Loading...
2002-7-Minutes for Meeting December 19,2001 Recorded 1/4/20021130 N.W. Harriman St., Bend, Oregon 97701-1947 (541) 388-6570 • Fax (541) 388-4752 www.deschutes.org Tom De Wolf Dennis R. Luke MINUTES OF BOARD MEETING Mike Daly DESCHUTES COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS WEDNESDAY, DECEMBER 19, 2001 Present were Commissioners Tom De Wolf, Dennis R. Luke and Michael M. Daly. Also present were Mike Maier, County Administrator; Jenny Scanlon, Commissioners' Office; George Read and Damian Syrnyk, Community Development; Laurie Craghead, Legal Counsel; Tom Blust and George Kolb, Road Department; Media Representative Barney Lerten of bendnet. com; and three citizens. Chair Tom De Wolf opened the meeting at 10: 00 a. m. 1. Before the Board was Citizen Input. None was offered. 2. Before the Board was a Public Hearing, and Consideration of Signature of Order No. 2001-095, Vacating a Portion of "A" Avenue (near Terrebonne) - George Kolb, Road Department George Kolb indicated there has been no opposition received on this matter. Chair Tom De Wolf opened the public hearing. Being no testimony offered, Chair De Wolf closed the public hearing. LUKE: Move signature of Order No. 2001-095. DALY: Second. VOTE: LUKE: Yes. DALY: Yes. DEWOLF: Chair votes yes. Minutes of Board Meeting Page 1 of 9 Pages Wednesday, December 19, 2001 Quality Services Performed with Pride 3. Before the Board was a Decision and Consideration the First Reading of Ordinance No. 2001-050 and Ordinance No. 2001-051, Regarding Changes to Plan Designations and Zoning of Certain Properties from Forest Use 2 to Exclusive Farm Use - Damian Syrnyk, Community Development Damian Syrnyk gave an overview of this issue (the Jim Watts application). He said Monday he received the final letter from the applicant's attorney, which was forwarded to the Board via e-mail. He then asked if the Board is prepared to make a decision at this time. He indicated that if the Board does decide to adopt these ordinances, staff recommends that the Board adopt its own findings regarding criterion B. DENNIS LUKE: I have something to read into the record. Should I do it now? LAURIE CRAGHEAD: I would recommend that you go ahead and do it now. DENNIS LUKE: Does this show an emergency clause? SYRNYK: Yes. This is a staff recommendation. Since there's a change in the zoning record, this gives people advance notice of the coming change. The change would become effective 90 days after the second reading and adoption. DEWOLF: I don't see what the emergency is. SYRNYK: The applicant did not request it. It's a staff recommendation, and has been done in the past. LUKE: Can the applicant apply for a use during the 90 -day period? SYRNYK: He has to wait the 90 days. DEWOLF: Does this affect any right to appeal, or the timelines for an appeal? Minutes of Board Meeting Page 2 of 9 Pages Wednesday, December 19, 2001 SYRNYK: Once the Board takes final action to adopt, we would give notice of that action the following day, which starts the clock if someone wants to seek a review of this matter at LUBA. MIKE DALY: It would not matter too much whether you have an emergency clause. SYRNYK: Correct. LUKE: We don't like to do emergency clauses unless it is absolutely necessary, as it tends to take some of the public out of the process. Some actions require an emergency clause, but if the applicant hasn't requested it, I don't want to do it. SYRNYK: We will amend the title of the ordinances accordingly. LUKE: (He submitted his written statement at this time; attached as Exhibit A.) DALY: I agree with Dennis. DEWOLF: There are a couple of things. One, in an e-mail that is on a page dated December 11; it also shows a December 3 date. It was to Laurie Craghead from William Kuhn. The thing I want to make note of is the paragraph that says, "I'm concerned with the appearance of impartiality demonstrated by the Commission in recent actions and rulings. They seem extremely chummy with Mr. Hunnicutt, director of legal affairs of Oregonians in Action, yet were almost hostile to Mr. Boyer, representing himself and ARLU DeCo at this hearing. Even though any claim of impartiality was raised at the time that the hearing began, this being part of the record ... " I want to address this on my part. That was not my intention. Regarding my feelings or beliefs about various parties to decisions, I'm human like anyone else. But when it comes to making these decisions, I really do my best to make those decisions based on the information I have received from all sides during the hearing. Minutes of Board Meeting Page 3 of 9 Pages Wednesday, December 19, 2001 DEWOLF: For the record, I'm going to support the motion that is made because the bottom line for me is that I believe Mr. Hunnicutt made his argument, and the opponents did not make the compelling argument to overcome this. In particular, Mr. Hunnicutt's letter of December 11 clearly outlined the arguments, and I agree with his answers to the arguments. So, I'll be supporting this motion. LUKE: I wish people who make these kinds of allegations against the Commissioners would have some documentation. If one were to check my voting record on Oregonians in Action at the legislature, they'd probably find that I supported about as equal a number of bills as I opposed. They did not, and Mr. Hunnicutt of course is the attorney for Oregonians in Action. Some of their bills were way out in right field, and some of their bills made sense. It bothers me to hear these kinds of allegations. DEWOLF: I definitely accept different people's impressions, and that's all this says here, it's the appearance, and I respect people's impressions about what we're doing. And we do joke a lot around here. I just wanted to be clear for the record that even though we do try to keep things moving along lightly, by the same token when decisions come before us, we take them very seriously and do our best. DEWOLF: When I have been where I don't believe I can be impartial, I've stated that. There have been at least a couple of hearings in the last three years when I've done that. LUKE: The legitimate question that legal counsel raised about standing was answered in favor, I believe, of the opponents. Since the court decision, it was legitimate for counsel to raise that concern, and counsel found for the opponents. LUKE: I move first reading, by title only, of Ordinance No. 2001-050, which would include approval of what I read into the record. DEWOLF: Do we need to include the findings as part of the reading? Minutes of Board Meeting Page 4 of 9 Pages Wednesday, December 19, 2001 LAURIE: I would recommend that you do, because that part of the ordinance includes findings; that's what the "whereas" clauses are. DEWOLF: As long as this is subject to our review. CRAGHEAD: When you come to the second reading, you will then to read that portion again, because that would be a substantial deviation from the original submitted ordinance. DALY: I'll second. VOTE: LUKE: Yes. DALY: Yes. DEWOLF: Chair votes yes. Chair DeWolf then conducted the first reading of Ordinance No. 2001-050, by title only. LUKE: I would move first reading, by title only, of Ordinance No. 2001-051, including the subject to review and the second reading of what I read into the record on findings. DALY: I second that. VOTE: LUKE: Yes. DALY: Yes. DEWOLF: Chair votes yes. Chair De Wolf then conducted the first reading of Ordinance No. 2001-151, by title only. The second reading and consideration of adoption are scheduled for January 3 at 10:00 a.m. 4. Before the Board was Consideration of Signature of the Fiscal Year 2002- 2003 Juvenile Crime Prevention Contracts between Deschutes County and the Oregon State Criminal Justice Commission - Deevy Holcomb, Commission on Children & Families Minutes of Board Meeting Page 5 of 9 Pages Wednesday, December 19, 2001 LUKE: Move signature. DALY: Second. VOTE: LUKE: Yes. DALY: Yes. DEWOLF: Chair votes yes. 5. Before the Board was Consideration of Signature of Continuation of a Contract between Deschutes County and Teresa Hutchens -Collins for Family Mediation Services - Dave Duncan, Mental Health Department LUKE: Move signature. DALY: Second. VOTE: LUKE: Yes. DALY: Yes. DEWOLF: Chair votes yes. 6. Before the Board was Consideration of Signature of a Personal Services Contract Renewal Regarding the Analysis and Development of Proposals for Infrastructure and Subdivision Development within the La Pine New Neighborhood - George Read, Community Development LUKE: Move signature of this Personal Services Contract. DALY: Second. VOTE: LUKE: Yes. DALY: Yes. DEWOLF: Chair votes yes. Before the Board was Consideration of Approval of the Consent Agenda. GEORGE READ: I would ask that you pull Item No. 8 from the Consent Agenda for further discussion. LUKE: Move signature of the Consent Agenda, less Item No. 8. DALY: Second. Minutes of Board Meeting Page 6 of 9 Pages Wednesday, December 19, 2001 VOTE: LUKE DALY: DEWOLF Consent Agenda Items Yes. Yes. Chair votes yes. 7. Signature of Letters Appointing of Individuals to the Deschutes County Commission on Children & Families • .. LVA RTF -552 a WMAPM M= f Hearing O ffi o,. Seiwiees. (See Item No. 8, below.) 9. Signature of Order No. 2001-126, Correcting the Legal Description for the Sahonchik Annexation to Rural Fire Protection District No. 2 10. Signature of a Letter Reappointing Mary Rose Dobson to the Board of the Lazy River Special Road District, through December 31, 2005 11. Signature of Order 2001-128, Authorizing Tax Refunds that Resulted from ORS 308.242 (Assessor's Authority to Change Roll after September 25) 8. Before the Board was Consideration of Signature of a Personal Services Contract with Tia Lewis of Merrill O'Sullivan for Hearing Officer Services. George Read explained that Tia Lewis did not receive the draft contract and the message regarding insurance requirements. He proposed to extend the existing contract until January 31, 2002, while the new contract is being reviewed. LUKE: Move signature of the contract extension, subject to legal review. DALY: Second. VOTE: LUKE: Yes. DALY: Yes. DEWOLF: Chair votes yes. CONVENE AS THE GOVERNING BODY OF THE 9-1-1 COUNTY SERVICE DISTRICT 12. Before the Board was Consideration of Approval of Weekly Accounts Payable Vouchers for the 9-1-1 County Service District in the Amount of $3,280.37. Minutes of Board Meeting Page 7 of 9 Pages Wednesday, December 19, 2001 LUKE: So moved. DALY: Second. VOTE: LUKE: DALY: DEWOLF Yes. Yes. Chair votes yes. CONVENED AS THE GOVERNING BODY OF THE EXTENSION/4-11 COUNTY SERVICE DISTRICT 13. Before the Board was Consideration of Approval of Weekly Accounts Payable Vouchers for the Extension/4-11 County Service District in the Amount of $75.40. LUKE: So moved. DALY: Second. VOTE: LUKE: Yes. DALY: Yes. DEWOLF: Chair votes yes. RECONVENE AS THE DESCHUTES COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS 14. CONSIDERATION of Approval of Weekly Accounts Payable Vouchers for Deschutes County in the Amount of $590,834.17. LUKE: So move, subject to review. DALY: Second. VOTE: LUKE: Yes. DALY: Yes. DEWOLF: Chair votes yes. 15. ADDITION TO THE AGENDA Before the Board was Consideration of Signature of a Letter Appointing Anna Mae Rhoads to the Board of the River Bend Estates Special Road District, through December 31, 2004 Minutes of Board Meeting Page 8 of 9 Pages Wednesday, December 19, 2001 LUKE: Move signature of this letter. DALY: Second. VOTE: LUKE: Yes. DALY: Yes. DEWOLF: Chair votes yes. Being no further items brought before the Board, Chair De Wolf adjourned the meeting at 10:25 a.m. DATED this 19th Day of November 2001 Commissioners. ATTEST: Recording Secretary for the Deschutes County Board of I Tom DeWolf, C it Dennis R. Luke, Commissioner -� g e,.,; 0 0" P, 0, / , 4 ich el M. Daly, om issioner Attachments: Exhibit A - Commissioner Luke's statement in support of the adoption of Ordinances 2001-050 and 2001-051. Minutes of Board Meeting Page 9 of 9 Pages Wednesday, December 19, 2001 Findings of the Board of County Commissioners on DCC 23.40.020(8)(b) In addition to relying on the Hearings Officer's findings, I propose that the following set of findings be added to the Board's decision: The Board finds that the site does not constitute forested lands that maintain soil, air, water, and fish and wildlife resources. The Board concurs with the finding of the hearings officer on this criterion, and supplements it with our own finding on this application. The record includes testimony from opponents that argue the subject properties constitute forested lands. The Board finds that the soils descriptions in the record, and the December 11, 2001 letter from applicant's attorney show that this is not the case. These documents, and the record of the Hearings Officer's site visit, confirm that the soils, juniper woodland, and understory of bitterbrush, sage, and bunch grasses are typical of rangeland in Deschutes County and do not constitute forested lands. The soil data submitted by the applicant indicates the soils present at the subject properties are not rated for woodland suitability. The record before the Board also includes documentation submitted by the applicant, including aerial photos showing the subject property to be only sparsely covered with timber and including letters from a consulting forester and staff of the Oregon Departments of Forestry and Land Conservation and Development that provide expert testimony as to whether the lands that are the subject of these application are forested lands. The record before the Board includes substantial evidence to conclude that the subject properties do not constitute forested lands.