2003-33-Minutes for Meeting January 08,2003 Recorded 1/16/2003DESCHUTES COUNTY OFFICIAL RECORDS
NANCY BLANKENSHIP, COUNTY CLERK
COMMISSIONERS' JOURNAL
111 01/16/2003 01;57;35 PM
2003-000033
DESCHUTES COUNTY CLERK
CERTIFICATE PAGE
This page must be included
if document is re-recorded.
Do Not remove from original document.
Deschutes County Board of Commissioners
1130 NW Harriman St., Bend, OR 97701-1947
(541) 388-6570 - Fax (541) 388-4752 - www.deschutes.org
MINUTES OF MEETING
DESCHUTES COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 8, 2003
Commissioners' Hearing Room - Administration Building
1130 NW Harriman St., Bend
Present were Commissioners Dennis R. Luke, Tom De Wolf and Michael M. Daly.
Also present were Mike Maier, County Administrator; Laurie Craghead and Rick
Isham, Legal Counsel; Gary Judd and Tom Blust, Road Department; Anna
Johnson, Commissioners' Office; George Read and Kevin Harrison, Community
Development Department; media representatives Mike Cronin of the Bulletin and
Barney Lerten of bend.com; and ten other citizens.
Chair Dennis Luke 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. 2003-003, Determining and Setting the Final Assessment for the
Gift Road Local Improvement District (in Whispering Pines Estates).
Gary Judd gave a brief overview of the item. He indicated he had spoken
earlier in today's meeting with some citizens who asked how payments could
be made. They appeared satisfied with his explanation and then left the
meeting. He said the original estimate of the total cost was $857,000, but it will
cost only $707,000.
Minutes of Board of Commissioners' Meeting Wednesday, January 8, 2003
Page 1 of 9 Pages
He added that Deschutes County owns 120 acres in the LID, and will have to
pay for twelve assessments. Chair Luke replied that it does increase the value
of the property.
Mr. Judd said that no written objections were received. One call came in from a
citizen who had recently purchased her property, and she was concerned about
the notification process.
Chair Dennis Luke then opened the public hearing.
Being no testimony offered, he closed the public hearing.
DALY: Move approval.
DEWOLF: Second.
VOTE: DEWOLF: Yes.
DALY: Yes.
LUKE: Chair votes yes.
3. Before the Board was Consideration of Second Reading and Adoption of
Ordinance No. 2003-002 (Previously Ordinance No. 2002-038), Text
Amendments to the Building Setback and Lot Coverage Requirements in
the La Pine Residential District.
Kevin Harrison gave a brief overview of the history of the ordinance. He
explained that since the ordinance was somewhat changed after the first
reading, the sections that had changed would need to be read in their entirety
during the second reading.
He said that a letter was received from Tom Walker, who represents the
applicant. They agree with the changes as proposed, but reiterated that the 100 -
foot setback that is required for properties adjacent to U.S. Forest Service land
be review. He stated that staff feels this is a separate issue and involves
findings for the UUC, and recommend that it not be reviewed at this time.
Minutes of Board of Commissioners' Meeting Wednesday, January 8, 2003
Page 2 of 9 Pages
Commissioner DeWolf asked if this could be handled by a conditional use
permit. Mr. Harrison said theoretically, if it affected one large undeveloped
parcel, it could be handled as a separate text amendment, or perhaps by
increasing the size of the lots next to the land. It could possibly be addressed by
having a road or alley between the subdivision and the U.S. Forest Service land.
This could be reviewed later if it appears to affect a subdivision, with a text
amendment.
Commissioner DeWolf then pointed out an error in item 5 (c), which should say
rear yard instead of side yard. Mr. Harrison replied that this would be
corrected.
DALY: Move second reading by title only, with a full reading of item 5
(a), (b) and (c), with that change.
DEWOLF: Second.
VOTE: DEWOLF: Yes.
DALY: Yes.
LUKE: Chair votes aye.
Chair Luke did the second reading by title only, including the new ordinance
number and item 5 (a), (b) and (c).
DEWOLF: Move adoption.
DALY: Second.
VOTE: DEWOLF: Yes.
DALY: Yes.
LUKE: Chair votes aye.
4. Before the Board was Consideration of Signature of Resolution No. 2003-
004, Adopting an Intergovernmental Agreement between Deschutes
County and the Bend Metropolitan Parks and Recreation District, relating
to Park Systems Development Charges.
Laurie Craghead said the amount of SDC's has been changed, and the County's
role would be to act as the collection entity for the SDC amounts.
Minutes of Board of Commissioners' Meeting Wednesday, January 8, 2003
Page 3 of 9 Pages
DALY:
How many properties does the County deal with in this regard?
CRAGHEAD:
Ten to fifteen, per George Read of Community Development
DALY:
And the County receives about $15 per property to do this?
NEIL BRYANT (representing Bend Metro Park & Rec District):
There are usually less than a dozen per year. Most of the fees are collected by
the City of Bend.
DEWOLF:
We've seen SDC's go up 500% of the total cost of the house over about eight
years. We are frustrated over the incredible rapid increase of SDC's. People
run for office stating "no new taxes", but then the SDC's go up. There is no
provision for Habitat for Humanity or other low-cost housing organizations to
get a break; but I understand that it is not built into the system with the State. I
know Commissioners Luke and Daly are also frustrated with this. Maybe it's
our inability to convince the local taxpayers that it is good to support funding
measures for community facilities. It has now gone on the back of SDC's, and
it is pretty onerous now. My comments are not directed personally to people in
the parks, but I have a big frustration with the process.
BRYANT:
We began on this about a year ago, and there were fourteen people in the
advisory group, including people representing affordable housing. The group
looked into developing an exemption for them, but couldn't do it. It was felt
also that those who do have to pay would be subsidizing the others. The group
met numerous times, and concluded that the increase is needed. This had not
been done since 1993 when it was originally developed. You can only do
SDC's for future development, not for maintenance or anything done in the
past. The group did not want to recommend other options; there was a
consensus within the group except for the Builders' Association.
The intergovernmental agreement works well for both sides, and helps to keep
collection costs down.
Minutes of Board of Commissioners' Meeting Wednesday, January 8, 2003
Page 4 of 9 Pages
DEWOLF:
I agree with the purpose of the agreement, but we don't have SDC's in the
County at all, although the City of Bend has proposed that we should. The
philosophy over the past eight or nine years is like we live in some magical
world rather than a country. You can live where you feel is best for you and
your family, and the focus seems to be having growth pay its way. My
philosophy is that all of our families have been paying their way in this country.
When these SDC's were first adopted, it wasn't at 100% in the City of Bend,
because of a firm belief that those already living here also benefited from the
growth, with a more stable economy and a broader tax base. In my opinion this
areas is a better place in which to live than it was twenty years ago.
Philosophically, it's frustrating to me when we need to do this to make up for
shortfalls. These kinds of things ripple through people's minds when we have
measures to present to the public. Is it any wonder that people don't trust their
elected officials?
DALY:
He said it all. I come from a building background, and SDC's have always
been considered an unfair tax for people who buy new homes; it makes
affordable housing hard to find. Unfortunately we have no say on the amounts
in this case. I would probably vote against it if I could. We are just the
collection agency, and it would cost more if we didn't cooperate. I am not
supporting it because I like SDC's.
LUKE:
Infrastructure needs to be paid for. I think SDC's are unfair, especially because
they same amount is charged regardless of the size of the house. From that aspect,
I think they are unfair. I fought its expansion while in Legislature; there needs to
be a better way. We are indemnified if there is a lawsuit challenging this.
There were no other comments offered.
DALY: Move approval of the resolution and the agreement.
DEWOLF: Second.
VOTE: DEWOLF: Yes.
DALY: Yes.
LUKE: Chair votes aye.
Minutes of Board of Commissioners' Meeting Wednesday, January 8, 2003
Page 5 of 9 Pages
CONVENED AS THE GOVERNING BODY OF THE SUNRIVER
SERVICE DISTRICT
5. Before the Board was a Public Hearing and Consideration of Signature of
Resolution No. 2003-002, Designating the Governing Body as the District's
Local Public Contract Review Board and Delegating that Authority to the
Managing Board.
Sharon Smith, representing the Sunriver Service District Managing Board, gave
an overview. Rick Isham added that in his opinion it is acceptable for the
Sunriver Managing Board to handle this. The Commissioners still have
authority if things aren't been done right.
Chair Dennis Luke then opened the public hearing.
Being no testimony offered, he closed the public hearing.
DALY: Move approval.
DEWOLF: Second.
VOTE: DEWOLF: Yes.
DALY: Yes.
LUKE: Chair votes aye.
6. Before the Board was a Public Hearing and Consideration of Signature of
Resolution No. 2003-003, Adopting Public Contracting Rules; Granting
Exceptions from Competitive Bidding for Certain Contracts; and
Designating Certain Service Contracts as Personal Services Contracts, for
the Sunriver Service District.
Sharon Smith explained that this is the second part of the request. She said that
Sunriver has specific needs, and tried to tailor this document to address those
needs. They have conducted public hearings in Sunriver and received public
input, and made some changes. She has been working with County Legal
Counsel.
Commissioner Luke asked to receive a copy of the minutes and public input.
Minutes of Board of Commissioners' Meeting Wednesday, January 8, 2003
Page 6 of 9 Pages
Rick Isham said that what he would like to propose for the County is to stay
with the Attorney General Model Rules; the County has been using them
without modification to procedures for about eight years. The rules make
sense, and people are familiar with them. But there are certain areas that
departments want to take exception for procurement rules. We plan to put
together a package for exempt details, which would be a less burdensome
process where we know that we need to act quickly, when the Model Rules are
more cumbersome.
Commissioner Luke explained that they are in place to avoid corruption and to
allow for fairness, and to protect the public.
Ms. Smith said that the hearing could be continued if necessary to allow for
further review.
Chair Luke then opened the public hearing.
Bill Starks, the Chair of the Sunriver Service District Board, stated that three of
the elected members present at their meeting had concerns about one issue.
They want to see the original agreements between the Governing Body and the
Sunriver Service District tied together regarding the responsibility of the
Managing Board and the Governing Body to make sure there is a third party
review of contracts. This has been incorporated into the document.
The hearing was continued for two weeks, and will be addressed at the
Wednesday, January 22 Board of Commissioners' meeting.
CONVENED AS THE GOVERNING BODY OF THE 9-1-1 COUNTY
SERVICE DISTRICT
7. Before the Board was Consideration of Approval of Weekly Accounts
Payable Vouchers for the 9-1-1 County Service District in the Amount of
$2,297.39.
DALY: Move approval, subject to review.
DEWOLF: Second.
VOTE: DEWOLF: Yes.
DALY: Yes.
LUKE: Chair votes aye.
Minutes of Board of Commissioners' Meeting Wednesday, January 8, 2003
Page 7 of 9 Pages
CONVENED AS THE GOVERNING BODY OF THE EXTENSION/4-11
COUNTY SERVICE DISTRICT
8. Before the Board was Consideration of Approval of Weekly Accounts
Payable Vouchers for the Extension/4-11 County Service District in the
Amount of $562.99.
DALY: Move approval, subject to review.
DEWOLF: Second.
VOTE: DEWOLF: Yes.
DALY: Yes.
LUKE: Chair votes aye.
RECONVENED AS THE DESCHUTES COUNTY BOARD OF
COMMISSIONERS
9. Before the Board was Consideration of Approval of Weekly Accounts
Payable Vouchers for Deschutes County in the Amount of $135,645.07.
DALY: Move approval, subject to review.
DEWOLF: Second.
VOTE: DEWOLF: Yes.
DALY: Yes.
LUKE: Chair votes aye.
10. Before the Board were Additions to the Agenda.
None were offered.
Being no further items brought before the Board, Chair Dennis Luke adjourned
the meeting at 10:45 a.m.
Minutes of Board of Commissioners' Meeting Wednesday, January 8, 2003
Page 8 of 9 Pages
DATED this 8th Day of January 2003 for the Deschutes County Board of
Commissioners.
ATTEST:
l6u4j,� (FA �l
Recording Secretary
Minutes of Board of Commissioners' Meeting
Page 9 of 9 Pages
Dennis R. Luke, C air
Tom DeWolf, Commissioner
4t,,�IIJ4
Mic ael A Daly, Co issioner
Wednesday, January 8, 2003