1991-05667-Minutes for Meeting February 27,1991 Recorded 3/7/1991ioG _ 0374
91-05GG 7
MINUTES '.'J ; 0i `•C,Mca
DESCHUTES COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS s,
February 27, 1991
Chairman Maudlin called the meeting to order at 10 a.m. Board
members in attendance were Dick Maudlin, Tom Throop and Nancy Pope
Schlangen. Also present were Rick Isham, County Counsel; Dave
Hoerning, County Engineer; Larry Rice, Public Works Director;
George Read, Planning Director; Paul Blikstad, Planner; Mike Maier,
County Administrator, and Bruce White, Assistant Legal Counsel.
1. CONSENT AGENDA
Consent agenda items before the Board were: #1, approval to
purchase crushed rock for projects in the Lower Bridge area;
#2, award of bid for 4,000 gallon water tanker to second
lowest bidder (Environmental Pollution Control) since the low
bidder (Smith Equipment and Welding) was not responsive; #3,
approval of transfer haul fee increase; #4, acceptance of Deed
for 30 ft. right-of-way along Rumgay Road; #5, signature of
Order 91-022 approving and confirming sale of tax foreclosed
property; #6, removed from consent agenda; #7, signature of
Resolution 91-013 establishing an imprest cash account for
Legal Counsel office; #8, signature of Order 91-037
transferring certain monies for the Land Sales Fund; #9,
signature of Indemnity Agreement with Pro Canam Racing for
off-road race in Millican Valley; #10, chair signature of
liquor license applications for Erickson's Sentry Supermarket
in La Pine and La Siesta Cafe #2 in Bend; #11, signature of
MP-90-51 creating two parcels off Ward Road for Peter
Goodmonson; #12, signature of final mylar TP-90-728 creating
4 lots in McKinney Butte Ranch for Michael Constantine; and
#13, signature of Tax Refund Order 91-038.
SCHLANGEN: I move approval of the consent agenda.
THROOP: I'll second the motion minus that item #6.
VOTE: THROOP: YES
SCHLANGEN: YES
MAUDLIN: YES
2. PUBLIC HEARING: ORDINANCE 91-013 AMENDING ORDINANCE 90-007
THE DESCHUTES COUNTY UNIFORM DEVELOPMENT PROCEDURES ORDINANCE
Before the Board was a public hearing on Ordinance 91-013
amending Ordnance 90-007, the Deschutes County Uniform
Development Procedures Ordinance which had been adopted last
December.
PAGE 1 MINUTES: 2/27/91 KFYPUNCHQ
f
106 - 0375
Bruce White gave the staff report. Staff had discovered
problems with the appeal provisions when dealing with an
appeal from Pacific Power & Light on a transmission line, plus
the Planning Director had some other minor changes. Section 1
was a new provision indicating that if false statements had
been made on the application or supporting documents and were
relied upon in making a decision, the application could be
declared void.
Section 2 was prompted by an attempt by PP&L to appeal the
Planning Director's decision to send an application to hearing
rather than to handle it administratively. The new subsection
2 would state that decisions regarding which process to use
would not be appealable.
Section 3 included clarifications.
Section 4 indicated that notice was not necessary when dealing
with a temporary approval.
Section 5 was a clarification.
Section 6 indicated that approval of a temporary use
application was not appealable since the final approval would
be appealable.
Section 7 indicated that notices did not need to be mailed
when dealing with administrative processes for which there was
no prior notice required.
Section 8 indicated that a sign did not need to be posted when
going through an administrative process which would not
require prior notice.
Section 9 had a minor change clarifying that only the final
staff report would be made available to the public.
Sections 10 & 11 clarified that appeals had to be filed within
10 days in the Community Development Department on one of the
County's forms, and had to include payment of the appeal fee
and a transcript of any hearing. Faxed appeals would not be
accepted.
Chairman Maudlin open the public hearing. There being no one
who wished to testify, the public hearing was closed.
MAUDLIN: Entertain a motion for first and second reading by
title only of Ordinance 91-013.
THROOP: So moved.
SCHLANGEN: Second.
PAGE 2 MINUTES: 2/27/91
106 • 0376
VOTE: THROOP: YES
SCHLANGEN: YES
MAUDLIN: YES
Chairman Maudlin performed the first and second readings of
Ordinance 91-013.
THROOP: Move adoption.
SCHLANGEN: Second.
VOTE: THROOP: YES
SCHLANGEN: YES
MAUDLIN: YES
3. PUBLIC HEARING: APPEAL OF HEARINGS OFFICER DENIAL OF CU-90-
092 FOR FARM DWELLING ON 40-ACRE PARCEL IN EFU-40 ZONE
Before the Board was a public hearing concerning an appeal of
the hearings officer's denial of a request for a conditional
use permit for a farm dwelling on an approximately 40-acre
parcel in an EFU-40 zone.
Paul Blikstad gave the staff report indicating that the
application was received by the Planning Division in November
of 1990 and had been originally scheduled for an
administrative decision by the Planning Director. After
making a site visit, he felt that all of the acreage at the
site was under irrigation. After discussions with the
Planning Director, they felt it should go to a hearing. They
were concerned about two issues: (1) would they be taking
productive farm land be taken out of production for a dwelling
and (2) was a dwelling necessary to manage that 40 acres of
alfalfa. The hearing was held before the hearings officer on
December 18, 1990 and a decision was issued January 14, 1991.
The applicant had waived the 120-day appeal period.
Chairman Maudlin opened the public hearing.
Nick Goyak, 8271 Highway 47, Carlton, OR 97113, testified
that he was one of the four owners of the property. He said
the property was currently under a six-year lease with two
years remaining with an option for an additional six-year
lease. They had owned the property since the early 80s and
there were a couple of years since then when the property was
not irrigated or farmed because they could not find anyone
interested in doing so. He felt the best use for the property
was for someone to reside on the property and maintain it
since it was only 40-acres, and it was difficult to find
someone who would come to farm this small of a parcel. They
had no plans to subdivide the property and would consider a
PAGE 3 MINUTES: 2/27/91
106 - 0377
deed restriction requiring that the 38+ acres with irrigation
be permanently used for irrigated farm purposes. The balance
of the property would be best used for a residence and farm
buildings. He said there was a house foundation on the
property when they purchased it. He said Mr. Mimms had been
seeking to buy the property, but he understood from the
realtor that he no longer planned to purchase the property.
(Mrs. Mimms spoke up from the audience and indicated they were
still interested in purchasing the property.) Mr. Goyak said
they would continue to farm and/or sell the property. He felt
the way to keep the property in farm production was to have
a residence on the property, since it had been difficult to
find someone who wanted to farm this small of an area. He
said a Mr. Moore had objected to subdividing the property, but
they would consider a deed restriction that 38 acres would be
used for irrigated farming with the remaining area used for
farm dwellings and related buildings.
Commissioner Schlangen questioned whether a dwelling was
needed on 40 acres with alfalfa since it would not support a
family. Mr. Goyak agreed, but said that if someone were
residing on the property they could have some other type of
employment. He felt that having someone residing on the
property would enhance the likelihood that it would continue
to be farmed. He said the property was surrounded by smaller
parcels.
Commissioner Schlangen expressed concern that there was no
domestic water. Commissioner Maudlin said there was no
domestic water use available from the canal, and that the
purchaser of the property would have to deal with that.
William R. Tye, lived at 25840 Alfalfa Market Road which was
directly west of the subject property, and spoke in favor of
the conditional use to allow a dwelling. He felt they could
get a water diversion from COI for a head gate out of the
ditch at the northeast corner where the proposed dwelling
would be located.
Dale Luckna, 25920 Alfalfa Market Road, was on the east side
of the subject property and next to the main canal. He said
you could make money on forty acres since he raised llamas on
20 acres which was very profitable. He said there was an
existing old building on the west/southwest corner of the
property which was still bare ground, and the pit was still
open where the foundation had been. He was in favor of the
conditional use because it had been a dust bowl before, and
with a dwelling, it would be more likely to be farmed.
Joanne Mimm, 19769 Nugget Avenue, Bend, 97702, testified that
they were the prospective purchasers of this property. She
said they only wanted to purchase the property if they could
PAGE 4 MINUTES: 2/27/91
106 • 0378
build and maintain a residence on the site while maintaining
the alfalfa. She said her husband was a builder and that
their buildings would enhance the area. Since it was a 40-
acre parcel and there was 38+ acres of water, they just wanted
to use the remaining 1+ acre non-irrigated area for a
residence. Commissioner Maudlin said that comments from COI
indicated that there were no irrigation rights for domestic
or livestock watering from the main canal, and asked if the
Mimms had discussed water rights from COI. Mrs. Mimm said
that she was not sure.
Martha Stuart lived at 62950 Johnson Ranch Road which was a
40+ acre parcel on one corner of the subject property. She
was in favor of the conditional use to allow a dwelling. She
understood that they couldn't subdivide the property into five
acre parcels but didn't see any problem with placing a house
on the 40-acre parcel. Commissioner Throop explained that
state law prohibited the County from taking any land out of
agricultural production. So if the entire 40 acres was
currently in production, then it might not be appropriate to
take part of the parcel out of production in order to create
a homesite.
Commissioner Throop asked Paul Blikstad if there was a clearly
distinguishable 1.09 acres of land on the 39 acre parcel that
was not under production. Paul Blikstad said he did not walk
the site but when viewing the 40 acres it looked to him like
it was completely in alfalfa production. The site of the
proposed dwelling was currently under alfalfa production.
Commissioner Throop asked if the law requiring that land not
be taken out of production also applied to the area proposed
for animal corrals? George Read said that agricultural
buildings fell under farm use and would be allowed on the
agricultural portion of the property without restriction if
they were an accessory building to a farm use occurring on the
property.
Nick Goyak testified again that there was a staging area in
the southwest corner which included the old building
foundation and that the parcel was not currently 100%
irrigated. Commissioner Schlangen clarified that the
southwest corner was not the proposed site for the residence.
Mr. Goyak agreed but said there was nothing to prevent someone
from using the southwest corner for irrigated area.
Commissioner Throop said he would like some more time to look
over the material before making a decision. Commissioner
Schlangen agreed and said she would like to visit the site.
Mr. Goyak agreed to the extension of time to make the
decision.
PAGE 5 MINUTES: 2/27/91
10E; 0379
4.
5.
Commissioner Maudlin announced that the public hearing was
continued until Monday, March 4, 1991, at 10 a.m. when a
decision would be made, however no further oral testimony
would be taken at that time.
PUBLIC HEARING: ORDER 91-033 CONCERNING ANNEXATION TO
SISTERS-CAMP SHERMAN RFPD
Before the Board was a public hearing on Order 91-033
approving the petition for annexation of territory to the
Sister-Camp Sherman Rural Fire Protection District and setting
the final public hearing for March 27, 1991.
Chairman Maudlin opened the public hearing. There being no
one who wished to testify, the public hearing was closed.
MAUDLIN: Entertain a motion for approval of annexation
of territory.
SCHLANGEN: So moved.
THROOP: Second the motion.
VOTE: THROOP: YES
SCHLANGEN: YES
MAUDLIN: YES
PUBLIC HEARING: ORDER 91-036 SKYVIEW TERRACE SUBDIVISION
DISCHARGE OF FIREARMS DISTRICT
Before the Board was a public hearing regarding Order 91-036
concerning the establishment of the Skyview Terrace
Subdivision as an area wherein the discharge of firearms would
be prohibited in accordance with Chapter No. 9.08 of the
Deschutes County Code.
Chairman Maudlin opened the public hearing. Rick Isham said
that the property was located south and east of the
intersections of Bear Creek Road and 27th Street and
constituted all of the Skyview Subdivision. He said there
would be four signs posted.
Louis Rogerson, 21280 Dove Lane, Bend, testified against
forming the district. He lived in the area for 25 years and
raised sons and grandsons in the area. Nobody on the north
of Dove Lane had signed the petition or agreed with the
petition. He owned lots 13 and 14 which bordered the lot of
the gentleman who started the petition. He said no one owned
the area to the middle of the canal. They had received
threats that their grandson's dog would be shot if it were
seen on the petitioner's half of the canal. If those who
signed the petition wanted to post their property, it was up
PAGE 6 MINUTES: 2/27/91
106 - 0380
to them, but he didn't want his lands posted and believed it
should be controlled by the property owners and not by the
Commission.
Commissioner Throop clarified that this process allowed
citizens to make the decision themselves. It was a citizen
initiated process not a County initiated process.
Louis Rogerson continued that to the east across the canal
there was 80-120 acres of BLM land, ditch line land and other
property where their sons and grandsons had been able to hunt.
They had controlled it for 25 years and there had been no
problems. Rick Isham pointed out that the open land Mr.
Rogerson was referring was not included in the proposed
district. Mr. Rogerson said he was aware of that.
Commissioner Schlangen asked where the petition had
originated. Rick Isham said there were three chief
petitioners who collected the requisite number of signatures
in order to bring the issue to public hearing. He said the
Board would need to delay their decision to verify the number
of electors within the district.
Don Defor, 21225 Dove Lane, Lot 3, said that when the person
circulating the petition asked him to sign the petition, he
said it was because people were shooting across the canal.
The problems that were explained to him had nothing to do with
the Skyview Terrace area since the firearms discharging was
outside of the subdivision. He felt there was no reason to
put any kind of gun control on the subdivision. He had talked
with his other neighbors and he felt they were doing an
adequate job of supervising, where they fired guns and what
size guns they were using.
Commissioner Maudlin wondered what would be accomplished by
creating this district since people could not be in the
subdivision and shoot out but could shoot into the subdivision
from across the canal.
Robert Pennington, 21730 Chilliwack Way, Block 3 lot 6,
testified in opposition to the formation of the district. He
said he and Mr. Rogerson had lived in the area for about the
same amount of time. He said they controlled their children's
hunting in the area and had kept them from hunting in the
subdivision area. Across the canal from the subdivision,
there were quail and ducks, and children and adults hunted in
the area. He felt the person that started the circulation of
the petition had a "personal thing against guns." He
contacted COI regarding who owned the canal. When the area
was replatted in 1963 an easement went through the area which
the irrigation district owned, so the surrounding property
lines did not go to the center of the canal as had been
PAGE 7 MINUTES: 2/27/91
1Q6 - 0381
suggested. It had been claimed by the petitioner that the
children could not use the canal cross bridges and could not
walk do on along
both sides of the canal from one tend O to the other.
property
Tony Rosengarth, 21279 Dove Lane, owned property adjacent and
south of Louis Rogerson, possibly lot 12 and was in opposition
to the formation of the firearms district. He and his family
had hunted in the open area which he felt was closer to 240
acres. He said the closest house across the canal to the east
was 3/4 of a mile away. They did not want to hunt in the
subdivision and had an He wanted to keep the area the
keep very controlled area.
was it was.
Roy Bieghler, 61908 Skyline View Drive, testified that he
started the petition because there had been guns fired in the
subdivision. He had called the County Sheriff who talked with
the person who had done the shooting. The shooter's excuse
was that he didn't know Mr. Bieghler was in the area where he
was firing. There were two incident when he had to call the
Sheriff because there was shooting from within the
subdivision. He had no problem with people shooting from the
property east of the canal as long as they stayed on the other
side of the canal and fired the other direction. He felt the
signatures on the petition verified that most of the people
in the subdivision did not want the situation to remain as it
currently was. He said he did not have a problem with guns
and was a gun owner himself, but he did not fire them in the
subdivision or any place with homes nearby.
Commissioner Throop asked if there was anyone in the audience
who was testifying against the formation of the district who
had signed the petition in favor of the district? No one
indicated that they had.
Bill Tye, 25840 Alfalfa Rd., testified that he owned lot 9 on
the corner of Bear Creek and Skyview Drive, and had farmed the
property directly to the east across the canal since 1975.
There had been a lot of hunting there over the years. They
normally would only use shotguns in the area because of the
housing nearby. He has cows there and had not had any trouble
with the shooting in the area.
Louis Rogerson testified again stated that the Sheriff had
been called twice. He admitted an instance when he fired a
shotgun between lots 13 and 14, which he owned, just to try
it out. He only made one shot and admitted that he should not
have done it. The other instance when the Sheriff came, the
kids had been shooting on the COI right of way towards the
open area and away from the subdivision. He said it was safer
when duck hunting to walk along the subdivision side of the
PAGE 8 MINUTES: 2/27/91
106 - 0382
6.
7.
canal and shoot towards the open area than to walk along the
other side and shoot towards the subdivision.
Chairman Maudlin closed the public hearing and announced that
a decision would be made at the Board's meeting at 10 a.m. on
Wednesday, March 13, 1991. No further testimony would be
taken at that meeting.
PUBLIC HEARING: ORDER 91-003 VACATING A PORTION OF THE OLD
CLINE FALLS ROAD
Before the Board was a public hearing on Order 91-003 which
would vacate a portion of the Old Cline Falls road located in
the High Ridge Estates Subdivision.
Dave Hoerning said a petition had been submitted by the
property owner adjoining this old right of way requesting it
be vacated. Due to the new entrance on the new Cline Falls
Road, this portion of the right of way was no longer needed.
The adjoining property owner wanted to incorporate it into
his property and landscape and maintain it.
Chairman Maudlin opened the public hearing. There being no
one who wished to testify, the public hearing was closed.
THROOP: I'll move adoption of Order 91-003.
SCHLANGEN: I second the motion.
VOTE: THROOP: YES
SCHLANGEN: YES
MAUDLIN: YES
VACATIONS OF RIGHTS OF WAY IN THE TERREBONNE AREA
Before the Board was signature of: (1) Resolution 91-005
accepting a petition to vacate a portion of Willamette Valley
and Cascade Mountain Road, accepting the engineer's report,
and signature of Order 91-024 setting a public hearing for
April 10, 1991; (2) Resolution 91-008 accepting a petition to
vacate a portion of Lower Bridge Road, accepting the
engineer's report, and signature of Order 91-030 setting a
public hearing for April 10, 1991; (3) Resolution 91-006
accepting a petition to vacate a portion of the Roy L. Kidder
Etal Road, accepting the engineer's report, and signature of
Order 91-026 setting a public hearing for April 10, 1991; and
(4 ) Resolution 91-007 accepting a petition to vacate a portion
of L.A. Hunt Etal Road, accepting the engineer's report, and
signature of Order 91-028 setting a public hearing for April
10, 1991.
PAGE 9 MINUTES: 2/27/91
106 - 0333
Dave Hoerning said that the people who farmed this area asked
if they could get some of these old right-of-ways off their
property since many of them were being farmed over and one
people were driving through for hunting. He put together a
list of all of the property owners in the area and
Commissioner Throop set up an informal hearing in Terrebonne
regarding these issues. The old Willamette Valley Road and
the Lower Bridge of 1909 had been obliterated due to the
mining and farming in the area. Out of all the roads
discussed, the only one that drew any controversy was the
Kidder Road. The discussion centered on the 3,500 feet which
came along the Deschutes River. There was a conservation
easement but the people were worried that they would not have
access.
Commissioner Maudlin said that access there had already been
shut off. Dave Hoerning said there were some pumps in the
area and a gate had been put up to keep the pump area from
being vandalized. Part of the Coalition for the Deschutes,
Trout Unlimited and conservation people wanted the right to
walk up the stream, and he had suggested that they attend the
public hearing to make their concerns known.
Commissioner Throop said he understood people attending the
meeting were told that the County would vacate the road, but
a public access would be left and would create an area for
parking cars. Larry Rice said that the area of controversy
was that they did not want to park down below but wanted to
be able to drive into the area. Commissioner Throop thought
it had eliminated the controversy by saying there would be no
vehicular traffic in that area, that it would be blocked off,
but that Fred Gunzner could not block off pedestrian access
and there would be a walk over.
Chairman Maudlin said they should wait until they hear the
testimony at the public hearing before making the decision on
where the public access would be maintained.
THROOP: I'll move approval of all of the motions
contemplated in [agenda] items 19 through 22.
SCHLANGEN: Second.
VOTE: THROOP: YES
SCHLANGEN: YES
MAUDLIN: YES
PAGE 10 MINUTES: 2/27/91
106 • 0384
8. JORDAN BRIDGE CLOSURE
Before the Board was a recommendation from the Public Works
Department that the Jordan Bridge, which had been closed due
to extreme hazard, not be replaced until a public hearing
could be held on a vacation of the road. Mr. Cyrus, who owned
the surrounding property, said that if the road were vacated
he would fix the bridge since he would need to farm the other
side. Larry Rice said they would hold a meeting of the
surrounding property owners to see what their concerns were,
then they would come back to the Board for direction on how
to proceed. If the road were vacated and reverted to Mr.
Cyrus, he would repair the bridge for his own use. It could
no longer be used by any other property owners.
THROOP: I'll move staff recommendation.
SCHLANGEN: Second.
VOTE: THROOP: YES
SCHLANGEN: YES
MAUDLIN: YES
9. REORGANIZATION IN DISTRICT ATTORNEY'S OFFICE
Chairman Maudlin said he was fully in favor of the
reorganization of the District Attorney's office which had
been presented to the Board at their Monday work session;
however he felt those items which had a fiscal impact should
be discussed during the budget process.
Mike Maier said there were a number of proposed
reclassifications in the reorganization which would have a
fiscal impact. He felt more time was needed to review the
need for these reclassification, but that the structural
reorganization should be approved immediately since the
District Attorney was ready to start the new team concept.
There was currently one unauthorized position which had been
filled through the "professional services" item in the budget.
It was currently an AOI position and was critical to the
organization, and he recommended that the Board authorize this
position immediately. There would be money in the District
Attorney's budget for this fiscal year to maintain this
position because of some vacancies in the office. There was
also a need to immediately change a current O.A. IV into an
O.A. III (lead) position which would require no monetary
change.
Commissioner Schlangen suggested letting the District Attorney
know that the Board approved going forward with the
reorganization, including the addition of a full time AOI
position and changing an OAIV into an OAIII lead position, but
PAGE 11 MINUTES: 2/27/91
1.06 - 0385
that all other classification changes would be considered at
a later time.
THROOP: I'll move that the Board authorize the AOIII
lead and the creation of the OAI position and
support the reorganization.
SCHLANGEN: I'll second it.
Chairman Maudlin wanted to clarify that the Board was moving
to adopt the reorganization plan with the changes of a OAIII
lead and finalization of the OAI as a full time position. All
other organizational issues would be addressed during the
budget process which would be finalized July 1, 1991.
VOTE: THROOP: YES
SCHLANGEN: YES
MAUDLIN: YES
10. WEEKLY WARRANT VOUCHERS
Before the Board were weekly bills in the amount of
$190,796.47.
THROOP: Move weekly warrant vouchers upon review.
SCHLANGEN: Second.
VOTE: THROOP: YES
SCHLANGEN: YES
MAUDLIN: YES
11. MP-90-26 ON BENHAM ROAD
Before the Board was signature of minor partition MP-90-26
creating two parcels on Benham Road for Lucille Skaggs.
THROOP: Move signature of MP-90-26.
SCHLANGEN: Second.
VOTE: THROOP: YES
SCHLANGEN: YES
MAUDLIN: YES
12. MP-90-66 ON VOLCANO AVENUE
Before the Board was signature of minor partition MP-90-66
creating two parcels on Volcano Avenue in the Redmond urban
growth boundary for Sherm Wright.
SCHLANGEN: Move signature.
PAGE 12 MINUTES: 2/27/91
THROOP: Second it.
VOTE: THROOP: YES
SCHLANGEN: YES
MAUDLIN: YES
106 -A 0386
13. ORDER 91-039 TRANSFERRING CASH AND RESOLUTION 91-014
TRANSFERRING APPROPRIATIONS
Before the Board was signature of Order 91-039 transferring
cash within various funds of the budget and signature of
Resolution 91-014 transferring appropriations within various
funds of the budget.
THROOP: Move signatures of the order and the
resolution.
SCHLANGEN: Second.
VOTE: THROOP: YES
SCHLANGEN: YES
MAUDLIN: YES
14. MP-90-46 ON WARD ROAD
Before the Board was signature of a minor partition MP-90-46
which would create two lots in an RR-10 zone on Ward Road for
Dave Tolve. This ended up being a major partition because of
the cul-de-sac dedication.
THROOP: I'll move signature.
SCHLANGEN: I'll second.
VOTE: THROOP: YES
SCHLANGEN: YES
MAUDLIN: YES
15. CONSERVATION EASEMENT FROM THE DAVID ALAN AND EUNICE ANN SMITH
FAMILY TRUST
Before the Board was signature of a Conservation Easement for
a 10 foot strip along the east bank of the Deschutes from the
David Alan and Eunice Ann Smith Family Trust.
THROOP: I'll move signature.
SCHLANGEN: Second.
VOTE: THROOP: YES
SCHLANGEN: YES
MAUDLIN: YES
PAGE 13 MINUTES: 2/27/91
1
106 - 0387
16. OUT-OF-STATE TRAVEL REQUEST FROM LIBRARIAN
Before the Board was an out-of-state travel request from the
County Librarian to attend the Public Library Association
Conference.
THROOP: Move approval.
SCHLANGEN: Second.
VOTE: THROOP: YES
SCHLANGEN: YES
MAUDLIN: YES
DESCHUTDS COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
Tom Throop, ommissio er
O~
Iza pe S haangen, Commiss'oner
dlin, ha irman
BOCC:alb
PAGE 14 MINUTES: 2/27/91