2007-1186-Minutes for Meeting January 26,1982 Recorded 6/20/2007FICIAL NANCYDESCHUBLANKENSHIPTES COUNTY CLERKS Yd 2OQf-ii8fi
COMMISSIONERS' JOURNAL 06IZOIZOOI 11;39;43 AM
1111111111)1111111111111111111
2 07-1Do 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
JANUARY 26, 1982 - WORK SESSION
Chairman Shepard called the meeting to order at 9:00 A.M. Commissioner
Paulson and Commissioner Young were also in attendance.
Amendments to There were none.
the Agenda
Discussion re- Jane Kirkpatrick, Director of Family Counseling, was
garding Emer- not present at this time to discuss this. She is
gency Holding planning to attend the formal meeting tomorrow.
Costs
Discussion Bob Shimek, Century West Engineering, will be present to
with Bob discuss the 208 Water Study with the Board at their reg-
Shimek, Cen- ular meeting tomorrow.
tury West
Engineering
Consideration Before the Board was a letter advising them that Bill
of Appointment Mayfield's term on the Deschutes County Fair Board of
of Bill May- Directors is up, but he is interested in serving again.
field to the It was noted that the Board appoints the Deschutes County
Deschutes Co. Fair Board of Directors, but the Fair Association Officials
Fair Assoc. are appointed by the Association's share-holding members.
Board of The Board had no other candidate for Mr. Mayfield's posi-
Directors tion on the Fair Board.
Adoption of Commissioner Young noted that last Saturday, Jordan
Historic Land- Maley had taken the Board on a tour of the historic
marks Criteria landmarks around Bend. Chairman Shepard noted that the
Historical Society had done some refinement of the His-
toric Landmarks Criteria.. This criteria is now before
the Board for their approval.
Jordan Maley, County Coordinator, was present to discuss
this. He explained that he had discussed the Board's
adoption of this criteria with Mr. Isham, County Counsel,
and evidently it is not legally mandatory that the Board
adopt this criteria. However, the Landmarks Commission
felt more comfortable about using this criteria if it did
have Board approval. He said that under Ordinance PL-21
the Board granted authority to the Historical Landmarks
Commission to designate buildings as historical landmarks.
He said that the Board's approval of this criteria will
not make it any more valid, it is just an expression of
formal approval. He noted that they will also be seeking
the city's approval. He went through the criteria. The
first was Interpretive Potential; was the property assoc-
iated with a historic or famous event? The second criteria
was Rarity of Type or Style (architecture). The third
was that the building be identified with a person or persons
who have significantly contributed to the history of the
county. The fourth was that the building have symbolic
value; i.e., contributed to the cultural or economic his-
tory of the area. The fifth criteria was Chronology; i.e.,
the property was developed early in the development of the
community, or an early example of type or style. With the
criteria was a scale for judging relative value. He said
Page 1 of 4
4
DESCHUTES COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
JANUARY 26, 198f.- WORK SESSION
that they plan to have several people evaluate each
site to avoid any interpreter's personal bias. He
said that with respect to evaluations, they hope to
get the Downtowners Association involved with this.
Chairman Shepard expressed concern about approving the
criteria when they did not know who would be doing the
evaluating. Mr. Maley answered that whoever would be
doing the evaluations would be doing so in association
with the Landmarks Commission and that the commission
would ensure that more than one person performed the
evaluations, to have a double check on the evaluation.
There was some further minor discussion on this.
Commercial
Rick
Isham, County Counsel, explained that
back in the
Feasibility
days
when Sanitation had a lot
of permits,
certain per-
Fee for Sani-
mit
categories tended to carry
others that
may or may not
tation
have
paid for themselves. The
County never adopted
fees
for feasibility permits,
so no fee was
ever adopted
for
a commercial feasibility or permit, it
was the same
as a
residential permit fee. He said that
this order
will
provide for an additional
fee on a graduated scale
base
d on size. This was Order
#82-002.
Consideration Mr. Isham explained that this was to rename a road. He
of Adoption of said that this was at the request of Charles Trachsel of
Ordinance #82- the Cloverdale Rural Fire Protection District. He said
002, naming that this road was dedicated to the county some time
Hurtley Road ago and was an unnamed road. He said that state statutes
require that this come under the same rules as a road
renaming, which requires that the Planning Commission
review this. They have reviewed t1lis and this ordinance
will be before the Board for adoption at their meeting
tomorrow.
Ratification Mr. Isham explained that this was with regard to a bargain
of Bargain and sale deed signed by the Board last week. He said that
& Sale Deed due to the fact that the bargain and sale deed was signed
signed 1/22/82 in a meeting, he felt that the signatures should be ratified
as well.
Six-month re- Michael Maier, Director of Administrative Services, said
port on the that Mr. Crabtree had sent him the six-month report last
Public Defend- week, and he wanted to to come in and present it to the
er's Office Board at a Board meeting. He will be in for tomorrow's
meeting for this purpose. He said that they must consider
negotiations for public defense for next year. He said that
it is anticipated that the State will take this over by
January 1983. Mr. Isham pointed out that the county's con-
tract with Crabtree & Rahmsdorff has an escape clause
in the event of a State take-over. There was some further
discussion on the State taking over the court system.
Mr. Isham also suggested that the Board consider having
a limited audit of the public defenders office.
Page 2 of 4
"Deschutes County Board of Commissioners
January 26, 1982 - Work Session
Discussion re-
Neil Hudson, Director of Public Works, was present to
garding County
discuss this. He noted that he had submitted a memo
Engineer Posi-
to the Board in regard to this matter. He said that
tion
he has been considering for some time getting the en-
gineering department of the Public Works Department
boosted to a higher level, retaining someone to head
up the engineering division. He said that Dave Hoerning,
County Surveyor, had come to him with the proposition of
combining his surveyor position with that of County
Engineer. As Surveyor, Mr. Hoerning works from 10:00 A.M.
to 12:00 A.M. daily. Mr. Hudson's proposal was to put
all the funds for both surveying and engineering functions
into the road fund and pay Mr. Hoerning from that fund.
Commissioner Young asked if an elected official can hold
two jobs with the county. At this time the discussion
was continued, in order to proceed with a public hearing
scheduled for 10:00 A.M.
Final Hearing
Mr. Isham explained that they had held the first hearing
for the Annex-
on this annexation about three weeks ago. He said that
ation to the
this must be filed with the State prior to February 11.
Cloverdale
Chairman Shepard opened the hearing and called for comments.
Rural Fire
Being none, he closed the hearing.
Protection
MOTION: PAULSON moved to approve Order #82-006.
District
YOUNG: Second.
VOTE: SHEPARD: AYE.
PAULSON: AYE.
YOUNG: AYE.
Discusion re-
At this time the Board resumed the discussion regarding
garding County
the County Engineer position. Commissioner Paulson said
Engineer
that it was important to make sure that this coy-biped pos-
Position
ition is limited to Mr. Hoerning's term, so that they
are not obligated to continue to combine the two posi-
tions in the future, should another person be elected
County Surveyor. Mr. Isham said that there is a constit-
tutional rule against an elected official supervising
himself in another position. He said that it would be
important to maintain the two positions as separate and
distinct positions, with neither having any influence on
the other. Chairman Shepard expressed concern about
having an elected official evaluated by an appointed
official. After some further general discussion, Mr.
Isham said that he would research the legality of this
further and report his findings at the Board's regular
meeting tomorrow.
For Signature
There was no discussion on the signature items.
Appointments
Before the Board were a number of letters of appointment,
to the Des-
prepared in advance by the Family Counseling Department.
chutes County
These appointees were: Dr. Alan Hilles, MD; Larry Tuttle;
Mental Health
Joan Hibbs; Ms. Hyale Smith; Dave Hulse; Steve O'Brien;
Advisory Board
Mrs. Sherrie Pierce; Lloyd Bishop; Juanita Serano; Rev.
Randyl Taber; Barbara Preble. There was no further dis-
cussion.
Page 3 of 4
Deschutes County Board of Commissioners
January 26, 1982 - Work Session
Discussion re-
Chairman Shepard explained that he had met with the
garding meet-
leaseholders on Awbrey Butte. Lately there has been
ing with Awbreyconcern expressed by some of the leaseholders about
Butte Lease-
not having the access road snowplowed, making it impos-
holders
sible to get to the tower site except by snowmobile.
They appointed a committee to work on the road mainten=
ance problem, looking to the possibility of working out
a voluntary assessment collected on a yearly basis for
the purpose of road maintenance. He noted that Jim
Bussard, Brooks Resources Corp., had mentioned that
Brooks intends to construct a water tower on the hill,
and plan to initially gravel the road, paving it at
a later date. Chairman Shepard also noted that Al Boyd
is chairman of this newly formed committee.
Discussion
Chairman Shepard explained that he had been working with
regarding
Barney Cosgrove in regard to the possibility of placing
Jail Facili-
a security facility on this side of the mountains. This
ties
stems from the fact that the state is planning a $60,000,000
bond issue for the construction of prisons or other types
of security facilities. He said that other counties are
working hard to get in their proposals for a facility
within their county. If the state does place a facility
in the county, they will share the facility with the county.
Mr. Cosgrove had done some research relative to this issue.
Commissioner Shepard explained that the state would con-
struct the facility and the county and the state would
share in the financing of the operation of the facility.
This would benefit the county in that the county could house
their overflow from the county jail at this facility.
The projection figures Mr. Cosgrove had prepared indicated
that in about five years the county could expect to have
overcrowded conditions at the county jail. There was some
further discussion. Chairman Shepard stated that he would
like to go on record as having supported the idea.
Being no further business, the meeting was adjourned.
DESCHUW COUNTY B
_;~RD,.OF CORONERS
ay,-6...,f ftepard, Chairrman
Robert C. Pau son, Jr., o70054_ne
W
a,"
Albert A. Young, Co stoner
Page 4 of 4