2008-836-Minutes for Meeting August 27,2008 Recorded 9/11/2008COUNTY
NANCYUBLANKENSHIP,F000NTY CLERKDS 1~~I ~~OY-836
COMMISSIONERS' JO RNAL 09/11/2008 09:45:02 AM
2 -8:
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.orc
MINUTES OF BUSINESS MEETING
DESCHUTES COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
WEDNESDAY, AUGUST 27, 2008
Commissioners' Hearing Room - Administration Building - 1300 NW Wall St., Bend
Present were Commissioners Dennis R. Luke, Michael M. Daly and Tammy
Melton. Also present were Dave Kanner, County Administrator; Erik Kropp,
Deputy County Administrator; Sheriff Larry Blanton; Timm Schimke, Solid Waste
Department; Susan Ross and Teresa Rozic, Property and Facilities; Anna
Johnson, Communications; Tom Blust, George Kolb and Roger Olson, Road
Department; Mary Goodwin, Colette Whelan and Shannon Dames, Health
Department; Mark Pilliod, Legal Counsel; and approximately thirty other citizens,
including Hillary Borrud of the Bulletin and other representatives of the media.
Chair Luke opened the meeting at 10.•00 a.m.
1. Before the Board was Citizen Input.
None was offered.
2. Before the Board was the Reading of a Proclamation, Declaring September
National Preparedness Month.
Mary Goodwin read the proclamation to the audience. She, Colette Whelan and
Shannon Dames explained how the County and Health Department work with
other agencies and entities to address emergency situations.
DALY: Move signature.
MELTON: Second.
VOTE: MELTON: Yes.
DALY: Yes.
LUKE: Chair votes yes.
Minutes of Board of Commissioners' Business Meeting Wednesday, August 27, 2008
Page 1 of 17 Pages
3. Before the Board was Consideration of Chair Signature of Document No.
2008-476, a Notice of Intent to Award Contract Letter for the Knott
Landfill 2008 Rock Removal Project.
Timm Schimke gave an overview of the item. Nineteen responses were
received; $4 million was budgeted for the project and the low bid was $2.75
million. About'/2 million cubic yards will be moved to the Rose pit across the
road.
DALY: Move approval.
MELTON: Second.
VOTE: MELTON: Yes.
DALY: Yes.
LUKE: Chair votes yes.
4. Before the Board was Consideration of Chair Signature of Document No.
2008-481, a Notice of Intent to Award Contract Letter for Providing and
Erecting Two Metal Storage Buildings.
Roger Olson explained the item. The buildings will be used to store winter
sanding material and heavy equipment to be used for snow removal. ODOT no
longer lets the County use its sand or storage location.
MELTON: Move signature.
DALY: Second.
VOTE: MELTON: Yes.
DALY: Yes.
LUKE: Chair votes yes.
5. Before the Board was Consideration of Signature of Resolution No. 2008-
030, Initiating the Vacation of a Portion of Nelson Road.
George Kolb said that this portion of Nelson Road was abandoned when the
road was realigned. It is within the FAA clear zone by the Bend Airport and is
no longer needed for public transportation. The property will be split between
the City of Bend and a private property owner. A right of way easement will
remain for utilities.
Minutes of Board of Commissioners' Business Meeting Wednesday, August 27, 2008
Page 2 of 17 Pages
MELTON: Move signature.
DALY: Second.
VOTE: MELTON: Yes.
DALY: Yes.
LUKE: Chair votes yes.
6. Before the Board was Consideration of Signature of Order no. 2008-024,
Vacating a Portion of Nelson Road.
MELTON: Move signature.
DALY: Second.
VOTE: MELTON: Yes.
DALY: Yes.
LUKE: Chair votes yes.
7. Before the Board was Consideration of Signature of Document No. 2008-
485, a Memorandum of Understanding with the Urban Renewal Agency of
the City of Redmond to Exchange Land Related to the Becky Johnson
Center.
Erik Kropp gave an overview of the item, which involves the parking lot at the
Becky Johnson Center and nearby land.
George Endicott said the City Council approved the MOU last night. Jim
Hendrix introduced Heather Richards, Planner; and said this has been a long
project, important to revitalizing downtown and having a new City Hall.
Centennial Park is a key piece of this process. Using the existing parking lot is
necessary for this to happen. There will be street improvements for better
access, a better parking area and a play area for the Center. It is felt that this is
an equitable trade.
Ms. Richards said the play area will take up part of the alleyway, which will be
improved with lawn, etc. Liability will be shared between the County and City.
The Deschutes Children's Foundation has insurance coverage; the County and
City are property owners. Commissioner Luke asked who would be responsible
if the Deschutes Children's Foundation was no longer there.
MELTON: Move signature.
DALY: Second.
Minutes of Board of Commissioners' Business Meeting Wednesday, August 27, 2008
Page 3 of 17 Pages
VOTE: MELTON: Yes.
DALY: Yes.
LUKE: Chair votes yes.
8. Before the Board was a Public Hearing and Consideration of Signature of
Order No. 2008-078, relating to Hospital Revenue Bonds (Cascade
Healthcare Community, Inc.) Issued by the Hospital Facility Authority of
Deschutes County.
Commissioner Daly disclosed that he is the Chair of the Hospital Authority
Board.
Chair Luke opened the public hearing.
Michael McGinnis, CEO, oversees the operation of two Cascade Healthcare
Community facilities, in Redmond and Bend. Jim Diegel, Joe Smith and Kevin
Abe also came before the Board.
Mr. McGinnis gave an overview of the bonds and the reasons for this change.
The variable rate bonds have gone up in interest to an amount that is not
economically prudent. The new bonds will be at a fixed rate that is much
lower. The bonds do not constitute a debt on the County or the Authority; they
would be solely the responsibility of Cascade Healthcare Community, Inc.
MELTON: Move signature.
DALY: Second.
VOTE: MELTON: Yes.
DALY: Yes.
LUKE: Chair votes yes.
9. Before the Board was Consideration of Signature of Resolution No. 2008-
124, Awarding a Contract for Architectural Services related to the Design
of a Mental Health Residential Treatment Center as a Contract-Specific
Special Procurement.
Susan Ross explained the item, which involves an award to Pinnacle Architects
for work on the Center. It would be built the same as Sageview Center. The
proposal submitted by the architect team working on the public safety complex
was considerably higher. The contract amount is $70,000.
Minutes of Board of Commissioners' Business Meeting Wednesday, August 27, 2008
Page 4 of 17 Pages
Commissioner Daly asked if civil engineering is included; Ms. Ross said that
this work was already done as a part of the overall complex and was already
part of the budget documents as presented to the Board.
Commissioner Daly feels that a specific site drawing and additional engineering
will be needed to deal with the rock on the property. Ms. Ross stated that all of
the geotechnical work was already done for the entire area. The standard civil
architectural costs associated with the building are included in this bid.
MELTON: Move signature.
DALY: Second.
VOTE: MELTON: Yes.
DALY: Yes.
LUKE: Chair votes yes.
10. Before the Board was Consideration of Signature of Document No. 2008-
473, an Intergovernmental Agreement with Central Oregon
Intergovernmental Council and Local Cities and Counties to Conduct an
Endangered Species Act Fish Risk Assessment for Central Oregon.
Dave Inbody gave an overview of the item, which has to do with the
reintroduction of native species into the local river basins. Local agencies do
not have a way to know what the potential risks might be to various
jurisdictions, so part of the agreement would be to assess the risks. Land use
actions and water use near rivers could be an issue.
Commissioner Daly said he understands that this evaluation should be done but
he is concerned that almost anything having to do with growth, such as new
industry, can have a negative impact and cause problems for local government.
MELTON: Move signature.
DALY: Second.
VOTE: MELTON: Yes.
DALY: Yes.
LUKE: Chair votes yes.
Minutes of Board of Commissioners' Business Meeting Wednesday, August 27, 2008
Page 5 of 17 Pages
11. Before the Board was a Public Hearing (continued from August 6,13 & 18),
and Consideration of First Reading of Ordinance No. 2008-025, Making
Certain Determinations and Findings Relating to and Approving the Bend
Municipal Airport Urban Renewal Plan.
Dave Kanner had nothing to add to previous discussions, but that City staff is
present to answer any questions.
Commissioner Luke said there is concern about impacts on District funding, in
particular Rural Fire Protection District No. 2. The City Manager has indicated
something is being addressed.
Tom Fay said that he has some new information to present to the Board on this
issue. In reviewing the contract with the City and the District, the allotments
are based on taxable assessed value, before the urban renewal district impacts.
That means the entity is responsible for paying it at that rate. The Fire
District's portion would double, however. In actual revenue, 86% of funding
goes to fire services. The urban renewal district would affect expenses by about
3%. They are trying to work out a situation with the City to deal with the
shortfall for this area and for Juniper Ridge.
Commissioner Luke asked if the City took over fire protection at the Airport;
would that help. Mr. Fay said that both entities provide services and it hard to
know what might be needed there. One consideration is perhaps user fees or
other general funds related to the Airport.
John Russell of the City of Bend stated that there are a lot of options and the
City plans to work with them to resolve these questions.
Mike Maier testified that the City of Bend has not been forthright with the
county on urban renewal districts, including Juniper Ridge and the Park
District. There were discussions with the City and the City agreed to a
memorandum of understanding to reimburse the districts for lost revenues over
the life of the District. This would be after the City paid its up-front costs.
After that the City would not come up with the MOU. Given this history, it
appeared that was a money grab, saying what you need to say to get it
approved. He would like the Board to make sure the City commits to its
promises of the past before approving this.
Minutes of Board of Commissioners' Business Meeting Wednesday, August 27, 2008
Page 6 of 17 Pages
His experience with URD goes a long way back. Normally they are used for
areas that are in decay, identify the blight and improve the area. He has a hard
time believing this is a blighted area, and it isn't even within the urban growth
boundary. They should not ask the taxing districts to give up revenue for the
City to make more money.
Commissioner Luke stated that the Board is the Urban Renewal Agency on this
and bonds will not be issued until certain issues are resolved. Mr. Maier does
not want the Board to forget the promises made and broken a few years ago by
the City. The non-city districts should not have to pay for a City project, and it
needs to be put into writing so that in the future the facts will be known.
Jim Russell stated that he doesn't think the City committed to an MOU; it could
have been something that the City Administrator did at the time. If the plan is
adopted by December 31, 2008, this can be put into effect in 2009. The critical
date is to have the second reading and have the plan in effect before the end of
the year. Otherwise it would be delayed a year.
Mr. Kanner said the Plan is ready for adoption, but the concerns raised by the
Board do not relate exactly to the Plan but to its effects on other entities. The
issue regarding an MOU does not relate to the Plan, nor do discussions between
the Fire District and the City. They are legitimate concerns but do not directly
impact the Plan itself.
Commissioner Melton stated that if the Plan is already in place, incentive to
work on the other issues would be lost. Mr. Kanner said that in order for the
agency to issue bonds or incur debt, a separate action of the Board is needed.
The City cannot do anything without the Board's concurrence.
Commissioner Luke clarified that they can do anything they want within the
Plan as long as they are not asking for urban renewal funds.
Commissioner Melton said this was discussed some months ago and thought it
could be retroactive. Mr. Russell stated that the plan had to be effective by
September 30, when the frozen base set at last January. The other date is the
revenue date, having it effective by December 31, 2008.
Minutes of Board of Commissioners' Business Meeting Wednesday, August 27, 2008
Page 7 of 17 Pages
Sheriff Blanton stated that the Fire District is not the only potential issue
relating to taxing. Growth above the frozen base, when Sheriff's Office rates
were established, some assumptions were made. One was growth and what it
means to public safety. He disagrees with moving forward; the time to discuss
the fallout and parameters regarding lost revenue should be done before
anything is agreed upon. What this means to the Sheriff is uniforms and police
cars. It will be hard to do what needs to be done as it is, but urban renewal has
a negative impact.
Commissioner Luke said there is already compression in some areas because of
enterprise zones and urban renewal districts, where there is not enough funding
for all of the taxing districts.
Commissioner Melton asked about the airport's master plan, which has not
been updated in some years. Local residents are concerned about changes at the
airport. She asked when the master plan process will be finished, and how to
know if proper input has been obtained.
Mr. Russell said the projects in the plan are an estimate. They are a shot in time
and include a variety of ideas which will change over time. The master plan for
the airport will involve a broad public process. The urban renewal plan may
have to be changed after that process.
Commissioner Melton stated they are in an enterprise zone already. She is
concerned that businesses will feel what is in the urban renewal plan will
happen, and if something is removed because of master plan changes, a
business may be concerned at that point.
Mr. Russell said the enterprise zone is an incentive but provides no funding for
infrastructure. The City has to bear the expense of the infrastructure at this
point. He believes they can balance out. There needs to be a source for funding
of this infrastructure. Many of these issues will be addressed within the next
year and most businesses would not be reliant on this information so soon.
They may be relying on the existing master plan instead. Both will be modified
as needed.
Commissioner Melton said that the expansion is being paid by County
residents, and those residents need to be involved in the process. She
understands jobs are needed but so are essential public safety agencies.
Minutes of Board of Commissioners' Business Meeting Wednesday, August 27, 2008
Page 8 of 17 Pages
Sue Palmeri had nothing to add.
Commissioner Daly stated that they are losing track of the important issue,
which is the businesses that are attracted to the Airport and employ hundreds of
people. Many communities would love to have those companies there. The
County needs to show that they want these employers here, a diverse economy
that benefits everyone. Perhaps the new wages will help make up the shortfalls.
Commissioner Luke said that he is ready to move forward but is concerned
about an agreement of the Fire District and the City that needs to be resolved.
He would like to readdress this on September 3. There are concerns about the
impacts on area residents as well. The Sheriff's point about lost revenue is also
important. There is validity about keeping and gaining jobs, however.
Commissioners Melton said this is a 25-year plan and would like to see the plan
update happen first. Without the master plan being updated, with community
input, she is not ready to support this. She wants to balance the master plan
with potential growth.
John Russell stated that the County oversight of the plan will be for the
betterment of the Airport and the area.
Commissioner Luke continued the public hearing to the September 3 Board
business meeting.
12. Before the Board was a Public Hearing (Continued from August 18) and
Consideration of Signature of Resolution No. 2008-119, Submitting to the
Voters a Proposed Ordinance to Increase the Transient Room Tax Rate to
9%.
Mark Pilliod submitted a revised resolution, and explained that the changes
would be as follows: the amount would go from 7% to 8% on September 1,
2009; and from 8% to 9% on September 1, 2010. the reasons are recognition
that some providers already have contracts in place for that period of time.
Also, a clause was added in regard to alternative funding being necessary for
road maintenance. Ad valorem property tax funds cannot be used for road
maintenance, so the property tax component does not contain this element. As it
currently exists, there are restrictions in this regard.
Minutes of Board of Commissioners' Business Meeting Wednesday, August 27, 2008
Page 9 of 17 Pages
The rationale behind this recital was a concern that commitments may have
been understood by various interested parties that some of the revenue may be
devoted to, for instance, the Fair & Expo Center. Among these priorities,
finding the road maintenance funding source is the main priority.
Commissioner Luke asked if Tom Blust's letter is in the record. Mr. Pilliod
said that this letter and another should be included.
Tom Blust introduced a memorandum dated August 26 regarding road
maintenance costs and the use of transient lodging tax for some of these roads.
Commissioner Luke said that a lot of testimony has already been submitted, and
asked that testimony be kept brief today.
David Bishop testified that he is a member of the Fair & Expo Board, and
presented some thoughts and ideas relating to the Fair & Expo. (He submitted a
document for the record.) He said that room tax changes have been discussed
for many years and he feels that an increase in the tax should benefit the Fair &
Expo Center, which is eligible and a member of the International Association of
Conference Centers. The Fair & Expo puts a lot of "heads in beds". At one
time the Center cost the County about $800,000 a year but at this point is nearly
economic viable, with an annual subsidy of less than $170,000. A stable source
of funding is needed for operations and for reserves. There is a lot of area to
maintain, both parking and landscaping and buildings and equipment.
The goal is to encourage the 2% tax increase, and to include in the resolution
where the money will be spent. The Fair & Expo would like to see 6/9 of the
funding to go to them.
Commissioner Melton said that the 1% from the Welcome Center already goes
to the Fair & Expo. Mr. Bishop said that is much less than what is needed.
Commissioner Daly stated that he believes that the first year the deficit was
about $400,000, not $800,000. The first year didn't have any contracts in place.
It has improved over time but is unable to support itself without general fund
help. He feels that the concessions could make up the shortfall. He is
concerned that the Fair Board and others don't want to discuss this issue.
Minutes of Board of Commissioners' Business Meeting Wednesday, August 27, 2008
Page 10 of 17 Pages
Mike Maier said that he supports what Mr. Bishop stated. He feels that without
a doubt the Fair & Expo Center is the single largest facility the County has,
with perhaps about $90 million worth of improvements. He feels that funding
should be used to maintaining the facilities in the future. This is the most
successful venue of its type in the state. The Fair is successful each year while
other counties can't draw people to theirs. The Fair & Expo should be
identified as a recipient of funding. Voters will want to know where the money
is going. It will help them make a decision.
Commissioner Daly agreed that if the Fair & Expo is to get funds, it should go
into reserves.
Carl Vertrees, a resident since 1975, is a Fair supporter. He agrees with fiscal
responsibility, and feels that every Fair in the state is subsidized. He wanted the
transient tax raised some years ago. He feels that spelling out how the funds
will be spent should be detailed in the measure so it is more likely to be
supported by the voters.
Commissioner Luke stated that the summary statement does mention the Fair &
Expo Center.
Laura Harvey runs Sunriver Retreats and has been in the area for 24 years. She
wrote previously regarding reducing the room tax. She is disheartened that the
Fair & Expo wants more money than COVA. They are trying to rebuild their
industry. The State and Governor have ideas that are going to increase taxes for
citizens and will negatively impact tourism. She wondered why everyone else
feels is it important not to raise taxes except for the three Commissioners. She
went on in detail to talk about how the rising costs of gasoline, utilities, credit
card rates, mortgages and other things are all causing problems for the tourism
industry.
Commissioner Daly said that there was an increase of 6% in room tax
collections in July, and it seems to go up every year. He feels the industry here
is holding it own.
Greg Mindt of Wilsonville said that testimony had been provided previously
through Tom Luersen. He presented an industry position on the issue. There is
concern about the increase in these economic times. However, they waned to
present a compromise, including a 1% increase that is not effective until 2010.
These funds need to be invested where they yield the highest return. COVA
should get at least 70% of these funds.
Minutes of Board of Commissioners' Business Meeting Wednesday, August 27, 2008
Page 11 of 17 Pages
Also, a new entity, visitor development, could be put into place so the County
and COVA could work together. The fund would be used for matching funds to
bring in larger groups that may use the Fair & Expo Center. They would work
with COVA to decide where this business and funding should go.
Commissioner Daly asked if any of the items relate to the road maintenance
issue. Mr. Mindt said that COVA would target events, businesses and other
groups to create more business. This would be in addition to what COVA
already gets. The remainder could go for other County purposes, including
roads.
Commissioner Luke asked why a separate group would be necessary, and why
would COVA be in charge. Perhaps an independent group would be best,
involving those who are not vested in the industry.
Scott West, the strategy officer for Travel Oregon, said that Todd Davidson
testified previously. He was involved in this issue as far back as 2001. He feels
that the intent, tourism facilities, have been clearly identified by the State and
others. Transcripts were examined to confirm the intent. In regard to the
committee, people who feel the investment of those dollars is important should
be involved. This should include industry people who are in touch with the
marketplace.
The proposal to invest in the industry is important because it can be grown.
Those revenues benefit the County in many ways.
Alana Audette said that she provided a written statement via e-mail, but wanted
to point out the partnership with the County. The economic viability of the area
is the issue. Any tax needs to be fair and equitable, and should not be borne by
visitors. Residents need to pay their fair share. The investments made through
COVA have raised revenue for the County and the industry should not be
unfairly burdened just because it is an easy taxing mechanism in place.
She would like to work with the Fair & Expo Center to make sure it remains
viable but local citizens should fund part of this as well.
Commissioner Daly stated that COVA does a good job but there is a big
problem that relates to tourism facilities. The Road Department has lost $3
million in funding. General funds cannot be used for this purpose, and the gas
tax will not be raised. It makes sense that if a road is used primarily to get
tourists from one place to another, that is certainly tourism related.
Minutes of Board of Commissioners' Business Meeting Wednesday, August 27, 2008
Page 12 of 17 Pages
Ms. Audette said that local citizens should step up to the plate to take care of
some of these needs, and it shouldn't be borne entirely by tourists. Visitors
may not continue to come here if the tax is higher.
Commissioner Daly said that the cities already charge 11 % without problems.
He added that landfill fees have increased, and SCD's are now in place; both of
these are to help the Road Department's shortfall. It is unknown what is needed
for roads that relate to tourism. No options have been presented by the industry
in how to take care of this problem.
Ms. Audette suggested that a local option tax may be one way to go. The
industry wants to be a partner and COVA does a good job. She would like to
see COVA mentioned by name in the resolution so that voters are aware of
where the money would go.
Mr. Kanner asked Mr. Mindt if the Board accepted the 1% tax increase, would
his group agree not to enter into litigation if the County used it as it sees fit.
Mr. Mindt said it depends on how the funds would be used, but it should be
used primarily for tourism, at least 70%.
Commissioner Daly asked if he is familiar with the letter from Wayne Shetterly
regarding the intent of the law. Mr. Mindt replied that there would be a burden
of proof to show that a road is dominated by the tourism industry.
Commissioner Melton asked whether it can be indicated where funds should go
for the first five years. Mr. Kanner said this could be in the recitals; it would be
harder to put it in the ballot summary due to wording constraints.
Commissioner Melton said there are many needs and the intent should be clear.
Mr. Kanner pointed out that there is a problem binding a future Budget
Committee to certain things. Commissioner Daly said it may be hard to agree
with something that specific and binding.
Commissioner Luke stated that things change over time. The last payment on
the bonds that built the Visitors Center will be made this year, but it has not
been used for that purpose for years. At the time it was a good idea. The
Budget Committee is the place to make these decisions. COVA still has to
come before them, as does the Road Department and the Fair & Expo Center.
This can change with time and the Committee should be able to do what is
appropriate at that time. That would be the legitimate forum to make those
decisions.
Minutes of Board of Commissioners' Business Meeting Wednesday, August 27, 2008
Page 13 of 17 Pages
Commissioner Daly feels the Budget Committee is the appropriate place for
these discussions to occur. Many things could change over time. Each year
COVA and the others have to present their needs and this is the fairest way to
handle this issue.
Commissioner Melton said that if she is to move forward on this tax, which
may cause a reduction in industry revenue, she wants to know the specific
needs. Commissioner Luke stated that those needs can be detailed but he
doesn't want it in the ballot measure.
Commissioner Luke read a statement at this time. (A copy is attached.)
Commissioner Daly stated that he does not like to see taxes increase for anyone.
However, visitors impact local infrastructure and services. About 20% of the
Sheriff's calls come from those from out of the area. Some of that need is
plowing and maintaining roads, at more than $1 million a year. Some help is
needed to provide these services to make the area more attractive to tourists.
There are not many other ways to fund this work other than taking away from
Health and Mental Health and other departments that provide critical
community services. By phasing it in over time, it makes it easier on the
industry. Work has been done to make this more palatable with the industry but
tourism-related roads are important to everyone.
Commissioner Melton said that without specifically allocating the dollars, she
disagrees.
DALY: Move approval of the Resolution.
LUKE: Second.
VOTE: MELTON: No. (Split vote)
DALY: Yes.
LUKE: Yes.
Before the Board was Consideration of Approval of the Consent Agenda.
MELTON: Move approval of the Consent Agenda.
DALY: Second.
VOTE: MELTON: Yes.
DALY: Yes.
LUKE: Chair votes yes.
Minutes of Board of Commissioners' Business Meeting Wednesday, August 27, 2008
Page 14 of 17 Pages
Consent Agenda Items
13. Signature of Document No. 2008-477, a Space Lease with Portland State
University (portion of Juvenile Community Justice Building)
14. Signature of Document No. 2008-478, a Lease with All American Timber Co.
for Bare Land in the La Pine Industrial Park
15. Chair Signature of Document No. 2008-475, Request for Reconveyance (Paid
Loan)
16. County Administrator Signature of Document No. 2008-448, an Amendment to
a Lease Agreement with Mocha Janes, LLC
17. Signature of Resolution No. 2008-125, Transferring Appropriations to the
Crime Prevention Services Fund
18. Approval of Minutes:
• Business Meetings: August 6
• Public Hearings: July 7 (La Pine Groundwater); July 21 (Bend
Transportation District)
CONVENED AS THE GOVERNING BODY OF THE SUNRIVER SERVICE
DISTRICT
19. Before the Board was Consideration of Signature of a Letter Appointing
Stephen Hamilton to the Sunriver Service District Managing Board,
through August 31, 2011.
MELTON: Move approval.
DALY: Second.
VOTE: MELTON: Yes.
DALY: Yes.
LUKE: Chair votes yes.
20. Before the Board was Consideration of Signature of a Letter Appointing
Bob Wrightson to the Sunriver Service District Managing Board, through
August 31, 2010.
MELTON: Move approval.
DALY: Second.
Minutes of Board of Commissioners' Business Meeting Wednesday, August 27, 2008
Page 15 of 17 Pages
VOTE: MELTON: Yes.
DALY: Yes.
LUKE: Chair votes yes.
CONVENED AS THE GOVERNING BODY OF THE 9-1-1 COUNTY
SERVICE DISTRICT
21. Before the Board was Consideration of Approval of Accounts Payable
Vouchers for the 9-1-1 County Service District for Two Weeks in the
Amount of $9,293.56.
DALY: Move approval, subject to review.
MELTON: Second.
VOTE: MELTON: Yes.
DALY: Yes.
LUKE: Chair votes yes.
CONVENED AS THE GOVERNING BODY OF THE EXTENSION/4-11
COUNTY SERVICE DISTRICT
22. Before the Board was Consideration of Approval of Accounts Payable
Vouchers for the Extension/4-11 County Service District, for Two Weeks, in
the Amount of $2,288.38.
MELTON: Move approval, subject to review.
DALY: Second.
VOTE: MELTON: Yes.
DALY: Yes.
LUKE: Chair votes yes.
RECONVENED AS THE DESCHUTES COUNTY BOARD OF
COMMISSIONERS
23. Before the Board was Consideration of Approval of Accounts Payable
Vouchers for Deschutes County, for Two Weeks, in the Amount of
$190239381.45.
Minutes of Board of Commissioners' Business Meeting Wednesday, August 27, 2008
Page 16 of 17 Pages
DALY: Move approval, subject to review.
MELTON: Second.
VOTE: MELTON: Yes.
DALY: Yes.
LUKE: Chair votes yes.
24. Before the Board were Additions to the Agenda.
Before the Board was Consideration of Chair Signature of a Joint Letter of
Support for the City of Sisters' Conservation Grant Application to Help Fund
Development of a Water Management and Conservation Plan.
MELTON: Move approval.
DALY: Second.
VOTE: MELTON: Yes.
DALY: Yes.
LUKE: Chair votes yes.
Being no further discussion, the meeting adjourned at 1: OS p.m.
DATED this 27th Day of August 2008 for the Deschutes County Board of
Commissioners.
ATTEST:
Recording Secretary
Tammy
Vice Chair
Minutes of Board of Commissioners' Business Meeting Wednesday, August 27, 2008
Page 17 of 17 Pages
Deschutes County Board of Commissioners
1300 NW Wall St., Bend, OR 97701-1960
(541) 388-6570 - Fax (541) 385-3202 - www.deschutes.orc
BUSINESS MEETING AGENDA
DESCHUTES COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
10:00 A.M., WEDNESDAY, AUGUST 27, 2008
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 cards 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. THE READING of a Proclamation, Declaring September National
Preparedness Month - Shannon Dames, Health Department
3. CONSIDERATION of Chair Signature of Document No. 2008-476, a Notice
of Intent to Award Contract Letter for the Knott Landfill 2008 Rock Removal
Project - Timm Schimke, Solid Waste Department
4. CONSIDERATION of Chair Signature of Document No. 2008-481, a Notice
of Intent to Award Contract Letter for Providing and Erecting Two Metal
Storage Buildings -Roger Olson, Road Department
5. CONSIDERATION of Signature of Resolution No. 2008-030, Initiating the
Vacation of a Portion of Nelson Road - George Kolb, Road Department
6. CONSIDERATION of Signature of Order no. 2008-024, Vacating a Portion
of Nelson Road - George Kolb, Road Department
7. CONSIDERATION of Signature of Document No. 2008-485, a
Memorandum of Understanding with the Urban Renewal Agency of the City of
Redmond to Exchange Land Related to the Becky Johnson Center - Erik
Kropp, Deputy County Administrator
Board of Commissioners' Business Meeting Agenda Monday, August 18, 2008
Page 1 of 7 Pages
8. A PUBLIC HEARING and Consideration of Signature of Order No. 2008-
078, relating to Hospital Revenue Bonds (Cascade Healthcare Community,
Inc.) Issued by the Hospital Facility Authority of Deschutes County - Marty
Wynne, Finance; Cascade Healthcare Community, Inc. Representatives
9. CONSIDERATION of Signature of Resolution No. 2008-124, Awarding a
Contract for Architectural Services related to the Design of a Mental Health
Residential Treatment Center as a Contract-Specific Special Procurement -
Susan Ross, Property and Facilities
10. CONSIDERATION of Signature of Document No. 2008-473, an
Intergovernmental Agreement with Central Oregon Intergovernmental Council
and Local Cities and Counties to Conduct an Endangered Species Act Fish Risk
Assessment for Central Oregon -David Inbody, Administration
11. A PUBLIC HEARING (continued from August 6, 13 & 18), and Consideration
of First Reading of Ordinance No. 2008-025, Making Certain Determinations
and Findings Relating to and Approving the Bend Municipal Airport Urban
Renewal Plan (Plan and Report) - Dave Kanner, County Administrator; John
Russell, City of Bend
12. A PUBLIC HEARING (Continued from August 18) and Consideration of
Signature of Resolution No. 2008-119, Submitting to the Voters a Proposed
Ordinance to Increase the Transient Room Tax Rate to 9% - Dave Kanner,
County Administrator
CONSENT AGENDA
13. Signature of Document No. 2008-477, a Space Lease with Portland State
University (portion of Juvenile Community Justice Building)
14. Signature of Document No. 2008-478, a Lease with All American Timber Co.
for Bare Land in the La Pine Industrial Park
15. Chair Signature of Document No. 2008-475, Request for Reconveyance (Paid
Loan)
16. County Administrator Signature of Document No. 2008-448, an Amendment
to a Lease Agreement with Mocha Janes, LLC
Board of Commissioners' Business Meeting Agenda Monday, August 18, 2008
Page 2 of 7 Pages
17. Signature of Resolution No. 2008-125, Transferring Appropriations to the
Crime Prevention Services Fund
18. Approval of Minutes:
Business Meetings: August 6
Public Hearings: July 7 (La Pine Groundwater); July 21 (Bend
Transportation District)
CONVENE AS THE GOVERNING BODY OF THE SUNRIVER SERVICE
DISTRICT
19. CONSIDERATION of Signature of a Letter Appointing Stephen Hamilton to
the Sunriver Service District Managing Board, through August 31, 2011
20. CONSIDERATION of Signature of a Letter Appointing Bob Wrightson to
the Sunriver Service District Managing Board, through August 31, 2010
CONVENE AS THE GOVERNING BODY OF THE 9-1-1 COUNTY
SERVICE DISTRICT
21. CONSIDERATION of Approval of Accounts Payable Vouchers for the 9-1-1
County Service District for two weeks
CONVENE AS THE GOVERNING BODY OF THE EXTENSION/4-11
COUNTY SERVICE DISTRICT
22. CONSIDERATION of Approval of Accounts Payable Vouchers for the
Extension/4-H County Service District, for two weeks
RECONVENE AS THE DESCHUTES COUNTY BOARD OF
COMMISSIONERS
23. CONSIDERATION of Approval of Accounts Payable Vouchers for
Deschutes County, for two weeks
24. ADDITIONS TO THE AGENDA
Board of Commissioners' Business Meeting Agenda Monday, August 18, 2008
Page 3 of 7 Pages
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, August 25, 2008
10:00 a.m. Board of Commissioners' Meeting
1:30 p.m. Administrative Work Session - could include executive session(s)
Wednesday, August 27, 2008
10:00 a.m. Board of Commissioners' Meeting
1:30 p.m. Administrative Work Session - could include executive session(s)
Thursday, August 28, 2008
5:00 p.m. Joint Meeting of Board of Commissioners and Planning Commission
Monday, September 1, 2008
Most County offices will be closed to observe the Labor Day Holiday
Wednesday, September 3, 2008
10:00 a.m. Board of Commissioners' Meeting
1:30 p.m. Administrative Work Session - could include executive session(s)
Thursday, September 4, 2008
10:00 a.m. Quarterly Meeting with District Attorney
11:00 a.m. Quarterly Meeting with Community Development Department
1:30 p.m. Quarterly Meeting with the Road Department
Board of Commissioners' Business Meeting Agenda Monday, August 18, 2008
Page 4 of 7 Pages
Monday, September 8, 2008
3:30 p.m. Regular Meeting of LPSCC (Local Public Safety Coordinating Council)
Wednesday, September 10, 2008
10:00 a.m. Board of Commissioners' Meeting
1:30 p.m. Administrative Work Session - could include executive session(s)
Thursday, September 11, 2008
7:00 a.m. Regular Meeting with the City of Redmond Council, in Redmond
11:00 a.m. Quarterly Meeting with Mental Health Department
Wednesday, September 15, 2008
10:00 a.m. Board of Commissioners' Meeting
1:30 p.m. Administrative Work Session - could include executive session(s)
5:30 p.m. Joint Meeting with City of Bend Council, at the City
Thursday, September 17, 2008
8:00 a.m. Public Affairs Counsel Conference Call - Legislative Update
1:30 p.m. Administrative Work Session - could include executive session(s)
5:30 p.m. Public Hearing on Aspen Lakes Text Amendment
Thursday, September 18, 2008
9:00 a.m. Semi-annual Meeting with the County Clerk
10:00 a.m. Quarterly Meeting with Community Justice
Monday, September 22, 2008
10:00 a.m. Board of Commissioners' Meeting
1:30 p.m. Administrative Work Session - could include executive session(s)
Wednesday, September 24, 2008
10:00 a.m. Board of Commissioners' Meeting
1:30 p.m. Administrative Work Session - could include executive session(s)
Board of Commissioners' Business Meeting Agenda Monday, August 18, 2008
Page 5 of 7 Pages
Thursday, September 25, 2008
9:00 a.m. Quarterly Meeting with Fair & Expo Center
10:00 a.m. Semi-annual Meeting with Assessor
11:00 a.m. Quarterly Meeting with Commission on Children & Families
Monday, September 29, 2008
10:00 a.m. Board of Commissioners' Meeting
1:30 p.m. Administrative Work Session - could include executive session(s)
Wednesday, October 1, 2008
10:00 a.m. Board of Commissioners' Meeting
1:30 p.m. Administrative Work Session - could include executive session(s)
Monday, October 6, 2008
10:00 a.m. Board of Commissioners' Meeting
1:30 p.m. Administrative Work Session - could include executive session(s)
Wednesday, October 8, 2008
10:00 a.m. Board of Commissioners' Meeting
1:30 p.m. Administrative Work Session - could include executive session(s)
Wednesday, October 15, 2008
1:30 p.m. Administrative Work Session - could include executive session(s)
Monday, October 20, 2008
10:00 a.m. Board of Commissioners' Meeting
1:30 p.m. Administrative Work Session - could include executive session(s)
Wednesday, October 22, 2008
10:00 a.m. Board of Commissioners' Meeting
1:30 p.m. Administrative Work Session - could include executive session(s)
Board of Commissioners' Business Meeting Agenda Monday, August 18, 2008
Page 6 of 7 Pages
Monday, October 27, 2008
10:00 a.m. Board of Commissioners' Meeting
1:30 p.m. Administrative Work Session - could include executive session(s)
Wednesday, October 29, 2008
10:00 a.m. Board of Commissioners' Meeting
1:30 p.m. Administrative Work Session - could include executive session(s)
Monday, November 3, 2008
10:00 a.m. Board of Commissioners' Meeting
1:30 p.m. Administrative Work Session - could include executive session(s)
Wednesday, November 5, 2008
10:00 a.m. Board of Commissioners' Meeting
1:30 p.m. Administrative Work Session - could include executive session(s)
Thursday, November 6, 2008
8:00 a.m. Regular Meeting with Sisters City Council, Sisters City Hall
9:30 a.m. Regular Meeting with Judge Fadeley, Sisters
Monday, November 10, 2008
10:00 a.m. Board of Commissioners' Meeting
1:30 p.m. Administrative Work Session - could include executive session(s)
Wednesday, November 12, 2008
8:00 a.m. Conference Call, Public Affairs Counsel (State Lobbyist)
10:00 a.m. Board of Commissioners' Meeting
1:30 p.m. Administrative Work Session - could include executive session(s)
Thursday, November 13, 2008
7:00 a.m. Regular Meeting with the City of Redmond Council, in Redmond
Board of Commissioners' Business Meeting Agenda Monday, August 18, 2008
Page 7 of 7 Pages
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS' MEETING
REQUEST TO SPEAK
Agenda Item of Interest Imo; Date
Name A, , A- . A10,in r(ir/~ .lam
Address wtrt~ aj_V ~yv4t-~,1~ /yttn
Phone #s
E-mail address
Ej In Favor ❑ Neutral/Undecided F] Opposed
Submitting written documents as part of testimony? ❑ Yes ❑ N0
{
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS' MEETING
Agenda Item of Interest
Name gro,&~ tz
REQUEST TO SPEAK
16,0 It
Date " -27
Address q / / / t4) i / e,
Phone #s
,W1,
E-mail address 660,~_G -C- /VA M o ! .L% C~1 ~a I, G
In Favor ❑ Neutral/Undecided ❑ Opposed
Submitting written documents as part of testimony? ❑ Yes [M/No
1'JTES c4
o } { BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS' MEETING
REQUEST TO SPEAK
Agenda Item of Interest v~L OV, IQWZ~ Date
Name
Address
Phone #s
E-mail address 646 v `1t&414° e Z.,?n 12W4&gei;- ®o'~ 4-V
In Favor F] Neutral/Undecided Opposed
Submitting written documents as part of testimony? F1 Yes No
x0-fEs c
~v~ ' :ova
o { BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS' MEETING
REQUEST TO SPEAK
Agenda Item of Interest C&Op Date
Name M )c "9C-,- ~~i •,,S
Address Q q:~z 8-
Phone #s 9ST- 2-C 5'- ZE' /
E-mail address 0- . G
In Favor Neutral/Undecided Opposed
Submitting written documents as part of testimony? 1-1 Yes H-No
C~/-rte
4;;, `2{ BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS' MEETING
REQUEST TO SPEAK iV C.
Agenda Item of Interest
Name -_:j-0 ~ 5
Address f',' A,
Phone #s 3 (2- - 4(q 1 3
E-mail address i
K In Favor ❑ Neutral/Undecided 1:1 Opposed
Submitting written documents as part of testimony? F]Yes ;RrNo
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS' MEETING
REQUEST TO SPEAK
Agenda Item of Interest 0_H--4- 01-641, RName
Address
6
Phone #s
E-mail address
In Favor 1-1 Neutral/Undecided 0 Opposed
Submitting written documents as part of testimony? F]Yes ❑ No
6" L~ c wad
JTES ~
1'-r 7
{ BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS' MEETING
REQUEST TO SPEAK
Agenda Item of Interest o A, Date Fl7
Name I U/v-,,- r_i;k/
Address
Phone #s 5- 4 1 3.2 2` 6S 7__)
E-mail address T" _ d GWr , co
❑ In Favor ❑ Neutral/Undecided
Submitting written documents as part of testimony? V Yes
❑ Opposed
❑ No
Cam:
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS' MEETING
REQUEST TO SPEAK
Agenda Item of Interest Date
Name
Address A-) Ile. ~q r°., A
Phone #s J 3 ~75 ° Q / A-
E-mail address
❑ In Favor ❑ Neutral/Undecided
Submitting written documents as part of testimony? ❑ Yes
Opposed
KNo
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS' MEETING
REQUEST TO SPEAK
Agenda Item of Interest Date a 7 LO
Name L " r_~ C, u'
Address
Phone #s
E-mail address
1-1 In Favor R Neutral/Undecided
Submitting written documents as part of testimony? 1-1 Yes
Opposed
No
i
{ BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS' MEETING
REQUEST TO SPEAK
Agenda Item of Interest Zvz~n~ (a ~L Date 6 ~27 69Name
M
Address _ 022 St.)
0Z 97z970
Phone #s _';;D3-70L3-.2-10V
E-mail address
In Favor F] Neutral/Undecided
Submitting written documents as part of testimony? Yes
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS' ME
Agenda Item of Interest
Name d r►~
REQUEST TO SPEAK
t,.-~/S P
Address
OIL
Phone #s r3 - L/ C-/ 0
E-mail address
Opposed
No
Date `
F1 In Favor Neutral/Undecided Opposed
Submitting written documents as part of testimony? es No
.a, ^"Pa ~6 D,, CG
a~ { BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS' MEETING
REQUEST TO SPEAK
Agenda Item of Interest Date
Name
Opposed
No
Address
Phone #s -:5 f
E-mail address
F] In Favor F-] Neutral/Undecided
Submitting written documents as part of testimony? NYes
~T E
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS' MEETING
'171.
REQUEST TO SPEAK
.-;d /2
Agenda Item of Interest
Name
Address
2
/ ,u wJ c
Date Z 7 /Ogr
Phone #s
E-mail address
x In Favor Neutral/Undecided
Submitting written documents as part of testimony? 1:1 Yes
1-1 Opposed
IN No
TF r,. BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS' MEETING
REQUEST TO SPEAK
Agenda Item of Interest Z Date
Name
Address U Ci / V Cam/ /z 03r
Phone #s 0~
E-mail address
K In Favor F] Neutral/Undecided
Submitting written documents as part of testimony? ❑ Yes
1-1 Opposed
No
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS' MEETING
`,z\
7, REQUEST TO SPEAK
Agenda Item of Interest TAA~~L~d~ Date /
Name
Address
\PI) ni`
Scf,)
R t/,w/
Phone #s ~ ' S7 ?
E-mail address
F] In Favor a Neutral/Undecided Opposed
Submitting written documents as part of testimony? FlYes F-] No
4z~ { BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS' MEETING
REQUEST TO SPEAK
Agenda Item of Interest RonmTrA-Y, Date ° g
Name
Address (n to 1 S LJ S_+ • 130 l
. R Al d:q 0-?,- n X10 Z
Phone #s Ma 27°~)
E-mail address
F] In Favor Neutral/Undecided
® Opposed
Submitting written documents as part of testimony? Yes No
t>,2 BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS' MEETING
REQUEST TO SPEAK
Agenda Item of Interest SSA Date z
Name C s S ~J
Address
Phone #s
E-mail address
R In Favor F] Neutral/Undecided
Submitting written documents as part of testimony? Xyes
Opposed
No
J-c~ES c
0 A"
MEMORANDUM
DATE: August 26, 2008
TO: Board of County Commissioners
Dave Kanner, County Administer
FROM: Tom Blust, Director
RE: Transient Lodging Tax / Road Maintenance Costs
Road Department
61150 SE 27th St. - Bend, Oregon 97702
(541) 388-6581 - FAX (541) 388-2719
The purpose of this memo is to provide additional background information with regard to the use
of Transient Lodging Tax revenue for the maintenance of tourism related roads in the county.
Attached is a table listing county maintained roads that provide primary access to recreation
resources and tourist destinations within Deschutes County. These tourism related roads make
up approximately 13% of the county's total road mileage (106 miles of 830 total road miles).
Historically, the County has relied on funding from federal timber payments to help maintain
these roads. The loss of county timber payments (Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-
Determination Act of 2000) has resulted in a decrease of approximately $3.0 million in road
maintenance funding. These federal funds have not been replaced by any other source of
funding. Finding an alternative source of funding to meet the maintenance needs on these roads
is vital to the areas tourism industry.
It should be noted that county general funds derived from ad valorem tax levies may not be
expended on roads or bridges (ORS 360.705 (3)). To my knowledge, the county has not
approved any serial levy dedicated to roads.
"Enhancing the lives of citizens by delivering quality services in a cost-effective manner. "
{
u
c
C
c ~
(a O
g U
c
c
Q
cn
J E
C
o
O
U
N
Q
V
N
4)
Cl
N
~
N
~
NN
LPL
i
.
O
Li
a)
(o
z
a
O
00000 0000
V %D O N O V- V- N
O N i~ O Or% Ln V- V- Cn
O iNO kD tD(lzkDN
00 Ln -1 O _q +-i 0', r4 V"
V:P- V" N N ifl, AoT -4 {0}
Q1 a% -q N M d- M r*l
1D 0000 ~-1
1-4 0 0 0 MOOOM
Ln
4,
Ln
a)
a)
i
p C L Q) O f' viN
~ (0 c
Lnn z p a)
41
L fu
z
(n a)
a) (n D V) N i
~ a) Y V a~i ~ 1 (a F- O ~ZA Q N m In ~ N
U V +(8..+ L 7 O u J
lC L a..+ C LA (o
J U O Ln O C (6 V
O
41
(n aC3~ u O O U f6 Y V) U C co
M C:
C (0 t0 (fin a)
cu = v E v Q)
4-; C
u V) :3 ¢UV))~
a>a~QF--
a)
C
L J C C C
C
U c 0 c
cc c C
t u U U U N U
~ E a G a a s ~a
(n2wu w wwmw
a~ a)
'5 a>--,
N V)
c~Q c > .Wv
fo
O CO 0 0 U t V)
co
u [o
~
Li~3;~ LLL = =move
n
V'
v
_ -
O O
a) a) :Lj
14 > E a)
fu
c
to
J
c
O :3 Ln U V
c L .C
G a)
V
L w O a)
a) >
mC~uw a
a:LnV))
~IR
N
O
N
N
r
61?
H
O
U
V
(0
c
m
(0
Q
41
H
rn
c
c
N
N
C
.3
0
n
3
o a)
N C
C 3
N (0 (0
U
C
U
Q
O
>
O
C Y
O a) 0
N E uj
a 0 M a)
a)
N da C
O " OO
Q O O O
co N C
L L O M
> a a O
O
O co a a)
L pj (0 N
c C a)
'tQ Q L ~
C -0 O
co c
(0 a)
C :3
E
a
O Q CO
O a)
O c U
U _ C
m a)
a) ~ (D
c n
co
U
~ (Q c
a) s C
co
>
a)NC~
CO cu vi
~'_TEa)
-Cu
ch
U
U N LO C.)
(D
U N y
C C L fn
ca co
a) O a)
C C U
E E
a) m
a C
c 5 a) m
c O L
n U)
cn (n c_
zoL)
Three Sister Conference Center
at Deschutes Fair & Expo
Universal Criteria of IA CC
IACC, International Association of Conference Centers reviews Universal Criteria to
ensure that Conference Centers offer the current best practices of the Industry. Below are
the criteria that are reviewed and the qualifications of The Three Sisters Conference
Center at Deschutes Fair & Expo.
Priority of Business
1. Three Sister Conference Center has 33,736 s.f. of conference center space
2. Three Sister Conference Center is non-residential. Total Revenue for the Three
Sisters Conference Center; Middle Sister, North Sister & South Sister for
Calendar year end 2007 was $317,694.50. Total Revenue Summary for event
category; Conference, convention, meetings seminars and trainings total for same
time frame, Calendar year end 2007 was $278,339.90. 87% of total sales from
the Three Sisters Conference Center were generated from conference business.
3. Group Sizes vary from 25 - 10,000
4. Three Sisters Conference Center offers and actively promotes packages plans for
all conference business including room, customized set up of events based on
planners criteria, am and pm break service, breakfast - lunch - dinner.
Conference Center Design
5. Three Sisters Conference Center is non-residential. Leisure areas are separate
from conference rooms.
6. Three Sisters Conference Center has three main halls with 10 additional separate
break out rooms for concurrent session. Main halls meet the criteria of at least
one dedicated main conference room that can contain a minimum of 1,000 sq. feet
and at least three dedicated conference rooms without moveable walls.
7. Conferences that have multi-day meetings can store materials overnight in
productions offices within conference center.
8. Three Sisters Conference Center offers a full inventory of equipment to set
ergonomically. Chairs offered are fully upholstered. 3 Types of chairs offered
measuring 18" tall - 15" wide and 16" deep to a variable 18"-21" tall 20" wide
with arms that swivel.
Page 1
9. Three Sisters Conference Center offers sufficient inventory of tables to set no less
than 60% of meeting space with required measurements.
10. Lighting meets controllable level 50-70 ft. candles.
11. Three Sisters conference Center has individually controlled climate controls.
12. Walls have surface suitable for Flip Charts
13. Acoustical rating for sound transmission meets noise isolation class for all walls
14. Ambient Sound levels comply with noise criteria for reverberation time and
frequencies.
15. Built in house sound is available in all rooms over 1,000 square feet.
16. Each main hall has electric built within the floor on 20' square for use in
tradeshow display and set up. Entire facility is wireless connectivity for internet
and each room has ports for phone lines.
17. All Conference Rooms have unobstructed view and are column free.
Conference & Business Services
18. Three Sisters Conference Center staff includes skilled planners proficient in room
setup, special event planning, Tech support and services
19. Designated Staff are assigned to each group
20. Three Sisters Conference Center's Administration Center can provide office
services, workstations, wireless internet access, fax services, paper shredder, and
photocopying, shipping supplies as required by Conference Attendees.
Food & Beverage
21. Customized separate dining areas are available specifically for convenience of
conference attendees.
22. Customized dining is scheduled at flexible times for conference center attendees
offering Breakfast, AM Break Service, Lunch, PM Break Service, Social
Reception and Dinners.
23. Continuous refreshment service is made available outside of meeting rooms upon
request.
Technology
24. On-site AV technology is packaged for Conference Attendees upon request.
25. Conference Center packages all necessary AV equipment for Attendees upon
request.
26. Three Sister's Conference Center provides a skilled Technician for set up,
operation and instruction of all AV Equipment.
Guest Rooms
27 & 28 Not applicable to non-residential centers
Page 2
„a w
Ancillary Conference Centers
29. Three Sisters Conference Center is clearly signed and names so that it is
differentiated from the remainder of the Expo Center.
30. Signage is displayed with the name of the conference center at the entrance.
31. Public entrance that is separate from remainder of the facility at Main Gate.
32. Each Conference Hall has a separate foyer for reception and lobby with box
office.
33. Have public restrooms in each of the conference halls.
34. Employees a conference planner dedicated to the Conference Center.
Page 3
To: Deschutes County Board of Commissioners
From: Deschutes County Lodging Operators
Date: August 23, 2008
Re: Proposed increase in Deschutes County Transient Lodging Tax
As you heard during the public hearing held on August 20, 2008, and through the course of
accepting public comment, there is considerable concern over the County's proposal to increase
the transient lodging tax (TLT) from 7% to 9%.
It is important to clarify that while the business representatives you've heard from agree that they
are very sensitive to any proposal to increase the tax-due to current economic conditions and the
varying effects an increase may have on operations based on their book of business, guest mix,
business model, etc.-we can all agree that Deschutes County and rural counties all over the state
are faced with challenging economic realities. The balance between fiscal obligations and the
demand for services no doubt creates challenges for the Board.
There is a solution, however, that we would not oppose that will generate additional revenue for
Deschutes County and focuses on growing our way out of these difficult economic times.
Our compromise solution consists of several key strategies:
• A 1% lodging tax increase that will not take effect until January 1, 2010;
• New revenues derived from any increase in the Deschutes County TLT need to be
invested where they will yield the highest return;
• The Central Oregon Visitor Association (COVA) is the appropriate organization to
administer programs derived from at least 70% of new revenues;
• Deschutes County Board of Commissioners could establish a Visitor Development Fund
(VDF) which would be administered by COVA and funded with a portion of new
revenues derived from an increase in the Deschutes County TLT (a draft concept is
attached);
• Visitor Development Fund monies are awarded through a matching grant process and
directed specifically for use in targeting new or increased conventions, events,
conferences and other large group/meeting business like some of those held at the
Deschutes County Fair and Expo Center;
• A portion of new revenues derived from an increase in the Deschutes County TLT could
be directed specifically for use by COVA in targeting large conventions, events,
conferences and meeting business like those that could be held at the Deschutes County
Fair and Expo Center;
• Any new revenue derived from an increase in the Deschutes County TLT and
administered by COVA should be in addition to existing Deschutes County revenue
currently allocated to COVA to fulfill their core mission;
• As outlined in state statute, up to 30% of the new revenues may be used to fund county
services, including roads.
In the spirit of partnership, we look forward to working with the Deschutes County Board of
Commissioners to fully develop a solution for the County, the tourism industry and all of
Deschutes County.
T Luersen
NW Regional Managing Director
Lowe Hospitality Group
A J Lyche
arketing
JELD-WE Communities
Jim Kinney
General Manager
Seventh Mountain Resort
c
Loy mly
President & General Manager
Black Butte Ranch
Rich Hadley
Principal
Mountain Resort Properties
cott Pence
Owner
RE/MAX Sunset Realty
Larry owning
President
Discover Sunriver Vacation Rentals
Penny Bennington
Owner
Bennington Properties
lam`' ~ ~ L~
Ed Willard
Principal
Sunray Vacation Rentals, Inc.
Luersen, Tom
03.
From: Luersen, Tom
Sent: Sunday, August 24, 2008 10:03 AM
To: 'Dennis Luke'; 'mike_daly@co.deschutes.or.us; 'tam mym@co.deschutes.or.us'
Cc: 'dave_kannar@co.deschutes.or.us'
Board of Commissioners,
I want to summarize my position, on behalf of Sunriver Resort, on the discussion on the TLT tax increase proposal in
preparation of the meeting on Monday.
I am appreciative of the dialogue and openness to discuss the issue. I do wish we had engaged in the conversation about
the proposal sooner rather than feeling somewhat compressed with time to respond. We have met with Dave Kannar
multiple times but had not seen the written proposal until our first meeting with you in August, which personally, due to
business conflicts like the JeldWen Tradition, has made it difficult to dedicate the appropriate time to this discussion.
2008 is proving to be a most challenging year for all of us. While transient tax revenues appear through Dave Kannar's
number to be up or minimally static to last year, what is obvious from the Smith Travel Research data Dave has been
provided, rooms sold is down. This is the critical metric which indicates the status of our businesses. Revenues, tracked
through the county, only relate to "room revenue" and other fees associated like "housekeeping fees' that are now
taxed ( different from several years ago), and not all revenue. For example, at Sunriver Resort, Room Revenue is only a
small portion of our revenue base; golf, food and beverage, spa, club memberships, recreation, retail and others make
up the full story of revenues. There is no question, the revenue base, including room nights sold, is down in 2008 ....to a
level that is the lowest in some years. While there is no certainty to the future, it is expected and forecasted that the
industry will be in this low period for some time. Further compounding these tough times, is that almost all of the
lodging operators in Deschutes County, are connected strongly to the real estate industry. Many of us operate lodging
businesses that include management services of houses and condos. The down cycle of the real estate market is clearing
challenging us all.
Although I can not speak for the others on the following comment, I can tell you Sunriver Resort is closely evaluating our
operating expenses, since revenues are down, and are making difficult decisions regarding employees, payroll and
related.
For these primary reasons, I believe an increase to the Transient Lodging Tax to 9% as proposed is poorly timed and an
excessive increase. The increase of 9% from7% is a 28.5 increase. The timing proposed will likely hit the industry at the
worst time in business levels since September 11, 2001. While a 'no tax increase' at this time seems most appropriate, I
have attempted to counter your proposal with an approach of partnership and sensitivity to County challenges with
their own financial matters. Consequently, I have suggested a 1% TRT increase is more palatable than the 2% and further
suggested it be delayed until the market is predicted to start to rebound, which is January 1, 2010.
Moreover, I strongly support that the 70/30 split or allocation of funding be maintained and that COVA be the recipient
of county funds which reinvests the TRT receipts back into Tourism. The discussions we have had regarding the Fair and
Expo Center and whether it is a tourism related facility or if it's substantial purpose is to promote tourism as outlined in
the HB2267 language, remains unresolved. I believe the Fair and Expo Center does promote tourism, without doubt.
However, I am unclear if it meets the "substantial" definition test. Rather than arguing or debating on the emotional side
of this topic, it seems appropriate to measure this by survey or traffic studies that likely could establish a consensus
based upon the data yielded from such data. The allocation conversation regarding the use of funds from the 70% from
the TRT receipts is a more challenging discussion. Obviously, tourist as defined by the legislature, use all our roads.
Again, the issue seems to be 'how much ' do they use it compared to the residents or non-tourist in the area. I believe
the 30% allocation of TRT is the best use of funds for roads and does not challenge the statewide discussion of Roads
being allocated from the 70%. The precedent the road allocation from the 70% threatens the reinvestment of TRT taxes
into marketing and promotion for the state. Clearly, there are roads that lead to recreation assets, like Mt Bachelor,
Smith Rock, Lake Billychinook, airports and the like that predictably carry more tourist than other roads, but whether
they carry tourist from out of the area, as defined by the legislature, is questionable and seems prudent if there is belief
they do, a test or demonstration of that is the first step.
I am certain you will hear these issues and likely others in the next meeting on Monday. I wanted you to hear from
Sunriver Resort and my perspective in preparation of the meeting. I believe we, the lodging operators and the County,
have worked exceptionally well together to create a vibrant community that leads this state in a model of collaboration
that we should continue to leverage for future growth. The jobs our industry creates, the tax contribution including
property and TRT, and the recreation our facilities have that improves the quality of life in this region, makes decisions
which increase the price to the customer a very important decision and one that requires a full understanding of the
issues in doing so.
Thanks
To: Deschutes County Board of Commissioners
From: Todd Davidson, CEO Travel Oregon / Oregon Tourism Commission
RE: Deschutes County Lodging Operator Letter
Commissioners:
On behalf of the Oregon Tourism Commission, dba Travel Oregon, I want to thank you for
the opportunity to provide perspective on the intent of HB 2267 in 2003 which later became
codified as ORS 320.300-320.350. At the time the House Bill was being debated in the
Oregon Legislature, it is my recollection that the House Revenue Committee did
acknowledge the impact that visitors and tourists have on local services, like public safety
and transportation infrastructure - and that acknowledgement is precisely why the House
Revenue Committee agreed on a compromise of affording up to 30% of any revenue
attributable to a new or increased room tax for use on those services which are otherwise
not eligible. The correspondence Representative Wayne Scott, Vice Chair of the House
Revenue Committee in 2003, delivered to you during your public hearing last week captured
the spirit and intent of that legislative debate.
Additionally, we would like to provide our perspective on a proposal related to use of new or
increased transient lodging tax revenue that was developed by lodging industry members in
Deschutes County. The proposal I am referring to calls for establishment of a Visitor
Development Fund, a dedicated resource for growing convention or group business and an
additional resource for the Central Oregon Visitors Association to use for marketing.
We believe the proposal for use of new transient lodging tax revenues with 70% allocated to
COVA for administration of a visitor development fund, for targeted marketing of
convention or group business and for use in continuing to fulfill the core mission of the
Central Oregon Visitors Association does appear to meet the intent of HB 2267 and ORS
320.300-350.
Thank you for your commitment to the tourism industry and for your continued partnership
in helping to increase the economic impact of visitors for Deschutes County and all of
Oregon.
Sincerely,
Oregon Tourism Commisssion, 670 Hawthorne SE, Ste 240, Salem, OR 97301, 503.378.8850, fax: 503.378.4574, www.traveloregon.com
OREGON. WE LOVE DREAMERS
OREGON
• -G
ASSOCIATION
August 18, 2008
Deschutes County Commissioners
1300 NW Wall Street, Suite 200
Bend, OR 97701-1960
Dear Commissioners,
The Board of Directors of Oregon Lodging Association and other travel and tourism industry leaders across the
state continue to closely watch the Deschutes County room tax issue. During the 2003 legislative session,
Oregon Lodging Association led a broad-based effort to pass House Bill 2267. This bill had the support of
legislative leaders, Governor Kulongoski and the tourism industry at large.
The intent of HB 2267 was twofold. First, the bill established a stable, dedicated funding source for the Oregon
Tourism Commission (dba Travel Oregon). Second, the bill provides guidelines for new taxes passed at the city or
county level. These guidelines include definitions for appropriate expenditures of at least 70% of any new
transient lodging tax passed. Second, the bill allows for up to 30% of any new transient lodging tax passed to be
used for city/county services.
It is clear to those in the industry that any local infrastructure such as roads does not qualify under the
definitions of tourism or tourism related facility. Rather, this type of expenditure could be made using the 30%
allocation. Representative Wayne Scott, who carried the bill to the House floor in 2003, also provides additional
insight as to the intent of the bill.
As you've heard from those in the lodging industry in Deschutes County, the industry is bracing for a slowing
economy. I ask that the Commission consider current economic conditions and what impact a tax increase may
have on the industry.
Deschutes County lodging operators recently met to develop a proposal for the Commission's consideration that
includes a 1% lodging tax increase that would not take place until January 1, 2010. This proposal calls for the
establishment of a Visitor Development Fund that could be administered by Central Oregon Visitors Association.
The proposal further outlines uses for no less than 70% of any new lodging tax revenues. This proposal is fair and
considers county needs by allowing up to 30% of new revenues be used for county purposes. Additionally, it
focuses on opportunities for the industry to grow its way out of tough economic times. I encourage your support
of this proposal.
Thank you for your consideration. Please contact me if you have any questions.
Sincerely,
J. Gregg Mindt
President & CEO
cc: Deschutes County Lodging Operators
OLA 1 8600 SW Salish Lane, Suite 3 1 Wilsonville, Oregon 97070 1 T. 503-783-2797 1 F: 503-783-2798 1 E: info@oregonlodging.com
tivwiv.oregonlodging. co oil
Page 1 of 4
Dave Kanner
From: Laura Harvey [retreats@sunriverretreats.com]
Sent: Friday, August 22, 2008 5:17 PM
To: Tammy Melton; Dennis Luke; Mike Daly; Dave Kanner
Cc: dsmeage@sunriverchamber.com; larry@discoversunriver.com; Luersen, Tom; Jim
Subject: ROOM TAX INCREASE OPOSITION
Dear Dennis, Tammy, Mike and Dave,
I am contacting you today to Suggest that the County Commissioners HELP the private sector
RE-HABILITATE OUR FAILING
CENTRAL OREGON TOURIST INDUSTRY. Raising the County Room Tax for Visitors to
Central Oregon is defiitely not the answer to
the Countys' Inability to Plan ahead for the funding of the County Government services or the
welfare of its Citizens.
An over all room tax increase to total a 10% tax will definitely contribute to the further decline
of our already jeprodized and fading
Tourist Industry, the very Industry that keeps Central Alive, which used to thrive. Raising the
County Room Tax will only serve to further
decrease County Revenue, as a self defeating death wish for our County with more uninteded
consequences than benefits to the County!
I for one, turned one of my large vacation rental homes into a long term rental due to lack of
combined reservations. This insightful move on my
part now produces no tax revenues to the County. The Alternative was to suffer the
anticipated "to much dead time" in my combined rental homes. Presently the visitors are doing
us a favor by driving to our Central Oregon Paradise. The economy has taken a downturn in
the United States and it is obvious that citizens are staying home, their way that they
conserve their finances. Unstable gas prices and the media have certainly taken a devistating
toll on the economy of Central Oregon. As Republicans, it is a given that we do not raise taxes
during hard Economic Times.
Well, we are in a spiral of hard Economic Times here. Evidence of this is everywhere around
us. Driving through Bend on Highway 97 shows
us to much devistation with now empty business, creating more buildings that cannot be
rented. Recent well known Business Closures include:
Country Health Food Store
Denny's Restaurant
McManons Furniture Store
Kayo's Restaurants
Ernestos' Restaurants
Re/Max on Franklin - Real Estate
M.Jacobs Furniture Store
Re/Max Sunset Sunriver Business Park vacating their Real Estate / Vacation Rental Home
Building
Just to name a few.
We certainly do not need fewer Tourists. It is the Job of the County Commissioners to help the
8/25/2008
Page 2 of 4
Businesses and Citizens that have supported this County. You need to be much more
Creative!
You have options at your disposal to start with cutting expenses, Vacation Rental Managers
and Owners do not have options.
I understand that the Sheriffs' Department now has a Permanant Funding Base, so just why
are Sunriver Property Owners Paying the County for
the Sheriff Dept. on our property taxes and also paying the Sheriffs Dept through the Sunriver
Special Sheriffs Service District on our property taxes?????? There is definitely an over
abundance of Sheriff Deputies acting as the Sunriver Police in Sunriver. The County Deputies
certainly do not nor need to patrol Sunriver!
A Calculation of tax savings for the County Offices to operate on a 12 hour, 4 days a week
system should be looked at on the County Cost Savings Agenda.
Overtime payments could certainly by eliminated by the County just as the Private Sector has
had to do.
If County Services Costs more when performed during the night, then schedule these Service
during the day.
Remove one County Employee from each and every road crew.
Raise the timber cutting permits for fire wood.
Contract the Private Sector to fight fires, rather than the County Employees, when applicable.
Possibly there are many County functions that the Private Sector could do most likely at a
much reduced rate, considering that the County
PERS retirement is a definite drain on tax payer funds.
Raise the overnight camping fee in the camp grounds and install a nominal fee for day parking
at the Parks.
Apply for more Government Grant Money from the U.S. Government and State for Services to
the underprivileged business people many of whom may operate under the poverty level.
Stop giving Property Tax Free land deals to intice business to locate in Central Oregon.
Charge inmates at the jail room and board for their stays.
Go an extra year or two on pruchases of County vehicles, desks, computers and other
luxuries.
Cancel all magazine subscriptions.
Retreive County Credit Cards from all Employees and put them on a Voucher System.
Use the "Meetings On Line", "Go To Meetings" Computer System instead of Airplane Trips,
per diem and Hotel Rooms.
8/25/2008
Page 3 of 4
Take Mike Daly off his Expense Account!
Replace the Community Development Department
I am confident that our Esteemed County Commissioners know of many more areas of the
County Government System and budget where cost saving measures can easily be initiated
other than the few simple Creative cost savings that a very small business person such as
myself knows about.
Our Housing and Vacation Rental Business must go through a recovery period, and no one
knows how many more years this will take. In the mean time we are Commanding the County
Commissioners to work with us to help us through this painful recovery period. For the
Sunriver
Area, it may take as much time as it takes SilverStar to make massive headway in the
Construction of the New Sunriver Town Center.
LOWERING THE ROOM TAX RATE, Promoting and Advertising this Revolutionary Event for
the rest of 2008 and 2009 Just Might Result in Increased Tourism for Deschutes County which
will thus increase the Room Tax Revenues provided by the Counties most prized businesses!
In so doing, The County Commissioners will be the HEROS of the County and will have well
served thousands of business people and employees, Citizens with an upswing in our
Economic DeclineM This approach would be a WIN-WIN Event and makes so much more
sense than a Constricting, Detrimental Room Tax Increase!
DESCHUTES COUNTY would then become a Model of Government Working with the Private
Sector for the benefit of the Citizens to be used
by Counties across the United States. This novel idea may be denied by our three Esteemed
Commissioners, But the past ways of the
County Commissioners have obviously not worked, so a New Approach is the only Appropriate
move that is open to the Commissioners at this point. Mt. Bachelor also needs all of the help
that it can get and has already set in motion reduced lift ticket prices in order to rejeuvinate
their
declining business. Considering that Brilliant Business People shephard Mt. Bachelor, I would
suggest that our Commissioners follow their
lead.
I realize that you work very hard to run all of the complications of the County Business. A
totally new approach to looking at the same situation day after day is a road that could really
result in major benefits that have never been on the table before. I also wish to point out that
"Staff' is not qualified to refer an opinion to raise the Room Tax on the Vacation Industry. The
main and driving focus of "Staff' is focused entirely on their
salary and ultimate Retirement income, so they are not able to see the BIG PICTURE, or
PRODUCE NEW IDEAS OR APPROACHES to any problem. A new idea, in their minds,
would jeprodize their Civil Service Job and Retirement income. You are receiving bad advise
from the wrong advisers!!! You need to think about this fact of life and consider it with an open
mind. To my limited knowledge, I do not know of one single successful business person or
successful entrepreneur on your staff!
As the entire County and all its Citizens benefit from our Tourism Industry, then it stands to
reason that if the Commissioners only focus is to
8/25/2008
Page 4 of 4
"GET' more money into its coffers with no deep thinking involved, then the entire population of
the County should share in this antiquated
burden, to cover the County's Overspending and Old Habits when anticipated and foreseeable
decreasing revenues were not planned for in
advance by the Commissioners. The Industry that provides more than any other entity cannot
be penalized for this oversight by the Commissioners.
Please remember Dennis that Tourists used to come to Central Oregon, fall in love with the
area and buy a home or two or future building site as I did. It would be Great to get these
types of people to come to Deschutes County once again to help fill the County Coffers!
I also Mimic Larry Browning's Letter email to the Commissioners!
Laura E. Harvey
Owner
Sunriver Retreats
P.O. BOX 3494
SUNRIVER, OR. 97707
541-593-3162
RETREATS (a)SUNRIVERRETREATS COM
W W W.SUNRIVERRETREATS.COM
8/25/2008
August 18, 2008
Deschutes County Commissioners
1300 NW Wall Street, Suite 200
Bend, OR 97701-1960
Dear Commissioners,
I am the owner of Paintball Paradise and I am writing to express my concern over the proposed
room tax increase. Our business relies on tourists and locals to succeed. Given the economic
slowdown in Central Oregon-and across the state-I am concerned about the impact that any
increase in the cost of travel will have on our business and employees. Before taking further action I
urge you to remember that even slight changes can have an effect on my business. A decrease in
spending by travelers can occur if they see an increase in their tax rate at hotels and resorts.
I am aware that there has been talk of using new revenue for roadwork and I am also aware that state
law says that any increases in the lodging tax must be allocated with no less than 70 percent of the
increase being dedicated to tourism promotion and tourism related facilities. I don't believe that roads
are a tourism facility and I don't support using any new money for this. Should a lodging tax even be
considered, let the lodging industry and COVA help determine the best use of room tax for marketing
promotions that would deliver the highest return on the investment to benefit the entire County. If
we can get more people to come to Deschutes County, revenue for all businesses AND the county
will increase.
I respectfully recommend that you work with the lodging industry and other members of the tourism
and hospitality industry to reach a solution that is amenable to all parties. Local hotel and resort
operators are an integral part of Deschutes County and should be a part of finding a solution that
benefits all of us.
Thank you.
Sincerely,
Annie Sinatra
Owner, Paintball Paradise
cc: Dave Kanner, County Administrator
9 a
III AUG
BOARD OF COMMIS SINNERS
Page 1 of 2
Dave Kanner
From: Alana Audette [aana@visitcentraloregon.com]
Sent: Tuesday, August 26, 2008 4:39 PM
To: Dennis Luke; Tammy Melton; Mike Daly; Dave Kanner
Cc: 'Luersen, Tom'; 'Todd Davidson'; 'Scott West'; 'Gregg Mindt'; 'Audette'; 'Bennington'; Dan
Despotopulos; 'Evert'; 'Helmly'; 'Jay Lee'; 'Jay Lyche'; 'Kinney'; 'Nissen'; 'Oliphant'; 'Pence';
'Rathbun'; 'Willard'
Subject: Deschutes County TLT statement
Attachments: Desch utes_County_Visitor Development_Fund_(5board)[1].doc
Dear Commissioners & Mr. Kanner,
Thank you for the opportunity to engage in dialogue with the County regarding the proposed Transient Lodging
Tax increase for Deschutes County. Over the past few weeks you have seen the commitment of your tourism
industry partners to prioritize their schedules to participate in both Public Hearings and Work Sessions in the
interest of working with the County to find a solution for the Deschutes County funding shortfalls. As residents of
Deschutes County we represent not only specific business expertise, but a shared passion for the region's
economic prosperity and sustainable future. We recognize the responsibilities of the Commission are vast and we
have committed the tourism industry as a partner in developing solutions. The largest property tax collectors in
the County are the Destination Resorts and real estate development partners who share in your commitment to
the region's economic vitality and longevity.
Representing COVA, let me first thank you for the partnership that we have enjoyed with the county for more
than twenty-eight years. Put simply, this partnership has sustained for three decades because it is successful.
My goal is to continually grow that working relationship to produce greater economic stability for Deschutes
County and its residents. It is a privilege to serve as COVA's CEO and I am proud to know that our association
has delivered on the County requirements for accountability and return on investment of the TRT invested with
COVA. You have COVA's commitment to continue to serve the tourism promotion goals and objectives of the
County with excellence and professionalism. You have received testimony from our industry partners confirming
that COVA is both a recognized role model and leader in statewide and national tourism organizations. COVA is a
valuable resource for Deschutes County and we want to continue to build upon our history of success.
Every person at the table on the issue of a room tax increase is motivated by the shared commitment to support
a healthy tourism industry and to invest tourism resources appropriately, allowing the optimum return on
investment of lodging tax revenues for Deschutes County. With the lodging industry compromise support for a
phase-in of the proposed increase, it appears the single remaining difference in perspective between the County
and the industry is in the allocation of the potential new TRT resources. For COVA, the highest and best use is
that which will generate more tourism business, resulting in greater collections of total TLT overall, thereby
benefitting all partners collectively. COVA is a County partner generating revenue for Deschutes County during a
time of overall revenue decline. It is difficult to comprehend any decision that would direct excessive resources
awayfrom a revenue generating partner toward a non-revenue generating program at a time when additional
resources are in such dire need. The dedication of revenue-generating sustainability for tourism promotion was a
primary goal of HB 2267 and one which the industry is passionate to communicate and defend.
COVA has a nearly 30-year track record of stimulating additional TLT resources for the County. We can look at
the long-term history of collections and see the continued rise in collections, even in times of great travel
upheaval and economic stress (9/11/01, dot.com crash of '02, etc.) It goes to reason that if the County increases
the TLT and retains up to 30% for the General Fund as allowed in HB 2267; then dedicates the 70% intended for
tourism promotion to COVA; that you will be upholding a proven track record of the highest and best use of TLT
resources in what we know will be a challenging economic path in the next few years.
I ask you to remain committed to COVA as the region-wide, authorized conduit to fund additional tourism
8/26/2008
Page 2 of 2
programs (ie: Fair & Expo Center, related tourism programs, museums, etc.) through a qualified grant program,
whereby the criteria of HB 2267 will be applied to each applicant. This removes the County from a difficult and
time-intensive grant process and provides all tourism partners equal opportunity to qualify for funding through a
Visitor Development Fund process designed to fairly represent tourism throughout the County. (VDF draft
proposal is attached for reference).
COVA shares the County objectives for an economically healthy Deschutes County, including a cooperative
relationship with our partners at the Fair & Expo Center, as well as a stable road maintenance system. The best
way to achieve the economic goals for Deschutes County is to increase overall tourism revenue
through additional overnight stays and increased visitor spending. The highest and best use of TLT
to achieve additional overnight stays is through COVA's multi-tiered tourism marketing and
promotion programs.
Thank you for this opportunity to convey my recommendations. I plan to attend the Public Hearing on
Wednesday at 10am to submit my comments for the record.
Alana Audette
President & CEO
Central Oregon Visitors Association
800-800-8334
www..VisitC..entral_Orecion_.com.
alana0_v_isitcentraloregon.com
Central Oregon. Everything Under the Sun.
8/26/2008
Draft Concept
Proposal for use of increased transient lodging tax and creation of Deschutes
County Visitor Development Fund
This program is based on a distribution formula for any increase in the Deschutes
County lodging tax where 70% of new revenues are allocated to the Central Oregon
Visitor Association (COVA) and 30% of new revenues are placed in County General
Fund for use as the County Board of Commissioners deems most appropriate. It is
important to the tourism industry that the existing COVA resource is protected and
there is broad support for their efforts from lodging, restaurants, retail and others.
70% of new revenues would be allocated to COVA but directed as follows: a
minimum of 60% to COVA General Fund; up to 25% to a dedicated Visitor
Development Fund administered by COVA and established to support attracting
large group, conventions and conferences; up to 15% to COVA specifically for use
in marketing and attracting large group business, conventions and conferences to
Deschutes County.
Purpose of Visitor Development Fund
The purpose of the Deschutes County Visitor Development Fund (referred to hereafter as
VDF) is to ensure that the expenditure of revenues from a proposed increase in the
Deschutes County transient lodging tax shall be expended to attract large group business,
conventions and conferences to Deschutes County that maximize sales at lodging
properties through a matching grants program. The funding mechanism for this VDF
grants program would be the dedication of up to 17.5% of any increase in the Deschutes
County Lodging Tax (up to 25% of the 70% of new revenues allocated to and
administered by COVA).
The County Board of Commissioner will create a VDF Board of five members to
establish provisions, criteria and application materials, review grant applications, and
grant awards to eligible applicants for projects that contribute to the development and
improvement of the Deschutes County economy by means of the enhancement,
expansion and promotion of the visitor industry, specifically focused on conventions,
meetings and events that draw tourists from outside Deschutes County and maximize
sales at lodging properties.
VDF Board
VDF Board will consist of five members:
1 Deschutes County Commissioner
1 Member of the Fairgrounds and Expo Center Board or their designee
1 Member of the Central Oregon Visitor Association Board
1 Lodging Industry representative from a property located within Deschutes County
1 Lodging Industry representative from a property located in unincorporated Deschutes
County
"Lodging Industry representatives are to be appointed by COVA for first seating of
VDF Board, thereafter they will be nominated by COVA and appointed by the Deschutes
County Board of Commissioners
Eligible Applicants
Private companies, nonprofit groups or publicly funded organizations are eligible for
Grants from the Matching Grants Program by completing the application process as
established by the VDF Board. Applicants must demonstrate how their project will
generate new or incremental increased hotel sales and generate return-on-investment.
Eligible Activities
Eligible projects that may be awarded Grants from the Deschutes County Visitor
Development Grants Program include those that provide for improvement or expansion
of tourism marketing programs, or development of new tourism programs or products
designed to increase group meetings, conventions and events for greater economic impact
to Deschutes County or an incorporated city within the county. Eligible activities for such
projects may not involve construction of facilities, or modification of historic structures
or items, but they do include, but are not limited to, any of the following that represent
new or enhanced efforts, or other initiatives intended to increase large group meetings,
conventions or conferences, as opposed to only the continuation or maintenance of
existing programs, products or services:
(1) Brochure production and distribution;
(2) Media production and placement;
(3) Informational tourism signage;
(4) Video production and distribution;
(5) Tourism event promotion;
(6) Market research; or
(7) Visitor services projects.
Maximum Awards
The VDF Board shall establish the maximum Grant amount in the applicant guidelines
prepared for the VDF Grants Program. No more than 50 percent of the total cost of the
project may be paid for with funds from the VDF Grants Program, such that the applicant
must show a minimum one-to-one match, from private or public sources.
Program Information
(1) The VDF Grants Program will be administered by the Central Oregon Visitors
Association.
(2) At a minimum, the VDF Grants Program shall be undertaken every biennium, with
awards granted on a competitive basis.
(3) For an application to be considered for funding:
(a) A match of at least 50% of total project cost (up to one-half of the match amount
could be in-kind.)
(b) A description of how the project is focused on increased group convention, event or
conference activities within an economic development context.
(4) Completed applications which meet the established criteria will be considered by the
VDF Board for funding and ranked, with priority given to those projects which
demonstrate the following:
(a) Need, such as... What are the resources available to the applicant?... What is the
applicant's total project budget?... Is the project unique?
(b) Viability and Integrity of Project, such as... Is it clearly tourism business
development?... Will the project work?... Is it a quality proposal with realistic funding
expectations?
(c) The Potential for Economic Impact on Deschutes County and/or cities within
Deschutes County as a direct result of the project, such as... Is the project clearly going to
stimulate and generate tourism economic development, in a new or enhanced way?
(5) The Central Oregon Visitors Association will serve as the Administrator of the VDF
grant program. Projects will be monitored by the Central Oregon Visitors Association,
and a program report will be provided as requested by the Deschutes County Board of
Commissioners.
(6) Applicants who are awarded a grant by the VDF Board shall enter into a grant
agreement with the VDF grant program administrator. Grantees shall maintain records
sufficient for monitoring. The grant agreement shall include all timelines that must be
observed by the Grantee.
(7) When necessary, amendments may be made to the Grant agreement by mutual
agreement of the Grantee and the Commission, such that:
(a) Items subject to amendment may include but are not limited to substantial alteration
of cost, scope, location, objectives, or timeframe of the approved activities or project
funded by the Grant; and
(b) Failure by a Grantee to gain prior approval from the VDF Grant Program
Administrator (COVA) for substantial changes may be a cause for cancellation of VDF
Grant approval. If VDF Grant approval is cancelled, the total grant amount awarded and
paid to grantee is due in full to the VDF Grant Program Administrator net 45 days after
receipt of cancellation notice.
(8) Any Grant funds not used for an approved project shall be returned to the Visitor
Development Fund pursuant to the grant agreement.
(9) Projects must be completed within grant period stated at the time when the Grant is
awarded. Funds not expended by the end of a biennium shall be returned to the Visitor
Development Fund.
Application Information and Time Frames
(1) Applications shall be accepted at times specified and announced by the VDF Board.
(2) To be considered, applications must be:
(a) Signed by the presiding elected official of the city or county managing the project or
the chairperson, President or CEO of the entity making the application; and
(b) Received by the VDF Board during the application period specified by the VDF
Board in its announcement.
Application and Grant Management Information
(1) The Administrator, Central Oregon Visitor Association, under the direction of the
VDF Board, will prepare applicant guidelines for the program each biennium or grant
period. The guidelines will address the required content of applications, project selection
procedures, and basic administrative requirements.
(2) The most current edition of the applicant guidelines for the VDF Grants Program shall
be on file with the Deschutes County Board of Commissioners, and available at:
ADRESS HERE
(3) The Administrator shall prepare and provide the applicants with a checklist outlining
which specific requirements shall be enclosed in their application packet.
Page 1 of 2
Dave Kanner
From: Jay Lyche [Jay@jeld-wencommunities.com]
Sent: Thursday, August 21, 2008 9:54 AM
To: Board
Cc: Dave Kanner
Subject: Written Testimony For Transient Lodging Tax Issue
August 21, 2008
To the Board of County Commissioners:
I am sorry I was not able to make it to the Public Hearing on Monday, but I wanted an opportunity to
express my concerns about the proposed increase in the Transient Lodging Tax (TLT). Let me start by
saying that I understand the difficult position the county is in during these hard economic times, and I
am sympathetic to the hard choices that you must make.
It is my hope that you will also understand that this is a very difficult time for the lodging industry.
Under the current economic climate, I believe that any increased price pressure will have a harmful
effect on business, and I am hopeful that you will take this into consideration. Through July, Eagle
Crest's occupancy is off by 4% over the same period in 2007. July and August also saw increasing
pressures to lower our prices to drive business. An increase in the tax would only exacerbate this
problem. I strongly encourage the Board to refrain from referring the TLT increase to the voters at this
time.
Having said that, if the Board does decide to refer this issue to the voters, there are a few modifications
that could be made that would make it easier for me to support. First, I would ask that the Board
consider limiting the increase to 1%. Secondly, I would ask that the Board consider not implementing
any increase until January 1, 2010. Eagle Crest has over 50% of their revenue that comes from group
business. These groups generally sign contracts at least one year out. So, we already have a large amount
of booked business for 2009. If the tax were implemented immediately Eagle Crest would end up having
to pay the additional tax on these already booked groups.
Finally, my largest concern is how the money is allocated. I feel that roads do not meet the definition of
"tourism related facilities" as spelled out in (ORS 320.350 (6)). Speaking for myself and Eagle Crest, we
would strongly oppose any portion of the 70% of revenue that is dedicated to tourism and tourism
related facilities going to maintain roads.
Eagle Crest is a big supporter of the Fair & Expo Center (FEC). We benefit greatly from the larger
groups that they bring in. However, I am not sure that they meet the legal standard for a "tourism
facility" as spelled out in the law. It is my main concern that this money is allocated in accordance to the
law, and I believe that it is incumbent upon the county to demonstrate that the FEC meets these
requirements before they put anything on the ballot.
I am also concerned that the money is being considered for the FEC's reserve funds. I believe that with
our current economic climate, this is a horrible time to raise taxes to increase reserves. I know that the
lodging industry and COVA have agreed to meet with the Fair Board to discuss ways to work together
to promote the marketing of the FEC. If money is going to go to the FEC I would be much more
supportive if it was dedicated to promoting the FEC to groups outside the region. Ideally, I would like to
8/21/2008
Page 2 of 2
see these funds administered by COVA to the FEC.
Finally, it would be my preference that the 70% of funds that go to tourism go to COVA. Under these
difficult economic times, every dollar that is available should go to the highest and best use for
promoting tourism to this region. It is my belief that COVA is the group that would provide the best
return on investment on any marketing dollars spent. COVA has a long and successful partnership with
the County. COVA's board is made up of a broad range of industry experts that helps ensure that all
points of view are heard and that the money goes to the place where it will provide the highest return.
If you have any questions, or I can provide any clarifications, please feel free to call me at 548-9309.
Thank you for your consideration.
Sincerely,
Jay Lyche
Director of Marketing, Eagle Crest Resort
This e-mail and any files transmitted with it are confidential and
intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are
addressed. This footnote also confirms that this e-mail message has
been swept for the presence of computer viruses.
www.]ELD-WENCommunities.com
www,eagle-crest.com
www.runningy.com
www.silvermt.com
ww....b...r..a...sada...co...m.
w.w....w.r„idge. wate...rprop..e..rties...com
8/21/2008