they couldn't use. He suggested
that 10 feet be specified for each lot. He felt that each
case should be looked at on an individual basis.
Commissioner Throop said setbacks were not unique to Sunriver,
and that every single lot in Deschutes County had setbacks.
He said applications had been made for variances on these lots
but were denied, so they were coming back to request a replat.
He wanted the Deschutes County Board of Commissioner to go on
record as respecting and supporting the setbacks which had
been established in Sunriver.
George Read said one variance criteria was extremely difficult
to meet--the self-created difficulty. He said a self-created
difficulty would be found if the applicant knew or should have
known of the restriction at the time the lot was purchased.
If the property was purchased after this rule went into
effect, it was almost impossible to meet this variance
criteria. In looking for some other method to attempt to
modify the setback, removing the specific set back from the
plat was an option. He said there were very few plats which
had setbacks established on them, but this happened to be one
of them. Either way, it could ultimately be appealed to the
Board. The first variance request had been approved because
it had been before Legal Counsel's interpretation that when
the setback was a part of the plat it was a binding set back
which the County would enforce. Where the setback was placed
on as part of a deed restriction or restrictive covenant, the
County would not enforce it.
Rick Isham said the setback on a plat was legally the setback
that applied on that lot. If you purchased property with the
setback line on the map, then you purchased it with notice of
the setback, and therefore you couldn't meet that condition
of the variance.
Commissioner Prante said there needed to be a place to address
individual circumstances.
Rick Isham said there were a number of things that were on
plats besides setback lines, such as solar access
restrictions. The standard response was that these
restrictions were on the plat when you purchased the
property„ and you won't be able to get a variance to them.
PAGE 4 MINUTES: 11-14-90
105 144?
Commissioner Prante asked if the surrounding neighbors had any
problem with the change in setback on these lots. Win Francis
said no one in the entire cul-de-sac had any objection to the
setback change.
MAUDLIN: I'm going to move that we allow a 10 foot
encroachment to the set back, if that's what it's
going to be called, on lots 13 and 11, and a 10 foot
encroachment beyond the building line on lot 12.
PRANTE: I'm going to second.
Dave Jaqua asked for a clarification. As he understood Win
Frances' proposal, those were maximums not to exceed the
proposal that had been submitted.
MAUDLIN: I would correct that to the extent that they can
only be decks and not to exceed the plans as
presented.
PRANTE: Second.
Commissioner Throop said he opposed the motion. He felt the
setbacks were on the plat for a good reason, and that it was
a disservice to Sunriver to set up an expectation that
whenever a property owner didn't like something that was on
his plat, he could come in and request a replat.
VOTE: PRANTE: YES
THROOP: NO
MAUDLIN: YES
5. CONSERVATION EASEMENT
Before the Board was signature of a Conservation Easement from
the Breitensteins. Lauren Lezell said this Conservation
Easement was a condition of approval for a conditional use
application for development in a flood plain zone in Deschutes
River Recreational Homesites Subdivision. It appeared that
the lot and the proposed home would be located in the 100 year
flood area. The applicant was required to apply for the
conditional use permit, and the submitted elevations for the
proposed dwelling indicated that it would be located above the
flood plain. She said the easement was a standard condition
of approval required of all land use actions involving
property adjacent to the Deschutes River.
MAUDLIN: I move signature of Conservation Easement.
PRANTE: I would second.
PAGE 5 MINUTES: 11-14-90
105 - 1448
VOTE: PRANTE: YES
THROOP: YES
MAUDLIN: YES
6. REVISED MISSION STATEMENT AND GOALS POLICY
Before the Board was the Revised Mission Statement and Goals
Policy. Commissioner Throop suggested that the time frame be
moved forward to after the first of the year when people would
be more focused on setting goals. Commissioner Prante agreed
that it would be more appropriate to have the new
Commissioner, who would come on after the first of the year,
be part of the process. Commissioner Throop suggested
January 1 for the Board to establish goal objectives, March
1 for Department Heads to submit draft goals, March 1-March
15 for individual meetings with the Board, and April 1 for
adoption of Goals.
Commissioner Maudlin suggested signing the policy subject to
the revisions as discussed.
PRANTE: So moved.
MAUDLIN: Second.
VOTE: PRANTE: YES
THROOP: YES
MAUDLIN: YES
7. REDMOND WOOD PRODUCTS LOAN
Before the Board was a request from Redmond Wood Products to
increase their loan by $100,000. Mike Burton reported that
the owner said the package could not wait until the next
finance committee meeting on December 11, 1990, because they
would not be in business by December 11 if they were unable
to get the loans. They were asking for a total of $400,000
of which the County was being asked for $100,000. The County
currently had a loan to Redmond Wood Products for $74,000.
An application had been made to Juniper Bank which was
pursuing a loan subject to SBA guarantees and didn't expect
to hear for at least another week. The SBA and Juniper Bank
loan was conditional upon the County's participation.
Commissioner Throop asked if the loan would be adequately
collateralized so that if the business did go under, the
County could recoup the $174,000. Mike Burton said the
existing loan was part of a total of $110,000 of debt ($74,000
from the County and remainder from the Juniper Bank) which was
secured by the existing equipment. The SBA also had a loan
to the company, but they had expressed a willingness to remove
their lean position on the equipment, which would leave the
PAGE 6 MINUTES: 11-14-90
105 - 1449
equipment free for the existing debt and $400,000 of new debt.
A recent appraisal valued the equipment at about $1,082,000.
He said that on the new loan a first position had been
negotiated on a block of collateral such that debt to equity
would be about 75% ($100,000 of debt would be secured by first
position on $133,000 of equipment).
Commissioner Prante asked if this infusion of capital would
enable them to survive and prosper. Mike Burton said the
company had a number of purchase orders which they were unable
to fill because of the lack of capital. Commissioner Prante
asked his comfort scale on this loan. Mike Burton said about
"5." The company was promising to create 32 additional jobs
as a result of this loan. The loan would enable them to
further expand their product mix, adding stability to the
company and the community. He was uncomfortable with not
being able to have the finance committee review the proposal,
but given the time he'd had to look at it (which was
significantly less than normal), he recommended the loan
subject to the collateral position he described and subject
to the participation of the other lenders.
Commissioner Throop asked how comfortable he was with the
prognosis of the business and whether the loan would be
adequately collateralized? Mike Burton said the company was
currently not solvent and had received loans in the past which
were supposed to "lead to an expansion which would establish
the company and they would healthy and viable into the
future." The company had turned down orders because they
didn't have the money to pay for the people and the material
to meet the orders. He felt there was a reasonable likelihood
of repayment. He said the County could not participate in any
refinancing which would limit the amount that the County could
loan to $83,000. On the viability of the company, he rated
it a 6 or 7 and the collateral would be an 8 or 9. He told
the bank that the County might only be able to consider a
package of $250,000, leaving the County's share at $83,000.
It would leave the project $17,000 short of $400,000, but the
bank said it could address this shortfall.
Commissioner Throop said he would like to go ahead with the
$83,000 loan contingent upon getting a first position to
adequately collateralize the County. Mike Burton said the
bank and the SBA were both examining the package, and the
County's approval would be conditioned upon their
participation.
Commissioner Prante expressed concern that the finance
committee would be upset if the Board bypassed them and
approved the loan. Commissioner Maudlin, who was on the
finance committee, said they might be concerned about the loan
product but not the process.
PAGE 7 MINUTES: 11-14-90
105 rt 1450
Commissioner Maudlin was concerned that the request was made
with such a short time frame for approval. Mike Burton said
the company had blamed their accounting firm for taking three
weeks to get the package together. Jim Wellette told Mike
Burton that they had bills to pay and orders in hand. If he
paid off his bills, he wouldn't be able to meet the orders and
would, therefore, lose those clients. He said they had
followed through on the expansions they had promised in the
past. Commissioner Maudlin wanted to make sure that the bank
would approve the package before the County would be
committed.
Commissioner Throop said he would not be in favor of this loan
had the County not already loaned money to this business.
Mike Burton said the bank representative said they felt good
about this package and would probably approve the loan. Jim
Wellette had been banking with them for two or three years and
had delivered on his promises to them in the past.
Commissioner Throop suggested approving the loan with the
conditions as discussed.
PRANTE: I so move.
MAUDLIN: I'll second the motion.
VOTE: PRANTE: YES
THROOP: YES
MAUDLIN: YES
8. EXCHANGE OF PROPERTIES WITH ADMINISTRATIVE SCHOOL DISTRICT #1
Before the Board was ratification of their signature on a
letter to the Bend/LaPine School District #1 regarding an
exchange of properties. The School District was transferring
the library parking lot to Deschutes County, the old White
School property to the LaPine Park and Recreation District,
and a 40-acre parcel near Cooley Road to Bend Metro Park and
Recreation District. The County would transfer property on
SW 27th and the 40-acre parcel on Cooley Road to the School
District.
PRANTE: I move that we ratify the signature on the Letter of
Agreement with Administrative School District #1 for exchange
of properties.
MAUDLIN: Second.
VOTE: PRANTE: YES
THROOP: YES
MAUDLIN: YES
PAGE 8 MINUTES: 11-14-90
105 - 1451
9. CONTRACT WITH SCHOOL DISTRICT FOR OCCUPATIONAL THERAPIST
Before the Board was signature of a Personal Services Contract
with the Bend/LaPine School District to provide a licensed
occupational therapist to provide service to the Parent/Infant
Program of the Early Intervention Program.
PRANTE: Move signature.
MAUDLIN: Second.
VOTE: PRANTE: YES
THROOP: YES
MAUDLIN: YES
10. CONTRACT WITH SCHOOL DISTRICT FOR OCCUPATIONAL AND PHYSICAL
THERAPY ASSESSMENT
Before the Board was signature of a Personal Services Contract
with the Bend/Lapine School District to provide occupational
and physical therapy assessment, consultation and treatment
to early intervention eligible children.
PRANTE: Move approval.
MAUDLIN: Second.
VOTE: PRANTE: YES
THROOP: YES
MAUDLIN: YES
11. WEEKLY WARRANT VOUCHERS
Before the Board were weekly bill in the amount of
$196,776.23.
PRANTE: Move approval upon review.
MAUDLIN: I second.
VOTE: PRANTE: YES
THROOP: YES
MAUDLIN: YES
12. BENEFIT ADVISORY COMMITTEE
Before the Board was a request from Mike Maier to appoint
Michael Dugan, Frank Moore, Susie Penhollow, Karen Green, two
representative from the Employee Council, two representatives
from the Sheriff Association, and one representative from
local 701 along with himself to the Benefits Advisory
Committee.
PAGE 9 MINUTES: 11-14-90
105 .v 1452
MAUDLIN: I move we accept the recommendations as outlined and
have a letter drafted for our signature for the
appointments.
PRANTE: Second.
VOTE: PRANTE: YES
THROOP: YES
MAUDLIN: YES
DESCHUTES COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
Lois B "stow Prante, Commissioner
zlxr"
Tom Throo , Chair
Dick Maudlin, Commissioner
BOCC:alb
PAGE 10 MINUTES: 11-14-90