Loading...
2007-592-Minutes for Meeting April 30,2007 Recorded 6/8/2007COUNTY NANCYUBLANKENSHIP,F000NTY CLERKS COMMISSIONERS' JOURNAL ,,.,,NJ ,,,..,ME ON ,MI ,..MI 06/08/2007 03;06;01 PM 2007-5'2 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 Q]f! 4u -A ❑ 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 - LAND USE DESCHUTES COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS MONDAY, APRIL 30, 2007 Commissioners' Hearing Room - Administration Building - 1300 NW Wall St., Bend Present were Commissioner Michael M. Daly and Tammy Baney; Commissioner Dennis R. Luke was out of the office. Also present were Mark Pilliod, Legal Counsel; Tom Anderson, Community Development; media representative Charlene Lee of Fox TV; and ten other citizens. Chair Michael M. Daly opened the meeting at 10:00 a.m. The Measure 37 opening statement was distributed. 1. Before the Board was Citizen Input. None was offered. 2. Before the Board was a Hearing and Consideration of Signature of Order No. 2007-083, a Measure 37 Claim (Applicant: Johnson). Tom Anderson explained that this claim involves a single parcel located on Goodrich Road, northeast of Sisters, zoned EFU, Sisters-Cloverdale subzone. The claimants wish to partition it into two five-acre lots. The amount of the claim is $280,000. The property was acquired via a memorandum of contract dated December 10, 1979, and they have owned it continuously since then. The parcel was zoned PL-15 at that time; EFU-20 was adopted by the County on November 1, 1979. Therefore, a partition would not have been permitted at that time. minutes of board of Commissioners' Business Meeting Monday, April 30, 2007 Page 1 of 9 Pages This parcel was created as part of a larger parcel; applied for in February 1979 for the earlier, larger parcel, when the older zoning regulations were in place. That partition was approved in April 1980, so this may explain why the Johnsons believe the older zoning designation would apply to this particular parcel. The rules in place at the time of application govern what can be done. The actual date of acquisition of this ten-acre piece was in December before the piece even existed separately. This would be subject to a land use application, and the Johnsons may choose to go before a Hearings Officer. There were no letters of opposition received. Chair Daly opened the hearing at this time. Jim and Rochelle Johnson explained that they bought the property from someone who had several hundred acres; earnest money was put down earlier, and possession was granted in November. An attorney has told them the claim was held off for three months because of deliberations, finally being approved in February 1980. Ms. Johnson said that they were told if they bought the property and wanted to have two five-acre parcels, they'd have to pay off the loan. It is not farmable, there are no water rights, and the adjacent properties are all five-acre pieces. They were within days of the date of the zoning change. She said the earnest money was given in September. Commissioner Daly asked if that kind of evidence was submitted for previous land use claims. Ms. Johnson stated she can't find the canceled check after all these years. Mark Pilliod said the contract was signed December 10, 1979, and allowed for possession on November 30, 1979. There are no canceled checks or other documents relating to the September date. Commissioner Baney stated that it is possession, not intent to purchase as she understands it, that is important. Mr. Pilliod said that an earnest money is an offer, but that document is not available. The issues of the Ordinance being effective on November 1, 1979, has not bee investigated fully. If the vote on the matter was not unanimous, it is possible it could have been decided earlier. The time frame for this to be addressed is May 27, 20007. Ms. Johnson said that the people they bought the property from are deceased, but it is possible that the heirs have something in their records. Minutes of Board of Commissioners' Business Meeting Monday, April 30, 2007 Page 2 of 9 Pages Commissioner Daly asked if the date is critical. Mr. Anderson said that on the earlier date there was probably a five-acre minimum lot size. Attorney Bruce White said that he will be assisting the Johnsons in this regard. No other testimony was offered, so the hearing was closed. BANEY: Move continuance to the May 15 Board meeting. DALY: Second. VOTE: BANEY: Yes. DALY: Chair votes yes. 3. Before the Board was a Hearing and Consideration of Signature of Order No. 2007-084, a Measure 37 Claim (Applicant: Roberts). Mr. Anderson explained that this involves a single parcel located at 17317 Wilkes Road, northeast of Sisters. It is approximately eighty acres zoned EFU, Sisters-Cloverdale subzone, with a wildlife area overlay. The claimants wish to subdivide into six 13-acre parcels. The damage claimed is $826,247. The property was acquired with another property via a deed on February 9, 1962, and ownership has been continuous. There was no zoning in place at that time. There were letters of opposition from Jerry Norquist, Victoria Groves and Jim Rice. However, none of them were in the initial notice area so they are not able to provide oral testimony. Written testimony has already been entered into the record. Chair Daly opened the hearing at this time Bruce White, attorney for the claimant, said he is aware of the Norquist letter but not of any others. He agrees with the final order. He stated that his clients would like the division primarily because they have six children who would like to own a parcel. It is not a speculative investment. He then asked for an opportunity to review the other letter. Mr. Anderson said the Rice e-mail was very similar to the Rice letter. No one residing within the notification area testified; the hearing was closed. Mr. White stated that he would like time to respond to the e-mail. There is nothing in the Norquist claim that needs a response. Minutes of Board of Commissioners' Business Meeting Monday, April 30, 2007 Page 3 of 9 Pages BANEY: Move continuance to the May 15 Board meeting, only to allow the claimant's attorney an opportunity to provide evidence in response to the Rice e-mail. DALY: Second. VOTE: BANEY: Yes. DALY: Chair votes yes. 4. Before the Board was a Hearing and Consideration of Signature of Order No. 2007-085, a Measure 37 Claim (Applicant: Bartnik). Mr. Anderson stated that this claim involves three adjacent parcels located in the Alfalfa area. Tax lot 100 is about 40 acres; lot 101 is approximately one acre, which could be the access road to the parcel to the north; the last is lot 1200, consisting of 39 acres. All are zoned EFU, Alfalfa subzone. The claimant desires to subdivide the property into sixteen five-acre lots; the amount of the claim is $1,785,648. All three parcels were acquired together by the Bartniks in a lease dated April 1, 1975 that included an option to purchase; they were purchased on July 16, 1976. The Order identifies when the lease was executed. It is conceivable the subdivision would have been allowed in 1975, but a State waiver is also required. There were no letters of opposition received. Mr. Pilliod stated that he feels a lease option is enough to establish an interest in the property. Mr. Anderson added that the same zoning was in place in 1975 and 1976 anyway. Commissioner Baney disclosed that she knew the Bartniks when she was in the Stn grade. The Bartniks came before the Board, and said they agree with the Order. Commissioner Daly acknowledged a general letter of opposition received from Central Oregon Land Watch, and gave his copy to the Bartniks. No further testimony was offered, so the hearing was closed. BANEY: Move signature. DALY: Second. VOTE: BANEY: Yes. DALY: Chair votes yes. Minutes of Board of Commissioners' Business Meeting Monday, April 30, 2007 Page 4 of 9 Pages 5. Before the Board was a Hearing and Consideration of Signature of Order No. 2007-086, a Measure 37 Claim (Applicant: Stevenson Ranch). Mr. Anderson explained that this involves a single parcel located off Knott Road, just outside the urban growth boundary, west of Tekampe Road. It is 28 acres zoned EFU-TRB. The proposed use would be for a resort of some type. Ownership was acquired by Wallace Stevenson on October 3, 1977. It has been owned continuously since then. The zoning was PL-5, which was enacted in 1972. Chair Daly said there are two letters of opposition from Central Oregon Land Watch. Mark Pilliod stated that they refer to the same claim number in each letter. The record will reflect the receipt of the letter. Tom Stevenson and his attorney, Michael McGean came before the Board. Mr. McGean said that in his opinion the form of the Order should go back to 1975, as the basis for the earlier date would be the family connection between the limited partnership and the original date. This would be a technical objection to the date in the Order. Mark Pilliod explained that the Measure defines the property owners' rights to compensation. It is necessary to decide whether there are related family members with an earlier acquisition date and trace this back. For a waiver, the date has to be that of the claimant. It was not obtained in 1975, but instead in 1977. But because the same regulations were in effect both years, there is no big difference. No further testimony was offered, so the hearing was closed. BANEY: Move signature. DALY: Second. VOTE: BANEY: Yes. DALY: Chair votes yes. Minutes of Board of Commissioners' Business Meeting Monday, April 30, 2007 Page 5 of 9 Pages 6. Before the Board was a Hearing and Consideration of Signature of Order No. 2007-087, a Measure 37 Claim (Applicant: Stevenson Ranch). Tom Anderson stated this involves four parcels located near the previous claim. He then gave an overview of the size and zoning of the parcels. There are 195 acres total. The proposed use is similar to the other claim, to develop the land for a resort, golf course and horse ranch. There would be sixty lots down to V2 acre in size. The claim amount is $16 million. Ownership was acquired separately by a partnership group; six couples are listed. The properties were acquired in various years by the same group. All were conveyed to the D. M. Stevenson Ranch Limited Partnership on July 26, 1986. Mr. McGean said that the waiver should include grandfathering of the family members. In the voters' pamphlet, the sponsors of the Bill said that family members would be entitled to the same kind of relief. There is no dispute that this is a family ranch. Tom Stevenson, the manager of the ranch, explained the families involved in the properties and gave a history of their use of the various properties. He said it seems the intent of the public who voted for Measure 37 was to allow family members some kind of chain of title to the original purchase date. This was the basis for establishing Measure 37. It seems unfair to him to have the chain of title broken through a twist in language. He added that the County should not discount the claim because of the limited partnership and the LLC; this was done only for liability purposes. Commissioner Baney stated that it is difficult when something is put into law and has to be interpreted by others. Commissioner Daly said that he understands what Mr. Stevenson is trying to explain, but the only claim before the Board is from the LLC itself and the date the LLC acquired the properties. If the individuals had been named, he's not sure it would make a difference. Mark Pilliod said that an affidavit from Thomas Stevenson had been submitted but was unsigned. A signed version has been submitted, so this correction needs to be made. Minutes of Board of Commissioners' Business Meeting Monday, April 30, 2007 Page 6 of 9 Pages In regard to Mr. McGean's argument of the meaning of acquisition, it appears that this deals with exempt regulations; those not covered by Measure 37 such as health, safety, etc. requirements. Those were in place when the owner or family member acquired the property. The waiver form relates only to the current owner, who acquired the properties in 2002 with the creation of the LLC. That is the reason the 2002 date is being recommended to the Board. It was pointed out that a few other corrections need to be made; the name should be D. M. Stevenson, not D. L. Two references to 1972 should be corrected to 2002. BANEY: Move acceptance and incorporation of these corrections. DALY: Second. VOTE: BANEY: Yes. DALY: Chair votes yes. Mr. Pilliod explained that certain regulations came into effect after the acquisition of the properties by the owner and/or family members that could reduce the value. A claim for compensation has been submitted. It cannot be concluded that a waiver would extend to the acquisition date of family members. He recognizes that regulations adopted after the property was first acquired in 1963 could have reduced the value of the property. The recommended language for the second reference to 1972 is consistent with the concept. Mr. Stevenson stated that he still feels the ownership of the ranch has not changed; only the name has. He feels this is a specious argument and hopes that after thorough examination it will be overturned. Mr. Pilliod said that in theory, based on the regulations in effect in 2002, the subdivision described in the claim would not have been permitted. With respect to the argument that there are many owners, he pointed out that the owner is an LLC, not a host of family members. BANEY: Move signature of the Order as amended, stating the date of acquisition is when the applicant, D. M. Stevenson LLC, acquired the properties. Minutes of Board of Commissioners' Business Meeting Monday, April 30, 2007 Page 7 of 9 Pages DALY: Second. He agreed that there is basically a claim filed by the LLC with the 2002 date. He doesn't see how they can go back any further than that. VOTE: BANEY: Yes. DALY: Chair votes yes. 7. Before the Board was a Hearing and Consideration of Signature of Order No. 2007-088, a Measure 37 Claim (Applicant: Greer). Tom Anderson explained that this involves a single parcel located off Tumalo Reservoir Road, northwest of Bend and south of Bailey Road. It is three acres zoned EFU, Tumalo-Redmond-Bend subzone with a surface mining impact overlay. The claimant wishes to subdivide it into five residential lots. The claim amount is $810,000. The property was acquired by the Greers via a warranty deed on June 25, 1968, and has been owned continuously. At that time there was no zoning in place, so a subdivision probably would have been allowed. There have been two letters of opposition received from the same people, Jim and Charlotte Randolph, who live within the initial notice area. Chair Daly said that a request to testify today had been handed in by Ms. Randolph, with a note that says there are okay with the subdivision. Attorney Michael McGean said he has no objection to the Order as written. No other testimony was offered, so the hearing was closed. Mark Pilliod suggested that the written comments be made a part of the record. Based on the letters received, this is confusing. BANEY: Move signature. DALY: Second. VOTE: BANEY: Yes. DALY: Chair votes yes. Minutes of Board of Commissioners' Business Meeting Monday, April 30, 2007 Page 8 of 9 Pages 8. Before the Board were Other Items. None were offered. Being no further items to come before the Board, Chair Daly adjourned the meeting at 11:45 a. m. Commissioners. ATTEST: &4*X,C- &k",- Recording Secretary l l~. Mich Z1 M. Daly, Chair nnis R. Luke, Vice Chair a6~~ Tammy BaLney, " Commi 01 ner DATED this 30th Day of April 2007 for the Deschutes County Board of Ce- Minutes of Board of Commissioners' Business Meeting Monday, April 30, 2007 Page 9 of 9 Pages IF'YOU WISH TO TESTIFY Please complete this card & turn it in to a Coun y st ff erson. Name: Mailing Address:+ 1~GJ , Phone E-mail Address: Date: Subject:, M'7- (fu--4~ VkA -5-~ IF YOU WISH TO TESTIFY Please complete this card & turn it in ' a County st person. Name: 1fl eA~ f Mailing Address- Gi Phone ~-1' E-mail Address: Date: 41,3o- ,0 7 Subject: ° IF YOU WISH TO TESTIFY Please complete this card & turn IF YOU WISH TO TESTIFY Please complete this card & turn it in tom Cou ty staff person. Name:_ I , Mailing Address: L &A- f F Phone 544- t4ja Silo E-mail Address: Date: Subject: 1 , it in to a County staff person. Name: 1m£=d~-//E a,sa~J Mailing Address: 441 Phone E-mail Address: Date: x/36 1,,-?Oo 7 Subject: ~r~surr 37 IF YOU WISH TO TESTIFY Please complete this card & turn it in o a County staff person. Name: k Mailing Address: ~o S Phone E-mail Address: Date: 4 (o-7 Subject:MeA&t, 3l C4-Atw---"-RbR-x~'s permit, or authorize any other development on the property in question. he decision does establish which historical County land use regulations all be applied to a future development application on the property by det mining the acquisition date of the current owner. In certain cases specif land use regulations may be waived. Exempt regulations relating to he th and safety and procedural rules are generally not waived. Furthermore the County's decision is not intended as having any effect on land use o other regulations adopted by other government entities, such as the State f Oregon or LCDC. Testimony, arguments and evidence must be dir ted toward the criteria described above, or other criteria, which thZaportunity n believes to apply to the decision. Failure to raise an issue accompy statements or evidence sufficient to afford the Board and the parties to respond to the issue, may preclude judicial review based on sue. The order of presentation is as follows: 1. The County Administrator's rep rt and recommendation. 2. Claimant's presentation. I 3. Witnesses who oppose th Claimant's position. 4. Rebuttal by the Claimant. 5. If new informatiorl/is presented by the Claimant, then rebuttal by the witness in obnos ion. Any person that is nterested in this matter may challenge the qualification of any Commiss' ner to participate in the hearing and decision. Such challen/must ate facts relied upon by the party to a Commissioner's bias, prejudgrsonal interest, or other facts from which the party has concludhe Commissioner should not participate as they are not impartihallenge must be made prior to the commencement of the public h d will be incorporated into the record of this hearing. Does anyone wish to challenge any commissioner's ability to hear this matter? If so, please say so now? Hearing no challenges, I will proceed. Board of County Commissioners Measure 37 Hearing Process The Board of County Commissioners is now ready to open the hearing on a Claim brought against the County pursuant to Ballot Measure 37. The hearing before the Board is quasi-judicial, but not a land use decision. This proceeding is the only hearing provided by the County under the County code provisions which implement Ballot Measure 37. The Board's decision will be based upon the material submitted to the county and the Board. The County code provides that only the claimant and those persons who are entitled to written notice of these proceedings from the County will be given an opportunity to offer oral testimony bearing on the claim. This hearing is not open for comments from members of the general public or from those persons outside the notification area. The decision by the County on this matter will be memorialized in a Final Order. The Final Order will be recorded in the Clerk's Office. The criteria for this decision involving a claim under Ballot Measure 37 is contained within Chapter 14.10 of the Code. The applicable criteria are as follows: 1. The Claimant is the owner of the subject property; and 2. The Claimant or a family member has owned the subject property continuously since before adoption or the effective date of a county land use regulation; 3. The County's land use regulation is not exempt from challenge under Ballot Measure 37; and 4. The County's land use regulation has caused a reduction in the value of Claimant's property. If the Board determines that the criteria for compensation payment pursuant to Ballot Measure 37 has been established, and the claim is eligible, it may by written order decide that the county's land use regulation be modified, not applied to the claimant's property, or it may elect to pay compensation based upon the reduction in value attributed to the subject regulation. The County's decision will not result in the issuance of a building OT E S , { 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 30, 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, at the Board's discretion, regarding issues that are not already on the agenda. Citizens who wish to speak should sign up prior to the beginning of the meeting on the sign-up card provided. Please use the microphone and also state your name and address at the time the Board calls on you to speak. PLEASE NOTE: Citizen input regarding matters that are or have been the subject of a public hearing will NOT be included in the record of that hearing. 2. A HEARING and Consideration of Signature of Order No. 2007-083, a Measure 37 Claim (Applicant: Johnson) - Mark Pilliod, Legal Counsel; Tom Anderson, Community Development 3. A HEARING and Consideration of Signature of Order No. 2007-084, a Measure 37 Claim (Applicant: Roberts) - Mark Pilliod, Legal Counsel; Tom Anderson, Community Development 4. A HEARING and Consideration of Signature of Order No. 2007-085, a Measure 37 Claim (Applicant: Bartnik) - Mark Pilliod, Legal Counsel; Tom Anderson, Community Development 5. A HEARING and Consideration of Signature of Order No. 2007-086, a Measure 37 Claim (Applicant: Stevenson Ranch) - Mark Pilliod, Legal Counsel; Tom Anderson, Community Development 6. A HEARING and Consideration of Signature of Order No. 2007-087, a Measure 37 Claim (Applicant: Stevenson Ranch) - Mark Pilliod, Legal Counsel; Tom Anderson, Community Development Board of Commissioners' Business Meeting Agenda Monday, April 30, 2007 Page 1 of 6 Pages 7. A HEARING and Consideration of Signature of Order No. 2007-088, a Measure 37 Claim (Applicant: Greer) - Mark Pilliod, Legal Counsel; Tom Anderson, Community Development 8. 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 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) Monda,MMay, 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 30, 2007 Page 2 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 Wednesday 16, 2007 1:30 p.m. Administrative Work Session - could include executive session(s) Thursday, May 17, 2007 7:00 a.m. Regular Meeting with the Redmond City Council, Redmond Council Chambers Monday, May 21, 2007 10:00 a.m. Board Land Use Meeting 1:00 P.M. Budget Meetings Tuesday, May 22, 2007 7:30 a.m. Legislative Update Conference Call 1:00 P.M. Budget Meetings Wednesday, May 23, 2007 10:00 a.m. Board of Commissioners' Meeting 1:00 P.M. Budget Meetings Thursday 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 30, 2007 Page 3 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) Monday, June 4, 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, June 5, 2007 7:30 a.m. Legislative Update Conference Call Wednesday, June 6, 2007 10:00 a.m. Board of Commissioners' Meeting 1:30 p.m. Administrative Work Session - could include executive session(s) Thursday, June 7, 2007 10:00 a.m. District Attorney Update 11:00 a.m. Community Development Department Update 1:30 p.m. Road Department Update Wednesday, June 13, 2007 10:00 a.m. Youth Challenge Graduation Ceremony - Fairgrounds 1:30 p.m. Administrative Work Session - could include executive session(s) Thursday, June 14, 2007 1:00 P.M. Mental Health Department Update 2:00 p.m. Health Department Update Board of Commissioners' Business Meeting Agenda Monday, April 30, 2007 Page 4 of 6 Pages Monday, June 18, 2007 12:00 noon Regular Meeting with Department Heads 1:30 p.m. Administrative Work Session - could include executive session(s) Tuesday, June 19, 2007 7:30 a.m. Legislative Update Conference Call 10:00 a.m. Regular Meeting of the Employee Benefits Advisory Committee Wednesday, June 20, 2007 1:30 p.m. Administrative Work Session - could include executive session(s) Thursday, June 21, 2007 7:00 a.m. Regular Meeting with the Redmond City Council, Redmond Council Chambers 9:00 a.m. Juvenile Community Justice Department Update 10:00 a.m. Parole & Probation Department Update Monday, June 25, 2007 10:00 a.m. Board Land Use Meeting 1:30 p.m. Administrative Work Session - could include executive session(s) Wednesday, June 27, 2007 10:00 a.m. Board of Commissioners' Meeting 1:30 p.m. Administrative Work Session - could include executive session(s) Thursday, June 28, 2007 9:00 a.m. Fair & Expo Department Update 11:00 a.m. Commission on Children & Families' Department Update Monday, June 25, 2007 10:00 a.m. Board of Commissioners' Meeting for the Week 1:30 p.m. Administrative Work Session - could include executive session(s) Board of Commissioners' Business Meeting Agenda Monday, April 30, 2007 Page 5 of 6 Pages Wednesday, July 4, 2007 Most County offices will be closed to observe Independence Day. Thursday, July 5, 2007 7:00 a.m. Regular Meeting with the Sisters City Council, Sisters City Hall 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 30, 2007 Page 6 of 6 Pages