2000-780-Order No. 2000-085 Recorded 7/12/2000VOL: CJ2000 PAGE: 780
RECORDED DOCUMENT
STATE OF OREGON
COUNTY OF DESCHUTES
111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111
*CJ2000-780 * Vol -Page Printed: 07/13/2000 14:53:21
DO NOT REMOVE THIS CERTIFICATE
(This certificate constitutes a part of the original instrument in accordance with
ORS 205.180(2). Removal of this certificate may invalidate this certificate and affect
the admissibility of the original instrument into evidence in any legal proceeding.)
I hereby certify that the attached instrument was received
and duly recorded in Deschutes County records:
DATE AND TIME:
DOCUMENT TYPE:
Jul. 12, 2000; 12:32 p.m.
Order (CJ)
NUMBER OF PAGES: 84
MARY SUE PENHOLLOW
DESCHUTES COUNTY CLERK
KEY
UN -ED
J U000
---------------------------------
REVIEWED_��
BEFORE THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIO ERSLEGAL COUNSEL
FOR �'
c�
DESCHUTES COUNTY, OREGON
An Order Approving the Petition for
Incorporation of the Proposed City of
La Pine; Calling an Election Thereon; ) ''•'
Adopting Findings and Conclusions; and ) <_ ; �
Prescribing an Effective Date. )
ORDER No. 2000-085
WHEREAS, a petition for incorporation of a new City of La Pine has been filed pursuant
to ORS chapter 221; and
WHEREAS, ORS 221.040(2) provides that, upon the filing of a petition for
incorporation, the Deschutes County Board of Commissioners (Board) shall conduct a public
hearing upon the merits of the petition; and
WHEREAS, ORS 197.175(1) makes the Board's consideration of a petition to
incorporate a new city an exercise of County planning and zoning responsibility; and
WHEREAS, ORS 221.040(2) authorizes the Board to alter the boundaries of the
proposed city to include all territory that may be benefited by the formation of the city but must
first provide owners and residents of property within such additional territory notice and
opportunity to present evidence and argument on the applicable issues; and
WHEREAS, the Board, upon notice duly given, conducted the required public hearing on
the proposed petition on June 12, 2000; and
WHEREAS, after taking testimony at the hearing, the Board kept the record open for
written testimony until June 19, 2000; and
WHEREAS, the Board has considered all of the written and oral testimony and argument
submitted concerning the proposed incorporation; and
WHEREAS, the Board has determined that no additional territory would be benefited by
the proposed city; and
WHEREAS, the Board has determined that certain properties would not benefit from
inclusion within the proposed boundaries but that these exclusions would have no appreciable
effect on the economic feasibility and, therefore, has removed them from the petition; now,
therefore,
Page 1. ORDER APPROVING PETITION FOR INCORPORATION
KA419351000011EJSIEJS 02188
THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF DESCHUTES COUNTY,
OREGON, ORDERS as follows:
Section 1. That the petition for an election on the proposed city of La Pine, with
boundaries as amended by the Board, is hereby granted.
Section 2. In support of the decision set forth in Section 1 of this order, the Board makes
the findings and conclusions set forth in Exhibit B attached hereto and by this reference
incorporated herein.
Section 3. That this decision shall become effective on July 12, 2000, the date it shall be
mailed to the chief petitioners and other parties to these proceedings.
Section 4. That the election relating to the incorporation of the proposed City of La Pine
shall be held by mail on November 7, 2000. This election is the next regular biennial statewide
election that is not sooner than 90 days after the date of this order. The exterior boundaries of
the proposed City of La Pine as herein approved are as described in Exhibit A attached hereto,
which is incorporated herein by this reference.
Section 5. The County Legal Counsel shall prepare the ballot title for the election
ordered in Section 4 above and shall include in the ballot title a description of the boundaries of
the proposed City of La Pine using streets and other generally recognized features and a
statement of the tax rate included in the petition for incorporation of the proposed City of La
Pine in compliance with the requirements of 221.040. Said measure shall be submitted to the
County Clerk on or before July 12, 2000
Section 6. At the election ordered in Section 4 of this order, five City Council members
shall be elected. The County Legal Counsel shall prepare a notice of City Council election. The
notice shall be filed with the County Clerk on or before July 12, 2000.
DATED this 12th day of July, 2000.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF DESCHUTES CO TY, OREGON
li(n'da4Swear' en, Chair
ATTEST: Dennis R. Luke, Commissioner
Recording Secretary Tom DeWolf, Commissio
Page 2. ORDER APPROVING PETITION FOR INCORPORATION
KIA1935\00001\EJS\EJS 02188
Exhibit A
DESCRIPTION SHEET
Proposed La Pine Incorporation Boundary
EXHIBIT A
pa9e- Lo f y ....
All those tracts of land located in Sections 13, 14, 15, 16, 21, 22, 23, 26, 27, 28, 29, 32,
33, 34, 35, and 36 of Township Twenty-one (21) South, Range Ten (10) East; and all
those tracts of land located in Sections 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, and 17
of Township Twenty-two (22) South, Range Ten (10) East, of the Willamette Meridian,
Deschutes County, Oregon, the boundary of which is described as follows:
Beginning at the Northeast corner of said Section 1, Township Twenty-two (22) South,
Range Ten (10) East, thence west along the North line of said Section 1, to the easterly
right-of-way line of The Dalles-California Highway; thence southwesterly along said
highway right-of-way line to the easterly right-of-way line of the Great Northern
Railroad; thence southwesterly along said railroad right-of-way line to the northerly
right-of-way line of Reed Road; thence easterly along said road right-of-way line to the
intersection of said road right-of-way line with the northerly projection of the East line of
La Pine Industrial Site Phase II; thence southerly along the East line of La Pine Industrial
Site Phase II to the Southeast corner thereof; thence westerly along the South line of said
La Pine Industrial Site Phase II to the Southeast corner of said Section 14; thence
westerly along the South lines of Sections 14, 15, 16 to the Southeast coiner of said
Section 17; thence westerly along the South line of said Section 17 to the South one-
quarter corner thereof; thence northerly along the north -south centerline of said Section
17 to the center one-quarter thereof, thence westerly along the east -west centerline of said
Section 17 to the Southeast comer of Deschutes River Acres; thence along the South line
of Deschutes River Acres to the West line thereof, thence northerly along the West line
of Deschutes River Acres to the North line thereof; thence easterly along the North line
of Deschutes River Acres to the West line of the First Addition to Deschutes River Acres;
thence northerly along the West line of the First Addition to Deschutes River Acres to the
North line thereof, thence easterly along the North line of the First Addition to Deschutes
River Acres to the South one-quarter corner of said Section 8; thence north along the
north -south centerline of said Section 8 to the South one-quarter corner of said Section 5;
thence north along the north -south centerline of said Section 5 to the South one-quarter
corner of said Section 32, Township Twenty-one (21) South, Range Ten (10) East, also
being the Southwest comer of Forest View First Addition; thence north along the West
line of Forest View First Addition to the -Southwest corner of Forest View; thence north
along the West line of Forest View to the intersection with the South line of said Section
29; thence continuing north along the West line of Forest View to the Northwest comer
thereof; thence east along the North line of Forest View to the Southwest corner of Tall
Pines Fifth Addition, also being the West one-quarter comer of said Section 28; thence
north along the West line of Tall Pines Fifth Addition to the Southwest comer of said
Section 21, also being the Southwest comer of Pine Meadows Tracts; thence continuing
north along the West line of said Pine Meadows Tracts to the Northwest comer thereof;
thence continuing north along the West line of said Section 21 to the Southwest corner of
Parkway Acres; thence continuing north along the West line of said Section 21 and said
EXHIBIT__A_ .._.._._--..__.....
Page —Z -
Parkway
Parkway Acres to the Southwest corner of said Section 16; thence continuing north along
the West line of said Section 16 and said Parkway Acres to the Southwest corner of Terra
De Oro Estates; thence continuing north along the West line of said Terra De Oro Estates
to the Northwest corner thereof, also being the Southwest corner of Deschutes River
Recreation Homesites Unit 8 Part 2; thence continuing north along the West line of said
Deschutes River Recreation Homesites Unit 8 Part 2 to the Northwest comer thereof, also
being the Northwest corner of said Section 16; thence east along the North line of said
Deschutes River Recreation Homesites Unit 8 Part 2 to the Northeast corner of said
Section 16; thence continuing along the North line of said Deschutes River Recreation
Homesites Unit 8 Part 2 to the Northeast corner of said Section 15; thence east along the
North line of said Section 14 to the Northeast corner thereof, thence east along the North
line of said Section 13 to the Northeast corner of Lazy River South; thence South along
the East line of said Lazy River South to the Southeast comer thereof; thence west along
the South line of said Lazy River South to the West line of said Section 13; thence south
along the West line of said Section 13 to the Northeast comer of said Section 23, also
being a point on the East line of Lazy River .South; thence south along the East line of
Lazy River South to the Southeast comer thereof, also being the Northeast comer of said
Section 35; thence east along the North line of said Section 36, also being the North line
of Potter's Estates; thence continuing east along the North line of said Section 36, also
being the North lines of Cagle Subdivision Numbers 4, 6, and 7; thence continuing east
along the North line of said Section 36 to the Northeast comer thereof, thence south
along the East line of said Section 36 to the Southeast corner thereof, also being the
Northeast corner of said Section 1, Township Twenty-two (22) South, Range Ten (10)
East, the true point of beginning.
EXHIBIT--t--
Page---3
XHIBIT______._._Page 3 I _ ---,
EXCEPTING THEREFROM the following:
a) All that property described in Deed Vol. 1999, Page: 23195, in the Deschutes County Clerk's Office,
being the North Half of the Northeast Quarter of Section 5, Township 22 South, Range 10 East, of the
Willamette Meridian, Deschutes County, Oregon, and generally being an 80 acre parcel lying
Southwest of the intersection of Burgess Road and Dorrance Meadow Road.
b) All that property described in Deed Vol. 283, Page: 1181, in the Deschutes County Clerk's Office,
being the Southeast Quarter, the South Half of the Northeast Quarter; and the East Half of the
Southwest Quarter of Section 3;
and the West 750 feet of the Southwest Quarter of the Northwest Quarter; the West 750 feet of the
Northwest Quarter of the Southwest Quarter; and the Southwest Quarter of the Southwest Quarter of
Section 2, Township 22 South, Range 10 East, of the Willamette Meridian, Deschutes County, Oregon.
c) All that portion of Section 2, Township 22 South, Range 10 East, of the Willamette Meridian,
Deschutes County, Oregon, as described in Deed Vol. 1999, Page: 38586, and all that portion of
Section 2, Township 22 South, Range 10 East, of the Willamette Meridian, Deschutes County,
Oregon, as described in Deed Vol. 335, Page: 1472.
d) The East Half of Section 9, Township 22 South, Range 10 East, of the Willamette Meridian, Deschutes
County, Oregon.
e) The North Half of the Southwest Quarter of Section 9, Township 22 South, Range 10 East, of the
Willamette Meridian, Deschutes County, Oregon.
f) That portion of the South Half of the Southwest Quarter of Section 9, Township 22 South, Range 10
East, of the Willamette Meridian, Deschutes County, Oregon, lying Southeasterly from the Little
Deschutes River.
g) Section 10, Township 22 South, Range 10 East, of the Willamette Meridian, Deschutes County,
Oregon: the North Half of the Northeast Quarter; the Southwest Quarter of the Northeast Quarter; the
Northwest Quarter; the Northwest Quarter of the Southwest Quarter.
h) Section 11, Township 22 South, Range 10 East, of the Willamette Meridian, Deschutes County,
Oregon: the Northwest Quarter of the Northwest Quarter.
Final Boundary of Proposed City of La Pine
eachutm County
r�asArr)abasaobnsystm ,��
st..�+ve cieaaar
Copyright ® 2000 by Deschutes County, Oregon.
All Rights Reserved Printed in the United States of America.
EXHIBIT "B"
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
RE: PETITION FOR THE
INCORPORATION OF ) FINDINGS IN SUPPORT OF
LA PINE ) ORDER GRANTING PETITION
APPLICANT: La Pine Community Action Team
Gloria Benzel, Dennis Carter and Ken Mulenex, Chief Petitioners
(hereinafter jointly called "Petitioners")
INTRODUCTION
This matter came before the Deschutes County Board of County Commissioners on a Petition for
the Incorporation of the City of La Pine fled by Gloria Benzel, Dennis Carter and Ken Mulenex,
Chief Petitioners. ORS 221.020 provides authority for the residents of an area, no part of which
lies in an incorporated city and in which 150 person reside, to seek to incorporate a city.
Pursuant to ORS 221.031, a petition for the incorporation in a form prescribed by rule of the
Secretary of State must be filed with the county clerk prior to circulating a petition to incorporate
any unincorporated territory as a city.
The required contents of a petition for incorporation are set out in ORS 221.031(2). The petition
must designate the name and address of no more than three persons as chief petitioners, all of
whom must be electors and residents within the boundaries of the proposed city. It shall contain
the name of the proposed city. Further, "the petition shall also include a proposed permanent
rate limit for operating taxes that would generate operating tax revenues sufficient to support an
adequate level of municipal services." The petition must also include a map indicating the
exterior boundaries of the proposed city.
ORS 221.035 requires that an economic feasibility statement ("EFS") must also be filed with the
county clerk. The EFS "shall form the basis for the proposed permanent rate limit for operating
taxes required by ORS 221.031(2)." It shall also contain:
"(1) a description of the services and functions to be performed or provided by the
proposed city;
(2) an analysis of the relationship between those services and functions and other
existing or needed government services; and
(3) proposed first and third year budgets for the new city demonstrating its economic
feasibility."
Once the prospective petition for incorporation and EFS have bee filed, the county clerk may
authorize the circulation of the petition to gather signatures. ORS 221.040 provides that the
petition for incorporation can be fled with the county after it has been signed by at least 20
percent of the electors in the area proposed to be incorporated.
1 -- FINDINGS IN SUPPORT OF ORDER 2000-085 (7/12/00)
ORS 221.040(2) provides that upon filing of a petition for incorporation, the county court (in this
case, the Board of County Commissioners) shall conduct a public hearing after proper notice.
The purpose of the hearing is to enable the county to perform its duties, which are as follows:
(1) to receive and consider any oral and written objections to the granting of the
petition, the forming of the proposed incorporated city or the estimated rate of
taxation set forth in the petition;
(2) to determine whether to alter the boundaries as set forth in the petition to include
all territory which may be benefited by the formation of the proposed city;
(3) to determine whether to modify the boundaries as set forth in the petition to
exclude territory which would not be benefited by the formation of the proposed
city;
(4) to determine whether the petition for incorporation and the EFS comply with the
requirements of ORS chapters 221; and
(5) to determine whether incorporation of the proposed city would be in accordance
with ORS chapters 197, compliance with the statewide planning goals, and the
county's comprehensive plan.
Following the hearing on the petition, the Board of Commissioners, if it approves the petition as
originally presented or in an altered form, shall provide by order for the holding of an election
relating to the incorporation of the proposed city. See ORS 221.040 (3).
Application of statewide land use goals, county comprehensive plan and implementing
ordinances:
Oregon's land use statutes, as interpreted by Oregon's appellate courts, define the responsibility
of the county governing body in this proceeding, and by extension, the nature and scope of the
application of various state and local standards and criteria. ORS 197.175(1) explicitly makes
county consideration of a petition to incorporate a new city an exercise of county planning and
zoning responsibility. The statute requires that:
"Cities and counties shall exercise their planning and zoning responsibilities, including,
but not limited to, a city or special district boundary change which shall mean the
annexation of unincorporated territory by a city, the incorporation of a new city and the
formation or change of organization of or annexation to any special district authorized by
ORS 198.705 to 198.955, 199.410 to 199.534 or 451.010 to 451.620, in accordance with
ORS chapters 195, 196 and 197 and the goals approved under ORS chapters 195, 196 and
197."
ORS 195.025 (1) assigns to county governing bodies the responsibility to coordinate land use
planning within their jurisdictions, as follows:
"(1) In addition to the responsibilities stated in ORS 197.175, each county, through its
governing body, shall be responsible for coordinating all planning activities affecting
land uses within the county, including planning activities of the county, cities, special
2 -- FINDINGS IN SUPPORT OF ORDER 2000-085 (7/12/00)
districts and state agencies, to assure an integrated comprehensive plan for the entire area
of the county."
ORS 197.175(2) requires cities and counties to adopt comprehensive plans and implementing
ordinances in compliance with the statewide goals.
ORS 215.130 (2) provides that, until a newly incorporated city adopts its own land use plan and
implementing ordinances, the county's plan and ordinances continue to control land use within
the city.
ORS 197.757 requires cities incorporated after January 1, 1982, to have their comprehensive
plans and land use ordinances acknowledged by the LCDC as consistent with the state land use
goals by no later than four years after the date of incorporation.
FACTS
Based upon filings with the County Clerk, upon the evidence presented at the public hearings
and in supplemental submissions by interested parties, we make the following findings of fact:
1. Procedural Requirements
1.1 On January 18, 2000, Chief Petitioners Gloria Benzel, Dennis Carter and Ken
Mulenex, registered electors within the territory of the proposed City of La Pine, filed with
the county clerk prior to its circulation a proposed petition to incorporate an
unincorporated territory as a city.
1.2 As required by ORS 221.031(2) the petition:
1.2.1 Designated Gloria Benzel, Dennis Carter and Ken Mulenex as chief
petitioners, each of whom is an elector and resident within the boundaries of the proposed
city.
1.2.2 Named the proposed city the City of La Pine.
1.2.3 Proposed a permanent rate of $1.50 per $1,000 of assessed
valuation as sufficient to support an adequate level of municipal services.
1.2.4 Included a map indicating the exterior boundaries of the proposed
City of La Pine. (The legal description of the area within the boundaries on the map was
prepared by the County Surveyor as required by ORS 221.040(3)(a), which has
subsequently been amended pursuant to the Board's determination that the boundary
should be amended. A copy of the final legal description is set forth as Attachment A
hereto and incorporated herein by this reference.)
1.3 On January 18, 2000, the Chief Petitioners also filed the economic feasibility
statement (EFS) required by ORS 221.035, a copy of which is marked Attachment C
3 -- FINDINGS IN SUPPORT OF ORDER 2000-085 (7/12/00)
hereto and incorporated herein by this reference, and the County Clerk certified the
Petition for circulation and the gathering of signatures.
1.4 On May 2, 2000 the County Clerk verified 766 signatures on the Petition
which represents 20% of the electors within the territory of the proposed City of La Pine.
1.5 As required by ORS 221.040(1), on May 28 and June 4, 2000, notice of the
public hearing for June 12, 2000 at 4:00 p.m. in the auditorium of the La Pine High School
was advertised in the Bend Bulletin, a newspaper of general circulation within the territory
of the proposed City of La Pine. On May 26, 2000, the notice was posted in three
conspicuous places within the territory to be incorporated.
1.6 As required by ORS 221.040 (2) on June 12, 2000 the Board of County
Commissioners conducted the public hearing and advertised and received testimony from
all interested parties, including but not limited to, the proponents and opponents of the
Petition and people who sought answers to questions concerning the Petition and its effect.
1.7 At the conclusion of the testimony at its hearing on June 12, 2000 the Board of
County Commissioners kept the public hearing record open to receive written testimony
until 5:00 p.m June 19, 2000.
1.8 At its meeting of June 29, 2000, the Board of County Commissioners
discussed the record of these proceedings, approved an amended boundary and ordered
County Counsel to prepare a written order and findings for adoption by the Board on July
12, 2000.
2. Content of Petition and Supporting Economic Feasibility Study
2.1 The petition to incorporate the City of La Pine and the EFS supporting it, as
filed, meets the requirements of OS 221.031 through 221.040. They:
2.1.1 Designate the name for the proposed city as the City of La Pine,
Oregon;
2.1.2 Propose a permanent rate limit of $1.50 per $1,000 of assessed
value based upon a total assessed value for the proposed city of $214,959,002 (FYI 998-
99), which would be levied beginning the first full fiscal year after the effective date of
incorporation (July 1, 2001);
2.1.3 Provide a map of the exterior boundaries of the proposed city.
2.2 The EFS prepared by Petitioners forms the basis for the permanent rate limit of
$1.50 per $1,000 assessed value and is detailed in Exhibit C. As required by ORS
221.035, the EFS contains:
4 -- FINDINGS IN SUPPORT OF ORDER 2000-085 (7/12/00)
2.2.1 A description of services and functions to be performed by the
proposed city;
2.2.2 An analysis of relationships to other existing or needed government
services, including the absorption of the La Pine Special Sewer District, La Pine Water
District, Special Road District #8, Ponderosa Pines East Road District, and Forest View
Road District that will be entirely encompassed by the city and will be extinguished
pursuant to ORS 222.510, and the intent of Petitioners to remain a part of the La Pine
Fire Protection District and the La Pine Park and Recreation District;
2.2.3 The intent of Petitioners to continue to receive law enforcement
services from the Deschutes County Sheriff for the foreseeable future;
2.2.4 A projection of potential non -property tax revenues to provide
additional financial resources for city services;
2.2.5 Proposed first through third -year budgets for the new city
demonstrating economic feasibility.
3. Land That May Benefit
3.1 Based upon the record, the Board finds that those lands, and only those lands,
which are included within the boundaries of the city as proposed in the petition, as
amended by the Board, are likely to be benefited by inclusion within the boundaries of the
proposed city. Attachment B contains within it a detailed description of each area and the
benefits that will accrue to their inclusion within the boundaries.
3.1.1 All foreseeable needs for urban and urbanizable land can be met
within the boundaries as proposed.
3.1.2 Public infrastructure services can be provided to the urban portions
of the proposed city.
3.1.3 Urban development can occur without impact to resource lands
within the proposed boundaries.
3.2 Based on testimony provided by property owners and petitioners, certain resource
lands included within petitioners' petition were found by the Board not to benefit from the
proposed incorporation and these have been removed from the proposal that will be submitted
to the voters. These resource lands are believed by the Board to have an insignificant effect
on the economic feasibility of the incorporation proposal and the proposed permanent tax rate.
5 -- FINDINGS IN SUPPORT OF ORDER 2000-085 (7/12/00)
4. Land Use Findings Related to the Proposed Incorporation
4.1 Petitioners prepared findings related to the Statewide Planning Goals as
required by ORS 197.175(1). These are attached as Attachment B.
4.2 Based upon the record, including the findings contained in Attachment B, the
Board finds that it is reasonable to expect that the proposed city can comply with the
statewide planning goals when it prepares its comprehensive plan and implementing
ordinances.
4.3 Evidence provided in the findings and the EFS indicate that the city can
comply with the requirements of ORS 197.757 to have its comprehensive plan and land
use ordinances acknowledged by the LCDC as consistent with the state land use goals by
no later than four years after the date of incorporation.
4.4 Until such time as the city adopts a comprehensive plan and implementing
ordinances the Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan and implementing ordinances shall
regulate land use within city boundaries.
6 -- FINDINGS IN SUPPORT OF ORDER 2000-085 (7/12/00)
LIST OF ATTACHMENTS
FINDINGS IN SUPPORT OF ORDER GRANTING PETITION
ATTACHMENT
A. Map and legal description of area within the boundaries of the proposed City of La Pine.
B. Findings Related to the Proposed Incorporation of La Pine (land use).
C. Economic Feasibility Statement with Estimated Tax Rate: Revised September, 1999.
7 -- FINDINGS IN SUPPORT OF ORDER 2000-085 (7/12/00)
t
Attachment A
DESCRIPTION SHEET
Proposed La Pine Incorporation Boundary
All those tracts of land located in Sections 13, 14, 15, 16, 21, 22, 23, 26, 27, 28, 29, 32,
33, 34, 35, and 36 of Township Twenty-one (2 1) South, Range Ten (10) East; and all
those tracts of land located in Sections 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, and 17
of Township Twenty-two (22) South, Range Ten (10) East, of the Willamette Meridian,
Deschutes County, Oregon, the boundary of which is described as follows:
iAy
Beginning at the Northeast corner of said Section 1, Township Twenty-two (22) South,
Range Ten (10) East, thence west along the North line of said Section 1, to the easterly
right-of-way line of The Dalles-California Highway; thence southwesterly along said
highway right-of-way line to the easterly right-of-way line of the Great Northern
Railroad; thence southwesterly along said railroad right-of-way line to the northerly
right-of-way line of Reed Road; thence easterly along said road right-of-way line to the
intersection of said road right-of-way line with the northerly projection of the East line of
La Pine Industrial Site Phase II; thence southerly along the East line of La Pine Industrial
Site Phase II to the Southeast corner thereof, thence westerly along the South line of said
La Pine Industrial Site Phase II to the Southeast corner of said Section 14; thence
westerly along the South lines of Sections 14, 15, 16 to the Southeast coiner of said
Section 17; thence westerly along the South line of said Section 17 to the South one-
quarter corner thereof, thence northerly along the north -south centerline of said Section
17 to the center one-quarter thereof; thence westerly along the east -west centerline of said
Section 17 to the Southeast corner of Deschutes River Acres; thence along the South line
of Deschutes River Acres to the West line thereof; thence northerly along the West line
of Deschutes River Acres to the North line thereof; thence easterly along the North line
of Deschutes River Acres to the West line of the First Addition to Deschutes River Acres;
thence northerly along the West line of the First Addition to Deschutes River Acres to the
North line thereof, thence easterly along the North line of the First Addition to Deschutes
River Acres to the South one-quarter corner of said Section 8; thence north along the
north -south centerline of said Section 8 to the South one-quarter corner of said Section 5;
thence north along the north -south centerline of said Section 5 to the South one-quarter
corner of said Section 32, Township Twenty-one (21) South, Range Ten (10) East, also
being the Southwest corner of Forest View First Addition; thence north along the West
line of Forest View First Addition to the Southwest corner of Forest View; thence north
along the West line of Forest View to the intersection with the South line of said Section
29; thence continuing north along the West line of Forest View to the Northwest corner
thereof; thence east along the North line of Forest View to the Southwest corner of Tall
Pines Fifth Addition, also being the West one-quarter corner of said Section 28; thence
north along the West line of Tall Pines Fifth Addition to the Southwest corner of said
Section 21, also being the Southwest corner of Pine Meadows Tracts; thence continuing
north along the West line of said Pine Meadows Tracts to the Northwest corner thereof,
thence continuing north along the West line of said Section 21 to the Southwest corner of
Parkway Acres; thence continuing north along the West line of said Section 21 and said
2 J y
Parkway Acres to the Southwest corner of said Section 16; thence continuing north along
the West line of said Section 16 and said Parkway Acres to the Southwest corner of Terra
De Oro Estates; thence continuing north along the West line of said Terra De Oro Estates
to the Northwest corner thereof, also being the Southwest corner of Deschutes River
Recreation Homesites Unit 8 Part 2; thence continuing north along the West line of said
Deschutes River Recreation Homesites Unit 8 Part 2 to the Northwest corner thereof, also
being the Northwest corner of said Section 16; thence east along the North line of said
Deschutes River Recreation Homesites Unit 8 Part 2 to the Northeast corner of said
Section 16; thence continuing along the North line of said Deschutes River Recreation
Homesites Unit 8 Part 2 to the Northeast corner of said Section 15; thence east along the
North line of said Section 14 to the Northeast corner thereof, thence east along the North
line of said Section 13 to the Northeast corner of Lazy River South; thence South along
the East line of said Lazy River South to the Southeast corner thereof; thence west along
the South line of said Lazy River South to the West line of said Section 13; thence south
along the West line of said Section 13 to the Northeast comer of said Section 23, also
being a point on the East line of Lazy River South; thence south along the East line of
Lazy River South to the Southeast comer thereof, also being the Northeast corner of said
Section 35; thence east along the North line of said Section 36, also being the North line
of Potter's Estates; thence continuing east along the North line of said Section 36, also
being the North lines of Cagle Subdivision Numbers 4, 6, and 7; thence continuing east
along the North line of said Section 36 to the Northeast corner thereof; thence south
along the East line of said Section 36 to the Southeast corner thereof, also being the
Northeast corner of said Section 1, Township Twenty-two (22) South, Range Ten (10)
East, the true point of beginning.
3,F V
EXCEPTING THEREFROM the following:
a) All that property described in Deed Vol. 1999, Page: 23195, in the Deschutes County Clerk's Office,
being the North Half of the Northeast Quarter of Section 5, Township 22 South, Range 10 East, of the
Willamette Meridian, Deschutes County, Oregon, and generally being an 80 acre parcel lying
Southwest of the intersection of Burgess Road and Dorrance Meadow Road.
b) All that property described in Deed Vol. 283, Page: 1181, in the Deschutes County Clerk's Office,
being the Southeast Quarter, the South Half of the Northeast Quarter; and the East Half of the
Southwest Quarter of Section 3;
and the West 750 feet of the Southwest Quarter of the Northwest Quarter; the West 750 feet of the
Northwest Quarter of the Southwest Quarter; and the Southwest Quarter of the Southwest Quarter of
Section 2, Township 22 South, Range 10 East, of the Willamette Meridian, Deschutes County, Oregon.
c) All that portion of Section 2, Township 22 South, Range 10 East, of the Willamette Meridian,
Deschutes County, Oregon, as described in Deed Vol. 1999, Page: 38586, and all that portion of
Section 2, Township 22 South, Range 10 East, of the Willamette Meridian, Deschutes County,
Oregon, as described in Deed Vol. 335, Page: 1472.
d) The East Half of Section 9, Township 22 South, Range 10 East, of the Willamette Meridian, Deschutes
County, Oregon.
e) The North Half of the Southwest Quarter of Section 9, Township 22 South, Range 10 East, of the
Willamette Meridian, Deschutes County, Oregon.
f) That portion of the South Half of the Southwest Quarter of Section 9, Township 22 South, Range 10
East, of the Willamette Meridian, Deschutes County, Oregon, lying Southeasterly from the Little
Deschutes River.
g) Section 10, Township 22 South, Range 10 East, of the Willamette Meridian, Deschutes County,
Oregon: the North Half of the Northeast Quarter; the Southwest Quarter of the Northeast Quarter; the
Northwest Quarter; the Northwest Quarter of the Southwest Quarter.
h) Section 11, Township 22 South, Range 10 East, of the Willamette Meridian, Deschutes County,
Oregon: the Northwest Quarter of the Northwest Quarter.
Findings Related to the Proposed Incorporation of La Pine
Prepared for the La Pine Community Action Team by
Linda L. Davis, AICP, Consultant
With assistance from
Edward J. Sullivan, Esq.,
Preston Gates & Ellis LLP
1. Background
1.1. History of La Pine
Local historian Bob Shotwelll, summarizing La Pine's history, wrote the following narrative:
...in 1852 when engineers were seeking a route over Willamette Pass through the La Pine basin.
Two major wagon trails followed the Little Deschutes River upstream to the vicinity of Crescent
in 1853 and 1854 before heading west across the Cascade Mountains
For about 10 years in the late 1800s, Chief Paulin and his renegade band from the Walapi
Tribe of the Snake Indians roamed the area terrorizing Central Oregon with attacks on forts and
garrisons as well as ranches and homesteads The band got obsidian from Newberry Crater to
use for arrowheads and spear points
The town of La Pine was founded around 1900. B.J. Pengra had homesteaded in the area in
1870 and surveyed the first north/south wagon road through the La Pine basin, establishing
Pengra Huntington Road. The Huntington in the road name was for J. W. Pent Huntington, who
was the Oregon Superintendent of Indian Affairs -- a man who had used the rout when it was a
mere footpath,
In the early days, La Pine was considered a 'pretty wild place" with loggers, sheepherders and
cowboys making up a good part of the population. They lived hard lives Ina hard climate, lured
by promise of land that was "almost free" good hunting and good fishing. In 1910, town lots
were selling for $50 each and one of the recreation activities was a horseback ride to the
prairies around the town where horsemen would race the herds of antelope.
Present-day U.S. 97 began as an Indian trail from Klamath to the Columbia River. The road for
freight wagons carrying merchandise from Bend to Silver Lake through La Pine was uphill, rocky
and rugged in the summer and often blocked with snow in the winter. Tollgates were tried on
the road in the early 1920s, but were abandoned in 1925 because they were considered
harmful to the tourist business
From that early beginning, La Pine has grown to include approximately 7,000 people within the
proposed city boundaries. Several thousand more people reside outside the boundaries south
of the Sunriver destination resort. This area has been the subject of extensive
intergovernmental planning processes to resolve a number of growth -related problems in the
area, including groundwater contamination, wild fire hazards, loss of wildlife habitat/range
areas and migration routes, as well as economic issues. Other socio-economic issues have also
1 Taken from La Pine Strategic Plan
Findings Related to the Proposed Incorporation of La Pine 1
preoccupied the area including lack of health and other social services for an area which has
historically been dominated by retirees but is increasingly becoming more diversified.
1.2. History ofLCAT
Fourteen residents were appointed to the La Pine Community Action Team (LCAT) by the
Deschutes County Board of Commissioners in 1994 to develop a Strategic Plan. LCAT was an
outgrowth of the La Pine Health Care Council's efforts to improve health care services in the La
Pine area. In its six years of existence, LCAT has served as a significant forum for community
involvement in a wide range of projects and activities, including: the La Pine Strategic Plan
(1996 and 2000); the governance and incorporation studies; Southern Deschutes and Northern
Klamath Population and Income Study; establishment of a community web site and newsletter;
the development of a community vision; historical building preservation; and support for the
development and project funding of the La Pine Special Water District.
1.3. Strategic Pian
The La Pine Strategic Plan was completed in April, 1996. The Strategic Plan involved extensive
involvement by citizens in developing a community vision statement, goals, strategies and an
action agenda. The components of the Strategic Plan were structured around the four building
blocks of community and economic development -- Business Development; Physical
Infrastructure; Human Resources; and Quality of Life -- covering virtually every aspect of the
issues found in the complex interactions between the economy and community development
challenges.
Three fundamental statements of the Vision have served to direct the Strategic Plan and
subsequent planning efforts in the community, including the Quality of Life Goal -- to establish a
system of government for La Pine by the year 2000. These fundamental statements are:
♦ First., La Pine will maintain its rural identity and quality of life, preserving its local beauty
and environment.
♦ Second .• Economic diversification will lead to economic stability.
♦ Third.• La Pine will become a full-service community.
In April, 2000, LCAT completed a revision of the Strategic Plan. It establishes goals as follows:
♦ La Pine is a beautiful rural community. The development of a physical design for the
greater La Pine area is a major action to accomplish this goal. The visioning project now
underway is the implementation of this goal and action.
♦ La Pine is an affordable and equitable full service community. Action items to address this
goal include a plan to address housing needs, development of locally -based retail
establishments, improvement of health care services (including availability and affordability),
increase access to local transportation, building a domestic violence resource center/safe
house and building a senior resource center.
♦ La Pine is self -governed. Action measures include increasing voter registration and media
coverage to insure participation in the process and informed decision-making.
♦ La Pine is an economically diverse, self -sustained community. Actions include surveying
existing business to establish a data base of resources and needs and completing an
economic development strategy.
Findings Related to the Proposed Incorporation of La Pine 2
♦ Citizens of all ages are active in all aspects of the community, working together for the
betterment of La Pine. Increasing youth and senior involvement in community activities and
increasing community knowledge and awareness of local activities and issues are major
actions.
♦ High quality educational opportunities exist for all. Increasing local participation in the
Bend -La Pine School Board, Site Council and COCC Advisory Board and developing a plan for
the COCC South Campus Expansion are the primary action items.
♦ La Pine is a technologically advanced community. Major actions include introducing high-
speed internet access and increased bandwidth in La Pine, establishing required demand
levels from providers and developing an implementation plan for the telecom system.
♦ La Pine is a conscientious steward of its natural environment. Action items include
developing a comprehensive plan if incorporation occurs with a strong emphasis on
environmental and natural resource values and concerns, assessing the quality of the Little
Deschutes watershed and developing strategies to assure undeveloped natural areas.
♦ La Pine is a well-planned, sustainable community. On-going update of the Strategic Plan is
the major action required to implement this goal.
These activities provide strong evidence that the La Pine community understands where it is
today and where it wants to be in the future. Few communities have undertaken the level of
self-help that the La Pine community has undertaken. The proposal to place an incorporation
measure on the ballot has come after several years of studying the community's strengths and
weaknesses and how incorporation could help the community improve its overall livability.
1.4. Feasibility Studies
In early 1998, LCAT obtained a grant from the US Economic Development Administration to
undertake a study of governance options for the La Pine area. This study was a follow-up to
the Strategic Plan that had been developed previously that called for a system of governance to
be in place by 2000. LCAT hired the firm of Cogan Owens Cogan from Portland to undertake a
feasibility study of governance options.
After soliciting public input at a March, 1998 workshop, LCAT selected three governance options
for further study. These were:
♦ Incorporation of a large city
♦ Incorporation of a small city
♦ Formation of a multi-purpose county service district
In addition, the CAT selected five services in the analysis of each option to receive scrutiny and
to provide a basis of comparison. These services were: sanitary sewer; municipal water; parks
and recreation; planning and building code administration; and road construction and
maintenance. Below is a summary of the key findings for each option that was examined.
Option 1: Large City
The large city option encompassed an approximate 32 square mile area and about 7,300 people
(1998 population). It includes the current La Pine Urban Unincorporated Community (UUC) and
Findings Related to the Proposed Incorporation of La Pine
Wickiup Junction Rural Service Center (RSC), as well as surrounding rural and natural resource
land. Buildable land within the area studied would provide for almost doubling of the
population under the current comprehensive plan and zoning designations, which are
predominantly rural residential.
Because the proposed city would have encompassed the entirety of the La Pine Special Sewer
District, the La Pine Water District and three special road districts, they would be automatically
extinguished as stipulated by state law. All of the assets and liabilities of the districts would be
transferred to the new city. It also assumed that the City would withdraw from the La Pine
Park and Recreation District and then the City would have been responsible for all park and
recreation services.
The Governance Study projected costs for services and revenues. The study found that a rate
of $2.70/$1,000 assessed valuation was required to provide the services at projected levels.Z
The Governance Study found that there were no legal impediments to the large city option.
However, the study pointed out that in this case, which is particularly unusual, the city's urban
growth boundary (UGB) would be about one-tenth the size of its city limits. Like a county, the
City would be involved in regulating land use in natural resource areas, which most cities do not
do, in addition to dealing with urban issues.
Option 2: Small City
This option included the Wickiup Junction RSC, the La Pine UUC and a stretch of land owned by
the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) on the west side of Highway 97. Altogether, it
represented about 6 square miles and contained about 580 people. The analysis assumed that
the BLM land would remain classified as resource land and would not be available for future
growth and development unless the BLM sold or traded it as part of Deschutes County's
Regional Problem Solving (RPS) program. Otherwise, most of the vacant buildable land within
this option was assumed to be zoned for commercial and industrial development, therefore
there would be little future residential and associated population growth.
The small city would have encompassed the entirety of the La Pine Special Sewer District and
the La Pine Water District and therefore, as with Option 1, they would be automatically
extinguished per the requirements of state law. All of the assets and liabilities of the districts
would be transferred to the new city. It also assumed withdrawal from the La Pine Park and
Recreation District.
The Governance Study found that, even with a reduction in the extent of services required of a
smaller service area and population, it would have required a property tax rate above
$5.00/$1,000 assessed valuation, almost twice that required in the large city option. The
primary reason for the large property tax rate was the lack of state -shared revenues that the
City would receive with such a low population.
Z Note: The Governance Study assumed that the large city would provide more services than are actually
being proposed with incorporation such as full park and recreation services and transfer/maintenance of
county roads. Eliminating these and some other smaller services reduced costs and the proposed
permanent tax rate.
Findings Related to the Proposed Incorporation of La Pine 4
The small city option produced a very high property tax rate for very little appreciable increase
in existing service levels. Furthermore, it would have excluded over 6,000 people outside the
city who also need services and would benefit from local governance. This inequity could
produce fiscal and political problems for the City and County, as well as continue to leave the
County with the burden of providing services to the large unincorporated area.
Option 3: Multi -Purpose County Service District
The area and population encompassed in the option of a county service district (CSD) was the
same as for the large city. In this option, a CSD would be formed to provide a higher level of
road maintenance and planning services than are now provided by the County. It also would
absorb the La Pine Special Sewer District, the La Pine Water District, three special road districts
and territory from the La Pine Park and Recreation District.
The legal procedures for creating a county service district are different than for a city, and
when taking over existing special service districts, is very complicated legally and procedurally.
The study concluded that it would be impossible to take over park and recreation functions and
very difficult to assume water district responsibilities, based on specific requirements of state
law. (See Governance Study for more details).
The total cost of the CSD would have been about $772,500 of which $363,500 would have to
come from property taxes, or a rate of about $3.50/$1,000 of assessed value. The only
significant source of non -property tax revenue for the CSD would be sewer and water user fees
— CSDs cannot collect the same sources of non -property tax revenue that cities can.
The Governance Study found that the concept of a multi-purpose CSD in this case would
probably be unfeasible due to the legal/procedural problems for formation. In addition, other
than a higher level of service for road maintenance and planning, there would be very little
financial and governance benefit.
I.S. Governance Study Conclusions
It was concluded that the large city concept was the most feasible option for further study for
the following reasons:
a. It is large enough in population to provide a true alternative governance structure
for this area of Deschutes County.
b. It would establish a responsible entity to provide services, plan for future growth and
respond to current and future issues.
c. While there are legal/procedural steps to its formation, there are no legal
impediments to its formation.
d. It provides an economy of scale with a relatively good mix of residential and non-
residential properties to provide a diversified assessed value.
e. Non -property tax revenues that are available are sufficient to permit a conservative
but reasonable property tax rate.
Findings Related to the Proposed Incorporation of La Pine 5
f. The City could greatly ease Deschutes County's burden to be the area's
representative voice to deal with the range of issues present in the area and to
provide services.
g. The base of services that already exist would be relatively easy procedurally to
transition to the city.
It was on this basis of findings from the Governance Study that LCAT proceeded with the next
stage. The number/level of services studied under the large city option in the Governance
Study was subsequently honed down to that in this incorporation proposal, in the Economic
Feasibility Statement and in the first and third year budgets.
2. Incorporation Proposal
2.1. Reasons for Incorporation
There are many reasons to incorporate the City of La Pine. Some of these are:
♦ Establish local self -governance, to implement the 1996 Strategic Plan's Quality of Life goal.
♦ Enhance community identity
Increase economic opportunities for people living in the area
♦ Boost the area's sources of revenue to provide services
♦ Address long-term issues of livability
♦ Relieve Deschutes County from the burden of governing all aspects of the community,
which have increasingly become urban
Increase the area's political representation and clout
2.2. Boundary
The proposed incorporation boundary is shown on Map A. It includes about 32 square miles
and about 7,000 people (1998) -- the exact population cannot be known until the 2000 US
Census has been completed, by December 31, 2000. The map indicates each subarea that is
discussed under 2.2.2.
There are two sets of standards for the County's approval of the boundary: 1) land use; and 2)
ORS 221.040 (incorporation procedures) related to benefits. The standards under each are
quite different.
2.2.1. Land Use Standards
The Oregon Supreme Court in the 1985 Rajneeshpuram case held that the issue of establishing
a city boundary, while a land use decision and subject to a broad review against the statewide
planning goals (see detail under Section 3.0), is not the same as establishing a UGB and cannot
be confused with those requirements under the standards of Goal 14 when the plan is
prepared. In the case of establishing the city's boundary, the statewide planning goal review is
limited to whether the incorporation is compatible with the goals in a broad sense.
The proposed boundary includes three major classes of land use in the County Comprehensive
Plan: 1) urban (residential, commercial and industrial); 2) rural (residential and commercial);
Findings Related to the Proposed Incorporation of La Pine 6
and 3) resource lands (farm and forest). Each of these classes of land use will be discussed
under Section 3 regarding the statewide planning goals and Section 4 the County
Comprehensive Plan with the objective of identifying how the incorporation proposal is
compatible with the goals and plan.
2.2.2. Standards of ORS 221.040
ORS 221.040 gives the County the ultimate authority to modify the boundaries of the
incorporation petition as follows:
221.040(2) ........ The court may alter the boundaries as set forth in the petition to
include all territory which may be benefited by being included within the boundaries of
the proposed incorporated city, but shall not modify boundaries so as to exclude any
land which would be benefited by the formation of the proposed city. No land shall be
included in the proposed city which will not, in the judgment of the court, be benefited.
If the court determines that any land has been improperly omitted from the proposed
city and the owner has not appeared at the hearing, it shall continue the hearing and
shall order notice given to the nonappearing owner requiring the owner to appear
before it and show cause, if any the owner has, why the owners land should not be
included in the proposed city. The notice shall be given by publication and posting in the
same manner as the original notice for hearing and for the same period. For the
purposes of this subsection, "owner" means the legal owner of record except that if
there is a vendee under a duly recorded contract, the vendee shall be deemed to be the
owner.
The operative word in the statute is "benefited". This section is a discussion of why similarly
situated groups of properties are included, how they would benefit from inclusion within the
boundary as well as how the city will benefit from their inclusion. There may be some areas
that are marginally benefited by incorporation but are included because it makes sense in terms
of logical boundaries, for provision of services or for other reasons.
The Governance Study provides the basis for the "large city" boundary concept and establishes
the parameters for the specific boundary. This incorporation proposal is essentially the same as
the large city concept except that Newberry Estates and Pinecrest subdivisions and resource
lands south of La Pine State Recreation Road along the west side of Highway 97 north of
Wickiup Junction, certain farm lands south of Burgess Road, and one parcel zoned for forest
use at the corner of Dorrance Meadow and Burgess Roads which were included in the
Governance Study large city option, have been excluded from the incorporation proposal. The
reasons for these changes are discussed below.
The proposed city boundary is acknowledged as being unique but is largely dictated by the
historic pattern of development, which is low density and highly dispersed. This pattern
continues beyond the proposed boundary somewhat south, east and west and much farther
north to Sunriver. It is also smaller than the study area for the County's Regional Problem
Solving Project. This area/boundary was generally chosen for three primary reasons:
1. It represents what most people living in the area identify as "La Pine". There are some
subdivisions (e.g. Ponderosa Pines and Newberry Estates) that some might identify with La
Pine but were not included because resource lands provide a major break in the continuity
of the rural residential development pattern. It is understood that the boundary has to stop
Findings Related to the Proposed Incorporation of La Pine 7
somewhere and to include these two subdivisions as well as some others would begin to
make the boundary illogical and unwieldy.
2. It would provide a logical, identifiable boundary to the community and to agencies and
organizations that will work with or provide services to the city and that would benefit from
the incorporation in a similar manner. When viewing a map of southern Deschutes County,
this particular boundary stand outs and meets the test of being logical and identifiable.
3. It is the most financially feasible and viable. Revenues to support the city derive from two
major sources -- assessed value to provide property taxes and population to provide state -
shared revenues that are based on a population formula. A balance of these resources is
needed to provide for long-term sources of revenue that derive from the two bases.
Two areas covered in the Governance Study were excluded from the incorporation proposal --
Newberry Estates and Pine Crest. Ponderosa Pines, to the west of the proposed boundary, was
also considered for inclusion at one time. Newberry Estates and Ponderosa Pines were not
included because they were sufficiently distant from the other rural residential areas to cause
an illogical boundary had they been included. Once the decision was made to exclude resource
lands immediately to the west of Highway 97, north of Wickiup )unction, it appeared illogical to
include Pine Crest. It was recognized that as it is, this proposal includes a very large area -- to
reach even further out seemed unnecessary and detracted from the merits of the boundary as it
was changed.
During the public hearings process, testimony was received by owners of property zoned for
Exclusive Farm Use south of Burgess Road (Young and Harrision) and one zoned for Forest Use
(Barshofsky) at the southwest corner of Dorrance Meadow and Burgess Roads indicating that
there would be no benefit to being included within the proposed boundary. Petitioners provided
additional information that indicated that these three groups of property would not benefit from
proposed improvements to maintenance of public roads inasmuch as these properties are
accessed from county -maintained roads. As a result of this information, these properties were
excluded from the final proposed boundary by the Board of County Commissioners.
Benefits
All residents and property owners within the amended boundary would benefit from the
incorporation in the following manner:
♦ Local self-government. Residents within the boundary will elect city councilors to represent
them in decisions made by the council. Examples of city decisions that would affect all
residents and property owners include: long-range planning and land use; road
maintenance and transportation improvements; nuisance abatement and code enforcement;
environmental regulations; public safety; emergency planning and response; economic
development; community events and activities; and enhanced park and recreation activities
for youth and adults.
♦ City services. The Economic Feasibility Statement outlines city services to be phased in over
the first three years. The following would be available to all residents and property owners:
land use planning and development permitting, including a city -appointed planning
commission; conveniently located building permit and inspection services; code
enforcement; enhanced law enforcement; community recreation and events; cemetery
services; and business and job creation (economic development). In addition to local road
maintenance (see Rural Lands discussion below), the City may be eligible for funding to
Findings Related to the Proposed Incorporation of La Pine 8
improve state, county or local roads and can also develop local programs and funding
sources to improve all types of roads.
♦ Improved quality of life and economic vitality. The presence of a local government to
provide attention to issues and a higher level of services will increase the potential of
residents to improve their quality of life. Quality of life includes a healthy environment;
improved sense of economic well-being and security; lower rates of crime and delinquency
through greater community awareness and provision of programs such as youth recreation;
and an increase in services, particularly services to people such as health and social
services. These improvements will be reflected in vigorous real estate activity and higher
property values over the long -run. While all of these benefits are more difficult to prove
Findings Related to the Proposed Incorporation of La Pine 9
Map A: Proposed La Pine City Boundaries with Subareas
1" = approximately 1,817'(1/3 mile)
uuc
inction
idential
and
_and
Findings Related to the Proposed Incorporation of La Pine 10
and appear less tangible than direct city services, they are, nonetheless, real and for many,
are the most important reasons to be included within the boundary.
♦ Representation of local interests. City officials will be involved in many intergovernmental
activities that affect La Pine residents and property owners including land use and
transportation planning; environmental regulations; economic development; and health and
human services. At this time, La Pine does not have a direct voice in many of these
activities and decisions. Its representation is through the Deschutes County Board of
Commissioners, a three-member board that is elected at -large by all county residents. It is
difficult for a board with such broad geographic responsibilities to represent a subarea of
the county that has unique needs and values.
The following discusses the inclusion of particular groups of properties and the benefits they will
receive.
La Pine Core Area (Area 1)
La Pine is often referred to as the "core area". In land use parlance, it is referred to as the
Urban Unincorporated Community (UUC). The core area is included because it is the
commercial center for the community -- the future "downtown" of the City of La Pine" -- is
served with municipal sewer and water, and has land for urban uses to serve the entire
community. The core area will benefit from incorporation by the consolidation of the sewer and
water districts under one governing body that also will have land use authority. Because it is
the location of urban commercial and industrial land, it will be the greatest recipient of job -
generating economic development activities.
Area 1 will be the core of the city's UGB based on the priorities outlined in ORS 198.298
because it has already received an exception to the statewide planning goals for urban uses
outside a UGB (the prioritization criteria are discussed in greater depth in Section 3.2). This
area will also meet the seven factors of Goal 14 because it will:
♦ Provide land needed for long-range future population growth and employment
(Factors 1 and 2) of the entire city, such as areas for multi -family housing,
commercial and industrial land uses that cannot be provided elsewhere in the city;
♦ Accommodate the orderly provision for public infrastructure services such as sewer
and water (Factor 3) as well as other planned services;
♦ Permit maximum efficiency of land uses in terms of intensity and density for urban
development (Factor 4);
♦ Permit urban development with minimal environmental, energy, economic and social
consequences (Factor 5);
♦ Not require the conversion of agricultural land for urban uses (Factor 6); and
♦ Be compatible with nearby agricultural uses.
Section 3.14.2 discusses these factors in more detail.
Rural Exception Areas 2A -2H
Rural lands are considered "exception lands" because they were committed to nonresource uses
at the time the County adopted its comprehensive plan and, therefore, received an exception to
Goal 3 and/or Goal 4. As exception lands they are first in priority for inclusion in the UGB in the
same manner as the core area. However, as already indicated and will be demonstrated in
Findings Related to the Proposed Incorporation of La Pine 11
Section 3.14, it is unlikely that many rural residential areas will be required for inclusion in the
city's UGB to meet urban growth needs for well over 20 years.
The following is a discussion of the potential of each subarea based on established criteria and
other factors that would normally be considered in the analysis of a UGB. However, it should
not be interpreted by anyone that this discussion indicates a proposal or recommendation to
include any particular area within the city's UGB, other than Area 2A. Establishment of the UGB
will require extensive study to determine the need for land and the ability of each candidate
area to meet locational criteria in Goal 14 and ORS 198.298, as well as public input. The
evaluation is made in the findings to ensure that the City can meet these requirements when it
develops its comprehensive plan.
Wickiup )unction (Area 2A)
Wickiup Junction has 199 acres of rural commercial/residential lands with an estimated 100
residents. It is served by the La Pine Special Sewer District and has a community water system
that could be acquired by and made a part of the city's water system. Though classified as
rural and smaller, its appearance and land uses are virtually identical to the core area. It is a
logical candidate for inclusion within the UGB, particularly if the new neighborhood is approved
because the new neighborhood would connect the core area and Wickiup Junction to make a
contiguous area for urban development. Its benefits for inclusion within the city are virtually
identical to those of the core area.
Rural Residential Properties (Areas 213-21-11)
A total of 8,515 acres of rural residential lands are included in the city boundary, excluding
those in Wickiup Junction. Rural residential lots have individual sewage systems and wells and,
with a few exceptions, have unimproved public roads. Three areas are within special road
districts that tax themselves for limited road maintenance services.
Rural residential properties are included because they have most of the population (over 90%)
needed to provide the financial and political base of the community (see discussion in Section
3.14.2). Even with substantial growth of the probable urban area of the city, the rural area will
grow and retain at least 85% of the population. The population and assessed values of rural
residential properties are needed to generate the revenues necessary to support the City's
requirements, as found in the Governance Study. In addition, rural residents provide the
primary pool of candidates for elected and appointed officials needed to run the city. Many
owners and employees of businesses in the core area and Wickiup Junction live in the rural
residential areas, a factor that unites the community's interests. The incorporation of the core
area without the residential area would be tantamount to incorporating a downtown without
surrounding residential neighborhoods.
The incorporation will make the City eligible for state gas tax revenues to provide maintenance
of public roads.3 For those not currently part of one of the three road districts, this will provide
an entirely new service. For those within one of the three road districts, which will be
extinguished upon incorporation, this revenue will provide an increased level of maintenance as
well as other city services. An LCAT -sponsored road services committee is in the process of
developing a road services plan that will ensure that all public roads receive an equitable level
3 The County Public Works Department has not accepted most public roads within the proposed city
boundary for maintenance because they were not built to county standards.
Findings Related to the Proposed Incorporation of La Pine 12
of maintenance service within projected resources. In addition, the committee is examining
approaches to improve all roads to a higher level over time.
All rural residential areas benefit from inclusion in the city in the same manner as
neighborhoods receive benefits from being included within a city. In addition to road
maintenance services, residents will enjoy neighborhood parks, locally controlled land use
planning, code enforcement, enhanced law enforcement and other benefits that will accrue to
the community as a whole over time such as improved economic and social well-being.
Area 2B Residential and Rural Industrial Land: This area east of Wickiup Junction
RSC (Area 2A), contains unplatted residential land and one industrial parcel. Because it
is exception land and immediately adjacent to the RSC it would be a priority one area
based on the criteria of ORS 197.298 for inclusion and/or expansion of the city's UGB if
1) needed; 2) if efficient and economic to extend public infrastructure services to the
area, and 3) it meets the remaining factors of Goal 14. Because of its adjacency to the
RSC, it would be the most logical first candidate among rural residential land areas for
inclusion in the UGB after Area 2A.
Area 2C Cagle Subdivision: This subdivision immediately west of Area 2B is platted
and about two-thirds built -out. It could be a candidate for urban expansion.
Area 2D Lazy River Subdivision: The Little Deschutes River separates this
subdivision in two parts and is surrounded by resource lands. Unlike many rural
residential subdivisions, the roads are improved.
Area 2E Subdivision Land in Road District #8: This subdivision forms a logical
northern boundary, beyond which lie resource lands and La Pine State Park. It is within
Road District #8 that provides road maintenance services at a cost of $1.69/$1,000 AV.
At the time of incorporation, the district will be extinguished and residents will pay a city
property tax of $1.50/$1,000 AV. Road maintenance services will be provided by the
City with gas tax revenues. The district now pays about $1,800 per mile per year for
maintenance. It is estimated that the City will be able to provide about $3,500 per mile
for a higher level of maintenance.
Area 2F Forest View and Ponderosa Pines E. Road Districts: Similar to 2E, these
subdivisions provide a logical west boundary with resource lands to the west of the
proposed city boundary. These districts would also be extinguished at the time of
incorporation. Residents of these districts currently pay $1.35/$1,000 AV and
$1.05/$1,000 AV, respectively. Inclusion in the city will increase property taxes
moderately while increasing the level of road maintenance nearly the same amount as
Road District #8.
Area 2G Subdivisions South of Burgess Road. This area contains two subdivisions
-- one on the east side of Huntington Road and one on the west. The one on the west
has improved roads. It is included to receive other city services and to provide
contiguity. The subdivision on the east would abut the new neighborhood. These
subdivisions could be candidates for future urban expansion if needed, probably beyond
the twenty-year planning horizon.
Area 2H Balance of Rural Residential Land: These rural residential subdivisions
have the majority of the population. They are essentially homogeneous in terms of lot
sizes, service needs, etc. and would benefit in a similar manner.
Findings Related to the Proposed Incorporation of La Pine 13
Resource Lands (Areas 3A -F & 4A -E)
Resource lands included within the boundary are classified by Deschutes County in its
comprehensive plan and zoned for farm and forest uses. These are included because:
♦ Inclusion of resource lands will generally provide a more logical overall boundary and
make it easier to communicate to the public and other agencies. The historic pattern of
development is characterized by noncontiguous rural residential subdivisions, the La
Pine UUC and Wickiup Junction RSC with resource lands separating them; exclusion of
all resource land would cause a confusing, illogical boundary with land within it that
might not be contiguous.
♦ If resource lands are excluded, but are perceived by those in the area to be
geographically similar to those included, it can be confusing. This can make a "mish-
mash" of communications, regulations and enforcement within the overall area, with the
City responsible for some matters and the County, others. Furthermore, non-residents
can feel disenfranchised if they are affected by the City's actions but have no direct
voice in the City's political process.4 It also promotes more conflict between the City and
County.
♦ A large number of services will also be provided to residents/property owners of
resource lands, such as recreation services to adults and youth. To exclude resource
lands would potentially make them ineligible to participate in city -sponsored activities, or
require higher fees to participate -- creating "no man's lands" that are virtually
surrounded by the city but not included.
♦ Resource lands, while subject to state -imposed land use regulations, should be managed
in concert with urban and rural lands to provide a coherent community. LCAT has
developed a vision that includes resource lands as an integral part of the community
while respecting appropriate land uses as permitted by state law. As we describe later,
inclusion of resource lands will allow implementation of this vision in a manner that is
more creative than we have seen elsewhere in Oregon under the current bifurcated land
use planning process of separating rural and resource lands from urban lands.
♦ Inclusion of resource lands will provide the City with more flexibility to plan and manage
growth over the long-term. While there is a commitment to resource land protection
and preservation, it is also recognized that over a long period of time, land may be
needed for urban uses. For example, the proposed new neighborhood is resource land
that will have to be converted to urban use to permit the proposed plan for transfer of
development credits. It is important to include these lands in the city now. The federal
government as part of its "Urban Interface Plan" is examining other BLM-owned land;
some or all of it may be available for a variety of public uses, including leased to the City
for such uses as parks and community centers.
♦ Exclusion of resource lands could undermine one of the primary reasons for
incorporation — gaining more local control over the community's destiny and establishing
a greater level of community cohesiveness. Residents/property owners of resource
4 The Sisters area is often cited as an example to be avoided in La Pine. The City area and population is
small (about 900 people), but the larger Sisters area contains thousands of rural residents who identify
with and are concerned with happens in Sisters. Because they are not part of the city, they cannot
directly influence what happens in the city, and the City cannot benefit financially.
Findings Related to the Proposed Incorporation of La Pine 14
lands should be allowed to participate in city affairs and be represented in city
government. If they are not included, they will be in a situation of having to rely on the
County to represent their interests. This increases the complexity of decision-making
processes and also increases the likelihood of conflict between the City and County.
Area 3A Platted Land West of Core Area: Some of this EFU-zoned land is platted and
contains residences. 3rd and 6th Streets connect it to the core area but access to
properties themselves are from public roads that will benefit from maintenance by the City.
While a lot of it is in the floodplain of the canal and/or wetland, some of it on the west side
could be a candidate for future development.
Area 3B Meadowcrest Acres: This subdivision on Hawks Lair Road is generally
acknowledged by the County as having been incorrectly zoned EFU; it is an extension of the
subdivision immediately to the west zoned rural residential. It will benefit in the same
manner as subdivisions to the west including public road maintenance. During preparation
of the City's comprehensive plan, the zoning can be reviewed and changed if warranted.
Area 3C Park District -owned Land: This parcel was recently acquired by the La Pine
Park and Recreation District through a land swap/donation with the US Forest Service and
Crown Pacific Corporation. It is planned for park use.
Area 3D BLM Parcels: These parcels, considered by the BLM as difficult to manage by
the agency, may be available within the near future for a variety of other public uses
including parks or schools.
Area 3E Farm and Ranchland: These subirrigated farm lands are a mix of parcel sizes
with some scattered residences. Uses include the raising of cattle and keeping of horses for
pleasure. Almost all of these properties gain access from public roads that can benefit from
city maintenance. To eliminate them from the boundary may result in a direct benefit
without a financial contribution. Furthermore, many of these properties have residences
that can enjoy new or increased public services in the same manner as rural residential
residents. In addition, over the long-term, they could become valuable pieces of real estate
in the city's open space system.
Area 4A New Neighborhood Site: This BLM-owned parcel is the site of the proposed
new neighborhood. If it receives all land use approvals, it will be built to urban density with
about 3,600 residents when built -out.
Area 4B Sewage Treatment Expansion Site: This site is a prime candidate for
expansion of the La Pine Special Sewer District's sewage treatment plant. Part of it is within
an overlay zone for deer winter range. Inclusion within the city will permit ongoing land use
control and management by the city/sewer agency.
Area 4C Burgess Property. This property lies between the core area and the new
neighborhood site. It is included to provide contiguity. It could be a candidate for inclusion
within the UGB for reasons of contiguity and because it will be nearly surrounded by
nonresource lands.
Area 4D Miscellaneous BLM-owned Forest Lands: These areas are composed of a
scattering of BLM-owned parcels which, like the others, are candidates for other public uses
because of the difficulty of managing them for traditional BLM activities. Inclusion in the
city boundary will permit the City to work with the BLM on planning appropriate uses in
concert with preparation of its comprehensive plan.
Findings Related to the Proposed Incorporation of La Pine 15
Findings Related to the Proposed Incorporation of La Pine 16
M
N
�
L
C
cu
C
C
C
G7
>
'p
'O C
C N
n 7
40 p
V) 0-0
C O
7
C X
yam, O
O
C N
O
cu
' Y
A -f u
*' O
Co
O
u
m
v
O
v
E
N
E S L
E�
E m�
E��
ro
a� 0--0
H
E�
E'.
EO-0co0�
a
o
EOEmEZwE0
U TO(UU0
(C
U Ln �O
Uoa0w,000v
U CU
-0
.O L
w
U L
c
c
uL
cO.i L
N
V L
N
v L-
Ncu
fu
�
a 3
a 3
a
a 3
O
O
u_0U
'p
V 'p
U 'O
75
76
C
Cd
•v
L
L
C
C
V) v
to O
V) N
V) N
Q
Q
0
n0.
U CU
CV OJ
U VO)
U a))
c
M
O
O
W
c
o •io m
X
X
x
X
x
X
a
m
c
c
$$�
x
X
x
x
x
x
c
13 c 0 m
c$c�
X
x
x
x
W
O O (71
X
a>>
U
00
V)
c
O -�
O
vii
p C
Q
t
a
cL
c
cO
a C
-a O
C6 2 N :G
cn
w
cn c
0J
C
�Y N�
(U
`
a)
Nd
�=
p �-
O
7
C
:p v C p
O W
O
L C
0
'O C
O
'O C fp
C
U V) p
Z
LZ
r1
�'o'> Ln t�'a
p
�''>
O
�'>ao�i
V)
�'rn�
CU
�,. -0 cu L-rarn
'>
vmv
iav�cia�L)
c.c-Y_
V C
L V) m L
L IV
IV -II
L ..0
L .0 c
L' m
J 7
U
0 +'
OC w V) chi .0
O U
w
fp >>
J V)
7
w Vf
0 0 0 ._
w V) d U
7 w 4-
w O .0
M
V) i
O
Q
N
N
N
N
N
+-i
N
N
N
Ee
'tz
cury
fo
w
u
ami
c(UEcum
o
>:3
0
�
0 U
_W
O
i
O
O
a
0
c 0
a
0
p 0
s U
i 0
c��
C
O
a
rn
E
O
'
p
u a)
L
a) Y
`0 C
'�
U
V
V
E
fo L
a r
C
0
L
a)
c
.—
C a)
w 0
0 2 Q)
w
O E C
f7 C C
+�
C
a�
E 0
c
(1)
.o' ��
�
c
a+�'
a� � c -a c
'a)
CU m fCL O
7' a C
rO
Q)
V)
Oro
U >_
ro 0
a C
0 cn
cL 7
+�
Z vi
p
� .2
o
d rn
r o c p
(n C U fo r'1
CU � x
z
fo x
o fn
a)
oY
n
a
a
n,
a
c
(D
c4-1
ra
a
ua�ua�uua
ua`)
u
�,
(n
0)a)
a)
a3
V
U_ p
Z
U_ 'p
Z
u_ 'O
u_ -D
_U -0
ro
!�
fD
U_ "p
fu
O=
L.
fo
Ln a-
rc0
N
fo
N
ra
N
fo
�
c
N
C
(n
.r
,�
,U
V
U rn
V rn
U N
V fn
U fn
f1 fn
0. cn
CU 0
1-4c
L
W
c
O'ro m
X
X
X
X
X
a
�_
+�
fv
d
cc
$o'er
x
x
x
x
X
x
x
x
x
x
=c
p�aim
C2cE
a
x
x
X
x
x
on x
W
Zr C
H
;
X
.0
a�
c
fD
�
0
'
N
a
-0 u
4]
C
f°
O
j
O
o
c
p
coo
—
W
0
M O
O fa
V
O
fA
O
>
'O
c
—
u
(n—
-p
C
4'
-0
w ry
U2
fo
`h
a)
++
C
0
fo a)
3
O
,
ra
C
O
w
fo t
C p
3
f1
C
3
m
N
=
w a)
a) fo
+
v �,
c (n
'o
v
c
0
u
v
,
Z
c
p
O
fo
O
l0L
2
� 3
.0
c
E
�
N
N C
gyp' s
fo
i0
-i
m
�
m Ln
LL M
fo
_j �
T
•�-� (u 3
•L o
L
0r
a
w=
a
m
m
m V) O
a c
m
a
r �
aM
ro
Q
m
U
W
Q
m
V
W
N
M
M
M
M
M
V-
[r
Cr
V-
Ee
Area 4E Privately -owned Forest Lands: While zoned for forest use, these lands are
essentially large rural residential parcels, many of which have been cleared of timber and
have little or no real value as forest land. They are included to avoid a large island within
the surrounding rural residential land.
Table 1 lists all the subareas within the proposed boundary and summarizes their primary
reasons for inclusion in the boundary.
The term "benefit" is not viewed as if a property is to be the subject of a special assessment, as
with a sewer, road or water improvement. The notion behind the term is that the property can
benefit by being within a City. Incorporation allows a different group of electors, and their
representatives, to make decisions on land use, allocation of public funds and other matters. It
is possible that incorporation will not have an effect on a certain property; however, that cannot
be known until the new city council takes office and makes decisions. Obviously, no one knows
the effects of a particular incorporation at the time the election is authorized and a guarantee of
benefits cannot be the statutory standard. There is the possibility of benefits for all of the
properties included within the boundary.
2.3. Proposed Services
LCAT carefully studied current service providers and the capability of the community to raise
revenues to provide additional levels of service. The detail of these services and costs are
included in the Economic Feasibility Statement filed by petitioners. In summary, the City will
provide at least those services at levels at or above those currently provided by Deschutes
County or special districts that will be extinguished by the incorporation. Table 2 is a summary
of these services.'
Table 2. Summary of Services
Service
La Pine Core
Area (1)
Wickiup
)unction (2A)
Rural
Land(2B-2H)
Farm and Forest
Land (3 & 4)
General government
services ("governance")
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Wastewater collection
and treatment
Yes
Yes
No
Nob
Municipal water
Yes
No'
No
Nob
Maintenance of public
roads
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Land use planning
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Code Enforcement
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
5 The location of a service does not equate with beneficiaries in all cases. For example, recreation
programs might be physically located in the core area but would be available for use by (benefit) all
residents.
6 Except potentially the new neighborhood
' If Wickiup Junction is included in the UGB, it is possible that municipal water could then be extended
from the core area to Wickiup Junction.
8 Except potentially the new neighborhood
Findings Related to the Proposed Incorporation of La Pine 19
Service
La Pine Core
Wickiup
Rural
Farm and Forest
Area (1)
Junction (2A)
Land(26-2H)
Land (3 & 4)
Economic Development
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Community event,
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
recreation and park
improvements
Cemetery operations
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Enhanced law
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
enforcement
The users of those services will pay for costs for wastewater collection and treatment and
municipal water; no part of the City's permanent tax rate will go toward providing these
services.
The City will continue to be a part of the La Pine Rural Fire Protection District and the La Pine
Park and Recreation District. County roads that have been accepted for maintenance will
continue to be maintained by the County. Highway 97 will continue to be owned and
maintained by the Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT). Law enforcement services,
for at least the foreseeable future, would continue to be provided by Deschutes County; the
third -year budget anticipates the need to increase the level of Sheriff services through
additional funds for enhanced patrol.
2.4. Proposed Land Uses
The La Pine core area (UUC), is much smaller than the proposed city boundary. In keeping
with the community's desire to retain its rural character and quality of life, petitioners fully
expect that the UGB to be adopted as part of the City's comprehensive plan will remain small
relative to the total city, with the La Pine core area as the primary, and perhaps only, area that
will be included within the UGB. In every respect, the UGB will be required to comply with Goal
14 and other statewide planning goals.
Those areas currently planned and zoned for rural residential uses will continue to be so
designated because, as we discuss later, they will probably be neither suited nor needed for
urban development.
Furthermore, it is the intent of the petitioners that farm and forest lands continue to be
protected as required by Goals 3 and 4. Issues related to resource lands included in the city
boundary and the impact of this circumstance will be discussed more fully under Statewide Goal
findings. However, there is nothing in Oregon laws, statewide planning goals or administrative
rules that prohibit the inclusion of farm and forest resource lands within a city boundary. There
are, however, laws, goals and rules that govern the inclusion of such lands within UGBs, which
are not always and do not need to be co -terminus with city boundaries. 9 In all cases, city limit
boundaries are within and either co -terminus with or smaller than UGBs, although there are
cases in Oregon where city limit boundaries extend somewhat outside a UGB.
9 1000 Friends of Oregon v. Wasco County Court ("Rajneeshpuram" decision), Oregon Supreme Court
299 Or. 344, July 9, 1985.
Findings Related to the Proposed Incorporation of La Pine 20
2.5. Conclusion and Finding
While there is some differentiation in the type of services that will be provided to the urban
versus non -urban portions of the city, all land proposed within the city boundary will benefit by
incorporation; those areas that will benefit from wastewater and water services will pay for
those additional services through service fees. Benefits include not only services but also other
equally important factors such as local control and improved quality of life.
The La Pine core area will likely remain the core urban area for the. city, with the possible
addition of Wickiup Junction and the new neighborhood as an urban area. Rural residential
lands are where most of the residents live, and while some are currently in road districts and
most are not, all residents will benefit from improved road maintenance as well as other city
services. Resource lands will also be provided with services. Their inclusion will enhance
coordination of land use planning and the achievement of the community's vision to integrate
urban and non -urban portions of the community into an overall plan that retains the rural
character and quality of the area.
3. Statewide Planning Goals
Deschutes County has the most recent experience with the incorporation process in the State of
Oregon. In 1992-93, the County reviewed and approved a petition to incorporate Sunriver,
subsequently defeated by the voters. At that time, the Board of Commissioners was advised
concerning the scope of inquiry regarding the Statewide Planning Goals. This was also the
subject of inquiry during the initial feasibility study for the La Pine incorporation. Both the
County's analysis at that time and ours now focuses on standards set established by the Oregon
Supreme Court on appeals from decisions by the Land Use Board of Appeals and Oregon Court
of Appeals and in cases related to the Rajneeshpuram (Wasco County) incorporation. These
are still the relevant standards in addressing the statewide planning goals.10 In summary, the
Supreme Court said:
♦ A county's decision in connection with a proposed incorporation is a land use decision
that must accord with the goals
♦ The county's responsibility is to determine the compatibility of incorporation and its
consequences with the criteria stated in the goals
♦ Some of the consequences of incorporation may foreseeably affect land that remains the
county's responsibility.
♦ Goal 14 does not prohibit incorporation of a new city on rural land or an exception to the
land use goals.
♦ The county cannot expect proponents to actually develop a comprehensive plan before
an election on incorporation.
♦ A county discharges its planning and zoning responsibilities with regard to incorporation
if it finds that 'it is reasonably likely that the newly incorporated city can and will comply
with the goals once the city assumes responsibility for comprehensive planning in the
area to be incorporated" including the seven factors of Goal 14.
10DLCD adopted an administrative rule related to the Incorporation of New Cities (OAR 660- )
which, in effect, was nullified by the Rajneeshpuram case. However, this rule has not been amended or
repealed as a result of the Supreme Court decision but we consider it to have no force or effect on this
incorporation decision.
Findings Related to the Proposed Incorporation of La Pine 21
These findings will address both how the incorporation proposal complies with the goals in the
broad context per the Supreme Court's 1985 decision as well as the feasibility of complying with
the goals when the City adopts a comprehensive plan.
3.1. Goal.1; Citizen Participation
3.1.1. Summary of Goal 111
Citizen Involvement -- Goal l calls for "the opportunityfor citizens to be involved in all phases
of the planning process. "It requires each city and county to have a citizen involvement program
with six components specified in the goal. It also requires local governments to have a committee
for citizen involvement (CCI) to monitor and encourage public participation in planning.
3.1.2. Citizen Involvement in Incorporation Proposal
The incorporation proposal is fully a citizen -driven effort. LCAT and the Incorporation
Committee, an LCAT subcommittee conducted the Governance Study, Economic Feasibility
Study and all other investigations of the proposal. While all LCAT and subcommittee meetings
were public meetings, and were well -attended by members of the public, numerous public
meetings, workshops and other events were held to solicit ideas, input and questions from the
public related to the incorporation studies.
As indicated previously, the 1998 Governance Study began with a public workshop to identify
options for investigation. About 80 people attended this meeting. Later meetings were held to
present the results of that study and to gain consensus on the large city option that was
subsequently adopted by LCAT. Throughout the Incorporation Committee's further
development and study of the large city option, citizens were encouraged to attend meetings --
the first hour of each meeting was devoted to presentation of the work to date and a question
and answer period for citizens. Every question was answered at those meetings or provided
subsequently in written form.
LCAT developed and has continued to maintain a website that provides information about the
incorporation process as well as all of LCAT's activities. A quarterly newsletter and monthly
incorporation bulletin continues to provide information about the proposal to every resident.
LCAT and the Incorporation Committee met with a number of citizen groups including the La
Pine Chamber of Commerce, the local chapter of American Association of Retired Persons
(AARP), the La Pine Industrial Group and all of the special districts in the area. Memorandums
of Understanding were developed with each special district to memorialize the intent of the
incorporation proposal and its probable effect on each district.
Meetings were held with the three road districts in the area to explain the proposal and solicit
concerns. As a result of these meetings, a subcommittee with road district representation was
formed to develop a specific plan for road maintenance services to ensure that current levels of
service that each district enjoys will be maintained after incorporation.
Three surveys influenced the decision to move forward with an incorporation proposal. In early
1998, the University of Oregon Survey Research Laboratory conducted a survey of Northern
Klamath County and Southern Deschutes County. While primarily related to income and social
service needs, the survey included a question for only La Pine area residents about whether "La
11 Summaries of each goal are taken from DLCD's website.
Findings Related to the Proposed Incorporation of La Pine 22
Pine needs a form of government" -- 51.4% answered 'yes', 37.4% answered 'no' and the rest
did not answer or were unsure.
In August -September; 1999, LCAT conducted a door-to-door survey of La Pine residents to
determine the interest in and support for incorporation -- every household was contacted. Of
155 responses, nearly 75% said they had enough information to make an informed decision
regarding incorporation and 68% indicated that La Pine should incorporate. In November,
1999, the Portland public opinion polling firm of Davis & Hibbitts conducted a random sample
survey of 300 registered voters within the incorporation boundaries. The survey found that
90% of respondents had heard or read about incorporating La Pine. Fifty-four per cent (54%)
said that it was very important or somewhat important to incorporate La Pine.
3.1.3. Citizen Involvement in Land Use Planning
La Pine has a rich history of citizen involvement in a wide range of activities, including this
incorporation proposal. In addition, in terms of current land use involvement, Deschutes
County has involved La Pine citizens in the concept and development of the new neighborhood
proposal. Proponents of incorporation have a strong interest in retaining La Pine's tradition of
citizen involvement. Some have discussed an interest in developing a model form of
government, through a charter process, that will build on citizen involvement to a greater
degree than is typically found in city charters.
The strategic planning and actions to implement the Strategic Plan demonstrate a level of
involvement and participation that is exemplary. The recent visioning process is an example of
forward thinking about the future of the community that demonstrates commitment.
3.1.4. Conclusion and Finding
The La Pine community has a rich tradition of citizen involvement. The incorporation proposal
is a citizen -driven proposal that has included all segments of the community in a variety of
forums and activities. Furthermore, the community has demonstrated its interest and
involvement in a wide range of activities, many of which have been fostered by LCAT and the
Strategic Plan. It is reasonable to assume that this will continue after incorporation with
preparation and implementation of the city's comprehensive plan and implementing ordinances.
Therefore, the proposal complies with Goal 1 and it is feasible to comply with Goal 1 in the land
use planning process after incorporation.
3.2. Goal 2: Land Use Planning
3.2.1. Summary of Goal 2
Land Use Planning --Goal 2 outlines the basic procedures of Oregon's statewide planning program. It
says that land -use decisions are to be made in accordance with a comprehensive plan, and that suitable
"implementation ordinances" to put the plan's policies into effect must be adopted. It requires that plans
be based on 'factual information "; that local plans and ordinances be coordinated with those of other
jurisdictions and agencies; and that plans be reviewed periodically and amended as needed.
Goal 2 also contains standards for taking exceptions to statewide goals. An exception may be taken when
a statewide goal cannot or should not be applied to a particular area or situation.
Findings Related to the Proposed Incorporation of La Pine 23
3.2.2. Effect of Proposed Incorporation
The proposed incorporation, per se, does not affect land use. The County's comprehensive plan
stays in effect until the City adopts its own plan in compliance with the statewide planning
goals. The test here is to determine whether, on the face of it, the proposal violates the
statewide planning goals and/or whether it is feasible for the new city to develop a
comprehensive plan that meets the statewide planning goals, and to meet that requirement
within four years of incorporation. Part of the consideration is whether any new exceptions will
have to be taken to the statewide planning goals when the plan is prepared.
There are two types of exceptions that theoretically could be required in a case like this: 1) an
exception to permit urban uses or public facilities outside a UGB that have not already been
granted an exception; and 2) an exception to permit inclusion of land within a UGB that does
not fit the standards and prioritization system outlined in Goal 14 and ORS 197.298.
ORS 197.298 provides a prioritization scheme for inclusion of lands within a UGB as follows:
a) First priority is land that is designated urban reserve land under ORS 195.145, rule or
metropolitan service district action plan.
b) If land under paragraph (a) of this subsection is inadequate to accommodate the
amount of land needed, second priority is land adjacent to an urban growth boundary
that is identified in an acknowledged comprehensive plan as an exception area or
nonresource land. Second priority may include resource land that is completely
surrounded by exception areas unless such resource land is high-value farmland as
described in ORS 215.710.
c) If land under paragraphs (a) and (b) of this subsection is inadequate to accommodate
the amount of land needed, third priority is land designated as marginal land pursuant
to ORS 197.247 (1991 Edition).
d) If land under paragraphs (a) to (c) of this subsection is inadequate to accommodate
the amount of land needed, fourth priority is land designated in an acknowledged
comprehensive plan for agriculture or forestry, or both.
e) Higher priority shall be given to land of lower capability as measured by the capability
classification system or by cubic foot site class, whichever is appropriate for the current
use.
f) Land of lower priority under subsection (1) of this section may be included in an
urban growth boundary if land of higher priority is found to be inadequate to
accommodate the amount of land estimated in subsection (1) of this section for one or
more of the following reasons. (a) Specific types of identified land needs cannot be
reasonably accommodated on higher priority lands, (b) Future urban services could not
reasonably be provided to the higher priority lands due to topographical or other
physical constraints; or (c) Maximum efficiency of land uses within a proposed urban
growth boundary requires inclusion of lower priority lands in order to include or to
provide services to higher priority lands
3.2.3. First Priority Exception Areas
There are no urban reserve areas as defined in subsection (a) of ORS 197.298, therefore, first
priority will be given to exception lands to be included within the city's UGB. There are three
Findings Related to the Proposed Incorporation of La Pine 24
exception areas included within the proposal that could be candidates for inclusion within the
UGB.
The La Pine "core area" (Area 1 on Exhibit A), a total of 969 acres, is established as an Urban
Unincorporated Community (UUC) under OAR 660, Division 22. As such, it has urban uses
within the UUC boundary including 193 acres of commercial, 435 acres of industrial and 335
acres of urban residential land use. The core area is totally included within the incorporation
boundaries and will most logically be the prime area for urban uses in the future, such as the
city's downtown.
Wickiup ]unction (Area 2A on Exhibit A), 127 acres, received an exception to the statewide
planning goals when the County had its plan acknowledged and has since been designated as a
Rural Service Center (RSC) under OAR 660, Division 22. Rural service centers are permitted to
have limited commercial and industrial uses. Inclusion of the RSC in the incorporation
boundaries will not immediately affect land use designations. However, inasmuch as the
definition of an RSC is intended to apply to unincorporated communities, its designation within
the city will have to be reviewed and amended as part of the city's comprehensive plan. Part of
the consideration could be to include it within the city's UGB if it is found that land is needed for
urban uses. The RSC is already receiving municipal wastewater service from the La Pine Special
Sewer District through an exception to Goal 11 and has a community water system.
Rural residential land uses (Areas 26-2H), comprising 8,515 acres, are also exception lands. It
is unlikely that very many, if any, of these areas would be included within the city's UGB,
however, because: 1) municipal sewer and water are too costly to extend to this area, and
therefore could not qualify under Goals 11 and 14; 2) current land development patterns and
density make it impractical to consider these areas for urban use for the foreseeable future,
particularly without municipal sewer and water; 3) it is unlikely that they will be needed for
urban use, and; 4) there could be other environmental consequences such as further impacts to
the deer migration corridor. Their inclusion within the city boundaries, while unusual, is not
inconsistent with the County's plan or statewide planning goals. City services that would be
provided to the area are the same as those that the county or a special district is permitted to
provide in a rural area, such as road maintenance and improvement, enhanced law
enforcement, parks and recreation, etc.
3.2.4. Lower Priority Farm and Forest Lands (Areas 3 & 4 on Map A)
The proposed incorporation boundary contains 2,717 acres of land zoned for Exclusive Farm
Use (EFU) and 2,141 acres of land zoned for Forest Use. There are no statewide planning goals
or laws that prohibit these areas from being included within city boundaries, and a number of
cities in Oregon have one or both of these uses included within their city boundaries but outside
UGBs.12 The intent of proponents is to maintain these lands as farm and forest lands, with
some exceptions. The exceptions relate to: 1) those BLM lands currently being considered by
Deschutes County for a "new neighborhood" as part of the Regional Problem -solving process
(RPS), and 2) other BLM lands that are identified by that agency as part of its Urban Interface
Plan that could be made available to the City for public uses.
12 The issue of whether rural land could be included within a UGB was one of the points of appeal in the
1985 Rajneeshpuram Supreme Court decision. The Court upheld appellants position that this issue is not
a properly dealt with in incorporation but in the subsequent development of the comprehensive plan.
Findings Related to the Proposed Incorporation of La Pine 25
These changes in use will likely occur with or without incorporation. In the case of the new
neighborhood, the County's RPS planning has been under the assumption that it would be
established as a new UUC or an expansion of the La Pine UUC and would be required to take an
exception to Goals 4 and 14. Therefore, inclusion within the city's boundary does not change
this circumstance. It can be argued that in the long-term, it is wiser for this area to be included
within a city boundary prior to development rather than face a governance issue in the future
when the area is partially or fully built -out. In the case of BLM lands, there have been a
number of discussions with the County and local community about appropriate uses, which
would also be compatible with a resource designation.
The reasons for including the remaining farm and forest lands within the city are explained in
Section 2 and indicate how the city and resource lands would benefit by inclusion within city
boundaries even if they are not included within the UGB. While it is unlikely that resource lands
will be needed for urban development, they would be second in priority for inclusion within a
UGB if exception lands are not adequate for urban needs, they are completely surrounded by
exception lands and are not identified as "high value farmland". We discuss possible impacts to
resource lands by being included within the city boundary in sections 3.3 and 3.4 below, as well
as potential impacts that could result from the adoption of a UGB which would not likely include
resource lands.
3.2.5. Timetable for Plan Development
The City will have four years from the date of incorporation to develop a comprehensive plan
and implementing regulations, or until about November, 2004.
The Economic Feasibility Study includes a budget for the first three years of city operations.
This budget is required by law to assess the economic feasibility for city formation and to
establish the basis of the proposed permanent tax rate. However, it is important to note that
the future city council is not bound to adopt these budgets. After its first (partial) year of
operation, the new city is required to follow Oregon Budget Law, which among other provisions,
requires that a budget committee be appointed that includes lay citizens. Through the budget
process, a different budget could be developed and adopted by the City Council and still be
within the city's permanent tax rate. Therefore, the Economic Feasibility Statement should be
viewed as financially conservative and only as an indicator of the proponents' intent to provide
various programs and services at projected levels. As with all local governments, the actual
budget process and decisions will require a review and assessment of priorities measured
against costs and revenues.
The Economic Feasibility St "d assumes that the City will contract with Deschutes County
during its first full year of operations (FY2001-2002) primarily for land use permitting services;
the City will still be operating under Deschutes County's Comprehensive Plan and implementing
ordinances. Beginning in FY2002-2003, the City would establish its own planning department
and begin preparation of its comprehensive plan. In FY2003-2004, a grant of $20,000 is
included to help offset the costs of preparing this plan. Based on previous history, both the
cost of preparing the plan and the amount of the grant are conservative.
The City will have three general approaches available to develop its plan:
1. Adopt Deschutes County's Plan and implementing ordinances with a minimum number of
changes needed to comply with the statewide planning goals.
2. Begin the planning process from "scratch" -- a total re -look at the future of the area.
Findings Related to the Proposed Incorporation of La Pine 26
3. Take an approach somewhere between 1 and 2.
Given the community's objective to keep the current character and quality of life, it is
reasonable to assume that either option 1 or 3 is the most likely approach. It is reasonable to
assume that a plan of this magnitude could be accomplished in approximately two years
(FY2002-2004). It appears very unlikely that it would be necessary or desirable to start from
scratch. The community has been very involved in the County's planning activities over the
years and this incorporation has not been proposed as a means to effect radical land use
changes from those established in the County Comprehensive Plan. In any regard, the City will
be required to develop a budget and funding sources to conduct the necessary level of work to
accomplish its approach.
3.2.6. Conclusion and Findings
The proposed boundary includes 9,606 acres of exception lands. A total of 1,091 are either
within the La Pine UUC or Wickiup Junction RSC and could be made available for urban use
within the city's future UGB based on the priorities established in ORS 197.298. The new
neighborhood may also become an exception area that can be included within the UGB. The
remaining exception areas can remain within a rural density zoning district within the city's
boundaries and be in compliance with statewide planning goals. Farm and forest lands included
in the city boundary are not prohibited by state law or statewide planning goals and will be
benefited by being included in the city boundary, based on the reasons outlined in Section 2.2.
It is feasible that the City will be able to complete the development of a comprehensive plan
within 4 years of incorporation based on the optional approaches available and the ability of the
City to budget and obtain funding for the preparation of the plan. The City will be obliged to
follow state law and the statewide planning goals in preparation of its plan and implementing
ordinances, including addressing the exceptions already taken by the County and any new
exceptions that may be necessary.
3.3. Goal 3; Agriculture Lands
3.3.1. Summary of Goal 3
Agricultural Lands -- Goal 3 defines "agricultural lands. "It then requires counties to inventory such
lands and to 'preserve and maintain" them through exclusive farm use (EFU) zoning (per ORS Chapter
215).
OAR 660, Division 033 is the applicable administrative rule for agricultural land.
3.3.2. Effect of Proposed Incorporation
The proposed incorporation includes 2,717 acres of land zoned for Exclusive Farm Use (EFU).
The reasons for including EFU lands within the proposal are listed in Section 2.2. EFU land lies
in a large north -south swath between development along the west side of Highway 97 and rural
residential land further to the west. A large portion of the EFU land is along both sides of the
Little Deschutes River and is part of the river's floodplain. A small area of EFU land also lies
directly west of the La Pine UUC along a canal feeding the Little Deschutes. For the most part,
the La Pine area is not a major farming area. The farm land included in the proposed boundary
is significantly isolated from other major farming areas in the county.
Findings Related to the Proposed Incorporation of La Pine 27
EFU land within the proposed boundary is classified by the Deschutes County Comprehensive
Plan as "riparian meadows, grazing and meadow hay". These lands are not considered suitable
for crops because of the high elevation (4,000'), low rainfall and potential of damage from frost
or mid -summer hail storms. Studies that the County conducted in 1992 found that the La Pine
subzone is "somewhat different from the other subzones in that farm sales are less than farm
use values.....due to agricultural practices that depend to a greater degree than in the other
subzones on livestock grazing on non -irrigated pasture".
The incorporation, per se, does not affect agricultural land. The land remains planned and
zoned for agricultural use until such time as the City adopts a comprehensive plan and rezones
the land for other uses in compliance with the statewide planning goals. Impacts to EFU land
would not occur unless they are eventually included within a UGB or rezoned for other rural
uses such as rural residential. Given the amount of rural residential land that is already platted
in Deschutes County and the La Pine area, and the environmental regulations that apply, it is
unlikely that additional rural residential land could be justified through a new exception to Goal
3. The City will be required to demonstrate that EFU lands are needed for development to
include them in the UGB. With exception lands in the La Pine UUC, the Wickiup Junction RSC
and the new neighborhood (yet to be granted), it is unlikely that additional EFU lands will be
needed for urban development for the foreseeable future. Furthermore, as stated previously,
proponents do not intend to plan and zone lands currently zoned for EFU for either urban or
residential development. The community is committed to the recreation, environmental and
water resource values of the Little Deschutes River and its associated floodplain; development
would not be consistent with its vision to maintain the rural character of the area. 13 It is
expected that the City's comprehensive plan will address these values consistent with the
statewide planning goals.
There may be some perceived impacts to EFU lands included within the city boundaries due to
the fact that, customarily, EFU lands are not included within city boundaries. Cities are
established primarily to provide urban infrastructure services and local governance. However,
in this case, the presence of city boundaries cannot be equated totally with urban infrastructure
services. The development history and pattern of the area dictates the chosen governance
solution, which necessitates inclusion of EFU land to make a logical, identifiable boundary.
Another concern may relate to the potential impact of urban development on farming practices
on EFU lands. However, we believe that any potential impact to farming practices, real or
perceived, has or will occur as a result of the allowance of rural residential development on both
sides of EFU lands as well as the proximity of the La Pine UUC and the Wickiup Junction RSC.
Due to the fact that most of the EFU land is used for the grazing of livestock, with meadow hay
production as the only crop, there is very little potential impact to farming practices.
Part of the concern with inclusion of EFU lands may relate to state laws and administrative
rules. These laws and rules address the role and responsibility of counties in regulating EFU
land. The fact that cities are not addressed may raise the concern that cities do not have the
same responsibilities to regulate EFU lands. However, it is reasonable to assume that the
Legislature and LCDC intended that these laws apply to EFU lands wherever they occur, not just
within counties; the fact that cities are not mentioned is primarily because most city boundaries
are within UGBs, which are slated for future urban development. However, outside UGBs, it is
reasonable to interpret the laws also require cities to protect EFU lands.
13 This is further re -enforced in a community visioning process (charrette) that occurred April 28-29.
Findings Related to the Proposed Incorporation of La Pine 28
Some may maintain that cities are not equipped to regulate EFU lands -- that this is the
regulatory domain of counties. We do not believe there is any validity to this notion. The City
would be just as capable as a county to hire the technical expertise necessary to regulate farm
lands. In addition, the City has the option to contract with Deschutes County to administer EFU
lands, if desirable and agreeable to both.
The irony of EFU lands is that, while they are protected by state law differently than other land
use categories, state law permits a wide array of uses within EFU lands, either outright or
conditionally, that are not agriculturally -related. On the one hand, some of the conditional uses
may be desirable in this area and some may not be desirable. Therefore, city regulation of
conditional uses on EFU lands within the context of a total community is very desirable and
makes sense in this case. Inclusion of EFU lands will, therefore, eliminate any future conflict
between the City and County in terms of how the County would regulate these lands in the
future if they are not included within city boundaries.
Finally, some may be concerned that inclusion of EFU lands within a city boundary may
establish a precedent -- other cities may desire to include EFU lands, or may decide to rezone
land to EFU as an anti -growth measure.14 First, as a precedent, it may not be a negative in all
cases if the purpose is to preserve open space, address resource protection issues such as
water quality or to have control of city interests such as protecting a watershed. Second, cities
will need to continue to provide adequate land for urban development within UGBs. If cities
rezoned land as an anti -growth measure, they would violate Goal 14 and state statutes/rules
that require cities to maintain an adequate supply of land for urban development. Therefore,
when needed, there are safeguards to prevent the indiscriminate inclusion of EFU lands within
city boundaries or rezoning of urban land to EFU.
3.3.3. Conclusion and Finding
Inclusion of EFU land within city boundaries is not in violation of Goal 3. Furthermore, the City
can develop a comprehensive plan that will continue to protect EFU lands in compliance with
the statewide planning goals and their implementing administrative rules.
3.4. Goal 4; Forest Lands
3.4.1. Summary of Goal 4
Forest Lands -- This goal defines forest lands and requires counties to inventory them and adopt
policies and ordinances that will "conserve forest lands for forest uses. "
3.4.2. Effect of Proposed Incorporation
The incorporation proposal includes 2,141 acres of land planned and zoned for forest use. Of
this amount, 1,867 is owned by the federal government, of which most is managed by the
Bureau of Land Management (BLM). Forest lands are not in large contiguous parcels and there
is not commercial timber harvest of any magnitude taking place on these lands. The biggest
forest parcel is the site for the proposed new neighborhood along the west side of Highway 97.
14 A number of cities do have EFU land within their boundaries. In come cases, EFU land was included as
a means of growth management and to protect lands for farming until needed for urban development.
In other cases, EFU land is used for major public facilities such as water reservoirs and watersheds and
wastewater treatment facilities.
Findings Related to the Proposed Incorporation of La Pine 29
Other public lands are scattered on the periphery of the city boundary. Privately -owned forest
lands lie amidst rural residential subdivisions in the Day Road area and is more correctly
described as rural residential land on large parcels. Some of these parcels have essentially
been cleared of any commercially valuable timber.
Most of the same discussion related to EFU land also applies to forest lands. The BLM is
undergoing an evaluation of land it owns and has designated LCAT to provide public input for
its Urban Interface Plan. Some of these lands may be available for public purposes within the
foreseeable future. Many of the uses that have been suggested would be compatible with farm
and forest zones while also serving the rural and urban populations.
3.4.3. Conclusion and Finding
Inclusion of forest land within city boundaries is not in violation of Goal 4 and its implementing
administrative rules (OAR 660, Division 04). Furthermore, the City can develop a
comprehensive plan that will continue to protect forest lands in compliance with the statewide
planning goals.
3.5. Goal S. Open Spaces and Natural Resources
3.5.1. Summary of Goal 5
Open Spaces, Scenic and Historic Areas, and Natural Resources -- Goal 5 encompasses 12
different types of resources, including wildlife habitats, mineral resources, wetlands and waterways. It
establishes a process through which resources must be inventoried and evaluated. If a resource or site is
found to be important, the local government has three policy choices: to preserve the resource, to allow
the proposed uses that conflict with it, or to establish some sort of a balance between the resource and
those uses that would conflict with it.
3.5.2. Effect of Proposed Incorporation
Deschutes County identified significant open space and natural resources at the time the
Comprehensive Plan was initially acknowledged and then undertook an update in 1994 to
comply with the Goal 5 administrative rule. Resources identified within the proposed boundary
are:
♦ The Little Deschutes River (floodplain, wetland and riparian resources) corridor
♦ Highway 97, Huntington Road and Burgess Road Scenic Roadway Corridors
♦ Deer Migration Corridor (entire boundary outside the UUC and RSC)
Other than the roadway corridors, no Goal 5 resources were identified for the UUC or RSC.
These resources and how they are currently protected and managed by Deschutes County are
discussed in more detail in Section 4.2.11. The Little Deschutes River riparian/floodplain area
also contains associated wetlands, inventoried as part of the national Wetlands Inventory by the
U.S. Department of Interior. Federal and state laws, as well as county laws, regulate fill and
removal; incorporation will not change these regulations.
It is possible that setback standards within the Landscape Management Combining Zone for
Highway 97 could conflict with guidelines and standards that are promoted by the OAR 660,
Division 12, the Transportation Planning Rule (TPR) to foster compact, walkable communities.
Highway 97 through the commercial core of La Pine has been identified in the TSP and in
Findings Related to the Proposed Incorporation of La Pine 30
Highway 97 corridor studies as a major barrier for pedestrians to traverse and for autos and
pedestrians to cross safely. The City will need to consider this issue and balance the potential
conflict in its comprehensive plan and regulations.
Landscape Management and Floodplain Standards for the Little Deschutes River are compatible
with the community's intent to maintain the current land use status of the areas through which
the river flows -- either farmland or rural residential. Neither the UUC, RSC nor new
neighborhood are affected by these regulations.
The Wildlife Area regulations do not apply within unincorporated communities, which today
means the UUC and RSC. If the County is successful in extending the UUC boundary to include
the new neighborhood, it would also be exempt. In the balance of the area, the regulations
limit certain land uses, such as the requirement that land divisions in the RR -10 zone can be
permitted only as cluster developments on at least 20 acres with 80% open space.
Through the RPS project the County carefully examined impacts to the deer migration area
caused by the current level of rural residential development that had been permitted and
determined that transferring development credits to the new neighborhood was preferable and
was less of an impact than would otherwise occur.
3.5.3. Conclusion and Finding
The proposed boundary includes three distinct types of natural resources that are protected by
the Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan and its regulations. These plan designations and
regulations will remain in place until the City adopts its own plan and regulations. The values
represented by these resources are important to the community and there is every expectation
that it will want to provide the same levels of protection. There could be some conflict with
standards for Highway 97 that will need to be evaluated and balanced when the City develops
its plan and regulations.
3.6. Goa/ 6: Air, Water and Land Resources Quality
3.6.1. Summary of Goal 6
Air, Water and Land Resources Quality --This goal requires local comprehensive plans and
implementing measures to be consistent with state and federal regulations on matters such as
groundwater pollution.
3.6.2. Effect of Proposed Incorporation
The proposed incorporation has no effect on the requirement to maintain local comprehensive
plans and implementing measures to be consistent with state and federal regulations regarding
air and water quality. These requirements apply equally to cities and counties. As with Goal 5,
the incorporation could enhance success of the RPS project, thereby furthering the project's
water quality goals. The City will be required to address Goal 6 in development of its
comprehensive plan.
3.6.3. Conclusion and Finding
The proposed incorporation is consistent with Goal 6. The incorporation could enhance success
of the RPS project and further the project's water quality goals.
Findings Related to the Proposed Incorporation of La Pine 31
3.7. Goa/ 7; Natural Disasters and Hazards
3.7.1. Summary of Goal 7
Areas Subject to Natural Disasters and Hazards -- Goal 7 deals with development in places subject
to natural hazards such as, floods or landslides. It requires that jurisdictions apply "appropriate
safeguards" (floodplain zoning, for example) when planning for development there.
3.7.2. Effect of Proposed Incorporation
The land area adjacent to the Little Deschutes River has been designated by the Federal
Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) as a flood hazard area. It has been zoned Flood Plain
by Deschutes County and carries restrictions on development within the 100 -year floodplain.
These regulations are in addition to those of the Landscape Management Overlay Zone that
protects the scenic, open space, wetland and riparian qualities of the Little Deschutes. The
undeveloped portion of the floodplain will likely never be subjected to development pressure.
The problem of wildfire is a natural hazard that has received considerable study by Deschutes
County as part of the RPS project. Wildfire is a result of natural (lightning strikes in the
summer) and manmade causes, but in any regard, is exacerbated by human settlement in the
dry pine forests of the area. The new neighborhood concept, to reduce the number of new
housing units in low density rural settings, is designed to reduce the incidence of wildfire and
threats to human life and investment, as well as reduce the impact to the natural environment.
As indicated previously, incorporation could enhance the success of the RPS project.
3.7.3. Conclusion and Finding
Natural hazards in the area include flooding along the Little Deschutes River and wildfire. The
Flood plain protections under Deschutes County will continue until the City adopts its own
comprehensive plan and development regulations. Incorporation may enhance the success of
the RPS project, thereby furthering goals to reduce the potential for wildfire. The incorporation
proposal does not violate Goal 7 and it is feasible for the City to meet Goal 7 during preparation
of its comprehensive plan and implementing ordinances.
3.8. Goa/8: Recreation
3.8.1. Summary of Goal 8
Recreation Needs -- This goal calls for each community to evaluate its areas and facilities for
recreation and develop plans to deal with the projected demand for them. It also sets forth detailed
standards for expedited siting of destination resorts.
3.8.2. Effect of Proposed Incorporation
Recreation is a key value of the residents within the proposed incorporation area. While there
are major recreation opportunities of statewide significance in the immediate area, such as La
Pine State Park and Newberry Crater, the community lacks community -level recreation facilities
such as swimming pools, ball fields, playgrounds and recreation centers. Deschutes County
does not provide recreation programs. The La Pine Park and Recreation District provides
limited services to an area that exceeds the size of the proposed incorporation. As the area
grows, there is increasing concern that there are few recreation opportunities for youth and
that this could lead to increased delinquency. The permanent tax rate proposed as part of the
Findings Related to the Proposed Incorporation of La Pine 32
incorporation proposal includes some funding for enhanced recreation. Furthermore,
incorporation may provide more focus and support for eventual approval of a permanent tax
rate and grant funding for the La Pine Park and Recreation District which currently supports
itself on minimal non -property tax revenue such as fees.
3.8.3. Conclusion and Finding
Recreation is a key issue and value in the La Pine community. Incorporation will enhance the
area's ability to plan, fund and provide recreation facilities and programs in compliance with
Goal 8.
3.9. Goal* Economic Development
3.9.1. Summary of Goal 9
Economy of the State -- Goal 9 calls for diversification and improvement of the economy. It asks
communities to inventory commercial and industrial lands, project future needs for such lands, and plan
and zone enough land to meet those needs.
3.9.2. Effect of Proposed Incorporation
Economic development and diversification is a key issue for the La Pine community. The La
Pine Strategic Plan is strongly directed toward improving the local economy. The retirement
population that historically settled much of La Pine in the past is slowly decreasing in proportion
to the number of young people and families. However, major employment opportunities are
located primarily in Bend, a 30 -mile commute. There are few family -wage jobs in La Pine but
the potential exists to increase jobs with incorporation. Employers are dissuaded from locating
in La Pine today because of the lack of a city government that can provide local planning,
services, leadership and business support.
The proposed incorporation boundary contains 747 acres of land planned and zoned for
commercial and industrial land. The inventory of industrial and commercial land that exists in
La Pine and Wickiup )unction could significantly meet the needs for current and future
population growth within the proposed city, including for job growth. These areas are provided
with municipal sewer and water facilities and have adequate transportation from Highway 97
and the BN/SF Railroad. There is also the potential for an airport east of the City on BLM-
owned land.
With incorporation, the City will assume ownership and management of the La Pine Industrial
Park that is currently owned by Deschutes County and managed by the La Pine Industrial
Group, a local nonprofit organization. The incorporation proposal includes an economic
development coordinator who can administer the industrial park and promote economic
development.
The City will be required to comply with ORS 197.707-717 and OAR Chapter 660-009 regarding
economic development opportunities. For example, an economic analysis will be required to
determine whether this is adequate for current and future population at the time the
comprehensive plan is developed. The Strategic Plan already provides a strong policy basis for
the city's future economic development strategy and planning. As detailed under Section 3.14
below, the proposed city boundaries contain healthy areas of industrial and commercial land for
current and future population that can also serve population and employment needs for a
broader segment of the population in south Deschutes County.
Findings Related to the Proposed Incorporation of La Pine 33
3.9.3. Conclusion and Finding
Incorporation will support Goal 9 by providing local government leadership to provide the
necessary planning and promote job growth. Significant areas are already planned and zoned
for industrial and commercial use to meet current and future needs. In addition, the City will
gain ownership of the La Pine Industrial Park that will be an immediate economic asset to the
City. City financial support will enhance development of the park and promote job growth. The
Strategic Plan, land availability for economic development needs and importance that the
community places on economic development activity demonstrate the feasibility to comply with
Goal 9, state law and the administrative rule during development of the City's comprehensive
plan.
3.10. Goal.10; Housing
3.10.1. Summary of Goal 10
Housing -- This goal specifies that each city must plan for and accommodate needed housing types
(typically, multifamily and manufactured housing). It requires each city to inventory its buildable
residential lands, project future needs for such lands, and plan and zone enough buildable land to meet
those needs. It also prohibits local plans from discriminating against needed housing types.
3.10.2. Effect of Proposed Incorporation
While Goal 10 applies to "cities", the statutes and Goal 10 Housing Rule (OAR 660-008) relate
more specifically to areas within UGBs and the assurance that adequate land is provided for
future urban housing needs. Compliance with Goal 10 requires coordination of population
projections with the County under ORS 195.036; preparation of buildable lands inventories
under ORS 197.296 and addressing "needed housing" under ORS 197.303.
Deschutes County, as part of the RPS project, inventoried buildable residential land in the RPS
study area that included the La Pine incorporation area. The focus has been primarily on ways
to avert environmental degradation through continued provision of septic tanks on low density
lots. The question of "need" per se has not been the focus of the study because most of the
area subject to the study was approved prior to adoption of the statewide planning goals and
presumably could not be approved today, at least in terms of location. In the development of
its comprehensive plan, the City will be required to investigate the issue of need. Incorporation
will allow the area's full housing needs to be addressed in a way that they cannot be today as a
conglomeration of resource, rural and urban lands in an unincorporated status.
The question at this stage is whether there is a reasonable likelihood that there will be
adequate land to provide for a full range of housing types, including various income levels.
The following factors lead to a positive conclusion that it is reasonably likely that housing needs
can be met:
♦ In Deschutes County's RPS inventory, it was found that there are enough rural vacant
buildable lots within the proposed boundary to double the population.
♦ Historically, the area has attracted single family housing at the low to moderate end of the
cost spectrum. "Stick -built", modular and mobile homes are all prevalent in the area and
are interspersed.
♦ The area lacks urban density housing, including multi -family. However, at the time that the
La Pine UUC amendment was made, there were 94 vacant residential lots within the UUC
Findings Related to the Proposed Incorporation of La Pine 34
boundaries that had (or would have) public sewer and water. These lands could be
potential multi -family areas. Wickiup Junction RSC had 50 vacant commercial and
residential lots.
♦ The new neighborhood, if approved, will be a significant area for new housing that will be
more diverse than what would otherwise occur in the rural area that it is intended to
replace. It will include 1,800 housing units at a density of 6.6 d.u.s/acre, of which 692
(38%) will be multi -family. This will be a significant housing resource for the community.
♦ A 1994 inventory of land in the La Pine UUC indicates a total of 223 residential building lots
of which 94 were vacant. A 2000 GIS inventory tallies a total of 335 acres of urban
residential land. The La Pine UUC is served with municipal sewer and water to permit urban
level densities.
The 2000 Census will provide a significant data base on which to determine existing and future
housing needs. It will likely show, for example, that the area already has a comparatively large
proportion of mobile homes but has little multi -family housing.
The April, 2000 Strategic Plan goal for an affordable and equitable full service city, with the
action to develop a plan to address La Pine's housing needs, demonstrates the community's
commitment to address affordable housing.
3.10.3. Conclusion and Finding
A number of factors indicate that it is reasonably likely that the City can meet future housing
needs within the future UGB. The La Pine UUC contains lands that could be made available for
urban density housing on public sewer and water.
3.11. Goal 11: Public Facilities and Services
3.11.1. Summary of Goal 11
Public Facilities and Services -- Goal 11 calls for efficient planning ofpublic services such as sewers,
water, law enforcement, and fire protection. The goal's central concept is that public services should be
planned in accordance with a community's needs and capacities rather than be forced to respond to
development as it occurs.
3.11.2. Effect of Proposed Incorporation
Deschutes County's RPS project has attempted to address the past lack of foresight, particularly
with regard to sewer and water services to address water quality problems. It has also
addressed fire hazards in the area.
The area is currently served by several providers:
♦ The La Pine Rural Fire Protection District, which provides fire service to a large area of south
Deschutes County outside the proposed city boundary
♦ Deschutes County Sheriff, who provides law enforcement services to the unincorporated
area and on a contractual basis to the City of Sisters
♦ La Pine Special Sewer District, that provides sewer service to the La Pine UUC and Wickiup
Junction RSC
♦ La Pine Water District, that provides water to the La Pine UUC
Findings Related to the Proposed Incorporation of La Pine 35
♦ La Pine Park and Recreation District, that serves a larger area than the proposed city
boundary
♦ Several special road maintenance districts of which three are totally contained within the
incorporation boundary
♦ Bend -La Pine School District, that serves all of the Bend area and south Deschutes County
Incorporation will permit the consolidation of the sewer, water and three road districts, thereby
decreasing the number of service providers, facilitating improved coordination and planning and
enhancing services. Proponents of incorporation are proposing that the City remain within the
fire and park and recreation districts and continue to receive law enforcement from the County
Sheriff. Under the proposed permanent tax rate, it is not expected that the City could withdraw
from the fire district or provide a major increase in law enforcement over that now being
provided, but could enhance current services under service contracts with the fire district and
County. The park and recreation district does not have a voter -approved permanent tax rate
and, therefore, its ability to remain the primary provider over the long run is less certain.
The urban area will likely have less than 2,500 people at the time an urban growth boundary is
established.15 Therefore, the City will not be required to prepare a Public Facilities Plan
pursuant to OAR 660-011 Public Facilities Planning Rule. Nonetheless, incorporation will
facilitate improved public facility planning by consolidating water and sewer services in one unit
of government and also provide a local unit of government responsible for local roads and
transportation planning.
Sewer services will continue to be provided to the current La Pine UUC and Wickiup Junction
RSC commensurate with approved plans and already approved exceptions to the statewide
planning goals. It is also planned that these services will be extended to the new
neighborhood, with or without incorporation, if an exception is approved. Further expansion to
provide services will be limited by the statewide planning goals that do not permit extension of
sewer and water services outside UGBs as well as the economics of providing such services.
For example, the RPS study already examined the feasibility of extending municipal -type sewer
services to the rural areas that are threatened with ground water contamination and
determined that this approach is not economically feasible. With the emphasis to maintain a
rural, low density character in the vast majority of the residential area, both because of local
values as well as the potential environmental issues, it is not expected that municipal sewer can
ever be extended beyond the current and future, limited urban area.
Water service will continue to be provided to the La Pine UUC by the City. Wickiup Junction
has a community water system provided by a private company. Whether this system is
eventually taken over by the City will depend on the area's future status as rural or urban as
well as the financial capability of the City's system to purchase the private company's system
and make upgrades that might be needed to provide an urban level of service.
Road maintenance and improvement is the area's single greatest service need. Highway
97 will continue to be the responsibility of the Oregon Department of Transportation and county
roads will continue to be the responsibility of Deschutes County, although there are provisions
within state law for the City to request transfer and responsibility of county roads. It is not
expected that the City would request such a transfer for a very long time, if ever, because of
'5 See discussion in Section 3.14.2.
Findings Related to the Proposed Incorporation of La Pine 36
significant needs that will require resources of both the County and City to address over a long
period of time.
There are 84 miles of public roads within the proposed boundary. These roads are unpaved
and not built to any particular standard. For this reason, Deschutes County has not accepted
them for maintenance responsibility. As a result, residents suffer from considerable
inconvenience due to weather-related road problems, extreme dust during dry periods and
inadequate access, response time, and safety for emergency vehicles. In addition, the road
conditions place considerable wear and tear on both private and emergency service vehicles.
This is a problem for both residents fronting these roads as well as others in the community
that have to drive on them.
Three subareas within the proposed boundary formed road maintenance districts to tax
themselves to provide limited maintenance services such as snow removal and annual grading.
None of the three provide funds for actual improvement of the roads within their boundaries.
Incorporation will bring all the public roads under the jurisdiction of the City for maintenance
and improvement. An LCAT -sponsored road services committee has developed a plan for
providing these services with the recognition that immediate, projected funding will not be
adequate to provide much actual improvement of roads. However, projected funding through
state -shared revenues will provide an increased level of funding for maintenance over that
provided within all road districts and also provide a source of revenue for other areas not a part
of a road district. This will equalize maintenance services, enhancing the area's overall livability
and improve property values. Funding for road improvements could come over time from
sources such as local improvement districts, grants, systems development charges and other
sources available to cities. Cities may also utilize funding sources such as serial levies and
street utility taxes. Thus, incorporation increases the funding options the community has to
maintain and improve roads in the area. (See Goal 12 for discussion concerning Transportation
Planning).
Schools. The Bend -La Pine School District will continue to provide schools to the La Pine area.
School districts are not directly affected by incorporation because different statutes govern their
organization than those that affect special districts. Incorporation could enhance the district's
ability to work with the community to provide education services.
ORS Chapter 195 requires that cities and counties enter into land use planning coordination
agreements with special districts and urban service agreements with service providers related to
provision of urban services within UGBs. The City of La Pine will be required to develop these
agreements with Deschutes County and the special districts that will provide an urban service,
as defined in the statute, to areas within the UGB. The process has already started with the
development of memoranda of understanding (MOUs) that LCAT developed with each special
district that is affected by the incorporation.
3.11.3. Conclusion and Finding
Incorporation will promote Goal 11 through enhanced planning for public facilities to meet
current and projected growth. The comprehensive plan for the community will permit planning
based on the capacity of the land and water resources area to provide public facilities.
Compliance with the Public Facilities Planning Rule will likely not be required because the urban
area will contain less than 2,500 people. However, the City will be required to comply with ORS
195 regarding coordination and urban service agreements, a process that has been initiated
Findings Related to the Proposed Incorporation of La Pine 37
with development of memoranda of understanding regarding incorporation. Every expectation
exists that the City can comply with Goal 11 during development of its comprehensive plan.
3.12. Goa/ 12: Transportation
3.12.1. Summary of Goal 12
Transportation -- The goal aims to provide "a safe, convenient and economic transportation system. "It
asks for communities to address the needs of the "transportation disadvantaged. "
3.12.2. Effect of Proposed Incorporation
South Deschutes County has been the subject of three transportation studies and plans in
recent years. In 1994, ODOT completed a Highway 97 Corridor Study. Deschutes County
completed and adopted a county -wide Transportation Systems Plan (TSP) in 1998 (Ordinance
98-084) and subsequently developed the 1999 La Pine & Wickiup Junction Local Street, Bicycle
and Pedestrian Plan for La Pine and Wickiup Junction (LSBP). The LSBP contains a good
summary of current transportation facilities in the UUC and RSC, which was the focus of the
study (Table 3).
Table 3: Summary of Transportation Facilities
Mode of
Summary of Existing Usage and Operational Concerns
Transportation
Automobile
Dominant mode of transportation throughout the community and for
through traffic.
Trucking
Significant through traffic on Highway 97. Limited parking and lack of
adequate circulation associated with many commercial uses on Highway
101.
Truck traffic between Highway 97 and the industrial zoned land
including Reed Road, Foss Road, Finley Butte Road and Russell Road.
Truck traffic will increase in the future as the industrial land becomes
develo ed.
Recreational
Through traffic on Highway 97. Limited parking and lack of adequate
Vehicle (RV)
circulation associated with many commercial uses on Highway 101.
Transit
Greyhound currently has one daily Hwy 97 route with a stop at the
Wickiup Junction rideshare center at Burgess Rd. & Hwy 97.
Deschutes County provides a special transportation service (dial -a -ride)
for elderly and disabled in the La Pine area four days a week.
Bicycle
Existing designated bicycle routes (shoulder bikeways) are limited to
Hwy 97, Huntington Road and FinleyButte Road.
Walking
Existing pedestrian facilities are currently limited to sidewalks on Hwy
97; a portion of Huntington Road; limited sections of 1st, 3rd, and 4th
Streets; Bluewood Street/Place; and Coach Road along the school
frontage.
Rollerblading/
None observed however rollerblading/skateboarding might be present in
Skateboarding
the vicinity of the schools and parks.
Electric Carts
None observed however the potential for electric cart usage has been
Findings Related to the Proposed Incorporation of La Pine 38
Mode of Summary of Existing Usage and Operational Concerns
Transportation
mentioned with the potential "new neighborhood" adjacent and north of
La Pine.
Rail The BNSF Railroad transports freight through La Pine. No passenger
service is currently available.
Source: La Pine & Okk/up Loca/ Street, Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan prepared by ThLand Design Group,
Inc., Tigard, OR., 1998-99.
Major transportation issues are discussed in the TSP. The primary mode of transportation is
and will remain private autos. 'Highway 97 is a major north -south interstate corridor that has
an increasing amount of traffic, including major truck traffic. The conflict between through -
movements and local use will continue to increase as will the difficulty of crossing the highway
within the La Pine and Wickiup areas. The TSP recommends a major highway project to realign
Highway 97 in Wickiup to straighten out a curve and provide a grade -separation with the BN/SF
Railroad -- this is the only location without such a grade separation anywhere on the state
highway system.16 The TSP also provides for an eventual signalized crossing on Highway 97 at
11�/Reed. An update of the Highway 97 Corridor Plan is planned to begin in 2000; it may
provide more suggestions for how to deal with traffic issues affecting this area. Incorporation
will enhance update of the Highway 97 Corridor Plan by providing more organized community
involvement and a local agency to assist with implementation of the results.
Alternatives to the automobile will be difficult to achieve with or without incorporation given the
low density pattern of residential development and overall low population levels in this area of
the state. Even with growth, there likely will not be sufficient population to consider such
alternatives as passenger train service or even frequent transit. Peak -hour commuter transit is
a possibility however, as discussed in the TSP. Some opportunities to improve bike and
pedestrian facilities are included in the LSBP. The local road system outside the UUC and RSC
today is described under Goal 11. Even fewer sidewalks and bike paths exist outside the UUC
and RSC.
Commercial air transportation is available in Klamath Falls and Redmond and Sunriver has a
general aviation airport. There has been discussion about establishing a general aviation airport
east of La Pine.
The City will be required to develop a TSP in compliance with OAR 660-012 the Transportation
Planning Rule (TPR). The TPR applies differently to UGBs greater than 25,000 than those with
less than 25,000, but in all respects, the TSP must be consistent with land use. The urban area
will likely be less than 2,500 people and land use alternatives may not be a requirement of TPR
compliance; nonetheless, there may be opportunities for land use alternatives within the UGB.
For example, as discussed previously, incorporation will enhance the ability of the area to
attract jobs, thereby reducing the number of workers that must commute to Bend and
elsewhere. Many of the ideas that were developed during the recent visioning process are
compatible with TPR guidelines.
16 According to Deschutes County transportation planner Steve Jorgensen, rail traffic consists of 10-12
freight trains per day and this is anticipated to increase to as many as 30 over the coming years.
Findings Related to the Proposed Incorporation of La Pine 39
Incorporation will provide the opportunity to provide more detailed focus on transportation
issues in this part of the county as the City prepares its comprehensive plan, TSP and local
street plans. Immediate improvements will be in local road maintenance and their potential
improvement over a long period of time.
3.12.3. Conclusion and Finding
The south Deschutes County has been the subject of three transportation studies in the past
several years. The Highway 97 Corridor Plan update may identify more issues and
opportunities for this section of the highway corridor. The City will be required to address Goal
12 in the development of a comprehensive plan, and to develop a TSP in compliance with the
TPR for the rural and urban areas. Incorporation will assist transportation planning being
undertaken by Deschutes County and ODOT. Substantial evidence exists that the City can
comply with Goal 12 when it develops its Comprehensive Plan and TSP.
3.13. Goal 13: Energy Conservation
3.13.1. Summary of Goal 13
Energy -- Goal 13 declares that 'land and uses developed on the land shall be managed and
controlled so as to maximize the conservation of all forms of energy, based upon sound economic
principles. "
3.13.2. Effect of Proposed Incorporation
The County Comprehensive Plan identifies the presence of geothermal resources in the vicinity
of Newberry crater. At this time, these resources have not been developed.
Most family wage jobs are located in Bend, forcing a 60 -mile roundtrip commute for most
working people. As discussed under Goal 9, incorporation will promote local job growth and
potentially lessen the number of trips to Bend and elsewhere. In addition, as increased services
are provided in La Pine, fewer trips will be needed to Bend. These factors will reduce the
amount of gasoline consumption.
Energy consumption of other energy sources will likely be unaffected by incorporation because
of the amount of growth projected for the area, with or without incorporation. Increased job
growth, with accompanying energy consumption, will take place here instead of elsewhere as
opposed to not at all. Therefore, potential new employers will have to consider the availability
and cost of energy here as compared to alternative locations.
Development patterns that affect energy consumption are already established. There are
possibilities, over time, to improve the land development pattern within the urban area of the
city to be more energy conservation -oriented.
As an incorporated city, La Pine will be required to undertake recycling of solid waste in concert
with solid waste haulers.
3.13.3. Conclusion and Finding
Incorporation will likely have little or no affect on the consumption/conservation of energy,
other than gasoline consumption caused by long distance driving to Bend. Incorporation will
enhance job growth and establishment of local services, reducing the need to drive elsewhere
for these services. The City will be required to undertake recycling of solid waste. The City can
comply with Goal 13.
Findings Related to the Proposed Incorporation of La Pine 40
3.14. Goal 14: Urbanization
3.14.1. Summary of Goal 14
Urbanization -- This goal requires all cities to estimate future growth and needs for land and
then plan and zone enough land to meet those needs. It calls for each city to establish an "urban
growth boundary" (UGB) to "identify and separate urbanizable land from rural land. "It
specifies seven factors that must be considered in drawing up a UGB. It also lists four criteria to
be applied when undeveloped land within a UGB is to be converted to urban uses.
3.14.2. Effect of Proposed Incorporation
The proposed incorporation has no immediate effect on Goal 14. However, Goal 14, along with
Goals 2, is the most significant goal to be addressed in the future comprehensive plan,
particularly to establish the UGB. Goal 2 and Goal 14 have to be taken together. Therefore, all
of the discussion included here under Goal 2 regarding exceptions and the hierarchy of land to
be included in the UGB is relevant to this discussion of Goal 14.
When the City establishes its UGB it will have to consider the seven factors of Goal 14.17 These
are:
1. Demonstrated need to accommodate long-range urban population growth requirements
consistent with LCDC goals;
2. Need for housing employment opportunities, and livability;
3. Orderly and economic provision for public facilities and services
4. Maximum efficiency of land uses within and on the fringe of the existing urban area;
5. Environmental, energy, economic and social consequences;
6. Retention of agricultural land as defined, with Class I being the highest priority for retention
and Class IV the lowest priority; and
7. Compatibility of the proposed urban uses with nearby agricultural uses.
Factors 1 and 2 are considered the "need" factors, because they dictate how much land is
needed to accommodate current and projected growth. The remaining factors are considered
"location" factors because they direct what lands should be included within the UGB to meet the
need.
Factors land 2: Need
Factor 1 relates to urban population growth; a large proportion of the city's population will
remain rural. The exact amount of land area that will be needed for housing and employment,
as well as other urban uses, within La Pine's UGB is unknown at this time. Deschutes County is
required by law to coordinate population and employment projections county -wide based on
state and county control totals provided by the State Economist. In 1998 population projections
to 2020 were updated and coordinated with the cities of Bend, Redmond and Sisters (Ordinance
17 On May 1, 2000, the Department of Land Conservation and Development announced proposed
amendments to Goal 14 that, among other changes, would establish three "need" criteria separate from
four "location" factors to establish or change a UGB. Therefore, when the city actually develops a UGB,
the criteria and standards could be somewhat different than discussed here.
Findings Related to the Proposed Incorporation of La Pine 41
# 98-084) and the non -urban portion of the county. A total of 76,022 people are projected for
the non -urban portion of the county in 2020.
Ordinance #98-084 provides year 2020 new dwelling unit projections for three non -urban
subareas: 2,800 for the La Pine North Exception Area, which includes more than the proposed
city (about 1/3 larger); 884 for the La Pine UUC; and 10 for the Wickiup Junction RSC. Based
on a projected 1.95 persons/household utilized in the countywide projections, this would
produce an additional 5,460, 1,724 and 20 people, respectively, or a total of 7,204 new people
for the greater La Pine area by 2020. Estimating that about 2/3 of the La Pine North Exception
Area population would reside in the city (3,604), this would provide about 5,348 new people to
add to the current estimated 7,000, or a grand total of 12,348 people in the city by 2020.
Approximately 2,144 (10%) would reside within the urban portion of the city (La Pine UUC,
Wickiup Junction RSC and the new neighborhood)18
Based on the 1998 projections and county data developed for the new neighborhood, there will
be a 76.4% increase in population in the city by 2020 and a need to accommodate 2,144
people within the urban area by 2020. The new neighborhood alone will have about 1,800
housing units on 273 acres (6.6 d.u.s/acre), a capacity to accommodate 3,510 people at build-
out (sometime after the 20 -year planning horizon). In 2000 the UUC has 335 total acres of
residentially zoned land and, in 1994, there were 94 vacant lots;19 there has been little
development of residential land in the UUC during the intervening six years. Assuming 1.95
person/d.u. used in the 1998 projection, this land could accommodate at least 183 new people.
The new neighborhood and UUC combined provide 608 total acres of potential urban residential
land20. Therefore, there is ample land for urban population (residential) growth during the next
twenty years.
In February, 2000, the County prepared acreage calculations through its GIS for all of the area
included within the proposed boundary. These calculations indicate 435 acres of industrial and
193 acres of commercial land within the UUC and 127 acres of commercial/residential in the
RSC. The new neighborhood plan allocates 7.5 acres of land for commercial and 79 acres for
other non-residential uses (not including road right-of-way) that, if approved, will be for urban
use regardless of incorporation. Therefore, between 715 and 842 acres may be available for
urban development of non-residential uses; this represents from 49% to 58% of the land in the
UUC, RSC and new neighborhood.
In 1996, when the County amended its plan to establish the UUC, an inventory of land (1994)
showed a total of 133 and 48 commercial and industrial parcels, respectively, within the UUC,
and 132 commercial lots within the RSC; no acreages are provided. Of these numbers, 45
commercial and 33 industrial lots were vacant in the UUC and 66 were vacant in the RSC.
Some of these have developed since the inventory was conducted.
Table 4 summarizes urban land use potential.
Table 4: Potential Land Available for Urban Use (Acres)
18 It is estimated that approximately 300 people currently reside within the La Pine UUC and 100 people
reside within the Wickiup Junction RSC.
19 Ordinance 96-002 for La Pine UUC
20 Wickiup Junction is a single zoning district of Commercial/Residential and could be a source of
additional urban residential land.
Findings Related to the Proposed Incorporation of La Pine 42
Area
Residential
Commercial
Industrial/ Other
Total
La Pine UUC21
335
193
435
963
New
neighborhood 22
273
7.5
7923
360
Wickiup
]unction 24
127
127
Total
608-735
200.5-327.5
514
1,450
Total non-
residential
715-841.5
The percent allocated for non-residential land (49 -58%) is relatively large compared to most
urban areas. At the same time, it must be recognized that the urban area will have to provide
commercial services and jobs for the total population of La Pine, and also serve as a trade
center for a much larger community in southern Deschutes County and portions of Klamath and
Lake Counties. Preparation of the City's comprehensive plan will provide an opportunity to
examine the role of La Pine as a commercial center and establish an appropriate level of non-
residential land.
Data available indicate that the potential size and location of the future UGB is within the
"ballpark" to accommodate projected population growth without having to rely on rural
residential exception lands or farm and forest lands. Furthermore, the area contains a
substantial amount of commercial and industrial land to accommodate jobs and services for the
urban and rural areas.
Location Factors
Data provided here indicate that it is reasonably feasible to assume that urban land needs for
the City of La Pine can probably be accommodated within the three areas described -- the UUC,
RSC and the new neighborhood. Based on these assumptions, and the probability that no other
lands will need to be included within the UGB at the time the comprehensive plan is adopted,
the following discusses how this boundary would comply with the location factors of Goal 14.
Factor 3: Public Facilities
As discussed previously, municipal sewer is provided to the UUC and RSC; municipal water is
provided to the UUC and the RSC is served with a community water system that can eventually
be acquired by the City's water system. The new neighborhood will be served by the La Pine
Special Sewer District and La Pine Water District -- extensions of these systems are already
under evaluation as part of the County's RPS program. Fire protection will continue to be
provided by the La Pine Rural Fire Protection District and regional parks and recreation, by the
La Pine Park and Recreation District. Urban transportation facilities will be required within the
UGB.
21 Deschutes County GIS, February 2000
22 Deschutes County Department of Community Development
23 Excluding road right-of-way
24 Deschutes County GIS, February 2000
Findings Related to the Proposed Incorporation of La Pine 43
To a great extent, the provision of these facilities and services to an urban level will occur with
or without incorporation. Incorporation will permit improved planning and coordination within
the urban area, partly through the consolidation of sewer and water utilities. As it stands
today, the County is the entity that must coordinate public facility planning for this area.
Factor 4: Maximum Efficiency of Land Uses
This factor primarily relates to expansion of an existing UGB. In the context of the City
establishing a new UGB, it would probably come into play if the City needs to establish a UGB
that is larger than the existing urban area (UUC). By the time the City develops its
comprehensive plan, the new neighborhood would likely have already been approved as an
expansion of the UUC, along with the RSC, partly on the basis that the transfer of development
credits from the rural area to a higher density urban area will be a more efficient use of the
land and have less of a negative environmental impact. As discussed previously, it is unlikely
that additional land outside these three areas will be needed to provide a 20 -year supply of
urban land.
The relatively small size of the UGB relative to the overall size of the city will promote efficient
use of land within the UGB. For example, unlike most cities, this city will not have nodes of
commercial and industrial land at various locations throughout the city. Rather, industrial and
commercial land, as well as many public uses, will be concentrated within the UGB, i.e., the
commercial core consisting of the UUC, RSC and new neighborhood. Further, this concentrates
urban level infrastructure services to a relatively compact area as well.
Factor 5; ESEE Consequences
Factor 5 relates back to a number of the statewide planning goals in establishing the UGB. Its
purpose is to ensure that economic, social, environmental and energy consequences have been
considered in establishing the UGB. The analysis is similar to, but less detailed than, a federal
environmental impact analysis in that it provides a disclosure of the possible impacts.
In as much as the La Pine UUC is already designated as an urban area under the
Unincorporated Communities Rule (UCR) and provisions of Goal 14 and Goal 2, Exceptions, its
transition to a UGB should be relatively easy to accomplish because many of the consequences
have already been considered or have occurred through past development activity. The same
can be said of the RSC. The new neighborhood is being established largely as a measure to
avert further major environmental consequences of past development activity.
As discussed under Goal 9, the economic consequences of incorporation are expected to be
very positive. The lack of jobs, and the difficulty of attracting employers, is a major concern
that has been addressed by LCAT in the strategic planning process. Incorporation will provide
local leadership to help attract business growth and address problems and issues that deter
business and professional/managerial people from locating in the area.
The social consequences of incorporation are intricately related to the economic consequences.
An improved economy will provide more local jobs, thereby reducing commuting and allow
more people to work as well as live in the community. This promotes more social investment
through participation in community organizations and activities such as the Chamber of
Commerce, school organizations, city boards and commissions, youth activities and the like.
Findings Related to the Proposed Incorporation of La Pine 44
Greater social investment can improve activities and raises the self-esteem for youth and adults
deterring crime and delinquency.25
Environmental consequences of incorporation, if any, could relate to the more intensive
development activity in what will be the UGB than what would likely occur if the area remains in
an unincorporated status. For example, Wickiup Junction, as an RSC, has limits on the type and
intensity of commercial and industrial uses; its inclusion within the UGB will lift those limitations.
At the same time, the RSC's status could change as a result of the expansion of the UUC to
include the new neighborhood and the RSC, with or without incorporation. Other than the RSC,
it is possible that there may be more rapid or more intensive urban growth within the UUC than
would otherwise occur because of the City's interest in promoting economic development
objectives and because it may become a more feasible and attractive area in which to live.
More rapid or more intensive development could increase traffic congestion, storm water run-off
and vehicle pollutants.
The energy consequences are the most difficult to identify. An increase in energy usage will
occur in any regard due to growth, with or without incorporation. An improvement in jobs
locally could decrease the amount of commuting to Bend, thereby decreasing vehicle gasoline
consumption.
Factor 6: Retention ofAgricu/tura/ Land
As discussed previously, it is doubtful that any agricultural land will be needed for urban
development within the 20 -year planning period. Expansion of the UGB will be required to
meet the prioritization scheme of ORS 197.298 which stipulates that exception land would have
priority over agricultural land. The City would contain large amounts of exception lands to
choose from.
Factor 7: Agricultural Land Compatibility
As discussed under Section 3.3, the proposed urban uses would likely have no impact on
farming practices. The particular boundary configuration for La Pine could provide an
opportunity to coordinate growth within the UGB in a manner compatible with the adjoining
rural residential and resource lands.26 This coordination ("interface") is a strong theme within
Goal 14 but has not been explored very creatively in acknowledged plans. This is because the
tradition has been to separate urban from rural areas jurisdictionally -- while UGBs have been
largely a city or joint city -county responsibility, most rural lands are the exclusive responsibility
of counties, largely because most UGBs are completely outside city boundaries. The proposed
city boundary could be a model to find more creative approaches to manage this interface for
the benefit of both.
3.14.3. Conclusion and Finding
It is reasonable to expect that the City can comply with Goal 14 to establish a UGB in
compliance with the seven factors of the goal and based on the priority scheme of ORS
197.298. The proposed boundary already contains an urban area and large areas of exception
25 The concept of community policing utilized in many U.S. cities today is based on the concept of
community involvement and pride as a deterrent to crime.
26 Factor 4 of Goal 14 talks about establishing a UGB that considers "the maximum efficiency of lands
within and on the fringe of the existing urban area". The concept of taking a "holistic" approach to
planning urban and rural lands together for the benefit of both is also a theme that came out of La Pine's
April, 2000 vision charrette.
Findings Related to the Proposed Incorporation of La Pine 45
lands. One other area (new neighborhood) will likely have a goal exception to permit non -
resource uses. These areas can be considered priority one areas for inclusion within the future
UGB to accommodate future population growth without reliance on resource lands. At the
same time, the inclusion of resource land within the city boundary will enable a coordination of
land management strategies that can be a benefit to the urban -rural interface.
4. County Comprehensive Plan
4.1. Applicability
The most current version of the Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan was adopted and
codified in 1993. There have been several amendments made since 1993 including adoption of
the TSP and amendments for the La Pine UUC and Wickiup Junction RSC. The incorporation
proposal must address the Comprehensive Plan as well as the Statewide Planning Goals. At the
same time, it is recognized that the City will be required to prepare its own comprehensive plan
in compliance with the statewide planning goals and this may necessitate revision or
superceding of some portions of the County's Plan.
These findings address how the County's Plan supports, or otherwise does not conflict with, the
concept of incorporation and whether future adoption of a city comprehensive plan would
represent a significant departure from the direction established in the County's Plan, which has
been adopted and acknowledged in compliance with statewide planning goals.
Many sections of the County's plan are out-of-date and therefore, it is difficult to evaluate its
full impact on La Pine's incorporation.
4.2. Analysis of Proposed Incorporation
The discussion of the County Comprehensive Plan will be by major topic area as set forth in the
Comprehensive Plan. Only relevant portions will be cited.27
4.2.1. Existing Conditions and Concerns
This section, amended in 1998, establishes the population, employment, housing units and
other projections that provide the bases for the Comprehensive Plan. Population projections
were updated and coordinated with the cities of Bend, Redmond and Sisters. Because La Pine
was not incorporated, it was not involved with this coordination process. The amendment
provides projections for the non -urban portions of the county as well as the urban portions.
Projected 2020 dwelling units for the general area include: 2,800 for the La Pine North
Exception Area; 884 for the La Pine UUC; 10 for the Wickiup Junction RSC. (See Table under
Goal 14 discussion for more detail).
Ordinance 96-002, the amendment to establish La Pine as a UUC in 1996, provides a combined
year 2000 population estimate for the UUC and Wickiup Junction RSC of 6,619 which is greatly
in excess of the 1998 estimate. The County did not reconcile these numbers when they
conducted the 1998 allocation but we assume that the 1998 figures must supercede those
prepared in 1996.
Z' For example, Housing and Citizen Involvement are part of the county's plan but they are very general
in nature and there are no portions of those chapters that have specific relevance to La Pine.
Findings Related to the Proposed Incorporation of La Pine 46
When La Pine begins to develop its comprehensive plan, the County will likely need to amend
this part of the plan to include a coordinated population projection for the city and UGB area.
This effort will be aided by 2000 U.S. Census data. This update could change population
allocations for other areas in the county, a circumstance that could occur with or without La
Pine's incorporation.
The proposed incorporation does not have a direct effect on population growth and projections.
Development that has already been approved by the County, or may be approved in the future,
such as the new neighborhood, will affect the amount and distribution of population in the
county.
Some may argue that incorporation will encourage population growth in this part of the county.
La Pine's growth, without incorporation, has been (according to the Deschutes County
Community Development Department) as high as 15% in recent years, primarily due to the
number of platted lots that were approved prior to adoption of the County's Comprehensive
Plan. Lack of public facilities and environmental standards will continue to limit the ultimate
amount of growth and development that can take place. In addition, as discussed previously,
Deschutes County is the fastest growing county in Oregon and is running out of land for future
development. This factor will eventually affect all areas of the county.
Conclusion and Finding. Since La Pine is not incorporated, specific population projections for
the proposed city boundary are not provided in the County's plan. Incorporation will not affect
population growth. A coordinated population projection for La Pine will have to be prepared
when it develops its comprehensive plan.
4.2.2. Alternatives
This section of the Plan discusses the broad alternatives (concepts for growth and
development) that were considered in developing the Comprehensive Plan. The preferred
(adopted) alternative is a combination of current trends at the time the plan was developed and
"growth control". Under the preferred alternative, major growth is to occur in urban areas and
rural development is to be restricted to rural service centers and on existing rural lots. Sprawl
development is to be avoided.
Conclusion and Finding. The proposed incorporation and intent for land use is in keeping with
the preferred alternative. Rural residential development is within those areas defined as
"existing rural lots" which were extensive prior to adoption of the statewide planning goals.
The urban portion of the city is intended to be primarily within the La Pine UUC. Additional
urban area, if any, to be designated in the City's Comprehensive Plan, will be required to
address Goals 2 and 14.
4.2.3. Growth Management: Rural Development
This section specifies that rural areas are the focus of the County's Comprehensive Plan. It
predicts that La Pine will have incorporated by 2000 (page 35) and have a population of 3,620;
the plan does not identify the area predicted for incorporation. It provides information on how
many platted lots existed in 1979 and how many will be needed by 2000. It recognizes that the
pattern of rural development that was created by parcelization is costly to serve, wasteful of
energy, land and resources, less aesthetic and destructive of rural character. It identifies La
Pine as an area that was once intended to be for recreational subdivisions but has filled up with
retirees and younger people "seeking less expensive building lots", predicting that the area will
Findings Related to the Proposed Incorporation of La Pine 47
have to be subsidized by the rest of the county because the area was not planned nor intended
for this type of growth. It also identifies that incompatible land uses have developed in rural
service centers.
Policies relate to future rural residential development and encouragement of cluster or planned
development; destination resorts; commercial and industrial uses within rural areas, particularly
those that are more appropriate in rural rather than urban areas; designation of particular rural
service centers, including Wickiup Junction, 28 with compact commercial centers; and
recognition of pre-existing approval of rural residential subdivision plats that do not meet new
standards.
In 1996, Wickiup and La Pine underwent re-examination of their designations in light of the
Unincorporated Communities Rule. Wickiup Junction remained a Rural Service Center with a
slightly different definition than previously existed. It also provides a finding that the La Pine
Special Sewer District can provide sewer service to the area. La Pine was re -designated as an
Urban Unincorporated Community. New policies were added to the Plan (see Exhibit A),
including policy 27 which states:
The La Pine Core Area shall be encouraged to incorporate and/or form special service districts
to provide necessary public services. First priority shall be given to the sewer system.
Other policies relate to land use within the core area, transportation needs and deer migration
corridors in La Pine.
The Governance Study conducted in 1998 studied three options (see Section 1.4 discussion).
The study concluded that the small city option, which would be only the La Pine core area, was
not economically feasible nor would it solve governance issues in this part of the county
because the UUC boundary contains only about 5% of the population that would benefit from a
system of governance. The establishment of a large county service district, with boundaries
similar to the large city, was also examined. It was found to be deficient because it would not
gain from revenue sources that are available to cities and because of the difficult
legal/procedural steps involved in dissolving current districts to set up one large district. Road
maintenance services, in particular, would be far costlier because a special district does not
qualify to receive highway user fees for road maintenance as does a city. Finally, a county
service district would not really achieve governance goals because the county would still be
required to govern all aspects related to services the district would provide. None of these
factors was known when the County prepared the La Pine UUC amendment.
The plan carefully uses the word "encourage" indicating that it is a preference of the County
that La Pine incorporate, but it is not a strong policy direction that is violated either if
incorporation does not occur or occurs in a somewhat different configuration than the plan
contemplated. While the incorporation proposal takes in more than the La Pine core area, the
intent meets all of the concerns expressed in the Comprehensive Plan and will go farther in
addressing these concerns than would incorporation of only the core area. For example, the
concept of the rest of the county having to subsidize the area, if that is now or would be the
case in the future, would not be eliminated with incorporation of only the core area because the
core area would contain only a fraction of the population. Furthermore, the intent of the
proponents is to keep the area outside the core area rural in character.
28 La Pine was also designated as a rural service center but was redesignated as an urban unincorporated
community in 1996.
Findings Related to the Proposed Incorporation of La Pine 48
The Plan language is primarily concerned with the effects of development on the water
resources and environment in the area, which subsequently have been the subject of the RPS
project. The RPS new neighborhood project, with or without incorporation, will require a plan
amendment. By definition, La Pine UUC and Wickiup Junction RSC, if incorporated, will be
required to have plan designations changed (probably at the level of "housekeeping
amendments") because these apply to unincorporated areas. Re -designation, however, does
not necessarily mean that land uses that are now part of the RSC under state rule and county
ordinance will not remain after the City prepares a comprehensive plan and implementing
ordinances.
Incorporation would not by itself change any rural lands to urban lands. Rural lands will be
required to be examined during the preparation of the City's comprehensive plan. As stressed
throughout this document, it is doubtful that very many rural areas will be needed for urban
development and, therefore, would remain in a rural classification.
Conclusion and Finding. The proposed incorporation is in compliance with the intent of the
rural development section of the County's Comprehensive Plan because of the proponents'
vision and intent to keep current rural areas rural in character. While the County did not
anticipate that the incorporation proposal would go beyond the core area (UUC), the plan does
not speak to this circumstance or have language that expressly prohibits such a proposal. The
LCAT's Governance Study examined governance options and found that the large city option,
which takes in more than the UUC, is the only feasible option for the area. This information
was not available at the time the UUC and RSC amendments were made to the Comprehensive
Plan. "Housekeeping" amendments may be required to reflect the area's status as incorporated
versus unincorporated area.
4.2.4. Urbanization
This section, in response to Goal 14, relates only to the three UGBs in Bend, Redmond and
Sisters, and then only to areas that are outside the city limits of each city with the
understanding that each city would prepare its own plan. The La Pine UUC is included in the
Rural section of the Comprehensive Plan.
With the likelihood that La Pine's UGB will be wholly contained within the city limits, this section
of the County's plan will not be relevant to La Pine and will not be required to be amended
significantly.
Conclusion and Finding.. County policies apply only to areas within UGBs that are outside city
limits. It is not expected that this chapter will have any relevance to La Pine because the UGB
will be wholly contained within the city limits and be the responsibility of the city.
4.2.5. Economy
This section, which addresses Goal 9, discusses the importance of the local economy including
trends and projections, most of which are now out-of-date.29 There is no discussion of La Pine's
role in the county's economy. Goals and policies are very general in nature to encourage
tourism, natural resource use, and land use planning and development of industrial and
commercial lands.
29 For example, it is projected that lumber and wood products will continue to be the major economic
force in the county, which is no longer true.
Findings Related to the Proposed Incorporation of La Pine 49
Conclusion and Finding. The incorporation proposal is consistent with the County's economic
goals and policies to generally improve the economy of the county.
4.2.6. Public Facilities
The chapter of the plan discusses utilities, law enforcement, schools, fire, health and solid
waste in response to Goal 11. It has one goal aimed at planning and developing a timely,
orderly and efficient arrangement of public facilities and services to serve as a framework for
urban and rural development, including coordination of locations and service deliveries. There
are 38 policies.
The most relevant policies are:
♦ Policy 1 provides that public facilities and services should be provided at appropriate levels
and in areas appropriate to resource carrying capacity and to serve as distinctions between
rural and urban areas.
♦ Policy 2 distinguishes those types of service appropriate to serve rural and urban areas.
The intent of proponents is to make clear distinctions between rural and urban areas and what
services and service levels are intended to be provided in each area, in compliance with policies
1 and 2. This distinction is made in both the incorporation proposal itself and will be further
defined in the development of the City's comprehensive plan.
♦ Policy 3 relates to future development and its dependence on the availability of services.
Urban development would be required to locate where services are available, in compliance
with Policy 3.
♦ Policy 5 encourages the formation of special service districts to provide rural services in
preference to the county.
Policy 5 would meet the statement's overall intent to decrease the need for the county to
provide an urban service.
♦ Policy 6 concerns coordination of service providers and urban services with cities.
Incorporation does not preclude the application of Policy 6 to the new city, and this would be
expected as required by ORS 195 concerning coordination and urban service agreements. Work
has already been initiated by LCAT with the drafting of memorandums of understanding (MOUs)
with each service provider.
♦ Policy 7 considers funding to provide services for future development.
The incorporation proposal is one way to address funding for current and future development
by providing a permanent tax rate and other sources of revenue that would not otherwise be
available.
♦ Utility Policy 17 concerns annexation and the availability of services such as water.
Policy 17 concerns annexation, but it could be argued, could also apply to incorporation. The
incorporation proposal complies with Policy 17 in that it considers the availability of public
services in the service package proposed and Goal 11 requirements.
♦ Policies 33 and 34 concern health care and the role of the County to encourage facilities for
low income and disadvantaged persons.
Findings Related to the Proposed Incorporation of La Pine 50
The incorporation proposal could enhance Policies 33 and 34 because LCAT has evidence that
incorporation could encourage the location of more health care providers, including a hospital,
in La Pine. The lack of health services has been identified in the Strategic Plan as a major
community problem.
Conclusion and Finding. The proposal substantially complies with the County's chapter on
public facilities because it will facilitate the provision of public facilities and services to urban
and rural areas in a manner that the plan provides.
4.2.7. Recreation
This chapter discusses the need for park and recreation facilities and programs for the entire
county, with emphasis on urban and urbanizing areas in response to Goal 8. It also discusses
the strong presence of the federal and state governments in the county and the need to
improve planning and coordination of services. Standards are provided for acres of park land
per 1,000 population (Policy 8). Policy 15 encourages unincorporated communities to assess
recreational needs and work with public agencies and organizations to acquire land.
The incorporation proposal will enhance implementation of the County's goals and policies for
recreation. The proposal includes funding to help develop some local recreation facilities, and
overall, should help the La Pine Park and Recreation District establish park and recreation
facilities in the area.
LCAT has been designated by the BLM to provide citizen involvement to help plan for uses of
certain BLM land within the La Pine area. Incorporation will assist with implementation of those
ideas.
Conclusion and Finding. The incorporation proposal complies with the County's recreation goals
and policies.
4.2.8. Energy
The Energy chapter, in response to Goal 13, discusses existing and potential energy sources,
including energy conservation. Policies cover general issues, alternative energy sources (e.g.,
geothermal), recycling and conservation. Policies 9 and 10 encourage recycling county -wide
through county programs.
As discussed under Goal 13 Energy, the incorporation proposal has no real effect on energy use
or conservation. By virtue of the incorporation, however, the City will be required to provide
recycling, which will assist in implementation of the County's recycling policies.
Conclusion and Finding. The incorporation proposal complies with the County's energy goals
and policies.
4.2.9. Natural Hazards
In response to Goal 7, the plan identifies wildfire as the only significant natural hazard in the
county. Plan policies relate to flooding, drought and fire. Many of the flooding policies form the
base for the County's flood plain regulations.
The incorporation proposal does not affect the County's or La Pine area's vulnerability to natural
hazards. The largest element of risk is posed by development that has already been permitted
in the La Pine area. The County's RPS project has been aimed at reducing this risk, especially
Findings Related to the Proposed Incorporation of La Pine 51
at reducing the risk associated with wildfire. There is every reason to believe that residents of
the City will desire to continue the programs and policies to reduce risk from flooding and
wildfire through adoption of Comprehensive Plan provisions and regulations. In addition,
proponents assume that the City will remain part of the La Pine Rural Fire Protection District to
ensure adequate response to fire management in concert with the U. S. Forest Service and the
BLM.
Conclusion and Finding. The incorporation proposal complies with the County's goals and
policies concerning natural hazards.
4.2.10. Agricultural Lands
This chapter, amended in 1995 in response to changes in state legislation and revisions to OAR
660-03 (Goal 3), discusses the County's agricultural activities and products and the nature of
agricultural land. It indicates that non -irrigated farm land is usually SCS Capability Class IV and
lower. Specifically for La Pine, it was found that most farm land is associated with the sub-
irrigated pasture of the riparian meadow along the Little Deschutes River. As such it depends
to a much greater degree than in the other subzones on livestock grazing on non -irrigated
pasture. Irrigated or potentially irrigable farmland is of a higher class and is afforded greater
protections in county regulations.
Plan policies relate to the classification of agricultural land and rules for parcel sizes and land
division. There are no policies that relate to inclusion of lands within UGBs or cities, but that
would not be expected. The City would be required to develop similar policies and regulations
to those of the County to protect agricultural land. One reasonable option would be to adopt
the County's current policies and regulations.
Conclusion and Finding. The proposed incorporation is not inconsistent with the County's
agricultural land policies. The City will be required to develop policies and regulations to protect
agricultural land.
4.2.11. Forest Lands
This chapter, addressing Goal 4, of the Comprehensive Plan was amended in 1994 to comply
with changes in state law. It identifies that the greatest forest resource lies with the Deschutes
National Forest.
The incorporation proposal does not contain any land owned by the Deschutes National Forest.
Forest lands included in the proposed boundary are either BLM-owned or privately owned.
Nonetheless, proponents intend to protect forest land as this relates to the rural character and
community identity that residents value. Plan policy provisions and regulations will be required
to be adopted to provide this protection.
Conclusion and Finding_ The incorporation proposal complies with the County's goals and
policies for forest land.
4.2.12. Open Space, Areas of Special Concern, and Environmental Quality
This chapter was substantially amended in 1994 to comply with the Goal 5 rule, including an
inventory update of natural and historic resources and Economic, Social, Environmental and
Energy (ESEE) consequences analyses. The analyses identified conflicting uses and determined
how to accommodate them.
Findings Related to the Proposed Incorporation of La Pine 52
The Comprehensive Plan identifies three natural resources for protection:
♦ The Little Deschutes River (floodplain, wetland and riparian resources) corridor
♦ Highway 97, Huntington Road and Burgess Road Scenic Roadway Corridors
♦ Deer Migration Corridor (entire boundary outside the UUC and RSC)
Other than the roadway corridors, no Goal 5 resources are identified for the UUC or RSC.'0
The Landscape Management Combining Zone protects the scenic and open space values of the
Little Deschutes and other waterways and to designated roadways with scenic values. It adds
requirements to the base zone (ex. MUA, EFU, RR -10) in which a lot or parcel is located to
protect and enhance scenic vistas as seen from designated roads and rivers. For example, it
provides a 100 -foot setback for structures and septic systems, fill and removal regulations,
provisions for conservation easements and prohibition of hydro -electric facilities on certain
reaches of the Deschutes River and its tributaries. The community's is in accord with these
values as demonstrated in its recent visioning project.
The entire area proposed for inclusion within the city boundary, except the UUC and RSC, is
within the Deer Migration Combining Zone. If the new neighborhood is approved through
extension of the UUC, the exemption will also apply to this area. This zone carries limitations
on uses and standards for siting of uses and fencing. Within the rural residential area (1111-10),
it requires that future land divisions be at least 20 acres in size and occur in a "cluster" pattern
with at least 80% of the area retained in open space. In as much as most of the rural
residential area has already been platted to the minimum lot size or less, this standard has little
effect.
The County also has a Sensitive Bird and Mammal Habitat overlay zone to protect inventoried
species and sites. However, no sensitive birds or mammals have been identified within the
incorporation boundaries. Other plan policies and ordinances protect fish and wildlife in the
Deschutes River Corridor.
These designations and regulations will stay in effect until the City adopts its own regulations; a
reasonable option for the City to consider is to adopt those of the County to reduce time and
effort.
As discussed throughout this document, urban development is expected to be confined to the
current UUC, RSC and the new neighborhood and, therefore, there will be little impact to the
Little Deschutes River and deer migration area. There could be a potential conflict with the
Highway 97 scenic corridor setback standard of 100' and potential interests to develop the UUC
and RSC as compact urban centers that promote pedestrian use. Broad setbacks from
roadways are normally discouraged because they inhibit pedestrian use and encourage auto use
for short local trips. Highway 97 through the UUC has been identified in transportation studies
as a hazard area for pedestrians and autos.
The RPS project is designed to mitigate the impacts of development in south Deschutes County
on wildlife and water resources, amongst other concerns. The proposed incorporation could
facilitate a greater level of success by providing a local government and city services for the
new neighborhood. The incorporation expands the level of resources to address local
environmental issues overall.
30 This chapter does not mention the presence of historic resources in La Pine. However, Ordinance 96-
002 makes reference to two such resources but no information is provided as to what these consist of.
Findings Related to the Proposed Incorporation of La Pine 53
Conclusion and Finding. The proposed incorporation does not conflict with the County's
Comprehensive Plan for Open Space, Areas of Special Concern, and Environmental Quality.
Upon incorporation, the County's plan and implementing regulations will continue to regulate
these resources until the City completes its comprehensive plan. The most efficient response
could be to adopt relevant portions of the County's plan and overlay regulations.
4.2.13. Overall Conclusion and Finding
The proposed incorporation either complies with relevant chapters and sections of the
Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan or is at least not inconsistent. Several chapters are
significantly out-of-date making any discussion or analysis meaningless. The most important
policy directly relevant to the incorporation proposal is the Rural Development Policy # 27 that
encourages the incorporation of La Pine. No other goals and policies speak to the possibility of
incorporation.
Work done on Goal 5 by Deschutes County represents a significant amount of work and
something that would be best not duplicated if at all possible. The City of La Pine could choose
to incorporate all the relevant portions of this work into its own comprehensive plan.
Findings Related to the Proposed Incorporation of La Pine 54
Attachment C
_
�y
o
o
Z
PROPOSED INCORPORATION "r
m
THE CITY OF LA PINE, DESCHUTES COU14ty,
OREGON -:
ECONOMIC FEASIBILITY STATEMENT
WITH ESTIMATED TAX RATE
Revised September, 1999
Prepared for the La Pine Incorporation Committee by
Cogan Owens Cogan LLC, Portland, and
Moore Breithaupt Associates, Salem
PART ONE
Description of Services, Functions, and Relationships
to Other Existing or Needed Government Services
Description of Services and Functions
The proposed City of La Pine would provide the following services within the first
three years:
♦ General Governance: Incorporation of the City of La Pine would provide for local
governance through the election by city electors of five City Council members and
the hiring of city administrative staff to assist the Council to formulate and carry out
the Council's policy direction. General governance activities would be funded
primarily from the Permanent Tax Rate.
♦ Maintenance of public roads: The proposed city boundaries contain about 100 miles
of public roads. Incorporation of the City of La Pine would allow the City to receive
state -shared revenues to provide snow -plowing, grading and other related
maintenance of public roads. Per ORS 222.510, the City of La Pine would assume all
responsibility for existing special road districts that are totally encompassed by city
boundaries.
♦ Sidewalks and bikeways: The City may pursue improvement of off-street bike and
pedestrian facilities or on -street facilities in conjunction with public roads, county
roads or Highway 97. Sources of funding would include state -shared revenues,
grants or fees or exactions from new development
♦ Land Use Planning and Zoning: The City of La Pine would be responsible for
complying with statewide planning goals, including preparing a comprehensive
plan and regulating land use activities. The first year, to the extent that such an
arrangement is agreeable, the City would contract with Deschutes County to
provide planning and zoning services. By the third year, the City would provide its
own land use planning and zoning services. Land use planning and zoning
activities would be funded from fees, grants, and a portion of the City's permanent
tax rate.
♦ Building Code Administration: The City would be eligible to apply for the authority
to administer state -adopted building codes within the city limits. For the first year,
the City would rely on Deschutes County for these services until state authority for
2
Relationship between Above Listed Services and Other Existing or Needed Services
The following is a description of the relationship between services proposed to be
provided by the City of La Pine and other existing or needed government services. The
description includes typical services provided by cities and does not include services
normally provided by counties that remain unchanged with incorporation.
The La Pine Special Sewer District would be completely absorbed by the City per ORS
222.510. All of the assets of- the District, in terms of funds and capital equipment,
property, etc., would be transferred to the City. All liabilities would also be transferred
to the City, such as debts for loans, outstanding bond repayment, and other financial
liabilities.
As with the Sewer District, the La Pine Water District would no longer be a special
district, but would become part of the City at the time of incorporation. The Water
District is newly formed and, as of flus time, does not have any assets or liabilities. All
of the provisions that would apply to the Sewer District would apply to the Water
District.
Special Road Districts within the proposed incorporation area would be absorbed by
the City per ORS 222.510 and, as required by state law, all assets and liabilities would be
transferred to the City. The City would provide road maintenance services at or above
the current levels provided by the special road districts from state -shared Highway Gas
Tax revenues to which the City would be entitled.
The City of La Pine would remain within the boundaries of the La Pine Park and
Recreation District. The District owns land within the proposed city boundaries. The
City would coordinate its parks, recreation, and community events with those of the
District. Through coordination, the services of both the City and the District can be
improved.
The City would continue to receive law enforcement services provided by the
Deschutes County Sheriff. If City general fund resources permit, it may be possible to
contract for a higher level of law enforcement service at some point in the future if the
citizen so wish.
The City would remain within the La Pine Rural Fire Protection District for fire
protection and emergency services.
Roads and highways within the jurisdiction of Deschutes County and the Oregon
Department of Transportation (Highway 97) would remain with those jurisdictions for
improvement and maintenance.
4
Non -Property Tax Revenue - Appendix
In the Appendix, we present a description of the major sources of non -property tax
revenue the City of La Pine might expect and which have been incorporated in the
budget assumptions. Excerpts from the administrative rules of the Oregon Public
Utilities Commission regarding franchise fees follow the description of non -property
tax revenues because this is expected to be a major source of non -property tax revenue.
Table 1
Budget Page 2
City
of La Pine
Projected First through Third Year Operating Budgets
Year 1 2001.2002
Administrative Services
Year 2 2002-2003)
Year 3 2003-2004)
Personal Services: FTE
FTE
FTE
City Administrator 1.001
50,000
1.00
51,500
1.00
53,000
Clerk/Finance Dir. 1.00
40,000
1.00
41,200
1.00
42,400
Office Clerk 1.00
24,000
1.00
24,700
1.00
25,400
Extra Help 0.25
5,000
0.25
5,000
0.25
5,000
Mayor/Counci Members -
3,000
-
6,000
-
6,000
Total Salaries 3.25
$
122,000
3.25 $
128,400
3.25 $
131,800
Fringe Benefits (35% of salaries)
42,700
44,940
46,130
Total Personal Services
$
164,700
$
173,340
$
177,930
Materials & Services:
City Hall Rent 5,000 sq. ft $0.65/mo.
39,000
39,000
39,000
Utilities
81000
10,000
10,000
CityAttorney contract .
40,000
30,000
20,000
Enhanced Sheriffs Patrol
-
-
50,000
Annual Audit
12,000
15,000
Telephone
7,500
8,100
9,000
Office supplies
6,500
6,700
6,900
Travel & training
3,500
3,600
3,700
Vehicle mileage reimbursement
3,640
3,700
3,800
Vehicle expense
-
1,000
1,500
Equip. maintenance
500
500
500
Printing & advertising
5,000
5,200
5,400
Copy machine leasetsupplies
8,400
8,700
9,000
Postage
1,000
1,200
1,400
Liabil' & Fire Insurance
9,000
15,000
20,000
County election/survey cost reimbursement
35,000
-
Total Materials & Services
$
167,040
$
144,700
$
195,200
Capital Outlay.
Furniture/furnishin s/fumishin s
3,600
500
500
Computers & software
3,500
2,500
1,000
Vehicle Lease/Purchase
4,800
4,800
4,800
Financial Software
3,000
30,000
-
Total Capital Outlay
S
14,900
$
37,800 1
1$
6,300
Total Expenses - Adminlstradve Services
$
346,640
$
355,840
s
379,430
Budget Page 2
Table 1
Budget Page 4
City
of La Pine
Projected First through
Third Year Operating Budgets
Year 1
2001-2002
Year 2 2002-2003
Year 3 2003-2004
Community Recreation & Events
Personal Services:
Maintenance Foreman
0.90
18,000
0.90 18,500
0.90
19,100
Eventfrecreation coordinator
0.50
11.000
0.50 11 300
1.00
23.300
Total Salaries
1.40 $
29,000
1.40 $ 29,800
1.90 $
42,400
Fringe Benefds (35% of salaries)
10150
10430
14,640
Total Personal Services
$
39,150
$ 40,230
$
57,240
Materials 6 Services:
Contractual Services
8,000
5,000
5,000
Vehicle a nse75°�
300
600
600
Mileage reimbursement
200
200
200
Equipment maintenance
100
250
500
Plant material
2,000
2,100
2,200
Equipment rental
1,500
1,500
1,500
Misc. Landscaping.materials. _
600.
750
1,500
Special event suppliesetc.
2
3,0.00
3,500
Total Materials & Services
$
15,100
$ 13,400
$
15,000
Capital Outla:
Furniture/furnishings 75%
600
Computer & software 75%
1,125
-
-
Mower, trimmer, etc.
2,000
500
500
Audio-visual equipment
1,000
'
Park/Playground equipment
15,000
5,000
Capital improvements
7,500
10,000
-
Vehicle leasetpurchase (90%)
4,500
4,500
4,500
Total Capital Outlay
$
31,726
$ 20.000
$
5,000
Total Expenses Comm. Rec. d Events
$
85,975
S 73,630
$
77,240
Budget Page 4
Table 1
Budget Page 6
City
of La Pine
Projected First through Third Year Operating
Budgets
Year 1 2001-2002 Year 2 2002-2003
Year 3 2003.2004
Street/Road Fund
Revenues
Highway User Funds
324,700
334,400
344,500
Grants
-
-
Interest Earnings & Misc.
6 000
6,000
6,000
$
330,700
$
340,400
$
350,500
Expenditures
Materials & Services:
Contractual Services
250,000
257,500
265,200
Insurance
4,800
5 000
5,200
Total Materials & Services
$
254,800
$
262,500
270,400
Transfers to City Administration (536)
$
12,740
$
13125
$
13 520
Total Transfers
$
12,740
$
13,125
$
13,520
Capital Outlay
S
63,160
$
64,776
$
66,580
Total Eypendffures
$
330,700
340, 00
$
350,500
Budget Page 6
Table 1
Budget Page 8
City of La Pine
Projected First through Third Year Operating
Budgets
Year 1
2001-2002) Year 2 2002-2003)
Year2003-2004
Water Fund
.3
Revenues
Service Fees
10,000
220,000
230,000
Hookup Fees
10,000
10,000
10,000
S stem Development Charges
50,000
50,000
50,000
Grants
20,000
-
-
Loan Proceeds
3,000,000
-
-
Interest Earnings and Misc.
1,500
2,500
3,500
Total Water Revenues
$
3,091,500
$
282,500
$
293,500
Personal Services:
Operations Manager
0.50
12,500
12,900
13,300
Total salaries
0.50 $
12,500
$
12,900
$
13,300
Fringe Benefits (35% of salaries)
4,375
4,515
4,655
Total Personal Services
$
16,875
$
17,415
$
17,955
Materials & Services:
Contract Services (Engineering)
10,000
10,300
10,600
Supplies
5,000
20,000
20,600
Maintenance & Operations
10,000
20,000
25,000
Misc.
2,500
3,000
3,500
Total Materials and Services
$
27,500
$
53,300
$
59,700
Capital Outlay,
Capital Projects and Equip. etc.
3,020,000
25,000
30,000
Total Capital Outlay
$
3,020,000
$
25,000
$
30,000
Transfers:
Transfer to C4 Administration
5%
3,220
4,790
5,380
er transfers a service
15,000
175,000
175,000
Total Transfers
$
18,220
$
179,790
$
180,380
Total Water Fund Expenditures
3,082,595
275,505
288,035
Total Revenues Over Under
nditures
8,905
6,995
5,465
INP . U
(9
Esii([£8 '.Sly
54 /�
Um
.9
-
Budget Page 8
Table 3
Assessed Value of Property within the Proposed La Pine City Boundary
Property
Classification
Description
1998/99
Assessed Value
000
Miscellaneous - Unbuildable
530,070
003
Centrally Assessed
n/a*
200
Commercial Vacant
1,672,930
201
Commercial Improved
20,355,895
207
Commercial Mobile Home Park
799,665
231
Commercial Industrial Improved
83,010
300
Industrial Vacant
131,820
301
industrial Improved
2,558,765
400
Tract - Vacant
13,759,455
401
Tract - Improved
96,288,526
406
Tract - Vacant Waterfront
1,477,030
409
Tract - Mobile Home
62,834,014
416
Tract - Improved Waterfront
9,349,200
450
Tract - Exclusive Farm Use Vacant
154,110
451
Tract - Exclusive Farm Use Improved
489,375
460
Tract - F2 Zone Vacant
149,110
470
Tract - Perm. Forest Use Disq. Vacant
120,450
471
Tract - Perm. Forest Use Disq. Improved
872,675
490
Tract - Potential Dividable Vacant
406,760
491
Tract - Potential Dividable Improved
642,070
540
Farm - Non EFU Vacant
10,379
541
Farm - Non EFU Improved
506,780
550
Farm EFU Vacant
144,063
551
Farm EFU Improved
565,890
600
Forest F1 zone Vacant
3,110
601
Forest F1 zone Improved
398,525
640
Forest zoned & unzoned Vacant
710
641
Forest zoned & unzoned Improved
106,610
821
lRecreational Commercial Improved
548,005
total
214,959,002
rVa* = Assessed by State; value not available
Source: Deshutes County GIS
Assessed Value Classes — 1
APPENDIX - NONPROPERTY TAX REVENUE
Extractedfrom Oregon Local Government Law,
First Edition 19f1 and 1993 Sy0lemeniy
Oregon Law Institute
tate-Shared Revenu
gFMU0andI#WTXM
Oregon imposes taxes on distributors of cigarettes. The state general fund receives
11/14ths of the revenues; 1/14 is appropriated to cities, 1/ 14th is appropriated to
counties in accordance with a population -based apportionment formula; and 1/14th is
appropriated to the Public Transit Division of the Department of Transportation. ORS
323.455. There is no restriction on the use of this money by the recipient cities and
counties.
Similarly, revenue collected from alcohol sales regulation and licensing is allocated, in
part, to cities and counties. Cities receive 20% of money available for distribution in
such shares as the population of each city bears to the population of the cities of the
state and 10% is distributed to counties in such shares as their respective population
bears to the total population of the state. ORS 471. 810. There is no restriction on how
the recipient cities and counties spend the proceeds.
An additional 14% of the liquor revenues is distributed to cities under the State
Revenue Sharing Act of 1977. ORS 221.770.
GasTam
Oregon Constitution Article IX, Section 3a, requires, in part, that any tax levied on or
with respect to certain activities dealing with motor vehicle fuel and ownership of
motor vehicles shall be used exclusively for the construction, improvement, repair,
maintenance, operation and use of public highways, roads, streets and roadside rest
areas. Levies on the ownership, operation or use of campers and other recreational
vehicles may also be used for the acquisition, development and maintenance of parks or
recreation areas. The revenue can also be used for administrative expenses, refunds or
credits authorized by law, and for retirement of certain bonds.
ORS 366.524 allocates 24.38% of highway funds to counties, based upon the proportion
of motor vehicle registrations in each county to those registered in the state.
ORS 366.524 and 366.800 allocate 15.57° of highway funds to cities, the first $500,000 to
be expended by the state for city street improvements. The balance is distributed to
cities proportionate to their respective populations. ORS 366.805.
Non-PropmWTaxRzmn —page 1
Oregon Public Utility Commission
Administrative Rules Relating to
Franchise Fees and Rate -making
860-022-0040
Relating to City Fees, Taxes, and Other Assessments for Electric, Gas, Steam, and Water
Utilities
(1) The aggregate amount of all business or occupation taxes, license, franchise or
operating permit fees, or other'similar exactions imposed upon gas, electric, steam, or
water utilities by any city in Oregon for engaging in business within such city or for use
and occupancy of city streets and public ways, which does not exceed 3 percent for gas
utilities or 3.5 percent for electric,
steam, and water utilities, applied to gross revenues as defined herein, shall be allowed
as operating expenses of such utilities for rate -making purposes and shall not be
itemized or billed separately.
(2) Except as otherwise provided herein, "gross revenues" means revenues
received from utility operations within the city less related net uncollectibles. Gross
revenues of gas, electric, and steam utilities shall include revenues from the use, rental,
or lease of the utility's operating facilities other than residential -type space and water
heating equipment:. Gross revenues shall not include
proceeds from the sale of bonds, mortgage or other evidence of indebtedness, securities
or stocks, sales at wholesale by one utility to another when the utility purchasing the
service is not the ultimate customer, or revenue from joint pole use.
(3) Permit fees or similar charges for street opening, installations, construction, and
the like to the extent such fees or charges are reasonably related to the city's costs for
inspection, supervision, and regulation in exercising its police powers, and the value of
any utility services or use of facilities provided on November 6, 1967, to a city without
charge, shall not be considered in computing the percentage levels herein set forth. Any
such services may be continued within the same category or type of use. The value of
any additional category of utility service or use of facilities provided after November 6,
1967, to a city without charge shall be considered in computing the percentage levels
herein set forth.
(4) This rule shall not affect franchises existing on November 6,1967, granted by a
city. Payments made or value of service rendered by a utility under such franchises
shall not be itemized or billed separately. When compensation different from the
percentage levels in section (1) of this rule is specified in a franchise existing on
November 6,1967, such compensation shall continue to be treated by the affected utility
as an operating expense during the balance of the term of such franchise. Any tax, fee,
or other exaction set forth in section (1) of this rule, unilaterally imposed or increased by
any city during the unexpired term of a franchise existing on November 6,1967, and
containing a provision for compensation for use and occupancy of streets and public
ways, shall be charged pro rata to local users as herein provided.
OPUC MrinRdbs —page 1
(5) Except as provided in section (4) of this rule, to the extent any city tax, fee, or
other exaction referred to in section (1) of this rule exceeds the percentage levels
allowable as operating expenses in section (1) of this rule, such excess amount shall be
charged pro rata to utility customers within said city and shall be separately stated on
the regular billings to such customers.
(6) The percentage levels in section (1) of this rule may be changed if the
Commission determines after such notice and hearing, as required by law, that fair and
reasonable compensation to a city or all cities should be fixed at a different level or that
by law or the particular circumstances involved a different level should be established.
Stat Auth: ORS Ch 183,756 & 767
Stat. Implemented: ORS 756.040
Hist: PUC 164, f. 4-18-74, ef. 5-11-74 (Order No. 74-307); PUC 3-1990, f. & cert ef. 4-6-90
(Order No. 90-417); PUC 14-1990, f. & cert ef. 7-11-90 (Order No. 90-1031); PUC 7-1998, f. &
cert ef. 4.8-98 (Order No. 98-125)
860-022-0042
Relating to City Privilege Taxes, Fees, and Other Assessments for Telecommunications
Utilities
(1) The aggregate amount of all privilege taxes and fees and other assessments
imposed upon a telecommunications utility by
any city in Oregon for engaging in business within such city or for use and occupancy
of city streets and public ways, whether
applied to regulated revenues, net income, or other bases, shall be allowed as operating
expenses of the telecommunications utility
for rate -making purposes, subject to sections (2) through (4) of this rule.
(2) As used in this rule:
(a) "Fees and other assessments" means business or occupation taxes or licenses;
franchise or operating permit fees; sales,
use, net income, gross receipts, and payroll taxes, levies, or charges; and other similar
exactions imposed by cities, other than ad
valorem taxes, upon revenues or income received from regulated telecommunications
services by a telecommunications utility.
(b) "Local access revenues" means those revenues derived from exchange access
services within the city, as defined in ORS
401.710, less related net uncollectibles.
(c) "Privilege taxes" means taxes levied and collected by cities from a
telecommunications utility for use and occupancy of city
streets, alleys, or highways, as provided under ORS 221.515.
(d) "Regulated revenues" means those revenues derived from regulated
telecommunications services within the city less related
net uncollectibles. Regulated revenues include, but are not limited to, local access
revenues.
(3) Separate fees for street opening, installations, construction, and maintenance of
fixtures or facilities to the extent such fees
OPUC Adninxuks—Me2
Addendum 1 to Economic Feasibility Statement
December 14,1999
Page 4 of the Economic Feasibility Statement indicates that, as of the date of this report,
the La Pine Water District does not have any assets. On October 27,1999 the Deschutes
County Board of Commissioners signed an agreement with the La Pine Water District
to transfer assets from the County to the District, including the following:
1. A groundwater permit
2. County land use permit
3. Land grants from the U.S. Forest Service and the U.S. Bureau of Land Management
4. Well property
These assets would accrue to the City of La Pine if incorporated.