Loading...
2007-510-Minutes for Meeting April 02,2007 Recorded 5/11/2007DESCHUTES NANCY COUNTY CLERKDS ICJ ~0~1'J1O COMMISSIONERS' JOURNAL p5/11/ZOOt 11:Z1;1Z AM 1111111111111111111111111101 oil 2007-510 Do not remove this page from original document. Deschutes County Clerk Certificate Page If this instrument is being re-recorded, please complete the following statement, in accordance with ORS 205.244: Re-recorded to correct [give reason] previously recorded in Book or as Fee Number and Page 0-T E a G 02 Deschutes County Board of Commissioners 1300 NW Wall St., Bend, OR 97701-1960 (541) 388-6570 - Fax (541) 385-3202 - www.deschutes.org MINUTES OF BUSINESS MEETING DESCHUTES COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS MONDAY, APRIL 2, 2007 Commissioners' Hearing Room - Administration Building - 1300 NW Wall St., Bend Present were Commissioner Michael M. Daly, Dennis R. Luke and Tammy Baney. Also present were Mark Pilliod and Laurie Craghead, Legal Counsel; Tom Anderson, Catherine Morrow, Paul Blikstad and Terri Payne, Community Development Department; and twelve other citizens. No representatives of the media were present. The Measure 37 opening statement was distributed. Chair Daly opened the meeting at 10:00 a.m. 1. Before the Board was Citizen Input. Chair Daly stated that this is the time for any citizen with a concern or question about an issue not already on the agenda to make a statement. He cautioned that the issue of the destination resorts has been closed to oral testimony and the Board is now deliberating. Citizen Nunzie Gould came before the Board to encourage the Board to implement a transportation SDC system, since it doesn't look like legislative attempts to obtain funding for roads will be successful. She said in regard to community growth, a pool of resources needs to be collected. She then stated that there was substantial testimony in the past regarding one of the items on the agenda, and she wondered if the Commissioners had all of the information they should have. There was testimony she gave in 2004 in particular that she wants the Commissioners to review. She asked how the community can voice concerns if they are shut out of deliberations and discussions regarding items on the agenda. And there is a large body of public information that needs to be considered during deliberations. She wants there to be a public dialogue as this issue affects the community in a broad way. Minutes of Board of Commissioners' Business Meeting Monday, April 2, 2007 Page 1 of 13 Pages She then asked to present a list of property management companies to the Commissioners. Commissioner Luke interrupted Ms. Gould and stated that the Board will have to let everyone else, including the proponents and attorneys, testify if she testifies. He emphasized that the Chair was very clear in what would be allowed during citizen input. Commissioner Baney advised that she sat in on some of the previous hearings, and is up to speed. The meetings for public input have been completed and this issue cannot be opened up at this time. She added that Bev Clarno saved all of the previous information, which Commissioner Baney has reviewed, along with anything new. 2. Before the Board was a Hearing (continued from February 26) and Consideration of Signature of Order No. 2007-048, a Measure 37 Claim (Campbell). Catherine Morrow stated that the Campbell hearing was first held on February 26, but the attorney for the claimant had asked for it to be rescheduled. No additional testimony has been submitted since then. This is in regard to two lots on Tekampe Road, about one acre and four acres zoned MUA-10. The proposed use is a subdivision. The main issue is that the property owner died and the status of the estate is unclear. Michael McGean, attorney for the estate of Campbell, said that the claim was filed on behalf of the estate of Beverly Campbell; the estate was opened in 2004 in Lane County. Dennis Parker, his client, is the personal representative for his mother's estate. This is the first time an issue has come up in this county regarding the estate representing the claim. The obvious issue is when the property was acquired. There is tension in the statute, which says it goes back to when the original member of the family acquired the property, but the County and other jurisdictions have taken the view that this can be eviscerated to the present owner. Statute doesn't say this. He said he believes there is ambiguity in the statute; otherwise there is no purpose for the first five or six parts of the Measure. The primary issue is the Measure being unclear in its wording. He urge an interpretation be made for the purpose of giving meaning to the entire statute, and said the date of acquisition has to be when the family member acquired the property. Minutes of Board of Commissioners' Business Meeting Monday, April 2, 2007 Page 2 of 13 Pages He added that the estate has the same status as a family member, not a separate legal entity. Mr. Parker has a letter of administration from a Lane County circuit court where probate is being handled. Someone has to be considered the owner of the property during this time. Since all causes of action or suits survive to the personal representative, this means they don't go away when someone dies. Under that statute, the estate has the same status as the deceased person; this supports Mr. Parker's claim that he has the right to proceed with a Measure 37 claim. Commissioner Luke asked whether it there would be a better chance for the claimant to wait until the legislature clarifies the law. This is the kind of claim that might want to wait until they answer some questions. Mr. McGean said that they don't want to wait indefinitely but there are certainly unresolved issues. He added that to his knowledge, there is no legislation being addressed in regard to personal representatives. He asked the Board to adopt the waiver back to the acquisition date in 1971 or 1972. Commissioner Baney confirmed that the claim was not submitted by the representatives until after the original owner had died. Mark Pilliod stated that the point that needs to be recognized is the owner is reference in Measure 37, not a family member. The date of acquisition would be the date the estate passed, as referred to in statute. There is all kinds of room for disagreement as to what the voters intended, but he is not aware of any court or government having the personal representative take over in this fashion. Being no further testimony offered, the hearing was closed. LUKE: Move approval of the Order. BANEY: Second. VOTE: BANEY: Yes. LUKE: Yes. DALY: Chair votes yes. 3. Before the Board was a Hearing and Consideration of Signature of Order No. 2007-070, a Measure 37 Claim (Clement). Charles Clement of SW Catlow Way, Redmond, is the claimant. The property is a 1.42 acre lot zoned EFU within the Tumalo-Redmond-Bend subzone. He would like to do a residential division; the amount of damage claimed is $100,000. Minutes of Board of Commissioners' Business Meeting Monday, April 2, 2007 Page 3 of 13 Pages He claims the property was acquired in 1965 by adverse possession. The property has been used for growing crops. In 1971 a bargain and sale deed was conveyed to the claimant and recorded. The staff report reflects that adverse possession is insufficient to establish an interest back to 1965. The order proposes an acquisition date of 1981. Ed Fitch, attorney for the claimant, said that a Measure 37 claim was filed on the adjacent property by attorney Tia Lewis, but this portion was unintentionally left out. There has been open and notorious use of the property since before 1965. The reason for the 1981 deed was to resolve a dispute with the neighbors; $500 was paid so there would be no question of the title. The County has already issued a Measure 37 claim waiver for the remainder of the property. Mr. Clement stated that he owns the use of the water rights, and has paid taxes on the property since 1965. Ed Fitch said that the record could be left open and he will get documentation regarding the water rights and the taxes. Mark Pilliod stated that the Board would have to make a finding of adverse possession; he is not sure what claim of right existed at that time. The legal description should have included this tax lot. The fact that there was a fence to identify where to farm means the use of the property was open, this is a necessary element of the case. A deed is an indicator of ownership, and it didn't include this piece of land. Mr. Clement stated that the deed was for 86 acres, and this part was included. Commissioner Daly noted that it doesn't matter who pays the taxes or owns the water right, if someone is using the property openly. Commissioner Baney stated that things were done differently in 1965; the additional information would be helpful. BANEY: Move continuance of this claim to April 16, and the clock would be extended at least two more weeks. LUKE: Second. VOTE: BANEY: LUKE: DALY: Yes. Yes. Chair votes yes. Minutes of Board of Commissioners' Business Meeting Monday, April 2, 2007 Page 4 of 13 Pages 4. Before the Board was a Hearing and Consideration of Signature of Order No. 2007-071, a Measure 37 Claim (Patterson). The property is located off McKenzie Highway, and consists of two lots zoned EFU, Sisters-Cloverdale subzone. Lot 400 is 336 acres, acquired on September 16, 1968; Lot 401 is 9.54 acres acquired on November 4, 1975. The damage claimed is $1 million plus. The intended use is a subdivision, but no specific proposal has been detailed. A letter from attorney Ed Fitch dated March 30 clarifies what he believes to be the acquisition date of Lot 401, due to a change of tax roll. Central Oregon Land Watch has submitted a letter of opposition; they state the information is extensive and they have not had an opportunity to review it. Commissioner Baney asked if this letter is an issue for the Board to consider. Commissioner Luke stated that they do a good job of documenting the record, but all the Board is doing is establishing a date of the interest in the property. Unless they are challenging the deeds, their letter is only relevant to further land use action. Catherine Morrow said that the letter is seven pages in length, and claims the application is incomplete and that the claimant has not shown they can't develop the property otherwise. They also stated that the Commissioners do not have jurisdiction, and so on. Commissioner Baney said that this is fairly standard for what they have previously submitted, and may be relevant later. Mark Pilliod added that this material will be a part of the record. Ed Fitch stated that the regulations for July 1974 and November 1975 are probably identical. The ownership roll change of July 1, 1974 is when they bought it. A down payment was made at that time. In regard to valuation, a real estate evaluation for this property and for Pine Meadow Ranch, which is adjacent, was submitted. He said he agrees with the staff report regarding the dates. One property is landlocked but is owned by the same claimant. Mr. Pilliod said that he recommends the acquisition date for Lot 401 be stated as July 1, 1974. Being no further testimony offered, the hearing was closed. LUKE: Move that the Order be amended to indicate a date of acquisition for Lot 401 as July 1, 1974, and that corresponding changes in the staff report also be authorized. Minutes of Board of Commissioners' Business Meeting Monday, April 2, 2007 Page 5 of 13 Pages BANEY: Second. VOTE: BANEY: Yes. LUKE: Yes. DALY: Chair votes yes. LUKE: Move approval of the Order as amended. BANEY: Second. VOTE: BANEY: LUKE: DALY: Yes. Yes. Chair votes yes. 5. Before the Board was a Hearing and Consideration of Signature of Order No. 2007-072, a Measure 37 Claim (Runco). Catherine Morrow said that the property is zone F-1, and the amount of damage claimed is $1,700,000. The proposed use is residential. The deed was submitted by Roy and Caroline Runco is July 20, 1962, and it was conveyed to a revocable trust in 1998, which continues the individual ownership. The property has been continuously owned since 1962. There was no minimum lot size at that time, and probably was no zoning in place. Ed Fitch stated that they concur with the staff report and proposed Order. No testimony was offered, so the hearing was closed. BANEY: Move approval of the Order. LUKE: Second. VOTE: BANEY: Yes. LUKE: Yes. DALY: Chair votes yes. 6. Before the Board was a Hearing and Consideration of Signature of Order No. 2007-073, a Measure 37 Claim (Pine Meadow Ranch). Mark Pilliod said that he corresponded with the attorney on this matter, who requested that it be continued to April 16. This includes a waiver of the time frame. Therefore, it is inappropriate to take testimony at this time. Minutes of Board of Commissioners' Business Meeting Monday, April 2, 2007 Page 6 of 13 Pages BANEY: Move continuance of this claim to April 16, and the clock would be extended at least two more weeks. LUKE: Second. VOTE: BANEY: LUKE: DALY: Yes. Yes. Chair votes yes. 7. Before the Board was a Hearing and Consideration of Signature of Order No. 2007-074, a Measure 37 Claim (Crumpacker/Stoloff). Ms. Morrow said the property is located off Tweed Road and is 28 acres zoned EFU, Tumalo-Redmond-Bend subzone. The planned use is home sites, and the amount of damage claimed is $750,000. There are several owners. Deed information shows that James and Elizabeth Crumpacker have had a continuous interest since July 10, 1974 through a memorandum of contract. In 1985 Stoloff was added, and also signed the application. Mr. Fitch said he concurs with the staff report and Order. This is an aunt/ nephew relationship. Commissioner Baney stated that the document date November 2006 shows that the only claimant is the Crumpackers. Mr. Fitch noted that Stoloff thought he was on record at the time, but was not. Diane Ecker-Wadsworth testified. She said that her property abuts this property, and she is representing herself even though others are slightly upset regarding the development along Tweed Road and Highway 20. Commissioner Luke advised that the Board is not approving a development, but is just establishing a date when they had an interest in the property. Ms. Ecker-Wadsworth wanted to voice her objection. The County already approved development on Tweed Road, the Woods property, into three five- acre parcels; also the Walker property, 107 acres, can now be 21 parcels. This development affects the residents through increased traffic, water use, schools and fire protection. She said if this one is approved, it isn't just the 13 acres but the 28 acres. Commissioner Luke said that the Board hasn't approved any developments although they may have approved the Measure 37 claims. Ms. Ecker-Wadsworth again spoke of the ability of the people to - Minutes of Board of Commissioners' Business Meeting Monday, April 2, 2007 Page 7 of 13 Pages Commissioner Luke reiterated that all that is being done is establishing a date when they have an interest in the property. They have to apply for a land use application separately. Ms. Ecker-Wadsworth said that she understands that the proceedings today allow them to go ahead. Commissioner Luke stated that this only would allow them to apply. There is a separate land use process. Commissioner Baney added that anyone within the notification area can submit their testimony at that time. Commissioner Luke stated that the Order and staff report from the Measure 37 proceedings becomes a part of the land use record. Mark Pilliod said that the witness implied that the property has been divided. There are two separate tax accounts for the property is a single parcel. When Ms. Stoloff's interest was established, she had the same legal description. All three owners have an undivided interest in the same parcel. The Order reflects the different acquisition dates. Being no further testimony offered, the hearing was closed. LUKE: Move approval of the Order. BANEY: Second. VOTE: BANEY: Yes. LUKE: Yes. DALY: Chair votes yes. The Board called for a five-minute break at this time. 8. Before the Board were Deliberations (continued from March 19) regarding an Appeal of the Hearings Officer's Decision on File No. TP-06-977/A07-1 (Applicant: Arnett - C Corp Homes; Jordan Lane at NE 5th Street, near O'Neil Way). Paul Blikstad said that he received a copy of the letter from Mr. Fitch regarding the issues brought up at the previous hearing. He concurs with Mr. Fitch's statements, and believes as staff does that all issues have been resolved. Staff feels that the proposal as submitted can be approved. Minutes of Board of Commissioners' Business Meeting Monday, April 2, 2007 Page 8 of 13 Pages Laurie Craghead said she researched case law and couldn't find the case she had thought of in regard to ODOT and failing intersections. She added that she doesn't think this issue needs to be considered at this point if the information submitted is credible, including the traffic study and the new intersection that will remove traffic from the intersection. Therefore, the traffic issue is not exempt from Measure 37 claims. Approval would be based on the traffic study and hydrology report. Commissioners Luke and Baney indicated they were satisfied with the information provided. LUKE: Move acceptance of the staff recommendation to approve the application based on testimony provided during the appeal process, and the applicant's attorney is to work with County Counsel to draft findings for final presentation to the Board. The applicant may need to waive the time limitation. BANEY: Second. Commissioner Daly stated that he has known the Arnetts and the Coons for many years. Commissioner Baney said she has gotten permission from them to place campaign signs on their property, but doesn't have a personal relationship with them. VOTE: BANEY: Yes. LUKE: Yes. DALY: Chair votes yes. 9. Before the Board was Discussion of Specific Aspects of the Proposed Destination Resort Code Amendment (File #TA-04-4). Terri Payne gave an overview of the State statute changes to be incorporated in Code. Decisions were made on the five points, and she is back to talk about the final two points. One issue, #5, is the definition of overnight lodging; whether the units have to be separate units or if housing needs to be available at certain times. To also be considered is whether property owners in addition to a central reservation can be utilized, and whether they should have to track the ratio; whether deed restrictions would be included; and reporting issues. Minutes of Board of Commissioners' Business Meeting Monday, April 2, 2007 Page 9 of 13 Pages One idea that was considered was to track usage through room taxes, but Finances says that will probably not work well as the room tax Code would have to be changed, and it would burden the County. Also to be discussed is whether language should be required showing proof of compliance before plats are signed. Another potential change is the definition of overnight lodging, and whether it should be just hotels, motels and timeshares. There is not an easy way to track this, and it can't be changed for existing resorts. Commissioner Luke stated that maybe the County should make it worthwhile for the resorts to submit reports in a timely manner; perhaps a fine or not issuing building permits. There should be incentive. Laurie Craghead stated that there is a possibility of Dolan issues if the property owner is different but is penalized because of the resort. Ms. Payne said that Eagle Crest does not yet have a handle on the reporting; the others are still in the bonding phase. Pronghorn has provided a report. There is no firm timeline for this issue yet; she is trying to work with the resorts. Sometimes the homeowners' associations handle this function but it is hard to track. If these don't have to be counted, it would make the process easier. Even with these challenges, the County is ahead of everyone else in the State. Commissioner Baney stated that the resorts indicate using property managers gives more flexibility. Commissioner Luke stressed that he feels there should be sanctions for reports not coming in. The resorts are responsible for them. Commissioner Baney said that there is a $600 sanction now. Commissioner Luke noted that the resorts feel this is just a cost of doing business. If they couldn't get building permits, it would be more effective. There's no way to know if the resorts are in compliance. If sanctions are just money, the reports won't come in. Commissioner Baney stated that these are two separate issues, and a decision can't be made because one resort isn't complying. She asked that staff come back with ideas on how to obtain the necessary information. Commissioner Daly said that one motion would be to not include the individually owned units; he asked if this would be appropriate, at least until a way is found to do this. Minutes of Board of Commissioners' Business Meeting Monday, April 2, 2007 Page 10 of 13 Pages Ms. Payne asked if the language should stay as it is, separate this out or wait until it is resolved to finalize the Ordinance. Commissioner Luke replied that he isn't interested in approving anything right now until it is figured out. He has no problem with resorts using property managers if the reports come in as they should. He added that he has questions on other aspects and wants to talk about them. Commissioner Baney noted that staff time needs to be considered; a partnership with the resorts is good but the resorts need to do the work. Commissioner Luke said that this won't be just for Eagle Crest; something is needed to guarantee all of them will report as required. Ms. Payne said that the other issue, #6, is the phasing of overnight lodging and whether all 150 should be built or bonded before lot sales can occur. The resorts usually choose to bond, typically for one year with possible extensions. This would allow the first fifty before lots are sold, with another fifty within five years and the final fifty within another five years. The first fifty units could lead to default because of the high expense. This option would most likely be used by existing resorts. If the 2:1 ratio is used, it takes away much of the destination part of the resort, making it more of a subdivision. Commissioner Luke asked how they could be stopped from selling lots, since the County's ratio is permanent homes to rental units. Ms. Craghead said that if they bonded the 150, they could have sold up to 300 lots. This could be clarified with deed restriction language. Commissioner Luke stated that would not be on the subdivision plat. They can't be held back from selling lots; they just have to meet the ratio. Ms. Craghead said the first fifty would be deed restricted, and they would have to show the ratios for the rest to be approved. Commissioner Luke noted that building the first fifty before they can sell others is a huge financial burden, and only large developers could afford this. He doesn't think the County is sufficiently protected if they don't bond them. Commissioner Baney said that there aren't going to be Ma and Pa destination resorts. It is a responsibility for them to uphold the understanding of the community as to what a destination resort is. This is a commitment of the developer and a part of the business. Ms. Craghead said that they would have five years to decide whether to bond, and another four to build. On the third set, they could wait until the tenth year to bond or build, with another four years to do it. They would still have to comply with the 2:1 ratio during that process. Typically the bond cannot be extended, per statute. Minutes of Board of Commissioners' Business Meeting Monday, April 2, 2007 Page 11 of 13 Pages The bond is for the County to finish building them if the developer walked away. Pronghorn bonded the 150 but now can't build them in time. The County could go in and build, or can allow them to extend the time frame. Commissioner Baney stated that she isn't recommending that they build the first 150 up front. The best process needs to be put into place. Commissioner Daly noted that in the early 1980's real estate was down, and he doesn't want to see huge requirements put in place unless there are some options to be flexible. It is unrealistic for the County to build units that it can't operate. Bonding rules are appropriate if there are options available. Hard and fast rules don't allow flexibility when it is needed, and they to be able to finish. Ms. Craghead noted that they still have to be a destination resort with the appropriate amount of overnight lodging. Commissioner Luke said that they need to honor their commitments but some flexibility is good. They have to plan for the market, and bonding allows flexibility. He asked that a chart showing the options, what they have to do now, and what the proposals are would be helpful. He added that he is having a hard time following this issue. Commissioner Daly agreed. Commissioner Luke said that the Commissioners need to know when they can sign plats. Ms. Craghead replied that the plat is recorded but they can't sell under the destination resort Code. Enforcement is an issue, though. Technically they are violating the law if they haven't built the first fifty units. This is potentially a $600 per day fine per violation. Commissioner Luke said that he isn't in a big hurry on this issue. The other items that were agreed upon have been passed, leaving just these two issues. An additional work session will be scheduled to walk through the scenarios and to discuss possible sanctions. Ms. Craghead reminded the Board that this is a legislative and land use action, but is quasi-judicial so there is no problem with ex parte contact. Oral public testimony can't be accepted, but written testimony can be submitted. 10. Before the Board were Other Items. None were offered. Minutes of Board of Commissioners' Business Meeting Monday, April 2, 2007 Page 12 of 13 Pages Being no further items to come before the Board, Chair Daly adjourned the meeting at 12:15 p.m. DATED this 2"d Day of April 2007 for the Deschutes County Board of Commissioners. ATTEST: Tammy money, Comro sioner Recording Secretary Minutes of Board of Commissioners' Business Meeting Monday, April 2, 2007 Page 13 of 13 Pages Dennis R. Luke, Vice Chair Deschutes County Board of Commissioners 1300 NW Wall St., Bend, OR 97701-1960 (541) 388-6570 - Fax (541) 385-3202 - www.deschutes.org BUSINESS MEETING AGENDA - LAND USE DESCHUTES COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS 10:00 A.M., MONDAY, APRIL 2, 2007 Commissioners' Hearing Room - Administration Building 1300 NW Wall St., Bend 1. CITIZEN INPUT This is the time provided for individuals wishing to address the Board regarding issues that are not already on the agenda. Visitors who wish to speak should sign up prior to the beginning of the meeting on the sign-up sheet provided. Please use the microphone and also state your name and address at the time the Board calls on you to speak. 2. A HEARING (continued from February 26) and Consideration of Signature of Order No. 2007-048, a Measure 37 Claim (Campbell) - Mark Pilliod, Legal Counsel; Tom Anderson, Community Development Department 3. A HEARING and Consideration of Signature of Order No. 2007-070, a Measure 37 Claim (Clement) - Mark Pilliod, Legal Counsel; Tom Anderson, Community Development Department 4. A HEARING and Consideration of Signature of Order No. 2007-071, a Measure 37 Claim (Patterson) - Mark Pilliod, Legal Counsel; Tom Anderson, Community Development Department 5. A HEARING and Consideration of Signature of Order No. 2007-072, a Measure 37 Claim (Bunco) - Mark Pilliod, Legal Counsel; Tom Anderson, Community Development Department 6. A HEARING and Consideration of Signature of Order No. 2007-073, a Measure 37 Claim (Pine Meadow Ranch) - Mark Pilliod, Legal Counsel; Tom Anderson, Community Development Department Board of Commissioners' Business Meeting Agenda Monday, April 2, 2007 Page 1 of 6 Pages 7. A HEARING and Consideration of Signature of Order No. 2007-074, a Measure 37 Claim (Crumpacker/Stoloff) - Mark Pilliod, Legal Counsel; Tom Anderson, Community Development Department 8. DELIBERATIONS (continued from March 19) regarding an Appeal of the Hearings Officer's Decision on File No. TP-06-977/A07-1 (Applicant: Arnett - C Corp Homes; Jordan Lane at NE 5th Street, near O'Neil Way) - Paul Blikstad, Community Development Department 9. DISCUSSION of Specific Aspects of the Proposed Destination Resort Code Amendment (File #TA-04-4) - Terri Payne, Community Development Department 10. OTHER ITEMS Deschutes County meeting locations are wheelchair accessible. Deschutes County provides reasonable accommodations for persons with disabilities. For deaf, hearing impaired or speech disabled, dial 7-1-1 to access the state transfer relay service for TTY. Please call (541) 388-6571 regarding alternative formats or for further information. FUTURE MEETINGS: (Please note: Meeting dates and times are subject to change. All meetings take place in the Board of Commissioners' meeting rooms at 1300 NW Wall St., Bend, unless otherwise indicated. If you have questions regarding a meeting, please call 388-6572) Monday, April 2, 2007 10:00 a.m. Board Land Use Meeting 1:30 p.m. Administrative Work Session - could include executive session(s) 3:30 p.m. Regular Meeting of LPSCC (Local Public Safety Coordinating Council) Tuesday, April 3, 2007 1:00 P.M. Budget Committee Interviews Board of Commissioners' Business Meeting Agenda Monday, April 2, 2007 Page 2 of 6 Pages Wednesday, April 4, 2007 10:00 a.m. Board of Commissioners' Meeting 1:30 p.m. Administrative Work Session - could include executive session(s) Thursday, April 5, 2007 8:00 a.m. Regular Meeting with the City of Sisters Council, Sisters City Hall 9:00 a.m. Meeting with Judge Fadeley, Justice Court, Sisters Tuesday, April 10, 2007 7:30 a.m. Legislative Update Conference Call Wednesday, April 11, 2007 10:00 a.m. Board of Commissioners' Meeting 1:30 p.m. Administrative Work Session - could include executive session(s) Thursday, April 12, 2007 12:00 noon Audit Committee Meeting Monday, April 16, 2007 10:00 a.m. Measure 37 Hearings 12:00 noon Regular Meeting with Department Heads 1:30 p.m. Administrative Work Session - could include executive session(s) Tuesday, April 17, 2007 7:30 a.m. Bend Chamber of Commerce Breakfast Meeting - State of the County 10:00 a.m. Regular Meeting of the Employee Benefits Advisory Committee Wednesday, April 18, 2007 1:30 p.m. Administrative Work Session - could include executive session(s) Board of Commissioners' Business Meeting Agenda Monday, April 2, 2007 Page 3 of 6 Pages Monday, April 23, 2007 10:00 a.m. Board Land Use Meeting 1:30 p.m. Administrative Work Session - could include executive session(s) Tuesday, April 24, 2007 7:30 a.m. Legislative Update Conference Call 11:00 a.m. Meeting with Black Butte Ranch County Service District Board Wednesday, April 25, 2007 10:00 a.m. Board of Commissioners' Meeting 1:30 p.m. Administrative Work Session - could include executive session(s) Thursday, April 26, 2007 1:30 p.m. Sheriff Department Update Monday, April 30 10:00 a.m. Board Land Use Meeting 1:30 p.m. Administrative Work Session - could include executive session(s) Wednesday, May 2, 2007 10:00 a.m. Board of Commissioners' Meeting 1:30 p.m. Administrative Work Session - could include executive session(s) Monday, May 7, 2007 10:00 a.m. Board Land Use Meeting 1:30 p.m. Administrative Work Session - could include executive session(s) 3:30 p.m. Regular Meeting of LPSCC (Local Public Safety Coordinating Council) Tuesday, May 8, 2007 7:30 a.m. Legislative Update Conference Call Board of Commissioners' Business Meeting Agenda Monday, April 2, 2007 Page 4 of 6 Pages Wednesday, May 9, 2007 10:00 a.m. Board of Commissioners' Meeting 1:30 p.m. Administrative Work Session - could include executive session(s) Tuesday, May 15, 2007 10:00 a.m. Measure 37 Hearings Thursday, May 17, 2007 7:00 a.m. Regular Meeting with the Redmond City Council, Redmond Council Chambers 9:00 a.m. Juvenile Community Justice Update 10:00 a.m. Parole & Probation Department Update Monday, May 21, 2007 10:00 a.m. Board Land Use Meeting 1:00 P.M. Budget Meetings Tuesday, May 22, 2007 1:00 P.M. Budget Meetings Wednesday, May 23, 2007 8:30 a.m. Administrative Work Session (tentative) 10:00 a.m. Board of Commissioners' Meeting 1:00 P.M. Budget Meetings Thursday, May 24, 2007 1:00 P.M. Budget Meetings Friday, May 25, 2007 1:00 P.M. Budget Meetings Board of Commissioners' Business Meeting Agenda Monday, April 2, 2007 Page 5 of 6 Pages Monday, May 28, 2007 Most County offices will be closed to observe the Memorial Day Holiday. Wednesday, May 30, 2007 10:00 a.m. Board of Commissioners' Meeting 1:30 p.m. Administrative Work Session - could include executive session(s) Deschutes County meeting locations are wheelchair accessible. Deschutes County provides reasonable accommodations for persons with disabilities. For deaf, hearing impaired or speech disabled, dial 7-1-1 to access the state transfer relay service for TTY. Please call (541) 388-6571 regarding alternative formats or for further information. Board of Commissioners' Business Meeting Agenda Monday, April 2, 2007 Page 6 of 6 Pages