2006-481-Minutes for Meeting May 01,2006 Recorded 5/9/2006NANCYUBLANKCOUNTY OFFICIAL ENSHIP, COUNTY CLERKDS Q 2006481
COMMISSIONERS' JOURNAL
111111111 05/09/2006 03:09: 1i PM
2006-483
DESCHUTES COUNTY CLERK
CERTIFICATE PAGE
o~
7- E,13
2
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.orc
MINUTES OF ADMINISTRATIVE LIAISON
DESCHUTES COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
MONDAY, MAY 1, 2006
Commissioners' Conference Room - Administration Building - 1300 NW Wall St., Bend
Present were Commissioners Bev Clarno and Michael M. Daly; Commissioner
Dennis R. Luke was out of the office. Also present were Mike Maier, County
Administrator; and, for a portion of the meeting, Susan Ross, Teresa Rozic and
Anna Johnson, Commissioners' Office; Joe Studer, County Forester; Tom
Anderson, Community Development; Timm Schimke, Solid Waste Department;
Mark Pilliod, Legal Counsel; and one other citizen. No representatives of the
media were present.
The meeting began at 1: 30 p. m.
1. Discussion of Bethlehem Inn Citizen Inquiry
A letter from a citizen complaining about the presence of the Bethlehem Inn
and associated concerns was discussed. It was decided that a copy of the letter
should go to Liz Hitt so she can reply to the citizen; and Anna Johnson will
respond as well, acknowledging that the Board has discussed the issue.
2. Project Update and Property Management.
Susan Ross and Teresa Rozic followed up on a previous discussion regarding
County-owned property located near Romaine Village along Highway 97. The
three parcels are about 5,500 square feet each. A Realtor price opinion has
been obtained, and the value is approximately $15,000 per parcel. Therefore,
the properties cannot be sold to the adjacent property owner without going
through the normal land auction process.
Minutes of Administrative Liaison Monday, May 1, 2006
Page 1 of 4 Pages
Ms. Rozic added that she contacted the Oregon Department of Transportation,
and they indicated they are not interested in purchasing or trading into these
parcels. The next County land auction will take place in September, and she
will notify the adjacent property owner accordingly.
Ms. Rozic said that a citizen, Jim Young, wishes to exchange his six-acre parcel
for a smaller parcel owned by the County, located in the La Pine area. The
County parcel will help him consolidate his land holdings, and the property the
County would obtain in trade can be added to the New Neighborhood and used
for a variety of facilities. His property is valued at $25,000, and the County's is
valued at $20,000; therefore, no bid process needs to be followed since the
County is obtaining property with a higher value.
DALY: Move approval that this exchange move forward.
CLARNO: Second.
VOTE: DALY:
CLARNO:
Yes.
Vice Chair votes aye.
3. Economic Development Grant Requests.
Commissioner Clarno granted $1,000 towards the Sunriver Music Festival.
4. Executive Session, called under ORS 192.660(1)(e) - real estate
negotiations; and ORS 192.660(1)(h), pending or threatened litigation.
The Board briefly adjourned to go into executive session.
At the conclusion of executive session, the Board took the following action.
DALY: In regard to a code enforcement issue on property located in
Cascade View Estates, move that Laurie Craghead be authorized to
negotiate no less than a $10,000 settlement payment to the County.
CLARNO: Second.
VOTE: DALY:
CLARNO
Yes.
Vice Chair votes aye.
Minutes of Administrative Liaison Monday, May 1, 2006
Page 2 of 4 Pages
5. Forestry Update.
Joe Stutler brought two intergovernmental agreements before the Board. The
first (Document No. 2006-210) was an agreement with the Department of
Forestry in which they provide $36,000 from the Project Wildfire National Fire
Plan Grant to be used for FireFree programs.
DALY: Move approval.
CLARNO: Second.
VOTE: DALY: Yes.
CLARNO: Vice Chair votes aye.
The second intergovernmental agreement discussed (Document No. 2006-209)
involves reimbursement to the County when County equipment, typically
bulldozers, graders and other large pieces of equipment, are used to respond to
wildfire situations at the request of another agency. The agreement also allows
for the reimbursement of travel expenses and time of the County Forester, in
particular to attend training events.
DALY: Move approval.
CLARNO: Second.
VOTE: DALY: Yes.
CLARNO: Vice Chair votes aye.
6. Other Items.
The group discussed several e-mails received by the Commissioners regarding a
variety of citizen concerns.
■ Whispering Pines road issue - the message is to be forwarded to George
Kolb at the Road Department so he can respond accordingly.
• Noise and dust issue regarding off-road vehicles, La Pine - this message will
be forwarded to Tom Anderson in Community Development so he can
investigate.
■ Excess trash problem, La Pine - Tom Anderson will respond.
■ Agricultural exemption for permits - Tom Anderson will respond.
Minutes of Administrative Liaison Monday, May 1, 2006
Page 3 of 4 Pages
Timm Schimke explained that he examined a recent aerial photograph of Knott
Landfill, which is used to help project the life of a landfill cell, and it appears
that the current cell will reach capacity this year instead of the later date that
was anticipated. There has been an unprecedented 18% increase in flow. Much
of this could be due to the dramatic increase in population, as well as the
continued high volume of building homes and commercial structures. At this
rate, some waste may have to be shipped to Crook County, probably from the
Fryrear Road and Redmond transfer stations.
A general services agreement is in place for a variety of work to be done by
URS Corporation. However, developing the design and specifications, and
overseeing the construction of, a new cell would cost approximately $270,000.
Legal Counsel has advised that to use URS for this project would require an
exception to the public procurement rules. A limited RFP could be sent to
local, qualified companies, which would make the process somewhat quicker.
Construction of the cell itself would go through a separate bidding process. The
cost is anticipated to be around $2.2 million.
The Commissioners indicated the limited RFP process is preferred, even though
it could delay construction of the cell.
Being no further items discussed, the meeting adjourned at 3:10 p. m.
DATED this 1St Day of May 2006 for the Deschutes County Board of
Commissioners.
ATTEST:
Recording Secretary
ABev R. Luke, Chair
arno, Vice Chair
i ael M. Daly, Co missioner
/11
Minutes of Administrative Liaison
Page 4 of 4 Pages
Monday, May 1, 2006
Deschutes County Board of Commissioners
1300 NW Wall St., Suite 200, Bend, OR 97701-1960
(541) 388-6570 - Fax (541) 385-3202 - www.deschutes.org
ADMINISTRATIVE LIAISON AGENDA
DESCHUTES COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
1:30 P.M., MONDAY, MAY 1, 2006
1:30 -1:40
1. Discussion of Britta Street Properties
1:40 - 2:00 - Susan Ross
2. Project Update
3. Economic Development Grant Request(s):
■ Sunriver Music Festival
2:00- 2:20
4. Executive Session, called under ORS 192.660(1)(e) - Real Estate Negotiations
2:20- 3:00
5. Other Items
April 18, 2006
Deschutes County Board of Commissioners
Mike Daly, Dennis Luke, Bev Clarno
1300 NW Wall St.
Bend, OR 97701
Esteemed Members of the-Board of Commissioners, "
Thank you for the opportunity to express my concerns about a growing problem in my
neighborhood. I live in northwest Bend, across from the Sheriff's Office. My family
moved into the neighborhood in April of 2003, and we loved the area instantly. Lots of
friendly people, kids, and we felt protected - being so close to the Sheriff's Office.
Everything was great: and then the Bethlehem Inn made its permanent location across the
street. I am not an elitist - I was okay with that. After all, everyone needs a place to lay
their head at night.
The problems started with little things: disposable coffee cups littered through the street,
cigarette butts littered the common areas in our complex, my husband walked out to his
flat-bed work truck one morning, only to find a bundled up man sleeping on the back, a
couple of guys smoking pot in front of our house, my car was broken into & my stereo &
CD's were stolen ...we just put up with it.
Then the owner of the four units across the driveway from us (address: 63323 NW Britta
St.) rented all four units to the Bethlehem Inn. The government subsidizes these units,
and the tenants only have to pay a small portion of the rent. To me, this is an insult. I pay
$750 every month to live in this neighborhood in a house the same as theirs, and the
Bethlehem Inn residents get the same thing for less money. How is that fair? These aren't
apartments. They are freestanding townhome-type places. They were only constructed
about 5 years ago. Not to mention that I rarely see any of the vehicles parked in front of
these homes move. Do they work? It really irritated me, so when I got a solicitation in the
mail for donations to the Bethlehem Inn, I wrote a letter to the director and voiced my
concerns. A few days later, I received a call from the director, a woman named Liz. She
was incredibly defensive, and downright rude. On her behalf, I understand that this is her
"baby." I understand the amount of effort she puts in to this organization. But as a
manager, when someone comes to you with a concern or a problem, the last thing you
should do is get angry, yell, and hang up. I told her that I no longer felt safe in the
neighborhood - to the point that my son is not allowed to go outside and play. I told Liz
about all of the different instances we have had, and she did not believe me. There is no
resolution.
.r
s
I would have let sleeping dogs lie, but more and more instances are occurring: my car
was scratched badly & intentionally with some blunt object while parked in my driveway.
The very next day, I had a homeless man come to my door and ask me if I had a place he
could sleep, or if he could sleep in my car. None of these, or the previously mentioned
things happened when the Bethlehem Inn was not there.
I agree with the concept of a homeless shelter. I agree that Bend needs to have one. But,
it is apparent to me that the resurrection of the Bethlehem Inn on Britta St. has brought
the downfall of the neighborhood. My friends joke about me living in the ghetto. I don't
think it's funny.
When you take a glance at homeless shelters in other areas, it's pretty easy to see that
they are not -located-in residential areas -like the one I live in. Take a look at Portradd: the
missions/shelters they have there are located in commercial or industrial areas. I have
noticed the same thing with most cities I have visited. So why is Bend allowing this
program in this residential neighborhood? It's not helping property values. It's not a good
selling point to move into the neighborhood. If the Bethlehem Inn relocated near a
wealthier community, do you think the residents would like it? I dare to say not, after all,
the residents of Awbrey Butte had a problem with Unicel coming into their
neighborhood. It made the news and caused quite a stir. How would those residents react
if the shelter came to their neighborhood?
The people at the Bethlehem Inn are an entirely separate issue. I understand those people
who are down on their luck. I understand and empathize with the single mom who has
nowhere else to go. But, what about the people who made bad life decisions? What about
the people who have been incarcerated so long that they have nowhere else to go? The
laws of probability would state that not all of these people have changed in a positive
manner. Why is it alright that they hang out across the driveway? I also know for a fact
that some of those people have violated the Bethlehem Inn's rules regarding living in
those units, and some people have even been evicted. Nevertheless - new people have
been shuffled in.
Another issue that should be brought up: why don't these people work? Liz told me that
they do - but they are always there whether I am off work early, home sick, or up late at
night. If they do have jobs, they aren't at them much. It seems to me that free or
substantially discounted room & board is a hand-out, not a hand-up.
This brings me to my final point: the whole Bethlehem Inn project seems to be a hand-
out. The homeless don't even have to make their way to the shelter. There are Bethlehem
Inn vans that go around and collect them in the evenings. Now, the shelter is open in the
daytime. Shouldn't these people be attempting to better themselves somehow during the
day? It seems to me that if these people are allowed to just "hang out" and are not made
to look for employment or other betterment opportunities, then this truly is a hand-out.
L
People tell me that I should just move. I have a problem with that, because my family
was there first. I do not want to give up on the neighborhood I first found so endearing. I
know several of my other neighbors are upset as well, not to mention my landlords.
Please consider what I have written. I would ask you to find another suitable location for
the Bethlehem Inn. If not another suitable location, then at least do not allow them to live
in the units across the driveway. It's been devastating to the neighborhood, particularly to
those of us who have had to deal with being victims of crime.
I am anxiously waiting a response.
Sincerely,
(het o
63319 NW Britta St. #4
Bend, OR 97701
541-419-0966
Page 1 of 1
L
Uto I/
Bev Clarno
From: Troyweigand@aol.com
Sent: Sunday, April 30, 2006 1:33 PM
To: Board
Subject: Whispering Pines Bully
Dear County Commisioners,
am writing to you about a situation in our neighborhood that I would like to express my opinions on. A hearing
is set for the 8th of May to disscuss road issuses for 94th st. Myrt Williams, a woman who recently moved into
the area, is protesting a resident's rocks and trees along 94th street. She want's the rocks removed and trees cut
down. I drive by the trees and rocks, that are alongside 94th, everyday; and I've never had a problem with the
rocks and feel the trees are beautiful asset to our neighborhood. The complaintiff has also pettitioned to have
94th paved. She has complained to other residents about dusty bumpy road she has drive down. Why would
someone buy a property, build a house, retire, and expect every thing to change in a neighborhood to her favor. I
have spoken with a number of long-time residents who feel Myrt is pushy and should have retired in
a neighborhood that was already set to her standards. Thankyou for your time, Cary Weigand
5/1/2006
Bev Clarno
Page 1 of 1
From: Dale W. Key [dvkey@bendnet.com]
Sent: Monday, May 01, 2006 7:44 AM
To: Board
Subject: Noise Control
Dear Board of Commissioners;
It is time for the board to make an issue of noise control in residential areas. I'm tired of noisy off-road
vehicles owners using their properties for race tracks. The noise and dust make it unlivable. There are
places in the county for this kind of activity, it's not in a residential area.
Please, make this a priority. The officer that was here yesterday because of my complaint, says that his
hands are tied and he isn't able to do anything. He also needs your help with this issue.
Thank you,
Dale W. Key
52675 Center Dr.
La Pine, OR 97739
541-536-7830
dvkey_ebendnet com
http..%/f_gmi lytreemaker.genealogy.com/users/k/e/y/Dale-W-Key_-OR/index.htm(
r
5/1/2006
Bev Clarno
From: RANDY R HORN [antiquetoyman@msn.com]
Sent: Saturday, April 29, 2006 4:25 PM
To: Board
Subject: junk
-lam t~ O d Page 1 of 1
0 VA
I live next door to junk I think a couch by the road for two years is long enough if you drive down
sunrise blvd off burgess you can see for your self. maybe you can write them and have them
remove there garbage, there name is patrica mellot sunrise blvd lapine, ore . if the county says I
have to clean my yard why don't these people. thank you for your time coleen horn
5/1/2006
Building issues & Complaint Driven infractions
Pagel of 3
Bev Clarno
From: Mary Ann Kruse [maryann@junehog.com]
Sent: Wednesday, April 26, 2006 10:04 AM
To: Board
Subject: Building issues & Complaint Driven infractions
Commissioners Daly, Luke & Clarno,
Thank you for your updated website. It is a pleasure to be able to write the same
letter to you all inclusively, rather than individually.
I am concerned about the recent exercise of building in the county via the
exploitation under the Agricultural Exemption "not a permit" permit.
After talking with a county planner, Tom Anderson, it is my understanding that the
Ag Exemption "not a permit" was initially created about 12 years ago, to subsidize
the farmers/ranchers for a large out building to be used in a proper agricultural
setting. This "not a permit" exempts farmers & ranchers from paying for a building
permit at the same rate as a county resident would otherwise afford.
Currently, there are Ag Exempt "not a permit" buildings being built in Deschutes
County that are occurring because of a convenient loophole. This loophole, once
others realize it, will be the bane of the county & Deschutes County citizens, in the
form of extraordinarily sized buildings being constructed in areas that are not
zoned for ranches or farms.
An example of this Ag Exempt "not a permit" building can be found in an RR10
(rural residential 10 acres or less) neighborhood at, 60135 Sterling, Bend, 97702,
in the Sundance residential area east of town. Please take a drive out to this
neighborhood to see this "Great Wall of Sundance" being built by (Glen & Jennifer)
Costa Builders. This is a neighborhood! Correction, this WAS a neighborhood, soon
to be over run by a 96,000 square foot equestrian horse breeding & training
center, along with traffic, trailers, & assorted accoutrements. Imagine, if you will,
the neighborliness that will noJonger be possible with this blatant disregard for the
RR10 zoning, not to mention the more stringent CC&Rs for this Sundance rural
residential neighborhood.
As I understand it, the Deschutes County planners have no jurisdiction over the Ag
Exempt buildings. With meager revenue for the county (perhaps as much as
$50.00!), no building size limitations, no building composition requirements, no
property setback requirements, no inspecting of electric or plumbing or septic or
engineering, this ""not a permit" building process places the neighborhood at risk,
the county at a loss of permit revenue, & the citizens of Deschutes County at risk
for buildings being built in zones never intended to house such buildings & in
neighborhoods never intended to have such buildings. The only response
5/1/2006
'Building issues & Complaint Driven infractions
Page 2 of 3
neighbors have for such an eyesore, that they now have to live with, wake up to,
see out their windows, deal with daily, is to report if the building is being utilized
in the manner for which it was constructed. I remind you, this will not take this
monstrosity down, this will only elicit a complaint which might result in a fine or a
verbal warning.
I urge you, Commissioners Daly, Luke & Clarno, to make a stand against utilizing
this Ag Exempt "not a permit" permit in Deschutes County. There are clearly very
few farmers & ranchers remaining in the county, who could actually utilize this
agricultural exemption building permit in good faith.
Building under this Ag Exempt "not a permit" will further divide the community,
destroy neighborhoods & create a great loss of revenue for the county without
having to obtain a proper building permit.
Additionally, I have another concern regarding the current process of "Complaint
Driven" only building infraction reporting in Deschutes County.
I would like to bring your attention, Commissioners, to this process that was
passed by the County Commissioners 2-3 years ago, regarding the latest
standard to make questionable county building infractions be "Complaint Driven"
only, that must be submitted in writing, on the proper Complaint form. For the
public to bring the County's attention to building infractions by a phone call,
should be an acceptable process. Realizing that the footwork has been done for
the enforcing body, which subsequently is reported by phone, which is then
followed up by a county employee that is dispensed to the site in question, seems
pretty easy. However, to expect neighbors to report, in writing, on their neighbors,
with potentially resultant ill feelings at best, & resultant retaliation, at worst, is
unnecessary & unwarranted. This written system is hardly user friendly. I wonder
what you all were thinking when this ill fated, time consuming concept was
conceived? Not only is this process cumbersome, but it also sheds poor light on
the county planning department, since the written process isn't common
knowledge. From the public's point of view, it appears as if the County isn't doing
their job enforcing permits being posted, code being followed, & a feeling of the
public of a general disinterest by the county when infractions are reported & the
caller is instructed to complete/the Complaint form, which will be reviewed at a
later date.
I would encourage the Commissioners to review this labor intensive process of
county building infraction reporting. The written "Complaint Driven" only mode
could be amended to include verbal reporting, which would ascertain the same
information,, documented accordingly & followed up.
Now is the time to end the cumbersome & time consuming & seemingly "hands
off" approach of the written "Complaint Driven" only County building infraction
public reporting. A simple phone call should be a red flag for an inspector to be
5/1/2006
Building issues & Complaint Driven infractions Page 3 of 3
l•
dispensed to the potentially offending building site. The offender would be
reprimanded, fines would be levied & an ensuing bill for a proper building permit
would be issued. Perhaps, if the practice printing infractees names in the
BULLETIN were a part of the process, it might be further encouragement for those,
who are considering building in the county without a permit, to secure one.
Thank you, Commissioners Daly, Luke & Clarno, for your consideration of
eliminating both the Ag Exempt "not a permit" building permit & the written
"Complaint Driven" only building infraction reporting process. Deschutes County &
citizens will not fair well while both of the processes are active. I encourage you to
eliminate both at your earliest convenience.
Most sincerely,
Mary Ann Kruse
Mary Ann Kruse
424 NW Federal Street
Bend, OR 97701 3018
541 383 3911
maryann@junehog.com
"The idea of wilderness needs no defense, only more defenders." Ed Abbey
5/1/2006