Loading...
2007-728-Minutes for Meeting August 30,1978 Recorded 6/19/2007DESCHUTES COUNTY OFFICIAL RECORDS CJ ~~07~728 NANCY BLANKENSHIP, COUNTY CLERK VY 0 COMMISSIONERS' JOURNAL 06/1912007 10:51:10 AM 11111111111111111111111111111111 2007-726 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 August 30, 1978 - MINUTES FROM MEETING - SIGNING OF INTERIM AGRICULTURAL LANDS PROTECTION ORDINANCE Chairman Young opened the meeting at 10:00 a.m. He said that this was to be the second reading of the Interim Agricultural Lands Protection Ordinance. After the reading Chairman Young said that there would be 30 minutes for comments for those opposed to the reading and 30 minutes for those in favor of the reading. After that the Commissioners will take all this into consideration and there will be no more comments. Chairman Young then read the proposed Interim Agricultural Lands Protection Ordinance in its entirety. CORM ENrS OPPOSED TO READING : Brent Lake of 1012 N. W. Wall, Bend, spoke first. He said that the Commissioners had received a letter from him on August 21, 1978, with his concerns about the ordinance and had also discussed them with Wes Kvarsten, LCDC Dept. Head. It is their contention that this ordinance will not comply with the LCDC require- ments. The document appears to be a process for the identification of agricultural lands, not the identification of the lands themselves. Pat Porter, 6195 Pettigrew Road, Bend, spoke next. She stated that she did not believe the ordinance met the criteria of LCDC Goal #3 - it does not identify, preserve, or maintain the agricultural lands. It favors development more than preservation. There is a conflict of interest in this situation. At least 4 of the 8 members proposing this plan have interest in lands here and are involved in real estate. She asked that the Commissioner please review this plan and accept the Planning Commissions' suggestions. Janel Flannery, 1331 W. Hills Ave., Bend, was next. She was speaking for the Tumalo Citizens Property Owners Association. The Association asked the Commissioners to accept the Planning Commissions' suggestions, as there was input from the Tumalo group and many other groups. The ordinance the Commission now is considering has no input from any of the groups attending these meetings. Scott LaFranchi, 1037 N. W. Brooks, Bend. Mr. LaFranchi is on the Citizens to Keep Deschutes County Livable. He stated that the group did not support any of the ordinance before the Commission today and they did not support the Planning Commissions' proposed plan either. There are a number of illegal things in the ordinance before the Commission today. (1) No definite acreage amount, how much, and where they are are no specifically defined. (2) There are 2 cases that have been in court and it was decided that the August 1, 1978, filing date was illegal. (3) The definition of agricultural lands is in violation of LCDC Goal #3. At this point the time was up and this portion of the meeting was closed to the opposition. C01vk E \1 TS IN FAVOR OF THE READING : William Pruitt, Member of Airport Property Owners Association, was first to speak in favor of the ordinance. He said that they did not really know what would meet LCDC requirements but we have to have some sort of plan to start with. Approximately 500 people have been involved with this plan for 7 months. This plan is supported by the Citizens Advisory group and we want it known that we support the ordinance now before the Commissioners. We can adopt this plan for the interim and work August 30, 1978 Minutes - Interim Agricultural Lands Protection Ordinance Page 2 towards a finalized plan that will suit the majority of the people and LCDC. We ask that the Commissioners accept the ordinance before them today. Paul Ramsay was next. He said that all the people speaking against the ordinance had not attended any of the agricultural committee meetings. At these meetings were people from the soil conservation district who gave expert testimony as to what could be called agricultural lands and what wasn't. He also pointed out that there is another LCDC goal besides #3 and that is Goal #1, citizen involvement. He stated he was in support of this plan. Gordon Randall, 1713 N. E. 13th, Bend, Land Developer. Mr. Randall stated that he felt as a land developer that they provided a service in the way of good living; Eastwood Subdivision, Edgecliff, Saddleback, and Woodside Ranch are some of the subdivisions provided the people of Bend. With less than 20% of the County being private land, a 5 to 10 acre home site will be priced out of reality. I an for going ahead and signing this ordinance and let the courts decide. At least we will have something to work around and ample time to develop a finalized plan. Don Walker, 65898 Hwy. 20, Bend. He stated that as to Brent Lake's points about identifying the agricultural lands, this process could be easily complete. We have aerial photos and can now define these areas for him. As to the definitions of parcel and the 2800 foot elevation, these could be satisfied in a very short time. I support adoption of this ordinance. Don Yeager, Agricultural Lands Advisory Committee Member. The people that work out and have, say 10-acre small farms, generate a lot of the dollars in the County than come out of large farms. These will not stop immediately just because this ordinance is signed today. I feel this is a working plan, and we realize we must go ahead and identify these lands; we felt this was the best possible interim plan that we could come up with. I an in favor of this plan. Irwin Lieu, 35 N. W. Hwy. 97, Terrebone. If we had good farmland here there would be corporate farms on these lands. We have too short a growing season here. We did a lot of compromise to get what we got for this plan, and I think we should adopt this proposal. Dan VanVactor, 2098 N. W. Trenton, Bend. I assisted in this plan also. The District Attorney's office was in on it also and the plan has been reviewed by my office and the District Attorney. I an in favor of this proposal. John Williams, 5660 N. W. Way, Redmond. I am in favor of the plan as drawn up. Forty acres is not even close to an economic farming unit. Three to four hundred acres would be an economic unit to support a family and make a profit. Dryland farming in this area is complete impossible. August 30, 1978 Minutes - Interim Agricultural Lands Protection Ordinance Page 3 Herb Hartman, 65950 Sizemore Rd., Bend. The opposition is more prone to let Planning decide rather than Goal #1 with citizens advisory. We have a frost almost 1 day each month in this area. We raise cattle and hay and get basically 3 tons of hay per acre. This is a good plan and I am in favor of adoption of it. David Garcia, 27464 Monterra Dr., Bend. I support this plan. When we talk 40 acres we are talking about not cutting land in less than 80 acres; it is more likely 79 and cannot be broken down into less than 40 acre parcels. With this in mind, we are protecting the agricultural land and esthetics. At this point Chairman Young closed the meeting on the comments of those in favor of the reading. COMMISSIONERS QUESTIONS: Commissioner Montgomery asked Brent Lake if Deschutes was the only county that was having problems with adoption of an agreeable program to the LCDC and he said that we were not the only ones to have these problems. Commissioner Montgomery then said that the Commissioners understood with the adoption of an interim program there would be no hearing September 14; however, now we understand there will be a hearing no matter. Why will there be a hearing if we have adopted something that is acceptable to LCDC approval? Brent Lake said he had asked Wes Kvarsten, head of LCDC, and he said the hearing would be held but lst on the agenda would be a policy review, and if this interim plan meets their approval then the hearing will be for information only. Commissioner Grubb explained that at the Hood River meeting a motion was made by John Mosser of LCDC that said if the County adopted an interim ordinance then there would be no hearing. Commissioner Grubb said he qualified this statement and the answer was that it did not have to be approved by the staff. The LCDC is making up rules as they go along. Now we have heard that no matter what we do there is going to be a hearing. Commissioner Montgomery pointed out that Mr. Walker had mentioned an aerial map, and noted that it would be easier to identify the agricultural lands with this. Mr. Walker said that this map would come very close to identifying if the Commissioners wanted it attached to the ordinance. Commissioner Grubb said that if we did incorporate this map into the ordinance then we would take care of the part that says we haven't identified these lands. He said his feeling was that the Commissioners should adopt this ordinance today and incorporate the map into it and acknowledge the fact that we appreciate the Committee's input into the making of this ordinance. Chairman Young asked the Deputy District Attorney, Bill McCann, if we could incorporate the map into the ordinance. Bill McCann said yes we could so long as it is all covered. He also said that the final draft of this ordinance did not come from the District Attorney's office. August 30, 1978 Minutes - Interim Agricultural Lands Protection Ordinance Page 4 Commissioner Montgomery wanted to know how mach land, total acreage, would be included in this if the ordinance with the map attached to it was adopted. He was informed that it would come to about 125,000 acres. Commissioner Grubb then made a motion to adopt the Interim Agricultural Lands Protection Ordinance with the following change: Section V - Agricultural Lands, Definition and Dimensions; A. Agricultural lands; Agricultural lands identified and shown on map listed as exhibit 1. Change A to B and it will say "Grazing lands are defined as meeting the following criteria. Change B to C. Commissioner Montgomery seconded the motion, and the vote was unanimous. The Interim Agricultural Lands Protection Ordinance was passed. BOARD OF CCRlISSIONERS /JiV, " ~ I ? " - , =TNAN C SIO