Loading...
2007-572-Minutes for Meeting March 14,2007 Recorded 6/1/2007COUNTY OFFICIAL NANCYUBLANKENSHIP, COUNTY CLERKDS V 2007.572 COMMISSIONERS' JOURNAL „1„„1 , , 06/01/2007 03:20:02 PM 2007-s1Z j 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 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 WEDNESDAY, MARCH 14, 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 Dave Kanner, County Administrator; Teresa Rozic, Commissioners' Office; Mark Pilliod, Mark Amberg and Laurie Craghead, Legal Counsel; Tom Blust, Paul Richardson and George Kolb, Road Department; Debbie Legg, Personnel; Sue Brewster, Larry Blanton and others from the Sheriff's Office; Tom Anderson, Community Development Department; and about twenty other citizens. No representatives of the media were in attendance. Chair Michael M. Daly opened the meeting at 10: 00 a. m. 1. Before the Board was Citizen Input. Citizen Judy Forsythe of La Pine expressed numerous concerns about questions and issues she believes were not addressed at the La Pine meeting. Commissioner Luke said that he felt the issues she brought up issues were covered at the meeting in La Pine the previous night. The first part of the statement has a problem in that the County is an agent of the State. The Department of Environmental Quality develops the program; the County's Environmental Health Department operates under contract with the State. The County can institute regulations that are more but not less restrictive than the State. The County cannot approve a system; that licensing comes from the DEQ. Mark Pilliod added that although these citizens are entitled to make a statement to the Board, they should understand that the Board is conducting public hearings on this issue and they should attend the hearings when they are resumed to be able to participate more fully. Minutes of Board of Commissioners' Business Meeting Wednesday, March 14, 2007 Page 1 of 10 Pages Liz Harmon of La Pine said that she was sorry people were so hostile at the meeting. She said in her opinion Community Development staff has not been respectful to the people; she asked if they would attend the next meeting to answer questions. Commissioner Daly said that they probably will be, but the USGS scientists probably won't be there. Commissioner Luke disagreed that they have no respect. They went out of their way to try to answer questions to the best of their ability. If people tried working with the staff at city hall, they'd find out how much better the County is. Community Development has a job to do and is taking direction to do it, and are doing the best they can to answer questions. There are uncertainties out there, and the elected officials have to make the final call. The certified smart people testify, and the Commissioners have to rely on them to help make decisions. Commissioner Daly added that the Commissioners are in a learning mode as well. They hope to give as much information to the citizens as possible. He said he's worried that a lot of the information might not have come through, as it is technical and difficult to understand. He hopes the next meeting will be better for everyone. Paul Richardson was awarded a plaque and letter for his thirty years with the County. Tom Blust stated that Mr. Richardson is one of those people you can always rely on to do his work for the Road Department. 2. Before the Board was Consideration of Signature of Resolution No. 2007- 025, Establishing a No Parking Zone on a Portion of Tetherow Road near Yucca Avenue. George Kolb gave an overview of the item. He said his department has received a lot of complaints regarding parking, partying, trash and inappropriate behavior at this location. (Mr. Kolb explained where the area is located, which is on both sides of the bridge) Commissioner Daly asked where parking would be allowed. Mr. Kolb said there is parking on the County property and the Park & Recreation District property as well. A safety hazard exists when people park on the roadway. The boulders would be moved to not create a traffic hazard. Commissioner Daly stated there is an area to park near the power station and fencing; Mr. Kolb said the boulders would remain. Minutes of Board of Commissioners' Business Meeting Wednesday, March 14, 2007 Page 2 of 10 Pages Commissioner Luke said the County property on one side of the river does flood, and asked if this area would be protected from people driving on it, since it is a sensitive location. Mr. Kolb stated they will examine it. Lt. Shane Nelson and Sgt. Dan Bilyeu said their office has responded to 108 calls regarding this location since last July. The offenders don't want to follow the rules. Part of the problem is there is a lack of manpower, and sometimes being able to respond when the problem is occurring is an issue. The neighbors tried to do some enforcement action themselves by getting license plate numbers. The folks who park on the private property are drinking, throwing trash around, fighting, playing loud music and involved in other inappropriate behavior. They would like to have people visiting the area to be decent citizens and not a problem for the neighbors. Commissioner Daly asked if these people would not just park by the old house. Lt. Nelson said they park on the south side of the bridge, and there is no space. Some of the people might retaliate as well, and could direct their anger at the neighbors. The folks who legitimately enjoy the park area behave appropriately. The ones parking on the south side of the bridge by the road are drinking, disobeying the noise ordinance, and are generally behaving badly. These are not people enjoying the park with their families. Commissioner Baney asked if the problem is escalating; Lt. Nelson replied yes. He theorized that some of this problem stems from meth use. Many of these people used to hang out at Cline Falls State Park, but there is strong enforcement there that drives them to other places. A couple of the people frequenting the Tetherow Crossing bridge area live near there, and some of the contacts are frequently contacted by police. Law enforcement wants to keep the area safe. Commissioner Baney asked what solutions might lead to a change to get them into a more appropriate area that is more easily controlled. Lt. Nelson said they want to be proactive and the citizen involvement is a blessing. Mark Amberg stated that from a legal standpoint, there is a recorded public easement to the river in that area, to ten feet above the high water level. This would not affect the public's access. There are two public properties, Park and Recreation and the County. These still would be open to the public, and access to the river would not be impaired or blocked. Minutes of Board of Commissioners' Business Meeting Wednesday, March 14, 2007 Page 3 of 10 Pages Four people asked to testify. Mike Wenger, who has lived at Tetherow Crossing since 1999, said he listens to what goes on and wanted to be here to say how much he supports what has been done so far. Placing the rocks has helped tremendously, and he would not like to see them moved at all. Commissioner Daly stated the power company picked the location. They are careful about putting it on their private property. Mr. Wenger encouraged the County to leave the rocks there but to establish the parking area. He'd like to see the park better maintained, and that a controlled burn is needed as well. He added that it is a nice park and a good place for families but they stay away because of the bad element. Commissioner Luke said he voted no to allowing the Park and Recreation District to take it over as they didn't have funds to maintain it. Joyce Waring, who lives in the area, said she sees it as an important issue to put up parking signs and clean up the area. She has to cross the bridge to get to her mailbox, and finds it intimidating. People won't move from the bridge; often they are too drunk. It is important safety wise to make some positive changes. Patrick Flaherty said his family moved there in June 2005; they heard stories of the criminal activity at the bridge, and made observations as they worked on their home. The problem began to escalate and it's not like it used to be. It has changed from a place where locals would go to cool off, to a placate where there is a hardcore group of criminals involved in meth use and drinking to excess, with a gang mentality, and they have taken over the bridge. He stated his background is in the criminal justice field, and he has no problem contacting law enforcement and providing them with the information they need to do their job. Photographs, vehicle plate numbers and other information have been provided. There are problems with drug use, meth use and associated issues like used syringes, public indecency, sex acts and other inappropriate activities. The Sheriff has information on a number of instances. There is a geographical problem for law enforcement - by the time they can get there, usually the individuals are gone. He undertook this effort thinking the group could clean things up if they work at it. The Sheriff's Office does the best they can but aren't able to solve the problem due to limited resources and geography. The Sheriff's Office suggested changing the parking situation to get it away from the ridge. Ed Stabb, a neighbor, put in the boulders and signs on his property, and this eliminated a lot of crime zone there. A letter was sent to Tom Blust at the Road Department. Minutes of Board of Commissioners' Business Meeting Wednesday, March 14, 2007 Page 4 of 10 Pages He said he's not a sociologist and can't explain why, but their observations have been that criminals want to be able to park on the bridge; they do not go across the bridge and park at the park or other places. They want to be close to their vehicles where they probably have their dope and music. No one else is at the park when the criminals are at the bridge. Commissioner Luke said the concern is appreciated. Commissioner Daly agreed, and added that the problem needs to be solved. Citizen Valerie Wright agreed with what was said previously. Ed Stabb stated he is a landowner in the area and owns 310 acres. He is a full- time farmer and has observed what goes on, and has seen a radical change in the character of the area. He used to pick up beer cans, but now it is needles and syringes. Northwest Redmond is a checkerboard of BLM and privately- owned land. BLM is being proactive and has a resources management plan that precludes all motorized vehicles, and barricades vehicles from certain areas. This has been very effective. They encouraged him to put up the boulders, which cost him $2,000. He has experience a series of burglary problems, and has four wheel line motors valued at $400 each stolen in the past two years, plus two burglaries. He is in lock-down mode every night. As private property owners, they need to take back the area. It's no longer safe for families to visit the bridge. The neighbors have put out a lot of effort to take back Tetherow Crossing. He added that they don't want to push the problem down the road to the public lands. The problem needs to be solved. Commissioner Baney thanked the residents for being proactive and involved. Steve Waring, a citizen who lives on Tetherow Bridge Loop, stated that the issue is not the boulders or the parking; he would like to see the turnaround back, but primarily the criminals need to go. LUKE: Move approval of the Resolution. BANEY: Second. VOTE: BANEY: LUKE: DALY: Yes. Yes. Chair votes yes. Minutes of Board of Commissioners' Business Meeting Wednesday, March 14, 2007 Page 5 of 10 Pages 3. Before the Board was Consideration of Signature of Document No. 2007- 119, a Deed of Dedication regarding the Realignment of Gribbling Road. George Kolb explained the item. The existing road doesn't follow where the road actually is and needs to be established in the right location. He is working with ODOT to clarify the access. LUKE: Move approval. BANEY: Second. VOTE: BANEY: Yes. LUKE: Yes. DALY: Chair votes yes. 4. Before the Board was Consideration of Approval of Department Director's Signature of Document No. 2007-122, an Intergovernmental Agreement for Central Oregon Community College to Provide Training Opportunities to Deschutes County Employees. Mr. Kanner stated this needs to be approved as soon as possible. Debbie Legg added that the first class would be scheduled on April 10 and it takes some time to get the word out to employees. Mr. Kanner said that the IGA is routine except for the services and the payment. Ms. Legg stated that there would be classes on Excel and Word. Mr. Pilliod indicated that the agreement would allow for future classes to be established as needed. Commissioner Baney asked about a threshold; Ms. Legg stated that the City of Bend and other public entities might be invited to fill any unused seats. LUKE: Move approval, with adjustments and corrections as appropriate. BANEY: Second. VOTE: BANEY: Yes. LUKE: Yes. DALY: Chair votes yes. 5. Before the Board was a Public Hearing (continued from January 31, February 7 and February 14) and Consideration of First and Second Readings and Adoption, by Emergency, of Ordinance No. 2007-004, Clarifying Board Meeting Scheduling and Establishing Consistency Terminology. Minutes of Board of Commissioners' Business Meeting Wednesday, March 14, 2007 Page 6 of 10 Pages Dave Kanner stated that this be continued indefinitely as there is still work that needs to be done. Commissioner Daly asked what changes are being considered. Mr. Kanner said that the Emergency Services Plan and the Ordinance need changes to be consistent. Commissioner Daly said that he thinks there is a big push to take the Commissioners out of the process and giving the power to the County Administrator. Commissioner Luke stated that it does merit further discussion. Commissioner Daly said that the Board is the governing body and needs to be the ultimate authority during an emergency; someone needs to be in charge and responsible. You don't want to end up with all the liability but not the control. Commissioner Luke noted that the Board needs to declare the emergency, but the County Administrator should provide direction to the departments. Commissioner Baney said that perhaps this could be discussed further in a work session with Don Webber. Commissioner Luke would like the portion of the Code regarding meeting dates to be adjusted as soon as possible. Commissioner Baney asked that when these types of things are discussed in the future, she would like to have legal counsel present. Chair Daly opened the public hearing. Being no testimony, it was continued to the Board meeting of March 28. LUKE: Move continuance to at least vote on certain aspects of the proposed Ordinance regulating to scheduling. BANEY: Second. VOTE: BANEY: LUKE: DALY: Yes. Yes. Chair votes yes. 6. Before the Board was Consideration of Approval of the Consent Agenda. LUKE: Move approval of the Consent Agenda. BANEY: Second. VOTE: BANEY: LUKE: DALY: Yes. Yes. Chair votes yes. Minutes of Board of Commissioners' Business Meeting Wednesday, March 14, 2007 Page 7 of 10 Pages CONSENT AGENDA 7. Signature of Resolution No. 2007-028, Transferring Appropriations within the Park Acquisition & Development Fund 8. Signature of Resolution No. 2007-029, Transferring Appropriations within the Health Department Fund 9. Signature of Resolution No. 2007-030, Appropriating New Grant Funds in the Health Department Fund 10. Signature of Resolution No. 2007-031, Transferring Appropriations within the Sheriff's Office Fund 11. Signature of Resolution No. 2007-032, Transferring Appropriations within the Solid Waste Fund 12. Approval of Minutes of Board Meetings: Business Meetings Administrative Work Sessions January 31, 2007 January 3, 2007 February 5, 2007 January 22, 2007 February 7, 2007 February 13, 2007 February 14, 2007 February 26, 2007 February 28, 2007 March 5, 2007 March 7, 2007 January 24, 2007 February 21, 2007 February 26, 2007 March 5, 2007 March 7, 2007 CONVENED AS THE GOVERNING BODY OF THE 9-1-1 COUNTY SERVICE DISTRICT 13. Before the Board was Consideration of Approval of Weekly Accounts Payable Vouchers for the 9-1-1 County Service District in the Amount of $30,994.21. LUKE: Move approval, subject to review. BANEY: Second. VOTE: BANEY: Yes. LUKE: Yes. DALY: Chair votes yes. Minutes of Board of Commissioners' Business Meeting Wednesday, March 14, 2007 Page 8 of 10 Pages RECONVENED AS THE DESCHUTES COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS 14. Before the Board was Consideration of Approval of Weekly Accounts Payable Vouchers for Deschutes County in the Amount of $1,461,153.33. LUKE: Move approval, subject to review. BANEY: Second. VOTE: BANEY: LUKE: DALY: Yes. Yes. Chair votes yes. 15. Before the Board were Other Items. Before the Board was Consideration of Signature of Order No. 2007-098. Teresa Rozic said the public land auction takes place on March 16, and an Order is needed for the County's Property and Facilities Manger to be able to sign the disclosure form. LUKE: Move approval. BANEY: Second. VOTE: BANEY: Yes. LUKE: Yes. DALY: Chair votes yes. Being no further items to come before the Board, Chair Daly adjourned the meeting at 11:15 a. m. Minutes of Board of Commissioners' Business Meeting Wednesday, March 14, 2007 Page 9 of 10 Pages DATED this 14th Day of March 2007 for the Deschutes County Board of Commissioners. ATTEST: Recording Secretary Attachments Exhibit A: Exhibit B: Agenda Sign-in cards T , Com>niWoner Exhibit C: Correspondence regarding Tetherow Crossing Minutes of Board of Commissioners' Business Meeting Wednesday, March 14, 2007 Page 10 of 10 Pages `l D nnis R. Luke, ipe-Cfi4ir 0 { 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 DESCHUTES COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS 10:00 A.M., WEDNESDAY, MARCH 14, 2007 Commissioners' Hearing Room - Administration Building 1300 NW Wall St., Bend 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. CONSIDERATION of Signature of Resolution No. 2007-025, Establishing a No Parking Zone on a Portion of Tetherow Road - George Kolb, Road Department 3. CONSIDERATION of Signature of Document No. 2007-119, a Deed of Dedication regarding the Realignment of Gribbling Road - George Kolb, Road Department 4. CONSIDERATION of Approval of Department Director's Signature of Document No. 2007-122, an Intergovernmental Agreement for Central Oregon Community College to Provide Training Opportunities to Deschutes County Employees - Debbie Legg, Personnel 5. A PUBLIC HEARING (continued from January 31, February 7 and February 14) and Consideration of First and Second Readings and Adoption, by Emergency, of Ordinance No. 2007-004, Clarifying Board Meeting Scheduling and Establishing Consistency Terminology - Laurie Craghead, Legal Counsel Board of Commissioners' Business Meeting Agenda Wednesday, March 14, 2007 Page 1 of 7 Pages CONSENT AGENDA 6. Signature of Resolution No. 2007-028, Transferring Appropriations within the Park Acquisition & Development Fund 7. Signature of Resolution No. 2007-029, Transferring Appropriations within the Health Department Fund 8. Signature of Resolution No. 2007-030, Appropriating New Grant Funds in the Health Department Fund 9. Signature of Resolution No. 2007-031, Transferring Appropriations within the Sheriff's Office Fund 10. Signature of Resolution No. 2007-032, Transferring Appropriations within the Solid Waste Fund 11. Approval of Minutes of Board Meetings: Business Meetings Administrative Work Sessions January 31, 2007 January 3, 2007 February 5, 2007 January 22, 2007 February 7, 2007 February 13, 2007 February 14, 2007 February 26, 2007 February 28, 2007 March 5, 2007 March 7, 2007 January 24, 2007 February 21, 2007 February 26, 2007 March 5, 2007 March 7, 2007 CONVENE AS THE GOVERNING BODY OF THE 9-1-1 COUNTY SERVICE DISTRICT 12. CONSIDERATION of Approval of Weekly Accounts Payable Vouchers for the 9-1-1 County Service District. CONVENE AS THE GOVERNING BODY OF THE EXTENSION/4-11 COUNTY SERVICE DISTRICT 13. CONSIDERATION of Approval of Weekly Accounts Payable Vouchers for the Extension/4-H County Service District. Board of Commissioners' Business Meeting Agenda Wednesday, March 14, 2007 Page 2 of 7 Pages RECONVENE AS THE DESCHUTES COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS 14. CONSIDERATION of Approval of Weekly Accounts Payable Vouchers for Deschutes County. 15. ADDITIONS TO THE AGENDA 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) Tuesday, March 13, 2007 10:00 a.m. Board of Commissioners' Meeting - Measure 37 Claims 6:00 p.m. Public Meeting regarding Groundwater Local Rule Issues, La Pine High School Auditorium Wednesday, March 14, 2007 7:00 a.m. Regularly Scheduled Meeting with the Redmond City Council, Council Chambers 9:00 a.m. Juvenile Community Justice Department Update 10:00 a.m. Board of Commissioners' Meeting 1:30 p.m. Administrative Work Session - could include executive session(s) 3:00 p.m. Legislative Update Conference Call Thursday, March 15, 2007 11:00 a.m. Parole & Probation Department Update Board of Commissioners' Business Meeting Agenda Wednesday, March 14, 2007 Page 3 of 7 Pages Monday, March 19, 2007 10:00 a.m. Measure 37 Hearings 1:30 p.m. Administrative Work Session - could include executive session(s) Tuesday, March 20, 2007 10:00 a.m. Regular Meeting of the Employee Benefits Advisory Committee 1:00 P.M. Meeting with Other Counties regarding Regional Jail Proposal 6:00 p.m. Public Meeting regarding Groundwater Local Rule Issues, La Pine High School Auditorium Wednesday, March 21, 2007 1:30 p.m. Administrative Work Session - could include executive session(s) Thursday, March 22, 2007 9:00 a.m. Fair & Expo Center Update 11:00 a.m. Commission on Children & Families' Update Monday, March 26, 2007 10:00 a.m. Board Land Use Meeting 1:30 p.m. Administrative Work Session - could include executive session(s) Tuesday, March 27, 2007 6:00 p.m. Public Meeting regarding Groundwater Local Rule Issues, La Pine High School Auditorium Wednesday, March 28, 2007 10:00 a.m. Board of Commissioners' Meeting 1:30 p.m. Administrative Work Session - could include executive session(s) 3:00 p.m. Legislative Update Conference Call Thursday, March 29, 2007 9:00 a.m. Budget Committee Interviews Board of Commissioners' Business Meeting Agenda Wednesday, March 14, 2007 Page 4 of 7 Pages 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 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 Wednesday, April 11, 2007 10:00 a.m. Board of Commissioners' Meeting 1:30 p.m. Administrative Work Session - could include executive session(s) 3:00 p.m. Legislative Update Conference Call 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 Board of Commissioners' Business Meeting Agenda Wednesday, March 14, 2007 Page 5 of 7 Pages Wednesday, April 18, 2007 1:30 p.m. Administrative Work Session - could include executive session(s) 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 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) 3:00 p.m. Legislative Update Conference Call Thursday, April 26, 2007 1:30 p.m. Sheriff Department Update Monday, Amil 30 10:00 a.m. Board Land Use Meeting 1:30 p.m. Administrative Work Session - could include executive session(s) Wednesday 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) Board of Commissioners' Business Meeting Agenda Wednesday, March 14, 2007 Page 6 of 7 Pages Wednesday, Mu 9, 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 Wednesday, March 14, 2007 Page 7 of 7 Pages IF YOU WISH TO TESTIFY Please complete this card & turn it in to a County staff person. Name: C..4 st-4Lb~ Mail l~in e AddrQQess: 2gZ,0 NW OR Phone 5 4t -X04- l03 ~ E-mail Address: e~,_ s~-a~1~ P0.~,~\I.~►~~ Date: 3 ICI o Subject: IF YOU WISH TO TESTIFY Please complete this card & turn it in to a County staff person. Name:" Mailing Address: O~? ~~~d7/6~ die Phone 5'8Y_ 4131 } E-mail Address: Date: Subject: IF YOU WISH TO TESTIFY Please complete this card & turn it in to a County staff person. Name: r,\e. , t Mailing Address: 3 ~S M z ~ r, Phone 5,-A\ 33~T E-mail Address: Date: 3- V - o _-4- Subject: )c) ~br IF YOU WISH TO TESTIFY Please complete this card & turn it in to a County staff person. Name: Mailing Address: Phone t---q f qZ 3 - 17 4%S ' E-mail Address: Date: 3-r4-&-7 Subject: `T-~~,~. [~~~ss „✓q IF YOU WISH TO TESTIFY Please complete this card & turn it in to a County staff person. Name: M ilin Address: ~?G, 60_ 3a-- Phone E-mail Address: 1►,~rl ~4~e~~c corn Date:" Subject: IF YOU WISH TO TESTIFY IF YOU WISH TO TESTIFY Please complete this card & turn it in to a County staff person. Name: tz., 4 Mailing Ad ress:~.. Jal Phone E-mail Address: Date: 3 G-~ - e 7 Subject: Please complete this card & turn it in to a Cou staff person. Name: ~ADui e__ntcA_( i 1-9 - Mailing Address: 333 3 1-C 4 r o Phone - E-mail Address: o u)u'Mh Y'°` Date: 0 -7 Subject: a~~~:~ES o-t- Tle, t4_" OW c~ It. . Dear Mr. Blust: We have twice discussed the crime zone at Tetherow Crossing. At Commissioner Luke's suggestion, I called you to request that the county post "no parking" signs on the south and north sides of Tetherow Bridge and post the bridge to prohibit loitering and jumping/diving off of the bridge. I explained in some detail the basis for the request and I understand that you have also spoken with the Sheriff's Office representative on this matter, Lt. Shane Nelson, so I will not reiterate in this letter the history of the problems at Tetherow Bridge and all the work that private citizens and the Sheriff's Office have done to ameliorate the crime zone. You initiated our second conversation when you called me on February 8 and told me that the county wanted to see the boulders moved back. You even implied that the county may not be willing to post "no parking" signs or deal with the loitering issue on the bridge itself. You talked about "safety concerns" and "access issues" and did not seem to understand the public safety issues presented by the criminal element that virtually takes over the bridge when vehicles are able to park at or near the bridge. After our second conversation, I spoke with county counsel, Mark Amberg, and explained in detail our efforts to ameliorate the crime zone at Tetherow Bridge emphasizing the critical role of physically precluding parking in that effort and the value that "no parking" signs would have. I encouraged Mr. Amberg to speak with the Sheriff's Office to confirm that the bridge area is indeed a crime zone and that the criminal behavior is perpetrated by persons who park in close proximity to the bridge and loiter on the bridge. Our hope was that when someone with authority looked at the "big picture", this idea of moving the boulders would quickly be dismissed as a counter-productive waste of limited county resources and that the posting of "no parking signs" would be seen as a cheap, proactive and cost-effective adjunct to the efforts we and law enforcement have made to get the criminals out of our neighborhood. Since that time, county counsel Mark Amberg and you have discussed the situation and, much to our dismay, Mr. Amberg has advised me that the county's position (i.e., the road department's and county counsel's position) regarding the boulders is that the boulders must be relocated because they present a "safety" issue. At the same time, Mr. Amberg advised me that the road department and county counsel were 100% supportive of posting "no parking" signs and that the only issue he wanted to further assess regarding posting the bridge to prohibit loitering/jumping/diving off of the bridge was the constitutional ramifications of prohibiting loitering. Mr. Amberg also told me that the road department was willing to compromise on a) the no trespassing signs that are already in place and b) how far back the boulders needed to be moved. Mr. Amberg suggested that while the county's position on the need to relocate the boulders was "non- negotiable", he said that he felt the boulders did not need to be moved to the edge of the right-of-way to eliminate the safety hazard and implied that the no trespassing signs in place could remain where they are. Mr. Amberg also discussed the possibility, not one that we raised but certainly a proactive thought, that the county will be looking at the r propriety of posting no trespassing signs or otherwise limiting vehicle access to the NW corner of the county property across the river. Mr. Amberg told me that I needed to write a letter to you formally requesting the signage so that you could schedule the matter for a hearing before the county commissioners. This is that letter. We have discussed at length with several county officials (before and after the boulder placement) and the Sheriff's Office has documented what is accurately and fairly described as a "crime zone" at Tetherow Bridge. The near perfect correlation between vehicles parked at or near the bridge or persons loitering on the bridge, and criminal activity at the bridge, has been documented by the Sheriff's Office. As I explained to both you and Mr. Amberg and as I believe Lt. Nelson has explained to both of you, the Sheriff's Office (through Lt. Eric Utter) recommended the placement of the boulders to physically preclude parking at the bridge because it was a cost-effective means of ameliorating the crime zone at the bridge. We checked with county counsel (Sue Brewster) and property management (Teresa Rozic) prior to placing the boulders and were advised that the county had no objection. I believe that Lt. Utter also spoke with county counsel prior to his written recommendation to physically preclude parking on the south side of the bridge. The property owner, Ed Stabb, incurred the expense of placing the boulders and we picked up the expense of placing the signs. I hope you can understand our confusion and frustration at the county's new position regarding the boulders. Mark Amberg tells me that the county's position regarding the boulders is "non-negotiable" because someone driving through the area in the dark might strike a boulder and the county would be liable. My wife, the Sheriff's Office, Ed Stabb who owns the bouldered property, and I suspect many of our neighbors, though I can not and do not speak for anyone other than my wife, believe that the boulders do not present a safety hazard and that the current boulder placement is a cheap and effective means of ameliorating if not eliminating the "crime zone." The fact is that the boulders are probably as effective at ameliorating the crime zone as having a full-time deputy living at the old homestead. But certainly, if striking the boulders is the safety concern, we would be happy to pay for reflectors or reflective paint to ensure that people who drive off the road will not hit a rock. That said, please just consider the following thoughts and ideas we have as residents of this area about road safety: Why do the boulders present more of a safety hazard than the Central Oregon Electric transformer box? Or are you demanding that the transformer be relocated? It seems that colliding with that object would be far more hazardous than colliding with one of the rocks. Where they are currently located, the rocks prevent someone from colliding with the transformer box. Are you aware that without the boulders where they are currently placed, drivers routinely crossed the bridge at a higher rate of speed than they now travel? Prior to the boulder placement some drivers routinely, yes, routinely, would fly across the bridge and do 360s in the middle of the road and engage in other acts of reckless or careless driving. • Don't you want to slow down and funnel traffic coming from the south prior to crossing the one-lane bridge? Don't you want to slow down traffic coming from the south and the north due to the pedestrian usage of the little bridge? • Why not put reflectors up on or in front of the boulders? Wouldn't that address what Mr. Amberg cited as the primary "safety"/liability concern? Or has someone who was not committing a traffic violation collided with one of the boulders? • What about all the old poplars and old junipers lining the road that are as close or closer to the road than the boulders? Certainly, a careless driver who strikes one of those old trees will incur far more damage than striking one of the rocks near the bridge. • The boulders were placed in line with the county sign advising of the bridge weight limits and with the county sign for Tetherow Bridge Loop. From driving the road every day for two years now, I can tell you that the boulders are consistent with a 4-5 foot shoulder on each side of the traveled portion of the road approaching from the south and departing the bridge to the north. Current tire impression evidence corroborates my perspective. The boulder line is wider than the bridge and appears to be as wide or wider than the road on the north side of the bridge. I haven't taken any measurements so I certainly could be mistaken but from driving the road every day, sometimes several times a day, it appears that the shoulder is actually wider adjacent to the boulder line than it is many places both south of the boulder line on Tetherow Road and certainly on Yucca. What about that blind, one lane corner on Yucca upriver from the bridge? Isn't that far more of a "safety" concern than the boulders? • Do you think the boulders present a greater safety issue than vehicles parked parallel to the road (because that is what you will have if you move the boulders back) and the (usually impaired) pedestrians accompanying the vehicles? I understand that you will advocate posting no parking signs but the signs will be routinely ignored after dark and, if you require the boulders to be moved back more than a few feet, my prediction based on nearly two years of daily observation is that it will take considerable county resources to enforce the no parking prohibition during daylight hours. The county was not able to enforce the criminal law out here. That's why the boulders were put in at private, taxpayer expense to begin with. It is unsound to think that the county will be able to enforce violation law more effectively than criminal law. • Do the boulders present more of road safety concern than the one lane bridge? • Isn't it true that only a driver committing a traffic violation, like VBR or careless driving or DUII, will ever have a problem with the boulders? In that event, the county doesn't have to worry about liability, does it? The bottom line for us, Tom, is that even if the boulders present a road safety concern, the road safety concern is dramatically and grossly outweighed by the public safety/quality of life concerns presented by allowing vehicles to pull over and park near the bridge. I believe that the agency primarily responsible for public safety, the Sheriff's Office, agrees with our perspective. Please reconsider your position on the need to move the boulders back with an eye for the "big picture." That having been said: We hereby request that the road department install no parking signs on the south and north side of Tetherow Bridge. We request that the no parking signs on the south side be placed adjacent to the boulder line that currently exists. We further request that no parking signs be placed on the road side of the poplar trees that currently exist on the north side of the bridge. Finally, we request that the county post the bridge to prohibit loitering and jumping/diving off of the bridge. Please call me at 383-0119 if you need any further information. Thank you for the time and energy you are putting into this matter. Sincerely, Patrick Flaherty Valerie Wright i_ Patrick Flaherty From: Patrick Flaherty [patrick@oregonlawoffices.org] Sent: Thursday, February 15, 2007 6:04 PM To: 'Tom_Blust@co.deschutes.or.us' Cc: 'Mark_Amberg@co.deschutes.or.us'; 'Ed Stabb; 'Shane Nelson' Subject: Tetherow Bridge Attachments: Doc2.doc DocIdoc (37 KB) Dear Mr. Blust: Attached is the letter that you requested regarding signage at Tetherow Bridge. Please acknowledge receipt by return e-mail or call me at 383-0119. Thank you. Patrick Flaherty 1