Loading...
2005-123-Minutes for Meeting February 15,2005 Recorded 2/22/2005DESCHUTES COUNTY OFFICIAL RECORDS rr C NANCY BLANKENSNIP, COUNTY CLERK yJ 1�OJ■�1� COMMISSIONERS' JOURNAL 1111i0111111005 01.54; 01 PM I111111111111111111 I III DESCHUTES COUNTY CLERK CERTIFICATE PAGE C w 0 -, C C- This page must be included if document is re-recorded. Do Not remove from original document. Deschutes County Board of Commissioners 1300 NW Wall St., Bend, OR 97701-1960 (541) 388-6570 - Fax (541) 385-3202 - www.deschutes.ory, MINUTES OF ADMINISTRATIVE LIAISON DESCHUTES COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 15, 2005 Commissioners' Conference Room - Administration Building - 1300 NW Wall St.., Bend Present were Commissioners Michael M. Daly, Tom De Wolf and Dennis R. Luke. Also present were, for a portion of the meeting, Joe Studer, Susan Ross, Anna Johnson and David Givans, Commissioners' Office; Mark Amberg and Mark Pilliod, Legal Counsel; Marty Wynne, Finance; citizens Jim King and Heather Rizou, and media representative Chris Barker of the Bulletin. The meeting began at 1: 50 p. m. 1. Action after Executive Session. LUKE: I move approval that Legal Counsel engage the services of outside counsel to advise on how to proceed with the lawsuit regarding Royal Blend Coffee, with a maximum expense of $10,000. DALY: Second. VOTE: LUKE: Yes. DALY: Yes. DEWOLF: Chair votes yes. 2. Discussion of Contract with Westlaw. Mark Amberg stated that Legal Counsel uses Westlaw as a source for research material, and the agreement for this service needs to be renewed. The best package for this service has been negotiated for a 3-1/2 year period of time. LUKE: Move approval of this agreement for 3-1/2 years, not to exceed a total cost of $95,000. DALY: Second. Minutes of Administrative Liaison Tuesday, February 15, 2005 Page 1 of 5 Pages VOTE: LUKE: Yes. DALY: Yes. DEWOLF: Chair votes yes. 3. Presentation regarding South County Fire Issues. Jim King said he represents the Upper Deschutes River Natural Resources Coalition, which is comprised of thirteen neighborhoods on the Upper Deschutes River corridor (Sunriver to Wickiup Junction). This group works collectively on the natural resource problems of the watershed, and in particular is concerned about the extreme fire risks that exist in and around these communities and the use of National Fire Plan funds. He said that the County unintentionally has been working against the interests of this group. If the County was in charge, the group could use preference points for obtaining funding. He then explained in detail what the group has accomplished thus far and hopes to accomplish in the future. (Copies of handouts provided by Mr. King are attached as Exhibit A) After his presentation and a brief discussion, the Board asked Mr. King to provide them with a letter detailing what the group is seeking so that the Board can consider various requests. He agreed to do so. 4. Discussion regarding Conflict of Interest. Mark Pilliod stated that outside legal counsel has been retained in the past to oversee issues regarding potential groundwater problems. Since then the outside firm has begun dealing with a Measure 37 issue. This could be perceived as a conflict of interest problem, although the two issues are not related. Mr. Pilliod asked if the Board would consider approving a letter waiving the conflict of interest in this case. LUKE: I move approval that Legal Counsel sign a letter to Perkins Cole LLP waiving the conflict of interest in this case. DALY: Second. VOTE: LUKE: Yes. DALY: Yes. DEWOLF: Chair votes yes. Minutes of Administrative Liaison Tuesday, February 15, 2005 Page 2 of 5 Pages 5. Discussion of Rent Charges to Various County Funds. Marty Wynne explained that a few years ago the County starting charging rent to departments in order to be able to refurbish the old Deschutes Services Building. The County also was able to obtain funding from the A & T grant. It has been determined that there is now a disparity on how these charges are handled, and a policy decision needs to be made by the Commissioners on this issue. (He provided a handout, which is attached as Exhibit B) Commissioner DeWolf noted that much of this activity, moving funds around, is a "shell game". He said that it is difficult for departments to pay indirect charges; Commissioner Luke added that he doesn't like charging indirects and would like to see these costs come out of the general fund. However, caution needs to be used so that A & T grant funds aren't lost. Commissioner Luke stressed that this topic needs a lot more discussion. Commissioner DeWolf said the options should be discussed with the departments, and he would like to see it resolved as soon as possible. A meeting regarding indirections is scheduled for Friday, February 18, at which time this could be discussed. The budget kickoff is scheduled the following week. 6. Project Update. Susan Ross detailed the status of various projects. Horizon House CORHA (Central Oregon Regional Housing Authority) has asked for a line of credit to complete the project. A Memorandum of Understanding has been drafted for the Board to review. (A copy is attached as Exhibit C.) The project is about 70% complete. Approving this line of credit would allow for another project in Prineville to proceed. Commissioner Luke said he understands the reason behind this request and that the project is a good one, but he will not support this action. DALY: I move approval of the line of credit for CORHA, subject to legal review. DEWOLF: Second. VOTE: LUKE: No. (Split vote) DALY: Yes. DEWOLF: Chair votes yes. Minutes of Administrative Liaison Tuesday, February 15, 2005 Page 3 of 5 Pages Ms. Ross explained that finally the Road Department remodel project is almost completed. The Crisis Resolution Center project has been postponed several times. A deadline has been given for the project to be completed no later than Friday, February 18. The contract does include a penalty clause if a project is not done in time, but it is hoped the County won't have to resort to that. 7. Other Items. Commissioner DeWolf asked if the County's participation in the Bend Community Center dinner program is being arranged. Ms. Ross said that Anna Johnson is handling this. LUKE: I move that the week's bills be approved without the signature of Mike Maier. DALY: Second. VOTE: LUKE: Yes. DALY: Yes. DEWOLF: Chair votes yes. Commissioner DeWolf stated that Steve Gorman wants to donate a house to the Redmond Habitat for Humanity, but says that the County is holding up the project. Upon investigating the situation, Commissioner DeWolf learned that Habitat does not want the building as it is too costly to move and renovate it, and they don't have a location to place it at this time. He added that evidently Mr. Gorman was seeking a tax write-off for the building, and wants to build something at the site. Commissioner DeWolf just wanted to make the other Commissioners aware of the situation. Commissioner DeWolf explained that the County's federal lobbyist has stated that the groundwater funding isn't going to happen. Community Development isn't involved in the first phase. He said he would forward the federal projects list to Ms. Ross for her to review. Minutes of Administrative Liaison Tuesday, February 15, 2005 Page 4 of 5 Pages Mark Pilliod said that he has made some adjustments to the revamped public contracting code. This will be noticed in the Daily Journal of Commerce. Since the rules change on March 1, the item will be on the February 28 Board agenda. Susan Ross asked if it is possible for the payment and performance bond to be exempted for short-term projects. Mr. Pilliod stressed that this exemption would be improper, since if the subcontractors don't get paid, it is illegal to lien a County property. Being no further items addressed, the meeting adjourned at 3:10 p.m. DATED this 15th Day of February 2005 for the Deschutes Con ty Board of Commissioners. Tom DeWolf, Chair ATTEST: Recording Secretary Attachments Exhibit A: Documents relating to Use of National Fire Plan Funds (67 pages) Exhibit B: Draft Promissory Note and Memorandum of Understand — CORHA and Horizon House (3 pages) Exhibit C: Spreadsheets regarding Interfund Rent and Indirect Charges (3 pages) Minutes of Administrative Liaison Tuesday, February 15, 2005 Page 5 of 5 Pages Bob, 2/14/05 As I mentioned to you over the phone, we believe this matter has been delayed long enough and we will file our appeal/complaint this week. I do want to remind you, however, that we still need our prior questions answered as soon as possible: • Prior years Western States grants to ODF compared to the total number of funded projects ♦ The job descriptions and funding sources for the two ODF staff listed with NFP in their job titles ♦ The person in charge and criteria being used to develop the "accurate and prioritized list of all communities designated by states as being at risk for wildland fire" as required by the NFP Implementation Plan by June 2003. Since our neighborhoods were curiously not included in your August 17, 2001 list; we, of course, request prior notice of hearings related to the drafts of any new list and an opportunity to comment prior to Agency finalization. As I also mentioned over the phone, we sincerely hope the inevitable broader audiences will hear our appeal in the proper context; viz. the real problem is the lack of fire related funding to all levels of government as well as the communities themselves. We deplore the cut backs stemming from the decades of anti-government and anti -tax politics. If we don't wise up soon; we may face not only irreversible damage to our natural resources but the very fabric of our society as well. The intent of our appeal is to clarify the legitimate confusion about the intent of NFP funding, vis a vis states vs communities at risk and does not mean we view ODF as "the enemy". Quite the contrary; and we remain committed to our long-term relationships and the partnership we need to continue to work together on our common problems. We intend to cite our recent Progress Report on Private Lands as evidence of the high quality and continuing assistance we receive from ODF. There is no way we would have accomplished any of it without the on-going help from Stu and Tom. I've attached a copy of that Report and again thank your Agency for all the assistance. Respectfully, Jim CC Rick Gibson, Bill Lafferty, Stu Otto and Tom Andrade Exhibit Page of To: Mary Brown, State Forester February 15, 2005 Stephen Hobbs, State Board of Forestry Chairperson Re: Appeal of Oregon Department of Forestry's Use of National Fire Plan Funds As residents of communities most at risk for fire, we are appealing your Agency's recent decision to deny our neighborhoods a chance to compete for federal funds to address these risks. As you know, the Western States Grants Program administered by ODF, is made up National Fire Plan funds that are suppose to ensure that Oregon's most at risk communities receive priority for funding for fuels treatment. Instead, ODF has funded itself and has excluded, for the last three consecutive years, communities at risk from any consideration for funding. Our communities are members of the Upper Deschutes River Natural Resources Coalition (www.udrnrc.org) that has also complained about the pattern of ODF decisions that have frustrated local efforts to reduce fire risks. Recent Histo Last spring, ODF and the Lapine Rural Fire Chief attempted to block our filing a Community Wildfire Protection Plan (CWPP) with US Forest Service and BLM to address the risks on adjacent federal lands. This fall, ODF's Administrative Rules covering private lands omitted most of the vacant lots in South Deschutes County that are undeniably this region's worst fire risk. Ironically, your Agency's policies are in stark contrast to outstanding service our neighborhoods receive from Stu Otto, the central Oregon service forester, and more recently Tom Andrade, the Implementation Coordinator of SB 360. Basis for Appeal / Complaint: Our appeal is predicated on three Agency violations: 1. your Agency's proposed use of NFP funds to hire state employees to implement state legislation (SB 360) 2. your Agency's choice to ignore the standards/norms of all the other states in the Western States grant program and 3. your Agency's failure to adhere to the NFP Goals and the Comprehensive Implementation Plan that were published in 2001 and 2002. Given the degree of non-compliance involved and the serious consequences to central Oregon's communities at risk; we request that this year's Western States grants be set aside and reallocated properly according to NFP and Western State Program standards. 1- Misuse of Federal Funds to Fulfill State Responsibilites While almost all of ODFs proposals mention implementing SB 360, three of the 10 funded projects very specifically describe it to be a primary purpose. ODF has failed to prioritize local communities at risk and has chosen instead to distribute this source of soft money around to the regional offices; most of which are documented to have far less risk than our rejected applicant neighborhoods. (Attachment A documents this pattern) While we agree the implementation of SB 360 is long overdue and very important to the extreme fire risk communities in Oregon; it seems a State mandate should be addressed by the Agency with State funds. We'd recommend you impose the $25/lot surcharge authorized by SB 360 to fund it's implementation rather than using NFP funds intended for communities at risk. Exhibit Page of 2- Failure to Comply with Standards of Western States Grant Program Your staff's claim to be following what are "common and acceptable" practices motivated us to research how other states use Western State Grant Program funds. With information provided by the Western State Program, we found no other state that denies access of the communities themselves to Grant funds. Moreover, ODF is proposing to fund 10 of your own projects, 7 of which are primarily to hire personnel for ODF based on a geographic balancing strategy. Neither the exclusion of private applications nor regional use of funds to implement a state law fit the guidelines published by the Western States Association. We reviewed data from all other states and talked directly to several of their representatives. The 2005 comparison with other states is as follows: Oregon totals vs Other states totals -# of projects for State functions 10 of 10 = 100% 1 for 58 = 1.7% -# to private at risk applicants 0 of 10 = 0% 34 of 58 = 59% In our view these numbers speak for themselves and demonstrate the degree to which ODF is "out of step" with all other western state agencies. (See attachment B for details) 3- Failure to Adhere to National Fire Plan Standards or Procedures There are three principle documents that describe the purpose of National Fire Plan funds and how those funds are be used. (All are available on NFP Website www.fireplan.govn • The August 2001 10 Year Comprehensive Strategy • The May 2002 Implementation Plan • The June 2003 Field Guidance: Identifying and Prioritizing Communities At Risk. All three clearly suggest that interface communities at risk (like ours) are the primary target for NFP funds and that each state agency's prioritized list of these communities be the basis for state level funding decisions. None contain language suggesting NFP funds are now to be used to shore up state agencies. All three heavily stress a collaborative approach between government and non-government entities that we feel is lacking with your funding decisions. Example #1: The requirement that state agency's, by June 2003 and after, "Develop and maintain an accurate prioritized list of all communities designated by states as being at risk for wildland fire" page 16 of Implementation Plan. Oregon Department of Forestry claims not use such a list because it is out of date. (The only and non -prioritized ODF list appears in the August 17, 2001 Federal Register and includes none of our extreme risk neighborhoods) Obviously, the State's preparations for implementing SB 360 has required some sort of prioritization of risk. Without it, how and why did ODF identify Deschutes County as the initial pilot site for SB 360 implementation? Example #2: The requirement that state agency's `ensure communities most at risk receive priority for hazardous fuels treatment". Quoted from the Action Plan from Goal #2 of 10 year Comprehensive Strategy. Instead of priority inclusion, the applications from Deschutes County's most at risk neighborhoods in received priority exclusion from any consideration for funding. For each of the last three years, private applicants have been placed at the very bottom of ODFs list of priorities. Your Agency claims the need to build Agency infrastructure and regional staffing to implement SB 360. We acknowledge that need and will strongly support your efforts to obtain State funds from the Oregon Legislature. However, these Western States Grant Program funds come from NFP that mandates priority be given to hazardous fuels treatments in Oregon's communities most at risk. We don't have alternate sources of funding and, therefore; insist that we be provided a level playing field to compete for funds intended for our communities at risk. Exhibit Page of ---7 Given the severity of the crisis we face in and around our communities (that is significantly exacerbated by ODF omission of vacant lot coverage) and the critical importance of NFP funds needed to address it; we see no other option than to challenge your use of these NFP funds. Proposed Remedv: We first talked to the administrators involved (Young, Lafferty and Gibson) pointing out the problems, provided them our data, and offered a specific unpublicized solution (which allowed a year for them to make revisions). They rejected our proposed remedy and, instead, made the claim to be "in solid alignment" with both the NFP Implementation Plan and the Western State Grant Program. Our research has found very little alignment and; therefore, urge you to reread the three documents mentioned above prior to deciding on our appeal. We next talked to the regional office of NFP and were informed that they did not have an "appeal procedure" appropriate to addressing this situation. They suggested we contact the regional Western State organization that has responsibility to review and approve state's actions. We then contacted this year's chair of the Selection Committee of the Western States Grant Program and were informed that, they too, currently lack an appeal process for addressing this problem. He was careful not to support what Oregon has done with these funds and did admit that ODF could restructure this year's allocation from the Westem States grant program "based on new information". Our repeated attempts to provide your ODF staff with "new information" (items 1-3 above) have been ignored. As the Oregon residents living with these extreme fire risks; we are disappointed that your Agency has been so slow to implement the 1997 State Legislative mandate of SB 360 and has refused to address the worst risks on vacant lots. We are again dismayed that your Agency is so slow to implement the 2002 Federal NFP Implementation Plan and has ignored the federal requirements that gives funding priority to local communities at risk. The fact that, every year, ODF places all private applicants — regardless of risk - at the bottom of your ranking is ample evidence you are not following the current NFP Implementation Plan. Therefore, we request you properly reallocate this year's Western State Grant funds according to current NFP and Western State Program requirements. We look forward to your prompt response to this matter. ♦ Conrad Ruel 593-7493 representing Deschutes River Recreational Home Sites #1-5 ♦ Dean Drabin 593-2745 and Al Randolph 598-2841 representing Oregon Water Wonderlands I and II ♦ Jane Hayhurst 536-1816 and Regan Olson 536-8069 representing Deschutes River Recreational Home Sites #6 CC. Governor Kulongoski, State Representative Chuck Burley State Representative Gene Whisnant State Senator Ben Westland Exhibit Page of 1o`r Annandiv n – Rar_kernund on Oregon's Allocation of Western States Funds OD F Ran Non- Government Scope of Work $ Amt Government Scope of Work $ Amt 1 ODF * E. Ore. Coordination $202K 2 ODF * E. Or SB 360 implementation $133K 3 ODF * Cen Or" ` $133K 4 ODF * Staff for SB 360 Implement. $130K 5 ODF * Staff to coordinate SB 360 " $122K 6 ODF. * Staff to Coordinate n " " $128K 7 ODF Bly / Klam Co.Fuels contracts $50K 8 ODF * E Lane staff for SB im lemen $152K 9 ODF Wallowa Co. "Fuels tx $245K 10 ODF * Marion Co. implem of SB 360 $189K 11 Deschutes Co* Staff for Co educ. & demo $51 K 12 Umatilla Co. Fuels reduct. and education $252K 13 ODF * Seas staff for Sis, LPA Bend $99K 14 Union Co. County wide fuels $257K 15 ODF * Staff to devel Biomass Utiliz $187K 16 Deschutes Co Fuels treatment on County lands $260K 17 ODF Klamath Co fuels treatment $100K 18 Josephine Co* Staff for education & outreach $151 K 19 Baker Co ? Baker Co. fuels reduction $257K 20 U of O * Educ. For NE & So. Oregon $51 K 21 Deschutes Co. Fuels tx on private lands $309K 22 ODF Crews for So Des Co fuelsTx $309K 23 ODF Sister area education $12K 24 ODF– Salem * Website Devel & Implement $479K 25 ODF – Sisters Pass-thru to Des. Co fuels tx $185K 26 ODF– So Cas Staff for educ & fuel contracts $91 K * 14 Projects that appear to supplement agency functions 27 DRRHS 1-5 Fuels Reduction $215K < Highest risk in State ! 28 DRRHS #6 Fuels Reduction $133K 29 OWWI & II Fuels Reduction $213K 30 Pond Pines Fuels Reduction $176K Non Government Organizations Total $737K Government Agency's Total $4.5 Million *Of the 10 funded, all 10 are proposals from ODF, ranked by ODF, and 6 are for ODF staff. 2 others are for CWPP development/coordination and only 2 are primarily for actual fuels reduction Exhibit Page _,f5— of Appendix B — Background of Use by Other Western States State by State Comparisons of Use of Western States (NFP) Grant Funds Alaska # of funded projects that are for State agency functions 0 of 5 # of funded projects that are given to private applicants* 5 of 5 Arizona # of funded projects that are for State agency functions 0 of 5 # of funded projects that are given to private applicants* 3 of 5 California # of funded projects that are for State agency functions 0 of 6 # of funded projects that are given to private applicants* 3 of 6 Colorado # of funded projects that are for State agency functions 0 of 3 # of funded projects that are given to private applicants* 2 of 3 Hawaii # of funded projects that are for State agency functions 1 of 2 # of funded projects that are given to private applicants* 1 of 2 Idaho # of funded projects that are for State agency functions 0 of 4 # of funded projects that are given to private applicants* 2 of 4 Montana # of funded projects that are for State agency functions 0 of 1 # of funded projects that are given to private applicants* 0 of 1 Nevada # of funded projects that are for State agency functions 0 of 6 # of funded projects that are given to private applicants* 0 of 6 New Mexico # of funded projects that are for State agency functions 0 of 6 # of funded projects that are given to private applicants* 5 of 6 Utah # of funded projects that are for State agency functions # of funded projects that are given to private applicants* Washington # of funded projects that are for State agency functions # of funded projects that are given to private applicants* Summaries: Oregon totals vs 4 of projects for State functions 10 of 10 = 100°% 4 to private at risk applicants 0 of 10 = 0°% Oof15 10 of 15 0 of 5 3 of 5 Other states totals 1 for 58 = 1.7% 34 of 58 = 59% Exhibit Page Io of UPPER DESCHUTES RIVER NATURAL RESOURCES COALITION CWPP PROGRESS REPORT ON PRIVATE LANDS JANUARY 2005 HISTORICAL CONTEXT: In November 2003, the 13 neighborhoods of the Upper Deschutes River corridor (Sunriver to Wickiup) organized as a coalition to work collectively on the natural resource problems of the watershed. The initial concern was the extreme fire risks that existed in and around these communities. In December 2003, the federal Healthy Forest Restoration Act (HFRA) established new authorities for local communities to work with the federal land managers to address adjacent forests at risk of catastrophic fire and disease. In January of 2004, the Upper Deschutes River Natural Resources Coalition (UDRNRC) initiated the development of a Community Wildfire Protection Plan (CWPP) for the upper river watershed. In February, private funds were committed to hire David Blair to coordinate and write a plan for the Upper Deschutes Wildland Urban Interface (WUI). A committee of community, federal, state, local fire district and environmental interests worked from March through June to complete the Plan. After several jurisdictional disputes were resolved, the Plan was officially filed with the USFS and BLM on July 24th followed in early August by a kickoff event keynoted by Senator Ron Wyden. In late Spring of 2004, the Oregon Department of Forestry (ODF) announced plans to implement the Oregon Wildland Urban Fire Protection Act that requires private land owners in high fire risk communities to create fuel breaks around structures and lot perimeters. The UDRNRC has appealed ODFs omission of vacant lots from fire break coverage; and as of January 2005, the issue has not been resolved. In December 2004, the Coalition began a strategic planning process for all natural resource problems in the watershed. The primary purpose of the strategic plan is to develop a set of clear priorities to enable the Coalition to seek additional outside funding to address the identified problems. PROGRESS TOWARD FIRE RESISTANT PRIVATE LANDS (ORGANIZATIONAL DEVELOPMENT): Because of the federal mandate for "measures to reduce structural ignitability" and the State fuel break requirements; the challenge for the Coalition is to better educate, organize, and mobilize the efforts of private land owners. Exhibit__, Page -7— of �P� The Coalition has met monthly since November 2003 to develop strategies to reduce the fire risks on federal within the entire watershed as well as the speck neighborhoods. The Coalition applied for, and has tentatively been awarded, a National Fire Plan Planning Grant to assist neighborhoods to more appropriately organize to deal with the fire risks. The thrust of the grant is to enable neighborhood associations to upgrade the fire protection efforts and to incorporate specific requirements in their CC&Rs and Association By -Laws Out of the monthly discussions, each neighborhood has agreed to conduct a fire risk assessment and develop an action plan to create and maintain fire resistant conditions within the communities. Each neighborhood has also agreed to work with the USFS and BLM on their projects adjacent to their communities. As of January, 2005, all thirteen have established a fully functioning fire protection committees and all but 1 or 2 have fire risk assessors trained and certified by ODF. As of January 2005, four of the neighborhoods (Wild River, Fall River, Vandervert Ranch, and Crosswater) had pre-existing fire protection plans. The remaining nine neighborhoods, (Haner Park, DRRHS #6, Beaver Road District, River Forest Acres Road District, OWWI, River Meadowns, OWW ll, DRRHS #1-5, and Spring River Road District) have completed initial fire plans in the last year. Most of these plans will be updated and improved as trained assessors have a chance to review progress during the spring and summer of 2005. All thirteen neighborhoods have committed to 1. maintain a fire protection committee (under various names) to provide local leadership and contacts for local fuels reduction efforts, 2. support the collective efforts (CWPP) of the Coalition, 3. train neighborhood level assessors (ODF standards), 4. assess fire risks on both developed and undeveloped lots, 5. provide technical assistance to private land owners 6. monitor and report the progress of fuels reduction work within the neighborhood. 7. periodically update Risk Assessments and Action Plans based on new information and/or conditions in the neighborhood 8. review "self assessments" turned into ODF and compare with "conditions on the ground". PROGRESS TOWARD FIRE RESISTANT LANDS (FUELS REDUCTION / LOT): The Coalition neighborhoods have unofficially adopted the ODF goals of having 100% fire resistant developed lots in 2 years (by 1/2007) and 100% fire resistant Exhibit Page of (L�—% undeveloped lots in 4 years (by 1/2009). The goal for the common areas is to have these acres treated in 2 years. The Coalition has twice sought National Fire Plan funding for fuels reduction to assist with the clean up of private lots. Both applications — NFP in January 2004 and Western States in November 2004 — have been unsuccessful for different reasons. The January 2004 application for NFP funding was lumped with a large government project and priced out of the competition and the Western States applications were deemed ineligible for consideration by ODF's (highly questionable) review process and criteria. Listed below are data from each neighborhood relative to the established goals of 100% fire resistant lots in 2007 and 2009. The baseline data shown for January 2005 was provided by the local neighborhood fire protection committees based on "drive by" assessments conducted in 2004. The purpose of the chart below is to show a baseline and initial progress toward fire resistance lots. It is expected that these progress measures will improve with each report. When available, data on ODF certified lots will be based on owner self reports. NEIGHBORHOOD Jan 2005 Jan 06 Jan 07 Haner Park Fire Resistant Developed Lots Fire Resistant Undeveloped Lots Fire Resistant Common Areas Number of ODF Certified Assessors ODF Certified Developed Lots ODF Certified Undeveloped Lots Wild River Fire Resistant Developed Lots Fire Resistant Undeveloped Lots Fire Resistant Common Areas Number of ODF Certified Assessors ODF Certified Developed Lots ODF Certified Undeveloped Lots 39 of 49 (80%) 18 of? 7 of 71/2 acres 1 0 - Not currently covered by ODF 82 of 82 (100%) 91 of 97 (94%) All 30 acres (100%) 2 0 0 Deschutes River Recreational Homesite #6 Fire Resistant Developed Lots 16 of 160 (10%) Fire Resistant Undeveloped Lots 17 of 341 (5%) Fire Resistant Common Areas NA Number of ODF Certified Assessors 6+? ODF Certified Developed Lots 0 ODF Certified Undeveloped Lots 0 Exhibit Page of 1p-7 NEIGHBORHOOD Jan 2005 Jan 06 Jan 07 Fall River Fire Resistant Developed Lots 58 of 60 (97%) Fire Resistant Undeveloped Lots 60 of 60 (100%) Fire Resistant Common Areas Also 100% Number of ODF Certified Assessors 1 ODF Certified Developed Lots 0 ODF Certified Undeveloped Lots 0 Beaver Road District Fire Resistant Developed Lots Fire Resistant Undeveloped Lots Fire Resistant Common Areas Number of ODF Certified Assessors ODF Certified Developed Lots ODF Certified Undeveloped Lots River Forest Acres Road District Fire Resistant Developed Lots Fire Resistant Undeveloped Lots Fire Resistant Common Areas Number of ODF Certified Assessors ODF Certified Developed Lots ODF Certified Undeveloped Lots Oreaon Water Wonderland #1 Fire Resistant Developed Lots Fire Resistant Undeveloped Lots Fire Resistant Common Areas Number of ODF Certified Assessors ODF Certified Developed Lots ODF Certified Undeveloped Lots River Meadows Fire Resistant Developed Lots Fire Resistant Undeveloped Lots Fire Resistant Common Areas Number of ODF Certified Assessors ODF Certified Developed Lots 36 of 42 (86%) 0 of 51 (0%) NA 1 0 Not currently covered by ODF 27 of 81 (33%) 1 of 51 (2%) NA 1 0 0 96 of 175 (55%) 11 of 179 (6%) NA 1 0 - Not currently covered by ODF 123 of 164 (75%) 67 of 74 (90%) 80-90% 2 0 ODF Certified Undeveloped Lots - Not currently covered by ODF Oreaon Water Wonderland #2 Fire Resistant Developed Lots 350 of 550 (64%) Fire Resistant Undeveloped Lots 271 of 505 (54%) Fire Resistant Common Areas NA Number of ODF Certified Assessors 1 Exhibit Page _� of&Z NEIGHBORHOOD Jan 2005 Jan 06 Jan 07 ODF Certified Developed Lots 0 ODF Certified Undeveloped Lots - Not currently covered by ODF Vandervert Ranch Fire Resistant Developed Lots 7 of 15 (47%) Fire Resistant Undeveloped Lots 1 of 6 (17%) Fire Resistant Common Areas NA Number of ODF Certified Assessors 0 ODF Certified Developed Lots 0 ODF Certified Undeveloped Lots - Not currently covered by ODF Crosswater Fire Resistant Developed Lots Fire Resistant Undeveloped Lots Fire Resistant Common Areas Number of ODF Certified Assessors ODF Certified Developed Lots ODF Certified Undeveloped Lots 53 of 53 (100%) 39 of 39 (100%) 400 of 500 acres (80%) 0 0 - Not currently covered by ODF Deschutes River Recreational Homesite #1-5,7-13 Fire Resistant Developed Lots 317 of 647 (49%) Fire Resistant Undeveloped Lots 168 of 1291 (13%) Fire Resistant Common Areas NA Number of ODF Certified Assessors 5 ODF Certified Developed Lots 0 0 ODF Certified Undeveloped Lots - Not currently covered b ODF Spring River Road District Fire Resistant Developed Lots Fire Resistant Undeveloped Lots Fire Resistant Common Areas Number of ODF Certified Assessors ODF Certified Developed Lots ODF Certified Undeveloped Lots 65 of 74 (88%) 15 of 18 (83%) NA 1 0 - Not currently covered by ODF Since over 60% of the developed lots in the watershed are currently fire resistant compared to less than 30% for undeveloped lots, the untreated vacant lots are clearly the greatest risk. Since ODF's current Administrative Rules only apply to 17% of the Coalition neighborhood's 2750 vacant lots, the Coalition will continue to seek corrective action by the State of Oregon for their omission of vacant lots and to support Deschutes County's local efforts to address the problem. Exhibit Page of FIELD GUIDANCE Identifying and Prioritizing Communities at Risk Prepared by: National Association of State Foresters June 27, 2003 Purpose: To provide national, uniform guidance for implementing the provisions of the "Collaborative Fuels Treatment" MOU, and to satisfy the requirements of Task e, Goal 4 of the Implementation Plan for the 10 -Year Comprehensive Strategy. Intent: The intent is to establish broad, nationally compatible standards for identifying and prioritizing communities at risk, while allowing for maximum flexibility at the state and regional level. Three basic premises are: • Include all lands and all ownerships. • Use a collaborative process that is consistent with the complexity of land ownership patterns, resource management issues, and the number of interested stakeholders. • Set priorities by evaluating projects, not by ranking communities. References: 1. A Collaborative Approach for Reducing Wildland Fire Risks to Communities and the Environment. 10 -Year Comprehensive Strategy Implementation Plan. May 2002. (Goal 4 Task e: "Develop nationally comparable definitions for identifying at -risk wildland urban interface communities and a process for prioritizing communities within state and tribal jurisdiction.") (Available at: http://www.fireplan.gov/reports). 2. Memorandum of Understanding for the Development of a Collaborative Fuels Treatment Program. January 13, 2003. (Available at: http://www.fireplan.gov/reports). 3. Concept Paper: Communities at Risk. National Association of State Foresters (NASF), December 2, 2002. (Available at: http://www.stateforesters.org/reports). 4. Wildland/Urban Interface Fire Hazard Assessment Methodology. NWCG, undated (circa 1997). (Available through the NWCG Publications Management System (PMS), NIFC Catalog number NFES 1597.) Definition — Community at Risk: For the purpose of this document, a community is defined as "a group of people living in the same locality and under the same government" (The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language, 1969). A community is considered at risk from wildland fire if it lies within the wildland/urban interface as defined in the federal register (FR Vol. 66, No. 3, Pages 751-754, January 4, 2001). Exhibit Page JZ_ of _ Approach: 1. Identify communities at risk (or alternately, landscapes of similar risk) on a state - by -state basis with the involvement of all organizations with wildland fire protection responsibilities (state, local, tribal, and federal) along with other interested cooperators, partners, and stakeholders. Alternately, in some locations this may be more easily done on a geographic basis through the already existing Geographic Area Coordinating Groups. • Using the 2000 census data (or other suitable means) identify all communities in the state that are in the wildland urban interface and that are at risk from wildland fire, regardless of their proximity to federal lands. Ideally, the results of this effort would be displayed on a map or series of maps. • Develop state -specific criteria for sorting communities (or landscapes) into three, broad categories (or zones) of relative risk, using the methodology described in the following section. You also may want to include a fourth category denoting little, or no significant risk. • Prioritize the categories/zones as high, medium, and low. Alternately, a classification of very high, high, and moderate may be more appropriate depending upon fuel types. Again, you may have a fourth category/zone that you would prioritize as having little, or no significant risk. • Using the identified criteria, sort communities (or landscapes) into each of the three categories or zones of risk. The product may be map -based with lines or colors depicting the three zones on a map or series of maps. In this case, all communities that fall within the same zone would be classified as having an equivalent degree of relative risk. Alternately, in some states cooperators may choose to use a written document to display how communities have been classified, such as a simple spreadsheet or table. In this case, individual communities would be listed by name under one of the three previouslyidentified categories of risk. • If there are land ownerships that cross state lines (for example Indian Reservations or single, National Forests), it is important to coordinate the risk assessment process with neighboring state(s) to ensure consistency in classification. • After completing the assessment process for a specific community, strongly encourage the development of a mitigation plan to reduce the identified risks to the community, particularly for communities in the higher risk categories. 2. Annually, using available mitigation plans or another similar analysis process, federal agencies, state agencies, and tribes will each examine the lands under its own ownership or jurisdiction and, with the involvement of all interested parties, identify high priority fuels reduction and ecosystem restoration projects which have the potential to reduce the risk to a specific community or communities. 2 Exhibit Page LSof 3. Prior to May 1 of each year (beginning in 2004) state, federal, local, and tribal partners and interested stakeholders should meet to complete a joint program of work for the upcoming federal fiscal year. Jointly prioritize projects within each state using the collaborative process defined in the national, interagency MOU "For the Development of a Collaborative Fuels Treatment Program ". Assign the highest priorities to projects that will provide the greatest benefits either on the landscape or to communities. Attempt to properly sequence treatments on the landscape by working first around and within communities, and then moving further out into the surrounding landscape. [Note: In some of the larger states, this process may have to be initiated at the sub -state level first. The resulting lists of prioritized projects would then be reviewed by a state level collaborative group, who would develop the final, joint program of work.] • First, focus on the category/zone of highest overall risk but consider projects in all categories/zones. Identify a set of projects that will effectively reduce the level of risk to communities within the category/zone. • Second, determining the community's willingness and readiness to actively participate in each identified project. • Third, for each potential project, determining the willingness and ability of the owner of the land surrounding the community to undertake, and maintain, a complementary project. • Last, set priorities by looking for projects that best meet the three criteria above. In other words, assign a higher priority to those projects with the greatest potential to achieve a proper sequencing of treatments. Assign lower priority to projects where either the community or the surrounding landowner is unwilling or unable to actively participate. However, do not overlook opportunities around isolated, rural communities which may be at high risk, but not be organized well enough to effectively advocate on their own behalf. • Note: One reason for the collaborative priority setting process is the opportunity to identify complementary projects on adjoining ownerships which, if implemented, would provide a greater benefit to communities than if only a single project was implemented. However, nothing in this document is intended to prevent non-public landowners (such as Indian tribes) from implementing any project on their own lands, regardless of overall priority. 4. Annually document accomplishments both quantitatively and qualitatively. • Quantitative measures. Document accomplishments in accordance with the performance measures identified under Goal 4 in the 10 -Year Comprehensive Strategy Implementation Plan (page 15). However, the single, most important quantitative reporting element is the number of K3 Exhibit Page � of Il�� implemented projects that result in a significant and measurable reduction of risk to the communities and landscapes within the project area. In the longer term, it is important to document situations where a wildfire burned through an implemented project area, and determine how the treatment affected fire behavior. • Qualitative measures. Document examples of successfully implemented projects using the guidelines previously distributed by federal agencies and the NASF for "success stories". These "success stories" will then be placed on both the NASF and the National Fire Plan websites as examples how we collectively are reducing risks to communities. Methodology: Although there is no uniform, national hazard or risk assessment process, there are a number of valid assessment processes that may work well in individual states or regions. In developing a risk assessment process for communities, use the NWCG publication "Wildland/Urban Interface Fire Hazard Assessment Methodology" as a reference guide. At minimum, consider the following factors when assessing the relative degree of exposure each community (landscape) faces. One effective approach is to map the four factors below using adjective ratings (high, medium, and low) and then overlay the maps to determine geographic areas of highest hazard, highest probability of fire occurrence, highest values being protected, and lowest protection capability. • Fire Occurrence. Using historic fire occurrence records and other factors, assess the anticipated probability of a wildfire ignition in the vicinity of each community (or identified landscape) using an adjective rating system, such as high, medium, and low. • Hazard. Assess the fuel conditions on the landscape and surrounding the community using a GIS mid-level mapping tool (if available) or other similar process. Again, apply an adjective rating to each specific area. • Values Protected. Evaluate the human and economic values associated with the community or landscape, such as homes, businesses, community infrastructure (e.g. water systems, utilities, transportation systems, critical care facilities, schools, manufacturing and industrial sites, etc.) as well as high value commercial timber lands, municipal watersheds, and areas of high historical, cultural, and spiritual significance. As with the other factors, apply an appropriate adjective rating to each community or identified landscape. • Protection Capabilities. Assess the wildland fire protection capabilities, including the capacity and resources to undertake fire prevention measures, of all agencies or organizations with jurisdiction: federal, state, tribal, and local. Again, apply an appropriate adjective rating. Consider using the Insurance Services Organization (ISO) rating for the community as an indicator. M Exhibit Page of SUMMARY: Using the process described above, it is possible to assess the level of relative risk that communities in the wildland urban interface face from wildland fire. This can then lead to an efficient process for prioritizing and scheduling effective, fuel reduction projects. However, recognizing that the condition of the vegetation (fuel) on the landscape is dynamic, and that the resilience of communities to wildfire loss varies widely and changes over time, it is not only important and necessary to complete community assessments, but also to periodically complete re -assessments. The frequency of re- assessments, however, will vary considerably across the country depending upon fuel types and climate. We must remember that it is not only important to lower the risk to communities, but once the risk has been reduced, to maintain those communities at a reduced risk. Further, it is essential that both the assessment process and the prioritization of projects be done collaboratively, with all agencies with fire protection jurisdiction — federal, state, local, and tribal — and interested stakeholders, taking an active role. Exhibit Page Ite of `7 Exhibit Page of U-71 Exhib�gqo Pagef �D% . M . [� . N . Pry . . Ln . . . . v • • `� ..ti73 o � O cd o U Ei w A U u Exhib�gqo Pagef �D% Exhib��Of Page _ � M C O b U~ � yy � o � v � •,� v v �' v OV C � J � � •.y N G u� N � CL Vt to 0 OV V/IP 71 p C v m41 ;, ecu p bA 'oWD p ti � O DA +� 't7 u� C a '.O 'd 71 cd v RI Q d c C C .-, b0A c+. m s� Ei Wcl cd b u v tl `a C v o.° v4, v ^rJ C d c p o 0 ' ^C V� bA c`Jd i� cra v °' o .47 c -o 71 . tlqj Li•i �� '� O V � N O� 0 0 <n V"d L Q y v v O 71 I�j C d °a ' lw L%� O 4. ¢' v ¢� ff tY°J Qa •� y a� v� O t -4. o C p cd � V Q a. - ^b ro a> • v o v -a � .� o v cd co C a bA N yCj" C p �+p" , F. V O Exhib��Of Page _ O 12 u 04 O G i 110. v u q O u u. Xy .d i� C O ti+ ct7 v W v v z1 w 3 bOp `C u •� v O iCOvi s O° ru cd H u G. C�1 R V) y thOtyyA �✓ 0 AJ y v G�1 ° u 4 o b lU C O O v [ r t/ Q a u �p bio cis Cd 7� v ~ y C N v u4 Cd O 04 o H ucoo u v d u ° o ca v 4� 4+ yo C C- o y u 3 0. V i -d � d o C° ° `� ° ° -tea > c°i u Ou Cd cd v v e w b°A 9 O O S H O O cud —. +bv 'v -tj o vi O O C .�- h al v-: o ,� c :o o .� Qj cd XCJ N • v Q w N L'" o Cts.. ..o a 04 .n o I'd � °' c u a 3 v - v ' -o °�'cl -� v v- o o H " a c�. v ai m 41 C: O p cs b o v w m o �. v o A. o v N o 'd o �, v i ' �,,, U ❑ 'TJ cud ai �" u u �. v 0 •'" • Zn v 61 cid v y ^y ce3 v u b g O h + v, u L, O �• sp^ 0. ..�. 4i 4�, . b vyi ° C �4 v Q `C� � ,y' U V u v O rL O end ' G v1a u �` L v .s' �. u H a �. .0 r cd V) ci v V] .5 cd P-.4 v Ra o a 0 o e� 41 140. Exhibit lq- Pageof Lo ° !U 1 N 11 ` V -111 w 1 ' V V - v o 14 41 v, Cl., v '`2✓ •Ci v '� a..+ 4!.� v {� O U v G7 a qj v w Q w v U '� ami ^p c y o VOO W O U y V) �py U Q ai IU tV ��y' "Ci . fl rte' ' cC ..u. +.+~-•�, ''� ,�.� -Lf • � ° Cy.1, � n.. y��" � N �"w... ami o �`" � ,:+ .M bA ` v "d° 'tJ v y v o cv o " u o o- _v � 0 3 0~ o v' -0 O. o° V � u 'y ^�7 rJ 'm v- p — 0 C14w Q 4j o ° 44 5 n >~ O D U v D p Cd s. + Q " -a G co v 0, y v, t� O O 'C3 Cd 4� V~ a. o o o v `d b y v w TI OA `n L o cn w b o h c'" o L �y O U V Q DG di R� ��..(U.� (v A o y �, v v -tea v y yo �•i x.11 s~/! cacu va u -d a v o o— Q a 8 o CIO48 a0i o v U L a Ls 1v v .G c�1 <`V y o 4.1 7 ucl OO V � / d may+ sv. i&" a 1� � � v vii � C U ❑ acv C �v, _E b..A t1. y ~ ° O ? v °U II� p ai v t0 U a U 41 v, ° O V� O /^�i"�`� a�y�i � • � p � ' V � a�"i "�' b�`A 0)ami �' v .� � "U 0 'U C. Exhibit -- Page -D— of a o~ 7-- 1 1 o -Y _ ` ro U tr .CL. v Cd +r Ln H � cn ro O s ?� �•+ V U LZ bn 'd >y 4 p bn O v v •� ++ { C v v ro41 L ? TJ v ns v O14 o O v G C ?. Q s• � 0.4-7 b c U p N v bo u y v E O *v+ C 6 s; o h Q c4. qj U c - ~ y U ca3 C bA +r. .� O bA ro v�S Svc Uc O ctl v C J U v"i y 00 �' y C ^. C 0 i. CJ O b y a O O c'd v0 r" V v cti ti b " :a � U N o . - z e cj � � o � � o � � v o -d o a, U " aoi o o a' °" a ton 3 crov C tn v n' b o Cdc '� tin ° a o ^b H o bn d C c 0 o ' y ° ° 3 � ° tin • � � a `� vbn .� w � m � v w v4-3 w �' a d v a ro t- c:, ocd ^d C auA a tC '"= cdCd ° . >~ ed C '� ro tvA ►- c° vs CL ,ro b L v `yi' t.' �O c�'d 4�J '.'. C �% °U tl' '-' v O :� pco c� o 0 C r O v :� `b •� •no O yC14 a o a ca c h U Ccu cl y O 2. u v U w N vs v ,. v Cd X.�: o °��w v V '�., • s.. 2 � N 4J � a.. � � v '' ° • t,3 c0 cd ..c.�' Q} ;� •� .Jy. C� N cd u >"r t,OV v �, tti a w o E -a cl o 0 _n • -• �, cC c� v N J. 3 Exhibit Page of (o'% p N C cd O U J 4. 79 v �i v Z7 O 54 • o o o G c7) p• C ca O v D o v C u Cl O. V O O fi --ZSti bA bA cd z . p O C 'd O' J O 7 o, Q u0 v 4Z p O L O p bA v O � u s; y o� •.N '� ' � �, � � � wbr ..� f.7.. ' bA I ami C a� v '� O y O CL, v b4 U O u O 'V -� �°{ v zt v cn C N 4 ,::4 aU�! v Gl p bA H to a w �. �. 0 Gr v b (1 �`� � CLI C*0 N 461 +'O+N ed vL4- CU v bA Cd ten, ... � O „ � c«, � y� o ..V � � '„ � � � •b � �., ,� � _� o '� 44 eo o z u ? w a J 'd L , p� v -4. Q o U N u n yj 43 p p p^ L t. �� �+" a •,° " y'37_1 l0 Ln 'O h O w o e 4y a �t CA pr. v o y r _, bA v Q o a " b�Ard O�o �tr 41 . G v� O O. l '44 V •5 v 2 110 tv 64 "f -I O o qj .�• O C LU. � H H t9 b w Exhibit Page pll;�_ of Exhibit Page of ED p w O cd O a •+:+ 4^ bb C. a0i u b tea+ a" t4. 'd `' O LS. .•-i C a,CU L8 t .-::3 bA cid -r,, a 'J O t! ��A O i" C O w v CLQ v ccd • � u u .,J• v O � � � y �O„ i� • O• •� rO." N 4., 4 s.. cud > u 7q bA"- C�O a b � v °Ard cz u r o v •r. sem. t." ...0 "CJ 4J ..O �c .� �+" .0 y 0 U O w > 0 r.-10cad' O Chi u �+ a � �vA' � t,,, � v � -� O j • o •� u O CU cd cud ;� S].' CO v O bA O O. y tt ° ° �L L o Cl. P L •.., �A �° ivy o, a •"1 -C. it fiA 4.1 • r'? • ~ W 'OG v °�' v w v b°A W, lab b°A cn o Exhibit Page of_ a� 'L u y V u O a`3 O ro O L u Cti xiu V " N V O a O L •C O .b .. p" 4 u O on •� 0 y L o � o _ w u 0-4 y y N .V4. U T y Gam! V v: cid 4_ to u O A 7� G O O h 4+ 'O C �O v � , V u d � b�A G C W C n ct 41 qj y 2 W C .L" rn �d V"❑� GA (J O O U p p cd qLj � O 0 C-1 Exhibit /+ Page p of -622-_ F; V c L V v O '� CJ r rJ w J O U u "c bfJ N L-4 a: I � y U � tUd .17 C O �y t4- H C U ,n O O r 6i, a C a •u y C O ca+ "8 bf c b [1 O v aCi rLw 4, C7 . b Cd O a x� O v .a w O �xw J � F; • Exhibit Page _je_ of & c L V v O CJ � J O U u "c N L-4 a: 4�4 .17 0. y O O C z a y C O ca+ [1 O v aCi rLw 4, 'Cf cd t6 Cd O a O v a w V ¢J y Q CJ Q • Exhibit Page _je_ of & 0 e`3 C; Exhibit Page 4910 of (p`' r 71 3 > 7:1 u J pA ,J u _ ca Q b ' G u cu ti JJ ✓1� � W � m w o y ; o N Q h iu.. Cd tin L O u Q � O r 10 • v .- C. r C > G _A C u Q —,,,. v r v o O J V :, •iK O Q CA U vG e`3 C; Exhibit Page 4910 of (p`' 71 3 > Q. pA O _ ca 'd b ' G u cu � � m w o y ; o N Q Q h iu.. Cd tin L O u Q � O r 10 e`3 C; Exhibit Page 4910 of (p`' c� 0 u v V. (u L+" a� a, u 0 Exhibit} Page L� of &71 v N u 0 0 •� U r u J cUi u J cd bA , r G 7d � o cz Qd ry � ,7j ,r., v U ,amu. '✓� V J v O � —y o J, CL N O -b! " C a 'b 0 U 80 :� J � •~ U 4� C7 IZ; U •t c� 0 u v V. (u L+" a� a, u 0 Exhibit} Page L� of &71 3 Exhibit f9- Page �(Z of (� r-1 C] H U CA � O o 0 •� v bA m o m h o cd si O .�4 y� y ✓) O ' j 0 V ._ v 0 ✓� o v 4, cu O .7J� uu44 O4,1VE t 3�- -ro O O L O.� .K fl. . .0 X bA C a . "n V t j C O O U O byA ro cd �-.CS O V� + Q v Ei •[ Q v 00 v1,4 O O O O v +, p. w 0' 4 U•V 'S. CL, nZ a ,cd 0 w .S Oj _ °o-u��� V • bOA L," Ct O O 44 O cd `•"' ••d rd N V 0 C O ¢+ 0 0 U 'bA•� w 0 EO 0 :.^ Q .� 0y 1.E Lvi ' y lea 0 3 L �� U t7. U U ..Cy ti ucd b iZ ++ 0 a�n IJ ••V Q% w0 17 G O v O L1, O ^cd O O O v Rd 14 O N Q V 411 2 4"3 ctl d A cOe TJ Q . ' s� va�i O cd �;O y0 � � ': • � U ►� , l C v 0 O ami c b rd v ' V U cd O L' O v CJ i O V U Cb �O v 4`3 z�.., x' U 3 Exhibit f9- Page �(Z of (� r-1 C] 41 h V u v "C1 Cd cu O .7J� v L cOa cd r O4,1VE t 3�- O.� .K fl. . .0 X oEi U a . "n V cd bA O ' r. 0 �-.CS O V� + Q v Ei •[ Q o v o� O O O v 4 U•V 'S. CL, O v a ,cd 0 Um _ °o-u��� C bVA'� CVOA Q O cd `•"' ••d rd N V 0 r. o 3 Exhibit f9- Page �(Z of (� r-1 C] fy E p p v O_O cd og Q.- Q v C u n Zi n cd a bA v p 71 O n N O v 41 p• .� U4 r,• o v o C •� v v v � o U v 3 0 3 cd �c O O CS bow 'C1 � L1. ~ rte. }' v ••T.y+ b�vA 'v 'n t3 f1. :0, �-t v ..>. M y bA tj v 'C} O y Obn v v up a w ' p i .S O 4C O^c� 0 C , v i"' U4 bbO 'Ty - cid jJ O v O v [ v$ N I . p v a C]. v v cd '�' ��"i > CL r CU w ° ^b O bA o O v y O C 'mss v -4 yy� .-�. v fd ^tl 7� �" p �•r U _v ti 751.0 QJ . 0 4 �VC y r v �j ;> �y Vi 'V tr C6 -V o " �c a v v v 91'--aa t� o �L O 0 0 Qj p, o u v b o° -a ai o -vs o Q U u o~ 0 w bb's`. Z a e v O is . v y ou O a0i v u `� v v, ,, v b v v c� "� U —80 Vyyyj f o (p� :r Ltl� Qi O H p C bA lu is, cd E v, O :1„ A, QF9.o CS. Exhibit Page L3L_ of /j —1 rj nn u y O , x •1:1 iw E. i= U a Elln 3 o v a s4 o o N o -o .41 o v v° ra ? L1 u rL b 2� o u v v bv '� 3 v nn w o o o v tuna o, +' ^. -ty ., cv c v o Cd cu v O v b o u v G Q a ,� v :? o v V ..a � i z; a o~ w°" bp O v •o cd vU s. o o v o 0 0 7� L ..� u sem. c� .� ..O � ..-�. • � V � - o u 04.4 1 o c -t�r r3 aa tv � 'b •� aj u . 73 m a � o.Z M co° b o ` u� 0n A„p X o o Ln " rl CL 0 V U ani > '� W p ``. ani to" -c` td ' u w O cd O ia .:; t� � E""' • � :.� . � b • C7" i," v C., � y •i'+i Q Q Sa ° v L nn d 4J X,• ° u. V (�vCj OCvJ�J (� �c��vn U iv u ty 0 %or 422 cd J5 L b� b ^� a> o >> b cd o -o KI- v v 3 UU u o N o ^ci c nun U cd -°d u °�' 0 .r� v a+ o o, o73 co w u o u v "� u nn b �, y ro LJ w v b po" `rJ G qj 41 In O '0 nn v' v n. L o o `a Vai a `a°J V Ev`O' -'v> UO v v 5co "d °O O °` w 04 0. a =. u1w aE Q 3 oc- d a� rA p Exhibit Page `�� of 6`7 J" v d o 0 v 46 o t� i. U u bA U O i. b y ; O 7� ti to44 O O bOA f4 O CO (U 41 �41c� cd O '�0., csl ^� u 2. v v� a`3 a. . i (7 u O N N (0) L� b�IJ U O v cid q)N bA A,' U ^v 0C7 u0 O O u O O U .� O c U V b N a+ v v, cd �+ cid v00cl '� p 30 OVA 4+ Cd v O w v [ O &. v 0 3 0 o� C o � w u ° � N � U4 0 04 -d u o . � � t-4. G an E o 0 0 o o .. w v o ° o 0 O 4 q) - COV 0 +°may' °V' 14 Ov V v" c V ° U4 cOd o vO 4S 00 44 w O C h U., y bo d y^ v .0 w 0 f�, v�+ ��. v u" ate+ C • -V. U 1.4 4, L""0 L4 p per+ p Cd U a. ° ani L4A 3 C ani H H4 o o o qq� o - " S cam, v v r u a r� a; 0 w .a � u, n. o w a' ria - a Exhibit Page <,-2Z3 of/ % Exhibit Page_ ofl �� z A4 r.m i Exhibit Page of -L�—j �. oQ F�1 a 0 U •) C) U O O O b A W V U � ° v ox o I z n. o �,bD It obh � .° v �. un �D o El .� 42 %z w i O bOA t] w O C3 a+ •tij w i, � O � � •'d � � 'd �c .O O r 'd o � 14, 71 z v o �+ 140. I y ° N v v � v ° OV5 -° w+ 04 W (Q O 14.014 � ° 17 4-1 p V) -(4 .- a `� o w bA r y [3W O A-+ yam.., Gn Cn .� W 42 O o ti 0 a h Q a4 W-4' U • 1-4 F U 42 V O U ❑ a" N a� O 0 ;e- w° V-) Q w Exhibit Page of -L�—j v G1 w 41 04 V r. U v ..W Q� Cdd" Q v w O .4 rA 0 Qj v b -cJ � 3 O o o. 'a °' v 71 O !]. 1 ^� w O o v w O 'V ° � �D NO o v • w u+ O ° U qj w �cu o W-40 7� ° u W C)� p v v 3 2 (�^ 9 1.J a 10 Q n w °�' an ° W� �o ` 0 w° �°� 0 ;; v a�� v a3 �" S bn � o v ti �C1 Q o�°n 5 0.4� C1 bn o� - o . � v - c� � w vin v c!1 ►• o '-� z �C=4 z U4.�\ x 9 Exhibit--b----�'�/� �_ C, o .b a, o ° -o El � v 7 v 0 o a C7 0 v Cd -v Cd o o41 ° U Q.1 ' C ca v d cit o ¢pJ�,� V a 04-1 k o W o v ro Gi 3 3 ;; cd w aj w w o 0 o U V� y w o f o� U :� o w U w 9-4 cc U Cdv . 0 � 0 �+ O° v w vu, op O Vi X v O / v �" �" • `J ° ° t' U v v L . � v "L��+S+ u ' 0 ' ° � �+ o '� n om.+ . V ° O V C. " is O v c� ed at Q , cd td C� U L." m Qj -Cd -L4.� O O v 42 0 .b v; w 2 .0 0 o°Un'� v °M' > v Q C7 ° w° �` ° 4 o o F" o `" U 0 C7 °°' Q V o° v °" Q� y l --I C a o v o cn c Y z `n ai b vio a 4D U o bnn .( —,u° v v o o o 3 o -2 U b u' u o �, E3 xUUAwwC7xx O� 0'°'a� a �cn14 �. AH 0o C7 WU��.-,uUll-, c-,cna�--,�►-,Qaaacn� � x Exhibit Page,FD77 of Lj;�j_ [� b�A r -•cd • c U o o o o v v N v~i :j -d A w -v O 0 w ''O' O O O O v 4J lu O9 .2 O p N ti cj) vii V Li. Q Q O V fn +v. p ;> v N wo ;>w° '� a, r v o U °� v U Z w o g w 1 er•A•QJ NC�Q�Ad �w Q5 o U , -u. 48 �Uwo rd o °OZ�o'd Z� w -dU vu�a Q q �' $W viva ��"� (j -d Q`n cd *a� v w v o o b o m, 14 cis as ca aaVUUAwwi�wxxxo°%o-O-% zzzQDCY �c: c° Exhibit 14 Page_ of & b ƒ + V� § � ® 't V t .- ° ° ( E A § 2 § • 2 u o w § �D 2 (51 V) » �D q H H k QD 2 V5 V) V) V)V) m w W � 2 Exhibit - pa e 0 Exhibit Page i -07 N O N Cv Poo* W o � Exhibit Page i -07 LdF Exhibit Page L41 of w � N rn h ti " m G C5 � a O c to o rz U G s o ti U to y °5vaoo"�' a o rz o o z y v z a G � G s� b0 G N V p _o Chi SZ rz 'Q Exhibit Page L41 of d 00 O .-- C- , 00 r, N N �`- > F a F v Cd p7 O f L � C. 5 'C! Ltvi w O � 60 L Lv' � o . � U C4 o � w W 4-a M -A0-0 rA rA a 4> C a Exhibit Page 14Z of to -I ti �^ Co cd 6 z IQ$cd v 0� w a •y w V5 N O 4z tu y v o?i •i 'd N v I=d o� i F CtS ' = z7 Cd cd Id cu o 4.L a `z > cd d 4.0 V •� A p .,., v � ,.O .O Cd y u Q GI -; O ^ ��y 44 "+ cd n w 04° aCdw v � b v 4; ti 3 tC p avi ai r o ° Id v Exhibit---A- Page xhibitAPage L43_ of to--l— cd Cd � U cd q to cc as I�d Vf L6 cd O iC3 ca it (3y y= ai cta mctl Cd Q o a va c) cd o i o cc o Cd aw o d°n D Cd . > O Id CJ ,O ESS O > O C vGi O N N •� O C7� spa cd Cl, � -ILI •� •� ccf Cd o m r czo L E al •�} ,� co, O G Ge a>, y vi L9 bac�_� (AGO) fj �L+ N COO G W r O ,� ceS C� O Q bA .CCA +� .fl ami y O y Q S1 C lz ccts O y �+ f3" p �O codyr O uU 'CS .CJ cd 0 c a-°' • • Cd cp �-iNM4 N r+NM Cd C p O w S+-. m Exhibit Page LAI -4 of 1P� �a U cd ox Cd "0 a; u; U � N C,J cc 1114O a 4 CO I Cd cdO A 1-4 Cd Q �-o o Q 0 Ln U 0 cd 'al Cd U 0 Cil cd �, CZ O �A O tn O U fin. , 'A CIA 0 Cd U a. cd Cd E. cid N ci 4.° J o � � ccdL ~ O ,>1 o �rs rn w u U O U Q -d • Exhibit__ Page L45 of (,p—I 0 O y O 0 0 CUC N o Cd cl, a, 72 cd cd ^O U Cd Cd 0 ° 3 y ° o i a;o O Cd b C U U Cd v vFi O s tw cid .n by U ��I Cd "� 'C3 U O � 4 Cd -ca cd .��" '� N 0 OD U U O � O ^t7 L7 U G U `Cd C* 'S7 •= 4•yy 7 U ^ U 0 O O U U bA U cd a O n cd U ai cc > U O Q -r� F .•o U � � � � ami Exhibit__ Page L45 of (,p—I i5 n CnC +U U p 4? U +�- :. "C7 v cd od ay y, > v two t �L�'+ �p ca to �v �O cG ' fL A v O ^cs t~ �' bA R3 O 0 to N Co O � 9 U 4� N +� �O tc3 Cd v RS P. Q E� ? O N bA cC �S N Q+ N bA £y O i CI1 y Ocd a 0czC,3 0. U O CUU 3 1 -- v C's+� Cd O. cd U rJ y1J O ^C cdcd 1-4 Z3 v cd v bA O ? p cclCd > cC R%co t O v tH b 43 cd �, a � i b �, � chi • n � � � ,� v � �+ � o 0 ca>' �• a .0 oCA bA o v O �U 4UU tv. 3 ' > v z7 U N �O b N O V bA C14~ N w;l 12 z: o 5 Cd pca S O O U cz U t3+ ti Vl Cd v• v bA h .S r% E�-y N •� � 3 H 3 a Exhibit Page of (�Z � y o Cd to to 'LJ G cl Cd O C3 O . Ln cd pA U !� bU O p •� rUn ccs � Id � N U cz i•+ "d U O H � .fl N � Cd U cd t� HO > ^$ 'w cd co Cd � a o Cd O �+ O cd C%� O d Cd � U H .O Cd Cd. O E c: co co y 0 O O 0 ^O Cd rA Cd O G CD U O GA ai a U 00 Q w 0 Exhibit Page l_ a— of 10-1 m b � bA •� v o � .?` � �cd v a� � Cd U 4.bA «t + + OCd v tb t; C Cd chi o � 'A � 4- JQCd Cd O � � F., , � per,,, byA O � p • � � � o� 0 tv j o tooR x•30 .0 00��,� to O ccz o Cd Q C3+ 't1 v v: r+ 's .! cdU A L7 O ? I.., — = tN.cd cd CL 0 cd I-rl c° Zn " a tzlO to ctl cd cd V O O L1 O CO,O N ¢, 3 booti a -tj .� cd al 7�5 Cd od w cd w '� ed Cd u —cdo o a U o! cd R" ObA O O O M o bcd as cd i T7 u _O cd 9 O Cl .�-. �- �� fes`,' c�C C� t1 £, ;> y •� try A O V b°A" N trod �� moi. a y10. COC z Exhibit Page of IQ e dl w w n fi bn v, v 71 cd Cd crica co 0 Cd s~ ccs vi • � p cz 7E, cd 4-4 rA ru Cd U°>,'- a° Cd 0 cd f� Q. o cd 0 3 a own w r. a`ai bn40> Cd 41 gz bb (474 O � w � °' .=. �. � � .� -C '3 v � 3 ',t„i .�••.. � ren O O w O. O Q CS ° "tp co r. [— O w Octl O .,1:7w si y b Q, L jnj l 'd 4" t 4.4 4.4 4-4 4cl tr W 0 w 4, . 3 .� O O d a' C u 0 boo w w* O cd w Qs~ w o� ; a o c m �ZaZQ aiJ,a �4 0 +- O cq-4= t-�' OO �" +•++ f- _ N ��. � sem„ a w cd C' •O00 s w a Exhibit Page Lof (�� � v ( O y � > ro � O U � c> a H c O O N = ZI ti ti o° N~ � W F. T3 W ,aHyi O � o x tj O Uj Y o•O� v as G 41 , 4a b 0 Z .. U N M cd re Ll O O O v cn (Cd al W 0 cd �D U cd i .�, d — O -cs . •Y O U W 0. 'C7 ml ca O 2 O U �+�° 0 v Ab L.d Cd M 4-4 N O 4-4 0 0 o W OZr� W }W � � v M a o Q cj rA 0 r y r C) LL S a 6> O o � 0 M � , a? O O, N Cd . w z cd to rW .� OA ~ W CO W 0 d Y ter. is Oj cd 0 O IX d b *+ e Cd L �cc0 cl b a cd +' 0 y Q� Exhibit_ Page�L of IP_ F Exhibit Paged of rn a b � rA cd U a .-. O O O CIS r -r CdO G ed O � N u c o E tmp cd rA Cd cri cd O O O RS .a, O G .� �+F 4- + + + N ^J tw 4-+ z:� oa N O UZ1 cd ^O U Exhibit Page sP53 of 621 G 0 cs 0 cz o W a o cc y Cd y cd � i. p � . �n +� O C qcd sz ccZZ: cd bb OR Zs aUi .'O�y- 'C w �% v cd ^CY CA 0 cdcj Cd . O S, fes" N C; cd UEn 42 o 2 O a � o v o o c,_, cd N ? +- cy V V M cd O = Q CD Z! 0� codCZ O p �" v1 rn sw T7 s� tli!O C to 14 "C c, rn O = a ce el �. >, . m a y10. 44-4 CI p -,0k,, p to O O O +�+ '�""+ +�+ •� FI o� p, O O O ;� o � «� � .� boy ,� � �•' o o �yy v�, o °�y � oa��y� N Q% Q� r.% Q% iy/ Q% i•! • N U M ' w�'i ° V w cl PC =Msz o aaaa.a oa �Ua o aoiV�l oUa Cd v o 0 U . f) co � � a o � � o rz G.1 3. CG t? Cd as 8� a Irk Exhibit Page .5-� of & Cd cri o Q rA N O N cC .D A tri U; in O tocdN c,0_, � � • � O O � w O � O O Z N vN w `aj 0 O w y co cO Cd 4 F cti > o v 'b > O >_ w • o 3 ,� o +�"+V O', uo o 4-4 'd w u oN Q O� ��o.� o Q o apn. CD (ov� °aCd H ° w UV) N 03 rj� go In, ITZI eq � S acd a cd p b o.�s�o° oro+ a ado -dbo'N c °°a a .G at v ' N A +�+ cd cq cm 1. co.ocd .CC 'b r" �, EO aw rn O la, Ua� 1:14 ���a� ova o ova o� o� p° r.w c> v ci t Exhibit_ 14 Paged of�� Exhibit Page,�5(o of �_ o � v � cct N CIS v � v o v aS 0 o. U +y ~ 0 0 � y 'C7 ec3 cN � 00 > o .� c N O vi a5 '�-. v, �+ N O b X;' b, ayi o O b o o �, o v O > a�a� aj asp Q•�+ o J ai � as v y a0Ed u O 4W y y th tea.; :,wa. v bA 0 ,°U of ��w >'d 44 S c�3 0 Ua� v�s��,Ow is ^O o cv £ r oUa�-Ij o . o NUa ra. �Ua� �Ua� b � � c) w > cqg a a o U v m A a U. w Exhibit Page,�5(o of �_ rA rA 0 � 4-a ..r°CIS .° � 'v H '*•� �; vii , y � a� a a o 7 � o ar o O 3 +, m O O Cd y .+ 40.to cd H L" p 'C 7C1 ca 4-+ TS cidV cd N n G �+•+ H G G cd N N � N H Cd O "O b al 0 co G > v Lo O Q 4° ai O +0, y t O� 'O y a n i' 'C > ;>cd O T1 N' bA Cd 45 GA .r- G yCd alCd N N N bA co cd Cd 0 ++ Ute" b N O rn p r-+ O" p N rq O cuco y bq O v G O bD y O W G � O 9' cn O v' GO O Cd o Cd C bum �0. Q '� U� >.p C3 N •�" o H G v U. ea c>o O O o ,� W Ln +C9 cd Q = V U ^C U x ?15 Exhibit Page -,a-a of 00 G 7 ,(D u tN M b 4� vi A t3 O CIS p y FO N � L] v O s cd X In GOPCd Cd -1 L; F chi 4 i vz rn vi s 4 0 En N . +,�.. vl 4.1 Cd N a 42 a+ cyv v c% 'cti & O� u v C'i O b L1 O a O OCIJ_ 0 cUJ tco N p" � � � � N b 6i cu Cd'C3 Cd O ccu I..� �"•+ ' V U O (y CO . rAcc 'C 'C0 Ccz vCA ., v -0 c M c H od Cd Cd C's0 O O N O d 'C cc `n N i1' sO. e) A „O co [d i +O 'Cf r+ W z cl cz cd Cd y a n Fr u U i� cd ice., • y ' � "O >i> t�, ,� � � .—� O � . � �, t�,,d Vim" N Fr ° 0 til Q O U O F 00 y ° t= ° ° cd . i FO N-tJ al cz Cd Cd M 'OC O. y Q O bA c cd cdL•7 'C? .+-.y cd 06 cd O GOA O N 4+ O ^ T. cd ° rz �° a Exhibit Page l -a of ca CO C a CO -c� r.G U c `~ U GA cid c �^ OA C, cd -� bA �. t-+ y •� U V � •.. y cd a A Cd as >- w y., Cdb 14 44 d O +- U U cn i�C CO cr y U m u ca F d f2.iT p O .b p j y y y � b r b bA cdCd iyn ^✓1 yy .� u bA •. +4 cr 0 cd y y a� v •o (40 b N w ped — p 10 v� CA y Cdcd Cd .a �� �° �� yim. Cd.-+ -� co V Cd o ci v, O Cd O ccv cy, V ID to '0 as m to s. p ani r:) " O cc Q F o tg +- � y ai C 'd C • �,,, ' a> y���°� Exhibit__ Page A5CI of Exhibit Page l,'7& Of —4? U w Cd A O � a O "4G � w w `'" vONi 'r stn � tb 0 � W ° � p 4+ 0 c'`'~diw, cz z o cd 4., 0 Rs z .� 0i as O z v vJ RS 't O z .� p Cs O z C7 ai cco O z bq wan CdCd v O •� o w Q w � b w 42 •v U m a 'C7 r� 0 v ° A w z z z z C7 O a U 3 Exhibit Page l,'7& Of —4? Exhibit Page— of �0 ^J H N � cdH Cd co W U y CS o ai CdJQcd .-3, � 'fl 0.y � N � � � +U•'�F, � o ^, F Ca ° _ H H'46) CI ' QA p co o �U a Qy � � ;� � p � p � •p � U 42Cd Cd IP 4 0� o ° N '� • �"-r Q �N' ''�y Cid cd iii U ej iw UU W 0 COrA .y F ++ ej `d a •H ° w o cd U u R.. v U o cd WDN co a ,. 03 U y cr2 � N O to ai .•� o � � � .� ° F—a� G �i � ° aA H 6n O ,p W v b iZ M G1J ce H �„i Cd N N O C,+ 0 r v °U $Z w A CON N iU+ a. Rj Cpj H y cv � U ) o C "d v • oG a 4-4 �,AZ cd f i " rn p 04 cd cd � " = •� Q ;-a � i � a o to�°�, co � 00 �+ 4'a,� '� w � °;�"H .a cn d o a C9 coo 0 QrSeO N ca NU z Foo ; 2 ",� �+ ElH� .� � c4 �v> O Exhibit Page— of �0 DOCUMENT POOR QUALITY AT TIME OF RECORDING. ------ Exhibit Page Of _(6q— s DOCUMENT POOR QUALITY AT TIME OF RECORDING. ------ Exhibit Page Of _(6q— O 75 CL, co N U cz v cd� cz `J � v . ani '�� `� � U 4.i c 4-; cd Z N H f� H bv� ' W on 4.4 +-, -� cd9u911 DOCUMENT POOR QUALITY AT TIME OF RECORDING. Exhibit A. Page 4P,3: of O +U, FU„ • � � U O (V O O r� 7.j ++ N U N C7cot O vCd .p OU O ami ami 41 cd C/1 O. a h Y o3 1 -t3 v ai t+= N M 04 00 O 75 CL, co N U cz v cd� cz `J � v . ani '�� `� � U 4.i c 4-; cd Z N H f� H bv� ' W on 4.4 +-, -� cd9u911 DOCUMENT POOR QUALITY AT TIME OF RECORDING. Exhibit A. Page 4P,3: of C, M . Exhibit Page -4 of � yCJ V �' 4�►r yam', iLr � Q 41 ,., CJ . Exhibit Page -4 of Exhibit Page �o of _ U 3 O � un U O 4-4 VCd o o aEn tt7 z O a r/i �Li m U r/i CCi C{.. N tti ^ v yU° 7=3 W O Cd w rA 4.4 c° cc 0 sa U �� ,�"4 �w � o �Q'; v, o baa �•� v 'Li O •'>•' O '.' Vl � Lr. Q N C7H H� A�J wz waw 044 4.4cl o Uw° oC; Cl Ido� xQ U oris ro In otz vs� Exhibit Page �o of _ U 3 � U O 4-4 VCd o aEn O a r/i �Li m U r/i CCi C{.. N 4 N ^ v yU° 7=3 W O Cd 4.4 c° cc csa •9 �� ,�"4 �w � o �Q'; v, o baa �•� v �. •�A �� �A o ~o C7H H� A�J wz waw 044 Exhibit Page �o of _ a, N O O O w w O O QQ y O O GLS O COD w O 0 p U> 0%F h V 0� r .0 •0 Q cd © oQ�) b M ami Q cl P64 w a� ° A� Fv� °H� w� �vz to w At IS U A r0 a0 7 PLO vi 0 w w O ►t z � U piU Exhibit Page— of `L Exhibit Page -&� of \ § § U ¢ � 3 ./ cri { $ 00 ■ k � � 7 #2 2/ 2� z k4 Exhibit Page -&� of \ � U 3 P c { $ 00 d /q 2/ 2� Exhibit Page -&� of '1 DESCHUTES COUNTY PROMISSORY NOTE DATE: February 21, 2005 PROMISOR: Central Oregon Regional Housing Authority 405 SW 6`h Street Redmond OR 97756 PROMISEE: Deschutes County 1300 NW Wall Street, Suite 200 Bend, Oregon 97701 FOR VALUE RECEIVED, Promisor promises to pay to Promisee, at Promisee's order, the principal sum of two hundred thousand & no/100 dollars ($200,000.00). Principal only shall be payable in one lump payment within twenty-four (24) months of the date of this note. Borrower: Central Oregon Regional Housing Authority Principal: $200,000.00 Interest Rate: 0% Term: Lump sum due February 21, 200" Maturity Date: February 21, 2007 Monthly Payment: NA Payment checks to: Deschutes County Attn: Finance 1300 NW Wall Street, Suite 200 Bend, Oregon 97701 Disputes. With respect to any dispute relating to this agreement, or in the event that a suit, action, arbitration, or other proceeding of any nature whatsoever, including, without limitation, any proceeding under the U.S. Bankruptcy Code and involving issues peculiar to federal bankruptcy law, or any action seeking a declaration of rights, is instituted to interpret or enforce this agreement or any provision of this agreement, the prevailing party shall be entitled to recover from the losing party its reasonable attorneys' fees and all other fees, costs, and expenses actually incurred and reasonably necessary in connection therewith, as determined by the judge or arbitrator at trial or other proceeding, or on any appeal or review, in addition to all other amounts provided by law. 2. Waivers. Presentment, notice of dishonor, and protest are hereby waived by all makers, sureties, guarantors, and endorsers hereof. This note shall be the joint and several obligation of all makers, sureties, guarantors and endorsers, and shall be binding upon them and their successors and assigns. 3. Notices. Any notice to Promisor provided for in this Note shall be given by mailing such notice by certified Promissory Note -- - -- — — (Revised 1/05) Exhibit Page _(_ of mail addressed to Promisor at the property address stated, or to such other address as Promisor may designate by notice to Promisee. Any notice to Promisee shall be given by mailing such notice by certified mail, return receipt requested, to Promisee at the address stated in the first paragraph of this Note, or at such other address as may have been designated by notice to Promisor. Under Oregon Law (ORS 41.580(3)), most agreements, promises, and commitments made by us after October 3, 1989, concerning loans and other credit extensions which are not for personal, family, or household purposes or secured solely by the borrower's residence, must be in writing, express consideration, and be signed by us to be enforceable. PROMISOR: CENTRAL OREGON REGIONAL HOUSING AUTHORITY Chair, CORHA Board of Commissioenrs Date Executive Director, CORHA Date Promissory Note Exhibit Page of _5 (Revised 1/05) REVIEWED LEGAL COUNSEL For Recording Stamp Only MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING Document No. 2005-064 This Memorandum of Understanding is entered into between Deschutes County (County) and the Central Oregon Regional Housing Authority (CORHA). On January 14, 2004, the County approved a $200,000 line of credit to CORHA for the Horizon House construction project. CORHA is authorized to draw down a maximum of $200,000 for use toward the construction costs of Horizon House. This line of credit is approved at no interest for two years from the date of note signing. At the end of the two years, the outstanding balance, if any, of drawn funds will be converted into a 10 -year, interest-free note. Parties acknowledge that County will benefit from construction and operation of the transitional housing known as Horizon House because CORHA will assist County in housing and transitioning County clients with mental illness from institutionalized care to eventual self- reliance. Dated this day of February 2005. DESCHUTES COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS Tom DeWolf, Chair Michael M. Daly, Commissioner Dennis R. Luke, Commissioner Dated this day of February 2005. CENTRAL OREGON REGIONAL HOUSING AUTHORITY Cyndy Cook, Executive Director Page 1 of 1 Document No. 2005-064 Exhibit 13 Page __�3_ of Allocation of Proposed Interfund Rent Charges Fund Dpt Building Services Admin Services Finance Legal Personnel Increase of Indirects to IT Depts - j ! 1 2 !Assessor 2,704 2,482 ; 65 1,870 4,164 1,13 2,418 13 1 5 j Clerk _ 2,961 925 24 1,581 1,269 1,803 8,563 1 6 BOPTA 102 40 1 10 66 - 219 1 8 BOCC - Commissioners I - - - - - -- 1 11 District Attorney 2,605 2,656 69 1,009 4,752 3,200 241 91 11 18! Tax 751 578 15 892 738 598 3,572 1 23 _ Veterans' 307 119 3 38 254 177 898 1� 25 Property Management 80 111 3 910 159 128 1,391 1 28 !Surveyor 001 - 128 3 185 156 - 473 1 45 Non -Departmental 15,325 638 17 - - - 15,980 (General Fund Subtotal 24,835 7,677 200 6,495 11,558 7,039 57,805 105 8 1 Business Loan - - - j - 19 - 19 120 8 Grant Projects - - - ! 19 127 - 146 123 8 IJustice Court 2,095 373 10 311 763 222 3,774 160 94 ,Transient Room Tax - 425 11 - - - 436 165 8 1 Video Lottery - 470 12 8 51 - 541 170 94 !Welcome Center - 279 7 - - - 286 200 1 27 ' Industrial Development - 49 1 - - - 51 2051 27 1 Land Sales Maint - 219 6 - - - 225 208 11 Liquor Enforcement - 30 1 - - - 31 212 11 Victims' Assistance 495 211 5 68 458 - 1,237 215 12 Law Library 311 88 2 9 64 131 606 218 5 County Clerk Records - 202 5 - - - 207 220 15 CCF 677 979 26 276 795 119 2,872 230 16 Juvenile 5,371 3,036 79 2,885 7,903 2,112 21,386 230 32 Juvenile - 1,925 50 - - - 1,975 Juvenile Fund Subtotal 5,371 4,961 129 2,885 7,903 2,112 23,361 235 17 Sheriffs Asset Forfeiture - 64 2 - - - 66 240 17 Court Facilties - 88 2 - - - 90 245 17 DC Communication Sys - 516 13 - - - 530 255 17 Sheriff 3,867 957 25 4,574 21,894 2,953 34,270 _255 29 Automotive _- 661 17 - - - 678 255 33 Investigations_ - 1,253 33 - - - 1,285 _255 34 _ Patrol - 5,143 _ - - 5,2_77_ 255 35 Records 470 _13_4 12 - - 950 1,432 255 37 255 38 255 39 255 41 255 43 255'4.5_ Adult Jail_ jTransport Emergency Services 1,547 4,919 138 83 128 1 1,276 4 - 2 L _ - 1,713 9,_583 - - 141 _ - - 85 Special Services - 322 8 - - - 330 'Training _ - 118 3 Sheriff Non -Dept - 878 23 - - - 901 SheriffsFund Subtotal 5,414 ! 14,941 390 5,850 21,894 5,616 54,105 Exhibit C. Page ( of ,--3 Allocation of Proposed InterFund Rent Charges Fund Dpt Building Services Admin Services Finance Legal Personnel IT Increase of Indirects to Depts 259' 20 I Health 5,925 3,930 103 1,702 6,662 1,220 1 19,542 _260; 20 HealthyStart - _-- - 475 12 - 128 - 615 270' 22 275 2 iABHA ental Health - 7,751 154 8,018 4 209 - j 5,823 - 11,494 - 1 158 2,321 35,616 280' 22 ;OHP-CDO - 166 4 - - - 171 2851 28 ;Public Land Corner Prs 755 867 23 - 797 794 1 3,235 _ 2901 36 Code Abatement - 23 1 - - - 23 295 36 1CDD 6,372 4,631 121 19,625 7,680 2,283 40,711 296 36 1 CDD-TDC - 200 5 - - - 206 3051 9 IGIS - 843 22 57 393 1,031 2,346 325 50 1 Road 5,224 10,215 267 1,778 7,502 1,158 26,143 3261 50 Weed Abatement - 293 8 38 254 - 592- 92330 33051 !Road Bldg & Equipment - 1,293 34 - - - 1,327 350 56 Dog Control 116 220 6 17 114 355 82 Adult P & P 3,145 2,103 55 2,490 3,421 1,789 13,003 4111 36 Newberry Neighborhood - 1,181 31 - - - 1,211 4401 27 Project Development - 1,042 27 - - - 1,069 4421 8 General County Projects - 204 5 1 - - -209 4511 8 La Pine Bldg/Remodel - 49 1 - - - 50 452 8 Remodel Projects - 565 15 - - - 580 455 8 Courthouse Remodel - 238 6 - - - 244 610 62 Solid Waste 1,739 4,053 106 2,930 2,925 1,117 12,870 613 62 Solid Waste Capital Prjt - 245 6 - - - 251 614 62 Solid Waste Equip - 430 11 - - - 441 616 62 SW Recycling Center - 916 24 - - - 940 618 8 Fair & Expo Center - 1,270 33 1,454 1,526 354 4,637 619 8 Annual Fair - 624 16 38 254 355 1,287 620 10 Building Services - - - - - - - 625 8 1 BOCC - Admin Services - - - - - - - 630 14 Finance - - - - - - - 630 19 Treasurer - - - - - - - 640 27 Legal - - - - - - - 650 31 Personnel - - - - - - - 660 9 IT - - - -- -67071 _670 71 Risk Management 880 - - 304 636 457 2,277 675_ 8 Health Benefit Trust - - - 28 191 - 219 _685 8 Fair &_Expo C_onstructio 434 11 - - __ - 445_ _705 75 Deschutes County 911 _- 1,495 3,083 80 - 4,043 923 9,625 720 74 Extension 4-H - 247 6 83 382 - 1 718 Totals 72,600 79,584 1 2,077 52,288 1 92,034 29,041 1 327,624 Exhibit Page of O �- O N (ll LLiN O O6 CU N pO U N >- LLLL C Nr N C: O O) O LL m O Co O cn Z U >- m LLC O p) �LLa v m C CD O O O C � C N (0 Q U (1) � � U (1)� O N LL.. cu N 7 cr cuO cu O O LL F.. CE U) O) C (6 O N O U Q Ui 0) m Cp Q O LL V' - N C' O O M O W N 00 O m M V N m O Or.- O I� N ::!,-I M Cn 0 O M zr N N (O O O �t O v O i O i O i i M M O (A V O N M O 00 N O 'IT 1� M'It V O M O N O � tl0 M a0 CA CA M I� O N � QNi u O O O 0 V' I- M �• IT O M O N (O m I- O M S 00 m m M I- IT O O N O N- I- M O O (O (A (A N CV V' r LO O N 46 I1,OOrnO o r r N M I-- O. (D M (O O "t M N O I- O (D CO CO O O O O M (O co N I O M O (o It 'IT K: N (D co Cl) N N-NN:N N N N N N N N(D.-CAO(0Oti000D N M 0!) N O M N M 00 It 0 - N M M- N M CD O M S O C6 C6 d 6 n O N O O m m N 1- O (O i M (A It O O O m co m M co M f -- M MM N mm m r — r- — M W --I C CD f"I O M N N M co <-MN'0'MCO MN O (OD N O O O to N f� 0 (O O N ti N Cl) N I COD. (ONO 0 O I O LO LI n N MIS N U Eo m a _cCD a) m a U) c o N N O a% m E m m N a) CL U X (1 p) (n O �Qu -jCL mmI�O O C (n O U N O CD co co O C 0 0 0 0— N c O 0 0 0 O 0 O N M'T O 0 0 0 0 0 0 O~ U C4 CD 0 co O O O O O O M 0 0 0 0 0 C) (0 d' O O CO-- N O M N N+ h O (fl O f- N M It C:)"' O O LO O O O N N O O CO d O (D N M IC\i O O LO LO Ln O LO LO 606'6 OO O O O O O CD CD O O .t0 0 r O N 0 0 0 0 O 0 0 0 0 0 O V O O - O N N N L N U U (n O omC7 �Q 7 0 t LO a) 0 mOLOCD �IN O CD O co M (O Cl O N O Cl) Cl) CO n c0 d' O N CD CV M W o L~L. X cc 0 LO a> a� 0) w c COC14 c N c (D U- 'C Q V M O C LLI O N C C LL v -N 0 O Co � a) a) O O C C m O a)U a� -ia o W o a) U- a U c o m (o L a) m a> U L C9 �� N cu C y U d LL O a. CO (x9 c o F- 0 0 m C m o M U �p O L O U cn — p (9 CU (9 c m LO E c 0, Q a Co d (m o a Q m o'U - O O O C a E O N CD 6 N O E U o 0 m O CO LO I,- (0 c O et .0 LO M (D C N N O r- Ln E Q) 0 � o) a) 0 a O M 0)0 Q) n C-00 a) N O7 a) O U Q CD O CO C O O Q 7 f0 O? c OU E C - U(� C U Y x ID o UCnm UH N M a Exhibit C Page 3 of 3 1:30-2:00 Deschutes County Board of Commissioners 1300 NW Wall St., Suite 200, OR 97701-1960 (541) 388-6570 - Fax (541) 385-3202 - www.deschutes.ora ADMINISTRATIVE LIAISON AGENDA DESCHUTES COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS 1:30 P.M., TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 15, 2005 1. Jim King Presentation regarding South County Fire Issues — Joe Stutler 2:00-2:15 2. Discussion regarding Conflict of Interest Involving Outside Legal Counsel — Mark Pilliod 2:15-2:30 3. Discussion of Rent Charges to Various County Funds — Susan Ross, Marty Wynne 2:30— 2:45 4. Project Update — Susan Ross 2:45— 3:00 5. Other Items