1991-12337-Minutes for Meeting April 24,1991 Recorded 5/7/199191-1233' 0106 1087
MINUTES`
DESCHUTES COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS,, >
April 24, 1991
AY
Chairman Maudlin opened the meeting at 10 a.m. Boac} rs in
attendance were Dick Maudlin, Tom Throop and Nancy Pope i`gen.
Also present were: Rick Isham, County Counsel; Ka en Green,
Community Development Director; Brad Chalfant, Property Manager;
George Read, Planning Director; and Mike Maier, County
Administrator.
1. LAND TRADE WITH LEONARD DOWNS GROUP
Before the Board was a request from the Leonard Downs group
that the County consider exchanging some property with them.
They had already exchanged some property with the County but
were unhappy with the exchange.
Brad Chalfant said the original exchange was conducted in
December of 1990. The County acquired approximately 10 acres
of wet lands in the LaPine area and, in exchange, the County
transferred two lots (one substantive and the other a strip
of land adjacent to it) in the City of Redmond to the Leonard
Downs group. The exchange was completed, however the Downs
group had some problems bringing a water line to the property,
and therefore wanted to make another exchange with the County.
Given the current work load in County Counsel's office, and
the amount of work another exchange would create, he could
not recommend going ahead with another exchange.
Commissioner Throop asked who had requested the original
exchange of properties? Rick Isham said the Downs group made
the request for the land exchange.
Dick Maudlin asked if the wet lands which the County received
was buildable property. Brad Chalfant said that after meeting
with the planners and the appraiser, he understood the
property was unbuildable.
Leonard Downs, 1462 S 12th Street, Redmond, testified that he
had requested the exchange a couple of years ago. They had
some wet lands in the LaPine area which was a "burden" to
them. Their LaPine property was free and clear, and they
assumed they had traded for the same thing. However, after
the trade, they found out that it would cost $14,000 to have
the city water connected to this property. The property was
assessed at $9,000+. After Brad Chalfant contacted the City
of Redmond, they reduced the cost of water hookup to $7,500.
They didn't feel even that amount was fair because the land
they had traded to the County was "free and clear," and they
had assumed the property they were getting in Redmond was also
"free and clear."
KE UNCHED
PAGE 1 MINUTES: 4/24/91
0,106 1088
A
Commissioner Schlangen asked if the property the County had
received in the exchange had been developed with water or
sewer?
Leonard Downs said the land the County received in the
exchange was right on the river, was swamp land, and couldn't
be developed, which was why they didn't want the property.
Commissioner Throop said that since Mr. Downs proposed the
trade, and the County took the time and energy to complete the
exchange, he felt that "a deal was a deal."
Leonard Downs felt the County should have told them there was
a water assessment on the property in Redmond.
Commissioner Schlangen pointed out that there was no
assessment on the lot. She said there was a cost to bring
water to the lot which was true of any lot being developed in
the City.
Leonard Downs said the cost of hooking up to the water and
sewer in downtown Redmond was only $2,600.
Commissioner Throop pointed out that the cost of a lot in
downtown Redmond was probably $15,000 also.
Leonard Downs said they thought the water was right near the
property and would take only the normal hook up fee.
Chairman Maudlin said there was water at the back of the lot,
but the City maintained that it couldn't be used. He pointed
out that hooking up the water would increase the value of the
lot in Redmond, while the value of the wet lands property "was
nil." He did not want to have the County staff spend time on
another trade, however, he would not have an objection if the
Downs group want to call off the original exchange.
Commissioner Throop asked if Mr. Downs wanted to cancel the
exchange and get the LaPine property back. Leonard Downs said
he'd discuss it with the rest of the group.
Commissioner Schlangen said that if they brought water to the
Redmond lot, it would have a greater value should they want
to sell it. Mr. Downs said yes, but it would be $7,500 less
than what they thought they would have. Commissioner
Schlangen said that the LaPine property would bring them no
revenue. Mr. Downs said that didn't have anything to do with
it, and they felt they had been misled by the City of Redmond
because they weren't told about the increased water hook up
fees.
PAGE 2 MINUTES: 4/24/91
0106 1089
Rick Isham said in order to reverse the exchange, the Board
would have to make a finding that the marsh land on the river
was not needed for public use, and the County's own ordinance
said it was needed, and that the County should retain it. He
felt the property would not be available to "undo" the
exchange unless there was some legal basis not dependent on
the County's exchange statutes, and he was not aware of any
such legal basis. He could only think of two possible
options: (1) leave the exchange as is and leave it up to the
Downs partnership to show a basis which would allow the
exchange to be set aside, or (2) to look at another exchange.
Chairman Maudlin said it was a decision that the Downs group
would have to make.
2. PUBLIC HEARING: ORDER 91-054 TRANSFERRING TWO PROPERTIES TO
ADMINISTRATIVE SCHOOL DISTRICT #1
Before the Board was a public hearing on Order 91-054
transferring two pieces of property to the Administrative
School District #1 for public purposes.
Brad Chalfant said that this was part of the exchange
involving the County's transfer of two properties on 27th
Street and property on Cooley Road to the School District.
In exchange, the County would receive the parking lot behind
the Bend Library; the LaPine Park and Recreation District
would receive the White School; and the Bend Metro Park and
Recreation District would receive a 40-acre parcel on Cooley
Road.
Chairman Maudlin opened the public hearing. There being no
one who wished to testify, the public hearing was closed.
THROOP: I'll move approval of the exchange.
SCHLANGEN: Second.
VOTE: THROOP: YES
SCHLANGEN: YES
MAUDLIN: YES
3. PUBLIC HEARING: RESOLUTION 91-012 ADOPTING COUNTY FEES
Before the Board was a public hearing on Resolution 91-012
adopting and continuing fees and charges for County services.
Rick Isham said there would be an additional Health Department
fee for out-of-County participants in the County's
HealthyStart Program for prenatal care. Since number of these
Counties received payment from the State for prenatal
services, he recommended that the County not enter into a
PAGE 3 MINUTES: 4/24/91
0106 1090
contract with other counties but charge a referral fee for
the service up to a maximum of $1,400 but on average $700.
Chairman Maudlin opened the public hearing. There was no one
who wished to testify.
Chairman Maudlin questioned whether there were fee increases
in the Resolution for solid waste. Since a representative
from Public Works was not at this public hearing, the public
hearing was continued one week to May 1, 1991.
4. NI-LAH-SHA MOBILE HOME DEVELOPMENT
Commissioner Throop said that the parties had reached an
agreement which was satisfactory to the applicant, the
attorney, and the County which was to phase in the road
improvement costs.
5. AMENDMENT #26 TO 19889-91 MENTAL HEALTH AGREEMENT
Before the Board was approval of Amendment #26 to the 1989-91
Mental Health Intergovernmental Agreement.
SCHLANGEN: I move approval of Amendment #26.
THROOP: I'll second the motion.
VOTE: THROOP: YES
SCHLANGEN: YES
MAUDLIN: YES
6. APPROVAL OF TERMS FOR CYSC ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEMBERS AND ONE
CYSC MEMBER
Before the Board was a request from the Deschutes County
Children and Youth Services Commission for Board approval of
the terms for one CYSC member and all members of the advisory
committees (attached).
SCHLANGEN: I move approval of the terms of the Children
& Youth Services Commission Advisory Committee
members.
THROOP: I'll second the motion.
VOTE: THROOP: YES
SCHLANGEN: YES
MAUDLIN: YES
PAGE 4 MINUTES: 4/24/91
0106 1091
7. GOLF COURSE ON EFU LANDS
Karen Green came before the Board to discuss a request from
the Department of Land Conservation and Development that a
representative from Deschutes County participate in a working
group to study the issue of Golf Courses on EFU lands, which
had become very controversial. Because of Deschutes County's
abundant golf courses and golf course applications, DLCD felt
it would be helpful to have someone from Deschutes County
participating in the working group. She felt the time
commitment would be minimal, and that it was an important
project for the County. The purpose of the working group was
to develop alternatives and recommendations for the
Legislature. Golf courses were currently permitted as
conditional uses in EFU lands, which was being questions as
an appropriate use for primary farm lands.
Commissioner Throop said he had chaired the LCDC subcommittee
on the golf course issue. The subcommittee directed the staff
to form a working group to put together recommendations that
would go to the LCDC and the Legislature. They identified
Deschutes and Washington as the most important counties to
participate in this working group. The golf course industry
and the agriculture community would also be represented on
this working committee.
The Board approved the County's participation in this working
group.
8. ACCEPTANCE OF DEDICATION FOR COOLEY ROAD
Before the Board was the dedication on the property which the
County was transferring to the school district. Brad Chalfant
said that Cooley Road had not been dedicated along that
section, which needed to be done before the transfer.
MAUDLIN: I would entertain a motion for approval of the
dedication.
THROOP: So moved.
SCHLANGEN: Second.
VOTE: THROOP: YES
SCHLANGEN: YES
MAUDLIN: YES
PAGE 5 MINUTES: 4/24/91
0106 1092
9.
10.
11.
EXCHANGE OF PROPERTY WITH CITY OF REDMOND AND DESCHUTES FAIR
ASSOCIATION
Before the Board was a letter of understanding between the
City of Redmond, Deschutes County Fair Association, the Fair
Board and Deschutes County. Brad Chalfant said that in the
agreement, the County would provide land south of the Redmond
airport for the Fair Association to relocate the Deschutes
County Fairgrounds. The land use application and site
planning which this would require were fairly extensive. The
Fair Board had a surveyor who was starting to work on that
aspect, and this agreement would outline how much each party
would pay for the work. The County's share would be picked
up by the City of Redmond in exchange for the transfer of a
small portion of the involved property to the City.
THROOP: I'll move signature of the Letter of Understanding.
SCHLANGEN: And I will second it.
VOTE: THROOP: YES
SCHLANGEN: YES
MAUDLIN: YES
RESOLUTION 91-032 DECLARING SURPLUS PERSONAL PROPERTY
Before the Board was signature of Resolution 91-032 declaring
personal property surplus and directing disposition. Rick
Isham said the Mental Health Department wanted to transfer
some personal property from their department to the County
Children's Foundation, an Oregon non-profit corporation which
operated children and youth programs.
THROOP: I'll move signature of Resolution 91-032.
SCHLANGEN: Second.
VOTE: THROOP: YES
SCHLANGEN: YES
MAUDLIN: YES
RESOLUTIONS 91-030 AND 91-031 APPROPRIATING GRANT FUNDS
Before the Board was signature of Resolution 91-030
appropriating new grant funds received from the State Mental
Health Division, and Resolution 91-031 transferring the
appropriations within the Mental Health Services Fund.
SCHLANGEN: I'd move signature of Resolutions 91-030 and
91-031.
THROOP: Second the motion.
PAGE 6 MINUTES: 4/24/91
VOTE: THROOP: YES 0106 1093
SCHLANGEN: YES
MAUDLIN: YES
12. APPOINTMENT TO MUNICIPAL GOLF COURSE STEERING COMMITTEE
Before the Board was appointment of Glenn Reed to the
Municipal Golf Course Steering Committee.
THROOP: I'll move the Glenn Reed appointment.
SCHLANGEN: Second.
VOTE: THROOP: YES
SCHLANGEN: YES
MAUDLIN: YES
13. LIQUOR APPLICATION FOR FRED'S DINER
Before the Board was chair signature of Liquor License
Application for Fred's Diner at Fred Meyer in Bend.
THROOP: I'll move chair signature of the liquor license
application for Fredy's.
SCHLANGEN: Second.
VOTE: THROOP: YES
SCHLANGEN: YES
MAUDLIN: YES
14. WEEKLY WARRANT VOUCHERS
Before the Board were weekly bills in the amount of
$195,286.33.
THROOP: Move signature subject to review.
SCHLANGEN: Second.
VOTE: THROOP: YES
SCHLANGEN: YES
MAUDLIN: YES
15. CENKOR LOAN
Bruce White said an arrangement had been worked out so that
Deschutes County's loan to CENKOR would be repaid. CENKOR had
gone out of business, and instead of filing bankruptcy, they
worked out an agreement whereby some unsecured creditors would
be assigned all of CENKOR's interest in all of its assets,
which was called an Assignment for the Benefit of the
PAGE 7 MINUTES: 4/24/91
0106 1094
Creditors. These creditors were acting as trustees for all
creditors and an arrangement had been worked out that the
County's loan (of $41,000+) would be repaid. The drill bit
inventory was being sold, and the purchaser's down payment
would be sufficient to pay off the County's loan. As part of
the agreement, the County needed to release its security
interest in the tooling. That release would not be filed
until the County had a certified check in hand which should
be available by the end of the week.
THROOP: I'll move chair signature of the closing agreements
to finalize the CENKOR loan payoff and all the legal
attachments required.
SCHLANGEN: Second.
VOTE: THROOP: YES
SCHLANGEN: YES
MAUDLIN: YES
16. COUNTY EMPLOYEE WORK SCHEDULE
Before the Board was consideration of a work schedule for
County employees whose employment impacted the General Fund.
Commissioner Throop stated that the majority opinion from the
management team meeting was that a flexible scheduling
approach would be the appropriate model to use in adjusting
to a 36-hour workweek. A standard system throughout the
County probably would not meet the needs of the departments,
the public, or individual employees, and therefore, the County
should move toward flexible scheduling to balance these needs.
County employees were being required to take a 10% cut in
wages and hours in order to recover the 10% in the personnel
services budget necessary to balance the budget for the next
fiscal year. The County wanted to strive to provide the
highest quality of service to the public even with the
significant cut backs on the amount of hours that employees
would work for the County. Flexible scheduling would also be
the best method for meeting the individual needs of both the
departments and employees, and would avoid layoffs and help
preserve the employee base in Oregon's fastest growing County.
THROOP: I would like to move that the County Commission
adopt a flexible scheduling approach to implementing
a 36-hour workweek, if in fact that's what's finally
adopted, and that during the first couple of weeks
of May, we work with individual department heads to
define those individual schedules for individual
departments and buildings, and then eventually to
have a schedule County-wide that we'll operate on
next fiscal year.
PAGE 8 MINUTES: 4/24/91
0106 1095
MAUDLIN: I'll second the motion for discussion.
Chairman Maudlin recommended that it be made clear to
everybody what "flexible scheduling" meant. He questioned
whether what was being considered was really a flexible
schedule or just different departments being on different
schedules. For an example, he said that the Courthouse held
the Treasurer, Data Processing, District Attorney, and
eventually the Sheriff. He felt the District Attorney could
operate on a flexible schedule and be closed to the public on
Friday, the Treasurer could be closed on Friday and Data
Processing, while it would have to be staffed if other County
operations were open, could be closed to the public on Friday.
Therefore, the Courthouse building could be closed on Friday.
Whereas, since the Community Development Department would be
open in the Administration Building, the remainder of the
building would probably be open too. However, the building
which would house the Veterans Office, OSU Extension and the
Assessor, could be closed on Fridays or work a flexible
schedule, whichever way they wanted to handle it. The Library
was unique and would have to come up with their own plan. The
Health and Mental Health Department had expressed their desire
to work a flexible schedule because of their funding problems.
Commissioner Throop said that different departments would have
different needs in terms of their schedules in order to meet
the service requirements to the public while balancing the
employee's needs. He felt that part of the schedule should
be an attempt to keep services available to the public five
days a week, as many hours as possible, while allowing
flexibility in how departments organized their staff to make
that service available. He felt this would give the County
the "best of both worlds" by trying to deliver services to
the public five days a week while taking into consideration
the individual needs of the employees as well.
Chairman Maudlin said there were some departments which were
not capable of operating five days with a reduced staff on
Monday and Friday, i.e. the Veterans service office with only
one staff person. The Treasurer and the Clerk both worked on
tight budgets and were not overstaffed, so whether they could
operate on a flexible schedule and be open five days a week
was mute. He said these were the kinds of things that had to
be considered when the Board made a decision.
Commissioner Throop said that many County Departments were
open to the public nine hours a day. He thought that by
closing during the noon hour or by closing an hour in the
morning or afternoon it might allow them to concentrate the
staff available during the hours when they would be open. He
PAGE 9 MINUTES: 4/24/91
0106 1096
felt the Board should come up with a model to be used by the
Departments to develop a work schedule to be negotiated with
the Board during the first couple of weeks in May. This would
give the employees and the public six weeks to make whatever
adjustments were necessary.
Commissioner Schlangen said the Board had to balance the
public needs, since the County was there to serve the public,
but they also needed to consider the employees and the
increased costs to employees if they had to come to work five
days a week while taking a 10% pay cut. She felt each
department would have to decide what they could do. She felt
small departments of one to four employees would find it
almost impossible to be short too many hours.
Chairman Maudlin said his main concern was that there needed
to be a flexible schedule, but he didn't want the Board to
dictate to the Departments what that flexible schedule would
be.
Commissioner Throop said he totally agreed.
District Attorney Michael Dugan asked if it was County policy
that all departments with more than two or three employees
remain open during the lunch hour. The Board answered "no."
He asked if it was the Board's intention that County offices
be open to the public 40 hours per week.
Commissioner Throop said that was what flexible scheduling was
all about. He said the Board could not make a standard
decision for all departments. He wanted the Board to sit down
and look at the mission and services of each individual
department, look at the needs of the public in relation to
that department, and then look at the needs of the employees
within that department. Those kinds of judgments should be
made on a department-by-department, building-by-building
basis. He was hoping to have as much consistency County-wide
as possible but recognized that there were already work
schedule inconsistencies among departments (i.e. library,
juvenile detention, sheriff's department).
Rick Isham said the Board would have to be consistent with
regular business hours for mandated services (i.e. Clerk).
Any nonmandated service could operate under their own schedule
(i.e. library). If the Clerk's office was operating under a
certain schedule, there would be other County services which
would be required to have the same schedule.
Community Corrections Director Dennis Maloney said he would
appreciate a charge from the Commissioners that would state
that the departments had to absorb a 10% pay cut. While
absorbing that cut, the Department would do what they could
PAGE 10 MINUTES: 4/24/91
0106 1097
to provide optimal access and quality services to the public,
while at the same time being sensitive to the needs of the
employees who were taking the 10% pay cut. If it looked as
if those two areas would clash, the departments would develop
a happy medium and bring it to the Board.
Mental Health Director Frank Moore said there had to be
flexibility in terms of hours and scheduling. He said it had
been very difficult to understand whether the Board had been
talking about hours of operation or hours of work, and there
were key differences between them. He said the Mental Health
Department and the Health Department did not have the same
hours of operation, and he did not want to be locked into
trying to provide services on the same schedule as the Health
Department. He encouraged flexibility in hours of operation
and hours of work. He felt one way to serve the public was
to have good staff morale. If the management team came out
with a unilateral charge that said that everybody had to do
the same thing, the County would "be shooting ourselves in the
foot."
THROOP: Maybe I could just summarize the motion and the
proposal and that is that we do go to 36 hours to
balance our budget, that we negotiate schedules
department by department and building by building,
and then departments and services that are connected
with one another for other reasons as Rick
described, and specifically within the establishment
of those schedules, the hours that each department
would be open to the public and the internal method
for implementing those hours of service open the
public will be what's subject to negotiation, and
we'll ask the department heads and the management
teams of each of the individual departments to
optimize their service to the public and provide for
the needs of employees to the best degree possible
in arriving at their recommended schedules, and we
as a Board will try to ensure as much consistency
as possible department by department Countywide, and
then we'll hope to initiate the process the first
of May and conclude it by the middle of May so that
we give six week's notice to the public and to our
employees.
Chairman Maudlin said that Librarian Ralph DeLamarter had
asked about having flexibility in the budget instead of just
flexibility in the hours of work (i.e. library stops buying
books, some employees taking sabbatical). These kinds of
things could also reduce the General Fund budget by 10%.
Commissioner Throop said this would create a lack of
uniformity and something to battle about for the next 15
PAGE 11 MINUTES: 4/24/91
0106 1098
months. One reason for the reduction to 36 hours was so there
would be a level of uniformity on how individual departments
were treated and how the staff was treated. He felt it would
be opening Pandora's Box, and he would not be enthusiastic
about trying to administer that kind of approach. He gave
examples of the problems it could create: some employees
working 32 hours so that others could work 40 hours, deferring
maintenance, deferring the purchase of new books, pressure on
less senior employees to take a couple of years off so
everybody else could work 40 hours.
Frank Moore said only 10% of their budget was County General
Fund money and the other 90% consisted of state and federal
funds. Under a flexible budget scenario, he could layoff the
employees funded by the County General Fund and continue to
operate 40 hours per week with the state and federal funds,
but he did not want to do that.
Chairman Maudlin felt it was just a matter of flexibility.
He said the Board would not tell the Departments they had to
consider flexibility in their budgets, but just that it might
be another option.
Commissioner Throop said "then maybe what we ought to call the
proposal that's currently under motion here is a limited
flexible schedule."
Dennis Maloney said he felt the County had adopted one of the
leading goal and objective setting processes in the state.
They were developed to meet the needs of the County, and every
dollar had been scrutinized to determine whether they were
needed to meet those goals and objectives. If all of the
items in the proposed budgets were essential, he did not see
how department's could determine that they could go without
some items in their proposal, i.e. photocopier, books, instead
of cutting personnel hours.
Commissioner Throop said the flexibility did not include how
many hours individual employees in property tax supported
department worked, but how that 36 hours would be implemented.
Commissioner Throop said there were a couple of other
alternatives supported by some members of the management team
and asked whether they should be discussed further before
there was a vote on the motion.
Commissioner Schlangen said she felt it was important to hear
from the Employee Council on their feelings on how the 36-hour
schedule should be implemented.
Emery Grantier, President of the Employee Council, said that
a few week ago Commissioner Throop and Mike Maier had made a
presentation to the Employee Council about their
PAGE 12 MINUTES: 4/24/91
0106 1099
recommendations for a 36-hour work schedule. After the
presentation, approximately 85 employees (20% of affected
employees) met and discussed the options presented. It was
a short discussion and it was unanimous that they wanted the
County to uniformly adopt a four-day week. This would
demonstrate to the public that the County had cut back due to
the budget shortfall while a five-day week would dilute the
effect. However the major reason the four-day week was
preferred was it allowed the employees to take advantage of
the extra day off for several reasons, i.e. cutting
transportation and child care costs and ability to find a
second job. The Employee Council was adamant that they would
like to see a four-day, nine-hour schedule.
Commissioner Throop said that at the time of the presentation
to the Employee Council, the County was looking at a uniform
approach to the reduction in work schedule. He asked how the
Employee Council would react to the flexible scheduling
concept now being discussed given the conflict between the
public wanting five days of service and the employees wanting
a four-day workweek.
Emery Grantier said he had only spoken to a few employees
after the new flexible scheduling concept had been circulated,
and therefore, his perceptions were really limited. The
Employee Council had not had an opportunity to meet to discuss
it. He felt the employee's perception of the flexible
scheduling concept would be dependent on how each of the
departments decided to implement it. If the department head
elected to require a five day schedule at the expense of the
employee, the employee would be very upset. However, if the
manager had the flexibility to select a schedule that was more
humane to the employees, they would be quite happy about it.
Therefore it could vary tremendously depending upon what
schedule was actually set up, and how it was communicated to
the employees.
Commissioner Throop said that flexible scheduling would defer
the decision on individual work schedules to individual
negotiations with each department.
Chairman Maudlin said there had also been some discussion
about trying for an individual tax levy.
Sheriff Darrell Davidson said he was looking at two or three
different options and wasn't prepared to discuss them at this
meeting. He said he would like to make a presentation to the
budget committee on Tuesday, April 30, 1991.
Karen Green, Community Development Director, asked if the
motion before the Board would apply only to tax-supported
departments.
PAGE 13 MINUTES: 4/24/91
0106 1100
Commissioner Throop said it applied to "departments where if
we made the reduction from 40 to 36 hours, there would be a
financial benefit to the General Fund." Those departments
whose reduction would provide no financial benefit to the
General Fund would be exempted.
VOTE: THROOP: YES
SCHLANGEN: YES
MAUDLIN: YES
Chairman Maudlin left the meeting at this time and Commissioner
Throop took over as Chair of the meeting. In attendance were
acting Chair Throop, Commissioner Schlangen, Counsel Rick Isham,
District Attorney Michael Dugan and Chief Deputy District Attorney
Joshua Marquis.
17. HOUSER REQUEST FOR SPECIAL PROSECUTOR FOR GUZEK CASE
Chair Throop said the reason for the meeting was a letter from
Doug Houser requesting that the County consider hiring a
special prosecutor (Ron Brown) for the Randy Guzek trial and
suggested some kind of a cost-sharing arrangement between the
County and the Houser family.
There was extensive discussion on the advantages and
disadvantages of using a special prosecutor, however it was
the District Attorney's responsibility to make the final
decision. The District Attorney had confidence that Joshua
Marquis, Chief Deputy District Attorney, had the necessary
expertise and the District Attorney's Office would allocate
the necessary support and time necessary to successfully
handle this trial.
DESCHU ES COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
_ To?Thro ,
Nancy
BOCC:alb
ommissio er
ch angen, Commiss
lin,
PAGE 14 MINUTES: 4/24/91