1992-29845-Minutes for Meeting August 26,1992 Recorded 9/3/199292-29845
MINUTES
0-1_19-05C3
q^,C_E
DESCHUTES COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS -
August 26, 1992
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;
Bruce White, Assistant Counsel; Paul Blikstad, Planner; George
Read, Planning Director; Karen Green, Community Development
Director; Sukey Walker, CYSC; Kevin Harrison, Senior Planner; Mike
Maier, County Administrator; and Terry Silbaugh, Search and Rescue.
1. CONSENT AGENDA
Consent agenda items before the Board were: #1, signature of
Declaration of Dedication for a portion of Hunnell Road; #2,
signature of Declaration of Dedication for Blue Eagle Road;
#3, signature of Declaration of Dedication for additional
right of way on NW 19th Street; #4, chair signature of
Clinical Affiliation Agreement with Central Oregon Community
College; #5, chair signature of agreement with CSD to provide
sex offender treatment; #6, signature of Conservation Easement
for Robert and Mildred Sampson; #7, signature of MP -92-8
dividing a .86 -acre parcel between Brookswood Boulevard and
Blakley Road into two lots in an RS zone for the Pammenters;
#8, chair signature of liquor license renewals for Deli & More
in LaPine, Casa De Ricardo, Crane Prairie Resort, Bend Golf
Club, Three Creeks Lake Store, Thousand Trails; and for Mt.
Bachelor Pine Martin Lodge, West Village Lodge, Minilodge,
Nordic Lodge, and Sunrise Lodge; #9, chair signature of
Indemnity Agreement for Eastmont Church for the Eagles -Chuck
Austin Run; #10, signature of Order 92-086 assigning the road
name of Mars Lane; #11, signature of Order 92-096 changing the
name of (NW) Bullion Lane to (NW) Homestead Court; and #12,
signature of Order 92-097 changing name of (NW) Odem Falls Way
to (NW) Odin Falls Way.
THROOP: I'll move approval of the twelve consent agenda
items that we worked through thoroughly on Monday.
SCHLANGEN: I will second the motion.
VOTE: THROOP: YES
SCHLANGEN: YES
MAUDLIN: YES
PAGE 1 MINUTES: 8-26-92
2.
3.
PUBLIC HEARING: ADAMS' APPEAL OF HEARINGS OFFICER'S DENIAL OF
MP -91-49
Before the Board was a public hearing on the Adams' appeal of
the Hearings Officer's denial of MP -91-49 which would create
two 20 -acre farm parcels in an EFU-20 zone on SW Young Avenue.
Chairman Maudlin opened the public hearing and announced that
the appellant's attorney had requested that it be postponed.
The public hearing was continued to September 23, 1992, at
10 a.m.
DECISION ON J -BAR -J BOYS RANCH EQUESTRIAN EVENT APPEAL
Before the Board was a decision on the appeal of the Hearings
Officer's approval of a conditional use permit for an
equestrian activities facility on the J -Bar -J Boys Ranch.
Chairman Maudlin said he felt the J -Bar -J Boys Ranch was a
proper location for this use, and he was "leaning toward"
allowing the use and upholding the Hearings Officer's
decision.
Commission Throop said he concurred with Chairman Maudlin. He
was familiar with the ranch site, however he had made a visit
to the area on Monday to look at the neighboring residential
properties with particular application in mind. The site
visit did not change his perspective on any of the issues,
however it confirmed his opinion. He said the site was zoned
for multiple use agriculture and did have a 10 acre minimum
lot size, it was outside the urban growth boundary, it was 36+
acres, and the proposed two-week use would be the only use
allowed on the site other than the classroom facility. He
felt this activity could be a "nice, defining feature for that
northeast boundary of Bend" while making the separation
between urban and rural. He supported an approval with the
findings and decision in the Hearings Officer's decision. He
felt the record was sufficient to address the applicable
standards. He ran through the issues which staff should pull
together as part of the Board's findings and decision
document: (1) traffic: Hamby Road was a rural collector and
had a sufficient weight limit to be able to handle the use;
(2) noise: this issue could be mitigated as spelled out in
the testimony; (3) dust: could be mitigated --greater control
of dust because applicant would control the site and have a
better system; (4) applicant had indicated site would be
developed to equestrian standards and he felt this should be
added to the conditions of approval; (5) applicant offered a
600 horse cap for the event which he felt was a reasonable
condition which should provide some assurances to the
neighborhood; (6) spectators who would attend would be
reasonable for the event and the parcel and the two week -ends
PAGE 2 MINUTES: 8-26-92
per year; ( 7 ) the vendors had limited impacts on the adjoining
area; and (8) the few overnight guests had limited impacts.
Therefore, addressing the land use standards for the zone, the
applicant "clearly meets the standards and the record clearly
demonstrates that those standards are met." He observed that
this was a good event for Deschutes County, Central Oregon,
and Oregon. It also provided a benefit to a very important
program in Central Oregon. He felt this use would certainly
beat other uses which could occur on this parcel if the urban
growth boundary was expanded, i.e. a subdivision. In the
Hearings Officer's findings and decision document, he thought
the findings of fact were accurate and sufficient for the
Board's document, and he supported conditions 1-6 in that
document. He wanted to add four additional conditions: (1)
that all promotional materials giving directions to the site
use Highway 20/Hamby Road as the route; (2) that the site be
developed to equestrian standards as they indicated it would
be; (3) that a cap of 600 horses be placed on the event; and
(4) that the event not evolve in such a way that it would be
common place for participants to stay on the site overnight
(no problem with the kind of casual overnight use happening
now with the majority staying in lodging facilities in the
community) .
Commissioner Schlangen said she had also visited the site in
the last week, and she had ridden in many grand prix events.
She said the events could only be held on grass, and she
didn't know of any other site which would be "as well taken
care of." She felt the event was a good use for this site
which was zoned MUA. She didn't feel there would be a major
dust problem since they had plenty of water and would be using
the grass just for this event. The event would only be for a
couple of weeks and only being during daylight hours. The
traffic was mostly horses coming in and leaving which only
happened once during the event. She felt the only people who
would be camping in the area would be grooms for the horses.
She had attended the event every year, and the noise from the
amplification system wasn't that loud or late in the day. The
manure would be easier to take care of at this site since they
would have control over the site. She agreed with
Commissioner Throop on the 600 horse cap and routing the
traffic on Highway 20, but didn't have any "great feelings
about" the other two conditions he proposed. She would vote
to uphold the Hearings Officer's decision and felt his
conditions were good. Concerning the "Cadillac" advertising,
she felt it gave the event prestige, and the "community should
be very pleased" since it would bring more money into the
community. She felt the event was very good for this area and
that the Bend community was very lucky to have it.
PAGE 3 MINUTES: 8-26-92
®1.19-05142
THROOP: I'll move that the Deschutes County) Board of
Commissioners uphold the Hearings Officer's
findings and decisions in the J -Bar -J application
and that three conditions be added to the list of
six conditions: the first that any directions
provided, direct traffic to Highway 20 and Hamby;
secondly, that the site be developed as was
described in the materials presented during the
deliberation to equestrian standards; and third,
there be a 600 horse cap on the event.
SCHLANGEN: I will second.
Bruce White pointed out that the motion should include
direction to the staff to develop sufficient findings to
support the Board's decision. Commissioner Throop said that
was certainly what he had intended, and as part of the motion
he would like to see staff develop sufficient findings to
support the decision. Bruce White also wanted to make clear
that the Board's decision was based upon the record which
developed at the hearing and not on the site visit.
Commissioners Throop and Schlangen agreed that was the case.
Bruce White asked if it was clear what "equestrian standards"
were. Commissioner Throop said his intent was that
"equestrian standards" would be what J -Bar -J described as what
they were going to do to perfect the site in the materials
which they submitted. He felt there was sufficient
information in the materials submitted to write this
condition. Bruce White mentioned the issue of the
appropriateness of the building in this application. Chairman
Maudlin asked if a classroom wasn't an allowed use in this
zone? Bruce White said when the language was recently
rewritten, this type of use was mistakenly left out.
Commissioner Throop felt the Fitch decision was sufficient on
that issue.
Chairman Maudlin felt that the County would have a "certain
amount of control" over this event if it were held at the J -
Bar -J Boys Ranch which it would not have at any other site.
Therefore, "if they were not good neighbors," the County would
have an opportunity to influence the ranch.
VOTE: THROOP: YES
SCHLANGEN: YES
MAUDLIN: YES
4. RESOLUTION 92-066 AMENDING FEE SCHEDULE
Before the Board was signature of Resolution 92-066 which
would amend the fee schedule Resolution 92-022 to include a
fee for the building height exception process.
PAGE 4 MINUTES: 8-26-92
5.
N.
7.
0-111-1 9-05w
Chairman Maudlin asked how the $300 was determined for this
exception process. George Read said that other similar review
fees were considered along with the amount of work necessary
(considering this was a contentious criteria) , and the cost of
sending out the public notice.
MAUDLIN: I would entertain a motion for signature of
Resolution 92-066 amending fee schedule Resolution
92-022.
SCHLANGEN: So moved.
VOTE: THROOP: YES
SCHLANGEN: YES
MAUDLIN: YES
PERIODIC REVIEW RESOLUTION AND ORDINANCES
Postponed.
CENTRAL OREGON COMMUNITY ACTION SERVICE CONTRACT
Before the Board was signature of an Agreement for Subgrant
under Deschutes County's Children and Youth Commission Child
Care Block Grant.
Sukey Walker said this was a contract for the Central Oregon
Community Action Agency Network to provide a part-time person
to recruit child care providers in the County.
SCHLANGEN: I move signature of Central Oregon Community
Action Service Contract.
THROOP: Second the motion.
VOTE: THROOP: YES
SCHLANGEN: YES
MAUDLIN: YES
ORDER 92-085 RELATING TO CDD REVENUE FUND
Before the Board was signature of Order 92-085 relating to the
Community Development Department Revenue Fund.
THROOP: I'll move signature of the Order.
SCHLANGEN: Second.
VOTE: THROOP: YES
SCHLANGEN: YES
MAUDLIN: YES
PAGE 5 MINUTES: 8-26-92
M
9.
ACCOUNTS PAYABLE VOUCHERS
01, f 9-05"i 4
Before the Board were accounts payable vouchers in the amount
of $132,072.52.
SCHLANGEN: Move approval upon review.
THROOP: Second the motion.
VOTE: THROOP: YES
SCHLANGEN: YES
MAUDLIN: YES
HEARINGS OFFICER'S DECISION ON MP -91-27 FOR HORACE FENNELL
Rick Isham said the referral by the Board to the Hearings
Officer was for a recommendation of decision, therefore the
Hearings Officer had not made a decision on this issue and
only the Board would make a decision. The purpose of having
the Hearings Officer reopen the record was so that County
Planning staff could supplement the record with respect to the
ordinance criteria, and so the Hearings Officer could make a
new decision and recommend that decision to the Board of
County Commissioners based on the LUBA remand. Chairman
Maudlin asked if that was what the Hearings Officer did and
Mr. Isham said no.
Commissioner Throop asked George Read if he felt there was a
difference of opinion between our legal/planning staff and the
Hearings Officer on the legality of conditional approvals?
George Read said he had spoken to the Hearings Officer
previously about conditional approvals. Mr. Read said there
might be a basis for looking at this as a conditional
approval, i.e. if you got a partition and there were no
houses, the conditional use permit would be a condition of
approval for any houses. The fact that the houses existed in
the Fennell case put another twist on it. He felt the
Hearings Officer should not have made a decision in this
manner, however he felt it was an issue which needed to be
discussed.
Because of the way the Hearings Officer's wrote his decision,
Rick Isham suggested that, although it was unnecessary, the
Board call up the Hearings Officer's decision for review which
would make it clear that the Board was issuing a new decision.
The Board would not need to hold any additional hearings. The
purpose of referring it to the Hearings Officer was for him to
conduct an evidentiary hearing and recommend a decision,
however his decision "was not as helpful as one might have
hoped." George Read pointed out that the Hearings Officer
established a 10 -day appeal period. Rick Isham said again
that he didn't feel it was required, however he recommended
PAGE 6 MINUTES: 8-26-92
10.
oar
( 9-05,-1,5
that the Board call up the decision since it would clarify the
record in case the applicants believed they had some rights
under the Hearings Officer's decision. Bruce White had some
concerns about the ramifications of calling up the decision.
Rick Isham then suggested that this issue be set for a work
session, the parties be informed that the Board had accepted
the recommendation, and that the Hearings Officer's statement
about the 10 -day appeal period was not appropriate to the
decision. After further discussion, Rich Isham said he had a
better solution: "issue an order calling it up and stay that,
and consider the opinion as a recommendation as a separate
procedure, and make a decision." He said he would prepare a
letter to that effect.
THROOP: I'll move that course of action.
SCHLANGEN: I'll second it.
VOTE: THROOP: YES
SCHLANGEN: YES
MAUDLIN: YES
The Board decided to have a work session on this issue on
Tuesday, September 8 at 11:00 a.m. with the decision probably
on Wednesday, September 9.
SCHEDULE FOR EFU WORK SESSION AND PUBLIC HEARING
Before the Board was a request from Kevin Harrison to schedule
dates for a work session and a public hearing on the Exclusive
Farm Use zone amendment. The public hearing was schedule for
Wednesday, September 23 at 6 p.m. and would be held at the
City of Public Works Building. A work session was scheduled
for September 15 at 1:30 p.m. There was discussion on whether
or not the Board would need to have a second public hearing in
order to give DLCD 45 days notice. Bruce White felt that the
45 -day notice to DLCD did not apply given this was in context
with periodic review.
Rick Isham suggested that the Board reconvene at 3:30 p.m.
this afternoon so that the staff could discuss these issues
and come to the Board with a recommendation.
RESOLUTION 92-069 ESTABLISHING CHECKING ACCOUNT FOR PROPERTY
MANAGEMENT
Before the Board was signature of Resolution 92-069 which
would establish an imprest checking account for property
management in the amount of $200.
PAGE 7 MINUTES: 8-26-92
12.
13.
14.
01 19-o,�s
Rick Isham said that each time the County did a property
transaction, there was a usual 10 -day delay in getting a check
from the County Treasurer before the deeds could be recorded.
This would allow the property manager to write a check and
deliver it to the County Clerk on the same day that the Board
approved the documents.
MAUDLIN: Entertain a motion for signature of Resolution 92-
069.
THROOP: I'll make the motion.
SCHLANGEN: Second.
VOTE: THROOP: YES
SCHLANGEN: YES
MAUDLIN: YES
RESOLUTION 92-070 - TERMS AND CONDITIONS FOR EXTENSION OF BOND
ANTICIPATION NOTES
Rick Isham said the County had an LID Bond Anticipation Note
for prior year LIDs which was coming due, and the current year
LIDs which were paid for under a bond anticipation note was
coming due next spring. Therefore, he wanted to take the
first bond anticipation note ad extend it so that it would
have the same maturity date as the one for this year's
projects so the County would only need to issue one bond.
This item was continued to the 3:30 p.m. Board meeting.
ORDER 92-101 FOR BUDGETED CASH TRANSFERS
Before the Board was signature of Order 92-101 transferring
cash within various funds of the Deschutes County Budget.
THROOP: I'll move signature of the order.
SCHLANGEN: Second.
VOTE: THROOP: YES
SCHLANGEN: YES
MAUDLIN: YES
SUBDIVISION PLAT FOR COLVIN ESTATES PHASE 2
Before the Board was signature of a City subdivision plat for
Colvin Estates Phase 2 off Daggett Lane for Mike Tennant.
THROOP: Move signature.
SCHLANGEN: Second.
PAGE 8 MINUTES: 8-26-92
07/9-05"17
VOTE: THROOP: YES
SCHLANGEN YES
MAUDLIN: YES
15. CONDOMINIUM PLAT FOR RIVER RIDGE ONE, STAGE D
Before the Board was signature of River Ridge One, Stage D,
Condominium Plat located off Mt. Bachelor Drive for Mt.
Bachelor Village Corporation.
SCHLANGEN: Move signature.
THROOP: Second.
VOTE: THROOP: YES
SCHLANGEN: YES
MAUDLIN: YES
16. AGREEMENT WITH OREGON EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT DIVISION
Before the Board was signature of a Local/State Comprehensive
Cooperative Agreement with the Oregon Emergency Management
Division for emergency services. Terry Silbaugh said this was
a renewal of the current agreement. Rick Isham expressed
concern about some of the new conditions. Terry Silbaugh said
they had plans to get a list of all the people in the county
who would not be able to hear warning signals because of
disabilities so that they could be taken care of in case of an
emergency. He said he planned to hand deliver this agreement
to Emergency Management in Salem so he could discuss the
conditions in person to help him fully understand them.
SCHLANGEN: I move signature
service agreement.
THROOP: Second the motion.
VOTE: THROOP: YES
SCHLANGEN: YES
MAUDLIN: YES
of renewal of emergency
17. FOUR RIVERS VECTOR CONTROL DISTRICT
Commissioner Throop said that approval of the Four Rivers
Vector Control District plan modification had been waiting for
the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife to review the plan
modification to determine if the use of Golden Bear Oil would
be acceptable. ODF&W had responded that it was acceptable,
therefore, Commissioner Throop suggested that the Board
approve it also.
PAGE 9 MINUTES: 8-26-92
o 3
THROOP: I'll move that the Four Rivers Vector Control
District Plan be modified to allow use of Golden
Bear Oil in concurrence with the ODF&W decision.
SCHLANGEN: Second the motion.
VOTE: THROOP: YES
SCHLANGEN: YES
MAUDLIN: YES
18. DUMPING FEE WAIVER REQUEST FROM OPPORTUNITY CENTER
Commissioner Throop said he had received a request from the
Opportunity Center for a fee waiver for dumping unusable trash
which came into their thrift store. They already had a fee
waiver at Negus Landfill for their Redmond operation but were
opening a satellite program in Bend and needed one here also.
He said it was similar to what the County had already done for
the Salvation Army and St. Vincent DePaul. If this were
approved, he would be willing to send them a letter indicating
they would have to do everything possible to discourage trash
from coming to their facility.
THROOP: I'll move fee waiver.
SCHLANGEN: Second.
VOTE: THROOP: YES
SCHLANGEN: YES
MAUDLIN: YES
19. ALLIANCE FOR A DRUG FREE CENTRAL OREGON
Commissioner Throop pointed out that the Alliance for a Drug
Free Central Oregon had made a presentation to the Board on
Monday, and he suggested that a committee be established to
consider their proposal and make a recommendation to the
Board. The Board asked Mike Maier, County Administrator and
Rick Isham, County Counsel to flush out the union/legal issues
involved with the possible implementation of the Alliance
proposals and make a recommendation to the Board on how to
proceed. Rick Isham pointed out that there had been a drug
program in place at the Public Works Department for two years
which could be used as a model for the entire County. The
Public Works program had a requirement that the employee had
to operate a vehicle on a regular basis or operate a machine
where there was risk of injury before the potential employee
would be subject to a preemployment drug test. Chairman
Maudlin agreed that it wouldn't be necessary to test office
staff, however there should be pre-employment testing for
people who would drive vehicles, etc. on the job, and testing
for cause.
PAGE 10 MINUTES: 8-26-92
Mike Maier asked whether the Board wanted a response on the
proposals concerning the matrix and the signs. Chairman
Maudlin said there were proposals which the County wasn't
going to address.
Rick Isham pointed out that Federal Courts have said employers
could not give pre-employment drug tests to everyone, because
that would be a search. A search by a government had to be
based on reasonable suspicion, and the fact that someone
applies for a job was not reasonable suspicion. Other courts
had been more liberal in their standard. He said the County
would not know if it had a legal program until the County
denied employment to someone because of his/her preemployment
test results. If he/she was a truck driver, he could
guarantee that the County would win the case if he/she tested
positive for drugs. However, if he/she was applying for a
secretarial position, he didn't know whether the case could be
won if that person was the most qualified. Chairman Maudlin
said he didn't feel the County should be testing every office
assistant, but should be testing for cause. Rick Isham
mentioned that in order to have any preemployment testing, the
testing would have to be done at the time the offer of
employment was made, so the County's current system would have
to be modified.
Commissioner Throop suggested that the Board ask Mike Maier
and Rick Isham to look at all five elements of the Alliance's
proposal and come back and discuss them with the Board. Mike
Maier agreed that the Board should make some response to the
Alliance on all of their proposals. Mike Maier and Rick Isham
said they would get back to the Board on this issue during
their meeting with the Board on Tuesday, September 8 at 1:30
p.m. (since their regular Monday meeting time fell on the
Labor Day holiday).
The Board meeting was continued until 3:30 p.m.
Chairman Maudlin reconvened the meeting at 3:30 p.m. Board
members in attendance were: Dick Maudlin, Tom Throop and
Nancy Pope Schlangen. Also present were: Rick Isham, County
Counsel; Bruce White, Assistant County Counsel; Brad Chalfant,
Property Manager; Karen Green, Community Development Director;
and George Read, Planning Director
(10. -continued) SCHEDULE FOR EFU WORK SESSION AND PUBLIC HEARING
Karen Green said she,
discussed whether there
on the EFU lands after
45 -day notice provision
would not need to set a
PAGE 11 MINUTES: 8-26-92
Bruce White and George Read had
needed to be a second public hearing
September in order to accommodate the
to DLCD. It appeared that the Board
later hearing for this purpose, since
o? s-0583
the County was either not required to give 45 -day notice or if
the 45 -day notice statute applied, it had a provision wherein
the Board could declare emergency circumstances to shorten the
notice period. She said DLCD had been receiving copies of
everything the County had been doing all along, so they have
been aware of the County's progress. She felt the County
could still proceed based upon the approved periodic review
schedule and hearing schedule approved in the Board's meeting
that morning. If discussions with DLCD changed that, she
would come back and discuss it with the Board. She suggested
that the Board set another work session on this issues for
September 30, 1992, when the Board would give the Planning
Staff their consensus on this issue, so the staff could go
back and finish up the necessary paper work. It would be
brought back to the Board for adoption on October 7 if
possible, since that was the only date in October when
Commissioner Schlangen would be available.
The Board decided to start their regular Board meeting at
8:30 a.m. on Wednesday, September 30, and then begin their
work session on this issue when the Board meeting was
finished.
(12. -continued) RESOLUTION 92-070 AUTHORIZING ISSUANCE AND
SALE OF BOND ANTICIPATION NOTES
Before the Board was signature of Resolution 92-070
authorizing the issuance and sale of limited tax general
obligation bond anticipation notes, 1992 Series D, in the
principal amount of not more than $210,000.
Rick Isham said it would authorize the County Administrator to
roll the LID notes issued in March of 1992 by issuing a new
note, and the new notes would have the same maturity date as
the $470,000 Series B notes for the LIDs which the County did
this spring and summer. There would be one bond issued for
the LIDs, the interest rate would be 3%, and U.S. National
Bank would be buying the notes.
SCHLANGEN: I move signature of Resolution 92-070.
THROOP: I'll second the motion.
VOTE: THROOP: YES
SCHLANGEN: YES
MAUDLIN: YES
20. ISSUANCE OF JAIL BONDS
Before the Board was consideration of how and when to issue
the $9.5 million jail bonds. Rick Isham said the current
interest rates would not get lower. When the County
PAGE 12 MINUTES: 8-26-92
originally issued the $1 million bond anticipation note for
the jail, it had a maturity date of May 1993. It was
estimated to take care of costs until the sale in May in 1993.
In May the project would have been bid so the bond could be
issued for the actual cost of the project. If the County
issued now instead, the County would be assured of getting the
lowest interest rate. The County Administrator had set it up
so that the County would levy the first tax for the jail bonds
starting July 1, 1993, so the first bond interest and
principle payment would fall due just about the time the
County would start collecting taxes in the fall.
If the County decided to issue the bonds this fall in order to
be assured of the lowest interest rate, there were two issues
to consider: (1) the County would already be issuing
approximately $4 million for the golf course, and if the
County issued more than $10 million in debt in any calendar
year, all issues would be considered non-bank qualified and
there would be an interest penalty to banks to purchase them.
Therefore, there would be a lot better market for the bonds if
the County did not sell more that $10 million in any calendar
year. (2) the County had already issued $1,070,000 worth of
LID notes, so issuing the entire $9.5 million jail bonds this
year would create problems: if the project did not cost $9.5
million, the County would have to put an early call provision
into the bond sale. Calling meant sending a letter to the
bond holder saying the County buying was their bond back.
Therefore, everyone who would buy the bond would charge the
County a higher interest rate because of that provision. Once
the County knew what the project costs would be, there
wouldn't have to be a call provision. The County would either
have to capitalize interest (issuing a bond to pay the first
interest payment), or the County would have to have a long-
term interest payment (first payment would be after one year
or fourteen months out) which would also cost the County
money.
Mr. Isham said that after meeting with Mike Maier, County
Administrator, they felt it was best to have two issues --one
this year ($4 million) and one next year when the actual costs
were known. The additional cost of having two issues would be
$30,000. Chairman Maudlin pointed out that the interest rate
on $9.5 million would not have to go up very much between now
and next spring to cost the County more than the additional
$30,000 cost of issuing part of the bond this year. He felt
the County would probably be better off issuing part of the
bonds now and paying the penalty. Commissioner Throop asked
if Legal Counsel had any problem with what Chairman Maudlin
was suggesting, or if he had any better alternative. Mr.
Isham said he liked Chairman Maudlin's suggestion since it
would allow the County to issue up to its maximum this year,
which would give the County plenty of working capital, and
PAGE 13 MINUTES: 8-26-92
then the County wouldn't be forced into issuing on a
particular date next spring. The only negatives were the
enhanced issuance costs. The only other alternative would be
to delay issuance of the golf course bonds, however since the
County had already issued some LID bond this year, that still
couldn't allow for issuance of the total amount of jail bonds
this year anyway.
Mr. Isham outlined how he felt the Board wanted him to
proceed. (1) Plan on issuing up to the County's maximum
amount (under $10 million) in all issues including the golf
course and jail this year. (2) The second portion of the jail
issue would be next year to be timed with the best interest
rate possible. (3) LIDs would be next year when the
anticipation notes were paid off. This would allow the County
to capture as much of the current low interest rate as
possible, since the County's financial advisor had indicated
that interest rates would not get lower. The Board agreed
with this assessment of how to proceed.
21. POSSIBLE USE OF LAPINE INDUSTRIAL PARK SITE FOR BECHTEL
Brad Chalfant said he had been working with Bechtel, the
company which was putting in the natural gas pipeline across
Oregon, and they wanted to lease some County property over an
old landfill. He was concerned that the Bechtel operation
might cause toxic material, which may be under the landfill,
to migrate to adjoining properties. He felt the safest thing
for the County to do was to "leave sleeping dog lie" and not
allow them to use the site. However, if Bechtel went
somewhere else, the LaPine community would lose the short-term
economic benefit of having that operation centered there.
Commissioner Throop asked why Bechtel couldn't lease another
area of the industrial park. Mr. Chalfant said this was the
only site which would work for them. Mr. Isham said they
needed this site because it had railroad access. Their pipe
would come in by rail, they would stack it at the site until
it was needed, then load it on trucks which could carry only
one or two of the huge pipes at a time.
Commissioner Schlangen asked about water monitoring. Mr.
Chalfant said the County had not done any water monitoring.
He said they had reached an agreement with Bechtel on
everything except some of the terms under the pollution clause
which required them to assume all responsibility for anything
which would be discovered (i.e. surrounding properties having
water problems). Bruce White said that even if Bechtel agreed
to that language, the County would still have to prove that
the problem resulted from Bechtel's activity. He felt there
was a "proof problem" because of the County's lack of base-
line data. Commissioner Throop said he felt it would be
PAGE 14 MINUTES: 8-26-92
W-1 9-RUS3
stupid to let them use the site. Mr. Chalfant felt it was a
gamble for the County. Mr. Isham pointed out that the County
could do nothing with this site and still have problems. Mr.
Chalfant mentioned again that if the County did not lease the
property, LaPine would lose the economic benefit of having
Bechtel located there. Mr. Isham said that he had already
been contacted by two members of the LaPine Chamber Committee
who indicated that they were waiting for Bechtel to come to
LaPine.
Mr. Chalfant said he requested that Bechtel post a $500,000
bond because they were creating a shell corporation. If there
was a problem, the County wouldn't be dealing with Bechtel,
but a shell corporation which didn't exit now and wouldn't
exist three or four years from now. Bechtel had agreed to do
that, however they did not want to be responsible for what
might be in the old landfill or for anything they didn't dump
on the site. Commissioner Throop asked why they were so
interested in this site? Mr. Isham said the pipe contractor
would save a lot of money by using this site because of the
railroad access.
Chairman Maudlin said he felt there was some risk in leasing
this site, however he felt the County should take that risk.
Rick Isham said if the County was going to assume more risk
than was originally intended, then the County should charge
more to lease the property. They had been discussing $15,000
for a 18 -month lease, so he suggested increasing that to
$25,000.
Mr. Chalfant asked how much to be Board wanted him to demand
in the pollution clause, i.e. a requirement that they
indemnify the County concerning anything which might be
discovered in two years. Commissioner Throop suggested that
the Board agree to more forward with negotiations while
increasing the lease charge to $25,000 if the County was going
to be taking more of the risk, and then asking Mr. Chalfant to
negotiate the best agreement for the County possible.
Chairman Maudlin said that was fine with him. Mr. Isham said
he thought they would agreed to take responsibility for
anything which the County could prove they caused within the
two year period, which meant that the County would spend every
penny of the lease payment trying to prove that they had
caused the problem. Bechtel's defense would be that if they
had never used the site, the County could have had problems
anyway. Bruce White advised that the Board not allow them to
lease the property. Chairman Maudlin said the site had not
bee used as a landfill for very long, and it had been buried
with pumice and wet down for a long time. He felt it had been
compacted enough and didn't think there would be a problem.
PAGE 15 MINUTES: 8-26-92
Mr. Chalfant said he understood his direction from the Board
was that the County demand more in compensation and negotiate
"what we can as far as the pollution clause." Commissioner
Throop asked that he come back to the Board before making the
final agreement. He requested that Mr. Chalfant negotiate the
best deal he felt he could, then bring it back to the Board so
the Board could take another look at it before giving Bechtel
the signal that an agreement had been reached.
Chairman Maudlin pointed out that the pipe didn't weigh much,
so it was only the trucks that would put pressure on the
landfill. Rick Isham agreed but said they would be using
those great big log loaders to move the pipe. Chairman
Maudlin said the tracks on those log loaders were very wide
and would distribute the load. Commissioner Throop asked Mr.
Chalfant to "get what you can but don't chase them out the
door." Mr. Isham mentioned that Bechtel may be negotiating on
other sites also.
DATED this day of
Commissioners of Deschutes C
7/:�W
Recording Secretary
PAGE 16 MINUTES: 8-26-92
1992, by the Board of
Tom ThrooD, Cess
Ma
,' Commissioniar