Loading...
2008-1011-Minutes for Meeting May 14,2008 Recorded 12/30/2008COUNTY OFFICIAL NANCYUBLANKENSHIP, COUNTY CLERKDS CJ 2408'1411 COMMISSIONERS' JOURNAL 12/34/2008 48;18;23 AM II I I I II I I IIII II IIII V I I I III I III 2008-3011 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., Suite 200, Bend, OR 97701-1960 (541) 388-6570 - Fax (541) 385-3202 - www.deschutes.org MINUTES OF WORK SESSION DESCHUTES COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS WEDNESDAY, MAY 149 2008 Present were Commissioners Dennis R. Luke, Michael M. Daly and Tammy Melton. Also present were Dave Kanner, County Administrator; Erik Kropp, Deputy County Administrator; Dave Inbody, Assistant to the County Administrator; and David Givans, Internal Auditor. Present for a portion of the meeting were Tom Anderson, Catherine Morrow, Peter Gutowsky, Peter Russell, Barbara Rich, Todd Cleveland, Terri Payne and Dan Haldeman, Community Development; Scott Johnson, Mental Health Director; Larry Blanton; Susan Ross, Property and Facilities; Marty Wynne, Finance Director; media representative Hillary Borrud of The Bulletin; and approximately twenty other citizens. Chair Luke opened the meeting at 1: 30 p.m. 1. Discussion of Planning Commission Appointments. Dave Kanner said four Planning Commissioners' terms are up at the end of June and one does not want to be reappointed. (See attached, marked as Exhibit A.) Catherine Morrow said she would get a formal letter sent out. Commissioner Luke said all three Commissioners are supportive of appointing Merle Ervine. Terri Payne said there are some discrepancies in the record, as some of the expiration dates are out of rotation. Terms were staggered so that not more than half of the Planning Commissioners needed to be reappointed or new appointees found in the same year. Ms. Morrow said she would work up a recommendation on how to get the terms staggered again. If the Board of Commissioners does not want to reappoint and wants to go through the recruitment process, she will need to know as soon as possible because of time needed to advertise. Commissioner Luke was in favor of going out for applicants; Commissioner Melton was, not as they just had an open recruitment. Commissioner Luke asked Ms. Morrow to proceed with the paperwork on staggering the terms, and they will make a decision at the meeting next week. Minutes of Administrative Work Session Wednesday, May 14, 2008 Page 1 of 9 Commissioner Luke asked Ms. Morrow about Mr. Brown's fruit stand. Ms. Morrow said she met with Mr. Brown to go over the site plan but there were site plan approval standards that he did not want to comply with. She did not know if he submitted an application after that. Tom Anderson said he remembered the meeting and as far as he can tell, the issue was whether Mr. Brown had to pave the parking lot. Whether the farm stand is temporary or permanent, Mr. Brown would have to have a paved parking lot and he did not want to do that. It was never stated he could not have the stand, but standards for parking were always there before he started the process. That was the issue. The requirement is part of the urban reserve zone standards. 2. Continued Discussion of OSP/9-1-1/Telecare Project. Mr. Kanner said a number of questions came up last time, such as the bond. There were questions raised about the residential treatment facility's security, as it looks more like a mini-college dorm rather than a mini jail. Scott Johnson said it is secure because once in, the residents cannot leave unless signed out by someone from Mental Health. Mr. Johnson passed around handouts that were then discussed. Mr. Johnson introduced guests Dr. Robin Henderson with Cascade Health Care and Bob Nikkel with Department of Human Services. He said regarding financing, Susan Ross and Marty Wynne have crunched some numbers. One of the issues is the County has far less of a capacity than the State. Statewide 32% of the residential programs are met and only 9% of the programs are in Deschutes County. They looked at other facilities to get information. Bob Nikkel said there are 19 secure residential treatment facilities around the State. There has been opposition in some communities and some controversy, as people who are registered sex offenders are in the facilities. Mr. Johnson said different people need different levels of care. Commissioner Melton asked them to explain the secure idea. Mr. Nikkel said they try to make it as much like a home as they can, with individual rooms and an outdoor fenced space on the perimeter. What it means is people cannot get out without a staff person approving it. Minutes of Administrative Work Session Wednesday, May 14, 2008 Page 2 of 9 Commissioner Luke stated many people are convicted felons and the room is left open. Mr. Nikkel said there could be a whole range of felonies, including murder. The dividing line is guilty except for insanity. Usually, treatment means being locked in a State hospital. The number one priority by law is public safety. The crimes were committed because the people were mentally ill. Typically, 29.8% commit another felony within three years, while under this program, it is less than 2%. Dr. Henderson said the difficulty of treating the mentally ill is having adequate facilities. They do not have the long-term care treatment facilities that are necessary. Sheriff Blanton said the primary issue is a lack of communication between the State hospital and the County. One of the issues for law enforcement is stating that secure housing is different from a police secure facility. He said there should be a transitional phase, possibly sending them to Salem for assessment before having them go into transitional housing. Mr. Nikkel said that he has not heard of that happening. Mr. Kanner said normally these people have been in treatment in the State hospital for years. Sheriff Blanton said if a person is in psychiatric secure residential housing rather than in a residential neighborhood, that would be the way to go. He asked if there is an obligation to have some neighborhood meetings making sure there are open lines of communication. He suggested a transitional phase, similar to the work center. He had heard about ten beds. Mr. Johnson said the total is ten beds, four PSRB (Psychiatric Security Review Board), four extended care, and two County managed beds (the capacity to place someone from community.) Dr. Henderson said they could stay at Sageview for five to seven days. There are individual private rooms in a secure campus secure environment but it does not feel like a traditional secure environment. If it is determined that a higher level of care is required, it is available. Sheriff Blanton said would like input on policy and procedures. Commissioner Melton said she could see that as a benefit in the planning. Commissioner Daly asked if the Pendleton facility is closing soon. Mr. Nikkel said no, but they are having a hard time finding a psychiatrist to work there. Commissioner Luke said they are having problems because of people not wanting to live there. Commissioner Daly stated that from looking at the pictures, the facility does not look very secure. (See attached marked as Exhibit B) Minutes of Administrative Work Session Wednesday, May 14, 2008 Page 3 of 9 Mr. Nikkel said the windows are hardened and you cannot just get out. Commissioner Melton said Telecare said the screens have sensors and an alarm goes off if someone were to try to get out. Commissioner Daly said the facility is on eight acres. Were other alternatives looked at, maybe something closer to Sageview? Has anything been put out for private contractors? Susan Ross said they have not. The County already owned the piece of property that they are going to start building on. Mr. Johnson said they felt this was a unique opportunity. Commissioner Daly said he supported it 100% and just wanted to make sure the bases are covered. Mr. Nikkel said Telecare is a private for-profit corporation. The Commissioners indicated that they do not have a problem with that, as long as the costs are in order and they provide good care. Ms. Ross said Sageview is a secure residential treatment facility and no one driving by would think of it like a jail. Mr. Nikkel said in talking with Woodburn Police Department they had concerns at first, but say the Woodburn treatment facility has worked out very well. Mr. Kanner suggested talking about financing. On the questions raised about bond measures, there is a way to get through construction and not issue bonds until getting money in on projects. Part of making it work is doing interfund loan. The County has many reserve funds. Mr. Wynne said the cost is about $510,000 for a year; Ms. Ross said this is the design part. Mr. Kanner said the County has enough money in project funds to cover two years and then replenish that money with new neighborhood land sales over time. Commissioner Melton said land sales are eventually, that is the question. Mr. Kanner said if the County can afford it, it would make sense to divide it into two bonds; an interfund loan for getting the design started over the next year. Mr. Wynne said it would be a net savings of $120,000 by doing two bonds. Commissioner Luke said the Board will need some time to think about this and can discuss it further at one of next week's meetings. Minutes of Administrative Work Session Wednesday, May 14, 2008 Page 4 of 9 Commissioner Melton did not think the market would turn around in two years. Mr. Wynne said there are other options if money runs out and land sales do not occur. Commissioner Luke asked Mr. Wynne to write up the different options for the next meeting. 3. Continued Discussion of South County Groundwater Protection Project. Pam Luettich said some of the South County Financial Assistance Committee members were present to address the Board. She introduced June Ramey and Ed Criss. Others were in the audience. Ms. Luettich read a brief statement concerning allegations made against the Committee. She passed out a handout. (See attached marked as Exhibit C.) Commissioner Melton asked if they were speaking on behalf of the whole Committee; Ms. Luettich replied that it was only in regard to legal ramifications. Commissioner Luke said if they have a quorum of the Committee members, the meeting has to be a posted meeting. Ms. Luettich said it is good that this has been clarified, as they feel the integrity of the Committee has come into question. Ms. Luettich said the Committee could not make distribution plans for $35 million with out a cost basis. There is only $462,000 dollars at this time. The remainder is tied to Pahlisch Homes. At no point in time did the Committee members openly vote. Neither Commissioners Luke nor Daly has attended meetings as the Committee has moved forward. The Committee printed in the Bend Bulletin that they want an apology from the Board and CDD Staff. Commissioner Daly said normally when an editorial appears, there is an opportunity to dispute the information. Mr. Criss said he is having a problem even understanding why it is even in the media; he asked why this just problem could not be discussed. Commissioner Luke said without a committee, it can be perceived as a political action group and County would have to pull out their staff. Mr. Criss said the people were picked by a formula. They are working on a financial program and he felt that they have been very much on track considering many people do not agree with Local Rule. Minutes of Administrative Work Session Wednesday, May 14, 2008 Page 5 of 9 One of problems was having Stan Biles chosen to be the chair. He was told they would be picking their own chair. They are going through the minutes before they okay them. He stated he was trained as a facilitator. He said Mr. Biles was not acting as a facilitator; he was acting as a member of the Committee. Commissioner Melton asked if at the first meeting they went over structure. Mr. Criss said they did not. He said they have a timeline to work with and are aware of what needs to be done. They are halfway through the meetings and are hung up on organizational issues. June Ramey apologized for the way the whole thing is being handled. They need to work together. The group is amazing and people have put a lot of time into the charge. As far as what the money will be used for, there are many options. They had an Oranco person advise that they could put in a sewer system for a small community for $10,000. All things need to be found out, such as the true costs. She said Mr. Criss has done research in other states and has found that the costs for maintenance is a lot higher than has been mentioned. She said to bring everyone to the table, represent every neighborhood and let the neighborhoods make their own decisions. They are excited about a sewer summit and bringing everyone to the table, and want everyone to get along better. South County people are ones who live there and will put the most effort into a solution. The newspaper made it sound like they are all "yahoos", and there are some, but the Committee could be helpful in changing those minds. Ms. Morrow said DEQ, the Department of Land Conservation and the County staff are all working very hard in putting information onto the website. Certain steps have to be made and they are doing everything they can think of to help streamline the process. Commissioner Melton said open communication is very important. The County is working with State agencies but it is incredibly slow to get things moving forward. It is not one individual department holding it up; it is just how it is. Ms. Ramey said that is okay because it is going to take neighborhoods a long time. Mr. Criss said the idea regarding a summit is to try to get information to the people. The need a sustainable comprehensive plan. They already know the process is slow; they are not concerned with that, but they still have people who do not have all the information. Minutes of Administrative Work Session Wednesday, May 14, 2008 Page 6 of 9 Commissioner Daly said they are right, everyone needs to step back and work together and if he has stepped on anyone's toes, he apologizes. The editorial board does not call and ask if what is written is true. Commissioner Daly said the Committee needs to continue with its job and the County needs to do its job. He hoped that everyone could meet in the middle. Ms. Luettich said the economy is not like it was. Ms. Ramey said as years go by hopefully there will be federal and grant money available for sewer infrastructure. She even heard of private funds of people wanting to invest in this type of project. Peter Gutowsky said they provided the people the best information they have on South Deschutes County. The Committee was given data and maps, and that is all that is available. Commissioner Melton said the population numbers should be updated. Mr. Gutowsky said the census for cities and counties does not do a breakdown for unincorporated cities and areas. Ms. Luettich said, speaking as an individual, that she did not feel like the Committee has been portrayed in a good light and they want some acknowledgment from the Commissioners. Commissioner Luke said if they respond to an article in the paper, it becomes more of a problem than leaving the article alone. Commissioner Melton said it is a huge issue and very large financial potential burden and there needs to be good communication. Commissioner Luke asked who the spokesperson is for the Committee, and Commissioner Melton said they needed to make that decision if no one is appointed. Ms. Luettich said they would internally address that at the meeting tonight. Mr. Inbody passed out documentation on the steps taken when a property is sold. (See attached, marked as Exhibit D.) He went over the handout, and provided a document from the Community Development Department on available funding for onsite wastewater system upgrades. (See attached, marked as Exhibit E.) Minutes of Administrative Work Session Wednesday, May 14, 2008 Page 7 of 9 Tom Anderson said they might want to leave some flexibility in releasing the lien. Mr. Inbody said it is not a lien; just recording a notice. Proof of compliance can take many forms. He thought there are ways to address this and will refer to Legal Counsel to work out the details. Failure to upgrade at the time of the sale would be a Code violation. The requirement stays with the property. They may have civil recourse with the seller and there might be a problem with cash transactions. Dave Inbody then passed out documentation on variances and fee waivers and went over them. (See attached, marked as Exhibit F.) He said they would like to modify the proposed Ordinance to include the time of sale provision not kick in until 2012 to take action. He is still waiting for the Financial Advisory Committee to give the County language for alternatives. Ms. Luettich said they never had an opportunity to address the language themselves. Mr. Anderson asked if they decided they did not want to vote on alternative language. Ms. Luettich said a couple of people are in opposition to the way it is laid out. Mr. Inbody said anything that meets the standards approved by DEQ they can do, as long as it reduces the nitrates. Ms. Luettich said she would take the information to the Committee. Commissioner Luke proposed some additional language to Local Rule that says the upgrades are not the only alternative. He said the direction is to go ahead and redraft the Ordinance to include the changes. Economic Development Grant Requests: Future Business Leaders - Send Members to National Event - (See attached marked as Exhibit G.) Mike Daly had other obligations, so declined to contribute to this request. Commissioners Luke and Melton granted $885 each. 4. Update of Commissioners' Meetings and Schedules None were discussed. 5. Other Items None were addressed. Minutes of Administrative Work Session Wednesday, May 14, 2008 Page 8 of 9 Being no further items to come before the Board, the meeting adjourned at 4:15 p.m. DATED this 14th Day of May 2008 for the Deschutes County Board of Commissioners. nn9RLuke, Chair ATTEST: Recording Secretary Attachments: Exhibit A: Deschutes County Planning Commission Appointments Exhibit B: Photos of Telecare PSRB Centers Exhibit C: Response from Southern Deschutes County Financial Assistance Advisory Committee (FAC) to Commissioners Exhibit D: On-site Wastewater Treatment System Upgrade Requirements Exhibit E: Exhibit F: Exhibit G: when the Property is Sold Funds Available for On-site Wastewater System Upgrades Variances and Fee Waivers for On-site Wastewater Systems Economic Development Fund - Future Business Leaders of America minutes of Aumimstrative Work Session Wednesday, May 14, 2008 Page 9 of 9 (",61AAJA^,~ Tammy ( ey) e on, Vice Chair Deschutes County Board of Commissioners 1300 NW Wall St., Suite 200, Bend, OR 97701-1960 (541) 388-6570 - Fax (541) 385-3202 - www.deschutes.org WORK SESSION AGENDA DESCHUTES COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS 1:30 P.M., WEDNESDAY, MAY 149 2008 1. Discussion of Planning Commission Appointments 2. Continued Discussion of OSP/9-1-1/Telecare Project 3. Continued Discussion of South County Groundwater Protection Project 4. Economic Development Grant Requests: . Future Business Leaders - Send Members to National Event 5. Update of Commissioners' Meetings and Schedules 6. Other Items PLEASE NOTE: At any time during this meeting, an executive session could be called to address issues relating to ORS 192.660(2) (e), real property negotiations; ORS 192.660(2) (h), pending or threatened litigation; or ORS 192.660(2) (b), personnel issues Meeting dates, times and discussion items are subject to change. All meetings are conducted in the Board of Commissioners' meeting rooms at 1300 NW Wall St., Bend, unless otherwise indicated. Ifyou have questions regarding a meeting, please call 388-6572. 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. r Community Development Department Planning Division Building Safety Division Environmental Health Division i` 117 NW Lafayette Avenue Bend Oregon 97701-1925 (541)388-6575 FAX(541)385-1764 http://www.co.deschutes.or.us/cdd/ MEMORANDUM TO: Tom Anderson FROM: Terri Hansen Payne, Senior Planner Catherine Morrow, Planning Director DATE: April 29, 2008 SUBJECT: Planning Commission DESCHUTES COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION Four members of the seven member Planning Commission have terms that expire on June 30, 2008. Brenda Pace (Bend) Term began July 1, 2002 Susan Quatre (At Large) Term began April 12, 2006 Kelly L Smith (At Large) Term began April 12, 2006 Robert Otteni (South County) Term began July 26, 2006 Kelly Smith has indicated he does not wish to be reappointed. Planning Commissioners can serve for two four year terms or ten years, whichever is greater. Historically, when a Planning Commissioner term expires and they are eligible to be reappointed, that has been done automatically. Recently the Board directed that staff require the Planning Commissioners to reapply for their positions and go through the recruitment process along with other applicants. Staff has a few concerns with this requirement. 1. The Planning Commissioners donate considerable time to assisting the County on land use matters and it appears disrespectful to require them to reapply. 2. The Planning Commission functions best when there are experienced members and some may choose not to reapply. 3. It is a challenge to find people willing to volunteer the time, energy and skills necessary to review and analyze complex land use matters. 4. It takes considerable staff time and resources to recruit. STAFF RECOMMENDATION At the last recruitment in early 2008, the Board interviewed two capable candidates. The choice was made based on the importance of geographical representation for the open Redmond area position. The other candidate was from the Bend area and the Board indicated they would like to see him appointed. Quality Services Performed with Pride _ -1 - 1. Offer the position held by Kelly Smith to Merle Irvine The Planning Commission terms have gotten skewed over the years. There should not be four commissioners with terms expiring at the same time. 2. The Board could direct staff to look at the code to determine how to remedy that issue. The current Planning Commissioners have experience and knowledge that is valuable. 3. Staff recommends that the Board reappoint Commissioners Pace, Quatre and Otteni DECISION If the Board prefers to recruit for all positions, staff will need time to initiate the new recruitment. A timely decision will ensure that the Planning Commission maintains full membership. 2 Telecare PSRB Woodburn Telecare PSRB Gresham McNary Place Secure Res. Treatment Umatilla Hazel Center Secure Res. Treatment Jackson Countv ' 711 I 4 r~ i Li At Hazel Center Yard May 12, 2008 Deschutes County Commissioners 1300 NW Wall Street Bend, OR 97701 RE: Response of the Southern Deschutes County Financial Assistance Advisory Committee (FAC) to Commissioners Commissioners, Deschutes County Staff and members of the media, it has been a very unsettling week for members of the FAC. We have faced many challenges as they related to inaccurate information gathering, third party communications and a complete communication breakdown between the FAC, Commissioners and CDD Staff. A few issues are outlined below: oo The FAC's commitment and direction are "off track" from our charge oo Some FAC members are biased due to their inclusions of certain neighborhood groups; namely the Community Action Group (CAG) oo The feeling, on the part of the Commissioners, that the committee would like to do more than their charge oo FAC members are having discussions as to whether the "science" behind the Local Rule is valid oo The negative impressions that our community views the FAC due to recent Bend Bulletin articles in which two Commissioners (Luke and Daly) make statements against said members. Keep in mind that neither members of the press or the Commissioners are attending FAC meetings, therefore all communication with the Commissioners are on behalf of third party (CDD) presence We, the members of the FAC, find the events leading up to the past few weeks very troubling from both the view of the committee as a whole and as our individual counterparts. We are members of this community as both residents and business owners/employees; therefore the way in which we are viewed is very important to us. At these points we feel our integrity has come into question and we cannot, and will not, abide by the recent questioning of our morals and ethics. First, let us begin by giving a brief history of how the FAC came to fruition. The Commissioners, seeking resident input in the proposed Local Rule, asked for interested parties to apply to be a part of the FAC. Applications were completed by many community members and submitted to the County Offices. The Commissioners then sourced and voted upon the thirteen members of the FAC, in full acknowledgement and understanding of applicant involvements within their community groups (CAG). A t-&-f e We were further charged with thirteen questions that the Board would like to have answered: oo How can the County's resources best be used to help homeowners implementing groundwater protection measures? oo Should any financial assistance be available for development on vacant land or should all financial assistance resources target existing development? oo Should property owners who hold approvals for conventional systems be compensated for having to install an ATT? oo What population should receive the bulk of the financial resources? All low income? Some middle income? Some to all levels? oo What proportion of funds should be available as loans that are paid back (and so can be used again) or grants? oo Should loans or grants cover 100% of the costs of the groundwater protection measures or should the homeowner have some cost share or some kind of sweat equity? Or should a set amount be available for all property owners? oo Should the County provide long term, cost deferred loans? 0o Should financial programs focus on groundwater protection measures completed at the time of property sale? oo Should incentives be offered that would motivate people to implement groundwater protection measures sooner rather than later? If so, what should those incentives be? oo Are there reasons to focus financial assistance geographically? For instance, areas that are closer to rivers or areas of denser development? If so, what would that take? While the above, at first glance, may seem easy we have approached our charge with the full understanding that the programs and suggestions we make will have vast and far reaching implications to the residents in the Southern Deschutes County area. It is with this understanding that we have employed much due diligence and conscientious thought to our recommendations. It is further within the due diligence process that we find ourselves in the position of seeking additional assistance from outside sources (CDD Staff, DEQ, ATT System Installers, and various technical professionals) to better understand the costs associated with the proposed Local Rule incorporation. One point, erroneously omitted by CDD Staff, is that there are many alternatives to ATT Systems that can be less cost prohibitive and provide sustainable long term environmental protection. A few such systems are Composting Toilets, Cluster Systems, larger scale Sewering and further technologies that can provide for the reuse of waste (through a cleansing process) to produce crops such as hay. It is with this conscience in mind, that we have explored cost options available to meet the proposed Local Rule guidelines. Understanding a Comprehensive Plan of Action to combat the Nitrates in the local area means also understanding actual costs to implement per household. Acting as ethical and professional members of the FAC we cannot make recommendations for the distribution of the proposed $35M, that will have such wide reaching and profound effect on South Deschutes County residents, without understanding the cost basis and living/financial demographics for the area. While we have requested the demographics for many weeks it has only been in the last week we have been presented with any such information and it was from a Census in 2000. We would further like to point out that the proposed $35M in funding that the County has said is available is not as it seems. First of all, the County only has around $450K in an account at this time. Secondly, the County has only discussed the floating of a $3M Bond to support the immediate needs of the community. That being said, the County has only the capacity to service the bond for 2 years. After this time no consideration has been made as to how the pay the servicing. And lastly, the remainder of the $35M would be tied to an established contract with Pahlisch Homes; whereby if they exercise their option to develop areas 3 and 4 of the new La Pine neighborhood, by 2012, the County would receive the funds to make up the remainder of the $35M. Should the contract end date lapse it would then be up to Deschutes County to seek alternatives to sale. We would further like to state that at no time has Deschutes County officially committed to the providing of the proposed $35M exclusively to the resident impact of the proposed Local Rule. In additional support to the falsely accused statements listed above, at no point in time did FAC members openly debate or vote on the "science" behind the proposed Local Rule. Any miss-representation of those facts by CDD Staff and/or the media constitutes a complete falsification of said facts and is entirely and utterly unacceptable. It is to this miss-representation of facts that we must address the following items. First let us address the pointed views of both Commissioners Luke and Daly. In most recent articles Commissioner Luke was quoted to say, "Several people on the committee are part of a political action committee, for lack of a better term, and it would seem now that the County is supporting a PAC." He further stated, "He will not know how the County will approach the situation..." Further to that he stated, "We were asking for advice from the committee, if they choose not to give us advice that's up to them." In similar fashion, Mr. Daly stated, "There's certain members of the committee, no question in my mind, who would like to have the committee do more, and I think that's been the holdup." To this he further stated, "A few members would rather talk about whether the science if valid or not, instead of what they're supposed to do." We would like to state unequivocally that neither Mr. Luke nor Mr. Daly have been to our committee meetings as we have progressed through our charge. Furthermore, that all information they are speaking to is entirely through third party hearsay and without founding. We would refer to the committee taped recordings as ultimate proof. Such irresponsible behavior by our Commissioners, CDD Staff and the media has had a profound negative impact on FAC members. We have each volunteered our time to the success of the FAC and find it absolutely outrageous that we should be treated in such a manner. We call for the immediate issuing of an apology from the Commissioners, CDD Staff and a recant of the accusatory statements made by Mr. Luke and Mr. Daly to be printed in the Bend Bulletin. We further call for the disciplinary action of the CDD Staff that provided the false information that ultimately caused character defamation to FAC members. In closing, we understand fully our charge and its ultimate impact to the residents of South Deschutes County. We pledge to continue to behave in an ethical and professional manner at all times, while providing the Commissioners with the most comprehensive and fair distribution of funds possible. We continue to hope, and expect, to work with the Commissioners and CDD Staff with honest communications and full disclosure of information. We further look forward to completing our charge in the near future. FAC members Please add the above statement to the Public Record for both the proposed Local Rule and the FAC i Step 1. County records a notice on each piece of property to the effect that the property is subject to the requirements of the local rule. Step 2 "f When property owner puts property up for sale and receives an offer, Title Company flags the notice as a cloud on the title. Title Company creates an exception to Lender refuses to loan the money until the title insurance policy. the cloud on the title is lifted, recognizing that County can seek a lien on the property for code violation. Step 3: Seller complies with local rule. May / negotiate some cost-sharing arrangement with buyer or finance the costs. May z receive financial assistance from County. Step 4: Seller provides county with proof of C__-00% compliance. (Installation permit and final inspection if septic upgrade; service agreement with sewer district; plumbin g A04- permit for composting toilet, etc.) Step 5: Seller (or buyer) records release of • notice recorded in step 1 which seller FO can provide to title co. and lender. SALE Property sale concludes. Caveats * Will probably require temp help to prepare the notices in step 1. * Hopefully, this motivates people to take care of LR compliance before they put their property up for sale. Some or all costs of compliance can be built into sale price. * The failure to upgrade or take some other nitrate-reduction measure at time of sale would be a code violation. Should a code violation occur, it would be difficult for the county to pursue redress from the seller, especially if the seller moves out of state. The buyer could still seek civil redress from the seller. * The above does not work in a direct cash transaction that doesn't go through escrow. Even in that case, the seller is still responsible for complying with the rule. REVIEWED LEGAL COUNSEL After recording return to: Deschutes County Community Development Department 117 NW Lafayette Ave. Bend, OR 97701 NOTICE OF DESCHUTES COUNTY ON-SITE WASTEWATER TREATMENT SYSTEM UPGRADE REQUIREMENT Pursuant to Deschutes County Code (insert local rule code number), Deschutes County, a political subdivision of the State of Oregon, hereby provides notice that: An on-site wastewater treatment system ("System") is located on the real property ("Property") commonly known as (insert street address, if any) and legally described as (Legal Description) 2. The System is not in compliance with Deschutes County Code. 3. Upon any sale, grant, conveyance or transfer of title of the property, all property owners of the Property must upgrade the System to a system approved by Deschutes County. For more information, contact the Deschutes County Community Development Department. See www.deschutes.org/edd for contact information. 4. The sale, grant, conveyance or transfer of title does not include the transfer into a living trust for which the owner(s) of record as of the date of the recording of this notice is (are) the trustor(s). 5. The sale, grant, conveyance or transfer of title does include the sale, grant, conveyance transfer of title of the Property from a trust to any beneficiary. Dated David Kanner, Deschutes County Administrator STATE OF OREGON ss Deschutes County ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of , 2008 by David Kanner, Deschutes County Administrator. Notary Public for Oregon My Commission Expires: REVIEWED LEGAL COUNSEL After recording return to: Deschutes County Community Development Department 117 NW Lafayette Ave. Bend, OR 97701 RELEASE OF NOTICE OF DESCHUTES COUNTY ON-SITE WASTEWATER TREATMENT SYSTEM UPGRADE REQUIREMENT Deschutes County, a political subdivision of the State of Oregon, releases the owner(s) of record from that NOTICE OF DESCHUTES COUNTY ON-SITE WASTEWATER TREATMENT SYSTEM UPGRADE REQUIREMENT recorded on (Date) in the Deschutes County Official Records at book and page Dated David Kanner, Deschutes County Administrator STATE OF OREGON ss Deschutes County ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of , 2008 by David Kanner, Deschutes County Administrator. Notary Public for Oregon My Commission Expires: ES Community Development Department { Environmental Health Division 117 NW Lafayette Avenue, Bend, OR 97701-1925 (541) 388-6575 - Fax (541) 385-1764 http://www.deschutes.org/cdd Funds available for onsite wastewater system upgrades US Department of Agriculture - Rural Development Program The US Department of Agriculture has funds to help low income residents or fixed income seniors upgrade onsite systems through the home improvement loans and grants program. Call 541-923- 4358, ext 130, or e-mail barrie.lasure@or.usda.gov for more information. Neighborlmpact Neighborlmpact (http://www.neighborimpact.org/home-rehab.html) offers multiple home improvement programs that use Community Block Grants to provide needed health and safety housing repairs to homeowners in Deschutes, Jefferson and Crook counties. Each loan program offers homeowners a low interest, deferred loan secured by a note and a recorded trust deed. Homeowners must repay the loan once the house is rented, sold or refinanced. As loans are repaid, proceeds are returned to the program to provide loans for future homeowners. Currently the program serves clients at or below 80% of county median income bracket (in south Deschutes County this is equal to $57,800/year). Projects include but are not limited to sewers, roofs, heating systems, handicap accessibility, and exterior paint. For more information contact the Redmond Homeownership center at 541-548-2380 x111 or by email at homerehab@neighborimpact.org. Pollution Reduction Credit Rebates Elk Horn Land Development is offering homeowners $3,750 when they upgrade their existing system to a nitrogen reducing system. In exchange, Elk Horn will receive a Pollution Reduction Credit to apply towards their development in the New La Pine Neighborhood. If you would like more information on whether your property is eligible for a PRC, please call the Environmental Health Division at 541-388-6575. For more information on the Elk Horn Pollution Reduction Rebate, call 541-385-6762. Last revised: April 2008 13.14.080. Variances. (Portion of the proposed Deschutes County Code) A. The Department Director or, if on. appeal, the Board, may authorize a variance from the requirements of DCC 13.14.050. B. Applications to the Department for variances shall be submitted on a form specified by the Department and accompanied by the fee established by the Board. C. The application must state fully the grounds for the variance and facts relied upon by the applicant and must demonstrate how strict compliance with the standard is impracticable. D. The Department Director or the Board may grant a variance in one of the following situations: 1. 3. The applicant demonstrates that an extreme or unusual financial hardship exists. a. The following factors shall be considered by the Department or the Board in reviewing an application for a. variance based on financial hardship: 1) Applicant's advanced age or poor health; 2) Applicant's financial ability to pay for a nitrogen reducing system; 3) Applicant's need to care for aged, incapacitated, or disabled relatives; and 4) The availability of financial assistance programs that are sufficient to offset the cost of installing, operating, and maintaining a nitrogen reducing system. b. Hardship variances granted by the Department may include conditions such as: 1) ]Limiting permits to the life of the applicant; 2) ]Limiting the number of permanent residents using the system; 3) Requiring the system is retrofitted to a nitrogen reducing system at time of sale of the property; and 4) The compliance date specified in DCC 13.14.050(F) shall not apply until time of sale of the property. Background: The variance processes provided for in this section are designed to provide variances to performance standards (including the requirement: to retrofit existing systems and the compliance date) established in DCC 13.14.050. One variance provided for is a hardship variance in the circumstance of extreme financial hardship. The proposed code language is taken almost verbatim from Oregon Administrative Rule (OAR). The proposed Deschutes Country Code language simplifies the process by eliminating: 1. the requirement for denial of an application for a "for cause" variance prior to application for the hardship variance, and 2. the requirement for any public hearings on the variance applications Fees: Oregon Administrative Rule states that fee waivers for variance applications may be given to persons 65 years of age or older. Staff knows there may be residents in the area affected by the proposed code amendment who are younger than 65 and that could need the fee waiver. Therefore, the proposed code language does not mirror this portion of the OAR. Staff expects that the fee for the hardship variance would be either established as part of the implementation plan for the code when adopted. The fee could either be set at zero or at some amount that would then be included in the variance request. Establishing this fee will be an important consideration because the County does not want to encourage capricious applications yet the County also does not want to discourage applicants with genuine need. Application Process: Staff expects the application process for the hardship variance to mirror the existing fee waiver process and application form that exists in CDD policy and procedure because the hardship is financial in nature. I Z / J OAR 340-071-0420 (basis for proposed County Code Hardship Variances (1) In cases of extreme and unusual hardship, the commission may, after a public hearing, grant hardship variances from rules or standards in this division to applicants for onsite permits. (2) Applications. (a) Applicants must submit applications for hardship variances to the department. (b) The application must document that: (A) A for cause variance under 340-071-0415 has been denied; and (B) An extreme or unusual hardship exists. (3) The commission may consider the following factors in reviewing an application for a variance based on hardship: (a) Applicant's advanced age or poor health; (b) Applicant's need to care for aged, incapacitated, or disabled relatives; and (c) Environmental impacts from the variance. (4) Hardship variances granted by the commission may include conditions such as: (a) Limiting permits to the life of the applicant; (b) Limiting the number of permanent residents using the system; and (c) Use of experimental systems for specified periods of time. (5) The department will strive to aid and accommodate the needs of applicants for hardship variances. ORS 454.657 Variance from subsurface sewage disposal system rules or standards; conditions; hearing. (1) After hearing the Environmental Quality Commission may grant to applicants for permits required under ORS 454.655 specific variances from the particular requirements of any rule or standard pertaining to subsurface sewage disposal systems for such period of time and upon such conditions as it may consider necessary to protect the public health and welfare and to protect the waters of the state, as defined in ORS 46813.005. The commission shall grant such specific variance only where after hearing it finds that strict compliance with the rule or standard is inappropriate for cause or because special physical conditions render strict compliance unreasonable, burdensome or impractical. (2) The commission shall adopt rules for granting variances from rules or standards pertaining to subsurface sewage disposal systems in cases of extreme and unusual hardship. The rules shall provide for consideration of the following factors in reviewing applications for variances due to hardship: (a) Advanced age or bad health of applicants; (b) Relative insignificance of the environmental impact of granting a variance; and (c) The need of applicants to care for relatives who are aged or incapacitated or have disabilities. (3) The department shall strive to aid and accommodate the needs of applicants for variances due to hardship. (4) Variances granted due to hardship may contain conditions such as permits for the life of the applicant, limiting the number of permanent residents using a subsurface sewage disposal system and use of experimental systems for specified periods of time. ORS 454.662 Variance fee; low income elderly exemption. (1) Except as provided in subsection (2) of this section, each application for a variance submitted pursuant to ORS 454.657 must be accompanied by a fee, the amount of which shall be determined by a fee structure adopted by the Environmental Quality Commission as described in ORS 454.745. The moneys received are continuously appropriated to meet administrative expenses of the hearings and appeals. (2) Notwithstanding subsection (1) of this section, an applicant for a variance under this section is not required to pay the fee specified in subsection (1) of this section if, at the time of filing the application, the applicant: (a) Is 65 years of age or older; (b) Is a resident of this state; and (c) Has an annual household income, as defined in ORS 310.630, of $15,000 or less. DESCHUTES COUNTY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT FEE WAIVER POLICY Effective January 4, 2006, the Deschutes County Board of Commissioner approved Ordinance No, 2006-001, 2006-002 and 2006-003 delegating authority to administer and approve septic permit, building permit and land use permit fee waiver requests to the Community Development Director and County Administrator. (DDC 13.08, 15.04.160 and 22.08.010). The Board of County Commissioners of Deschutes County has delegated full authority to the CDD Director to administer this policy with the exception of items #7 and #8. POLICY GUIDELINES: 1. Fee waivers under this policy provide a public benefit. 2. With the adoption of this policy and continuing with each budget, an amount not to exceed $5,000 shall be set aside into a hardship account within the CDD budget form any savings of budgeted expenses or excess revenue. 3. When money is available in the hardship account of CDD, the CDD Director may authorize fee waivers in amount not to exceed the fee waiver budget each year. 4. The CDD Director shall find an applicant meets one of the following criterion in granting fee waivers: A. The applicant meets the criteria for indigency and at least one of the following conditions. Indigence shall be established by the financial hardship process attached as Exhibit "A". 1. There is an immediate need of the services to CDD to protect the applicant's or public's health or safety. 2 ._Where granting the waiver will create a long term efficiency of a Code Enforcement issue. B. The request is from a nonprofit organization that has encountered an extraordinary hardship that could not have been anticipated in planning for and funding of the project; and the fee waiver will benefit the community. (NOTE-: Community Services may be required by the CDD Director for some or all of the waived fees.) 5. Fee Waiver requests covered above shall be submitted on a form provided by CDD. Applicants shall provide a written explanation of the request and explain why one or more of the above criteria are satisfied. The request will be delivered to the CDD Director for review and decision. 6. The applicant may appeal the CDD Director's decision to the Deschutes County Administrator. The applicant may appeal the Deschutes County Administrator's decision to the Board. 7. The Board of County Commissioners may issue blanket fee waivers, subject to the above criterion, for classes of hardship such as catastrophic fire. 8. The Board of County Commissioners may waive fees in any other case where the public benefit is served and other remedies have been exhausted. FINANCIAL HARDSHIP Some property owners or other responsible persons who lack the financial ability to obtain permits and approvals to pay fees established by the County for Community Development Services may receive relief. The procedure for establishing financial hardships as set forth below: Procedure: In cases where the applicant appears not to have the financial recourse to pay fees, the person may apply to qualify for financial or other assistance within available resources and under the following procedures: A. Criteria for Indigency To qualify for assistance under this section, the property owner or other responsible person must demonstrate a substantial financial hardship that makes paying the required fees impractical. B. Fee Reduction/Waiver An applicant may apply for a reduction or waiver of CDD development fees for permits. The decision to reduce or waive development fees will be made by the CDD Director, considering the following factors: 1. The degree of the defendants indigency; 2. The cost of the development permit(s) or approval(s) required; 3. Funds available for fee reductions/waivers in CDD's budget or in any other available funds; and 4. Other assistance available in the community. C. Community Service in Lieu of Fees Upon a finding of indigency the CDD Director may order community service at the rate of $10.00 per hour in lieu of some or all waived fees. A period of time shall be established in which the community service shall be completed. Fee Waiver Policy and Form January 2006.doc Page 2 DESCHUTES COUNTY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Affidavit of Indigence and Request for Fee Waiver The information is submitted in "Confidence" and is not subject to public disclosure (ORS 192.502(3) licants Name: I, the undersigned, am asking for a waiver of Deschutes County Fees for Community Development Services because I cannot pay now without causing substantial hardship to myself or my dependent family. The following information is true. I ask the CDD Director to use the information to decide whether I can have a fee waiver at public expense. I understand I can be required to document or verify this information. 1. PERSONAL Full Name of Applicant. Residence Address First Middle Last street Address Mailing Address (if different) City State Zip Street Address City State Zip Phone # Birthday Social Security# - - M/D/Y Sex: [ ] Male [ ] Female Marital Status: [ ]Married [ ]Single [ ]Divorced [ ]Separated [ ]Widowed [ ]Other: List the following information for everyone living in your household: Name Relationship Age Monthly Income Description of Fees to be waived: **Staff Use Only** Fee Waiver Approved: 1 1 Yes 1 1 No .,.,.-p...cut "uparmmeny mrector _ Est. Amt $ Date Fee Waiver Policy and Form January 2006.doc Page 3 11 Credit Cards: Card Name/Bank Acct # Expiration Date Motor Vehicle: Make, Yr Value Amt Owed Equity Vehicle payments made Are any of these motor vehicles used for work (other than driving to and from work)? Yes [ ] No All other property or assets: (for example: furniture, boats, guns, jewelry, tools, etc.) Description Value Description Value Money owed to you or spouse by others: (for example, tax refund, trust, judgment, etc) Name of Debtor Amount Owed Date Expected 4. MONTHLY EXPENSES List all expenses that are paid monthly by you individually or by you jointly with spouse: Rent/mortgage $ Utilities $ Credit Card pymt(s) $ Car payment $ Insurance $ Other: $ Medical Debt $ Child Support $ Court Order pymt(s) $ [ ] I am willing to perform Community Service to offset the public cost of my request. [ ] I am not able to perform Community Service for the following reasons: I certify that the above information is true and correct. Date Signature of Applicant Fee Waiver Policy and Form January 2006.doc Page 5 DESCHUTES COUNTY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Applicant Name: Releases to Obtain Information for Verification (Confidential) I understand that the County may verify my employment and financial situation to determine my eligibility for the fee waiver. I understand that some of the information necessary for this verification is contained in records that are protected under federal and state law. Because of this, I have signed releases below which allow public and private organizations and individuals to provide the County or its designee with requested information. I understand that organizations and individuals that may be contract include, but are not limited to, those listed below: • Social Security Administration • State Department of Revenue • Mortgage Holder • Department of Motor Vehicles • Employment Division(s) • Utility companies • Worker's Compensation Disability Provider • Adult and Family Services Division • Landlords ■ Private Disability Insurance Provider ■ Private Life Insurance Provider • Past Employers • Release Assistance Office ■ Credit Card Holders • Credit Bureaus ■ Schools and Colleges • Banks, Savings & Loans, Credit Unions (requesting savings, stocks, bonds, checking, loan and credit information including copies of applications) • Other: Specifically, by signing the releases below, I authorize the court or it's designee to directly contact my current employer by telephone or in writing and to release and utilize my address as needed by the Board or its designee. Date Signature of Applicant Fee Waiver Policy and Form January 2006.doc Page 6 ee Waiver Recluest Fo Name of Organization: Address of Organization: City: State: Zip Code: Type of Permit [ ] Building $ [ ] Planning $ [ ] Restaurant $ [ ] Other $ Total amount of Fee(s) requested to be waived: $ [ ] Subsurface Sewage The applicant shall provide a written explanation of the request and explain why one or more of the criterions stated below are satisfied. The request will be reviewed by the Community Development Director and a response will be provided within ten business days. Criterion that must be met to qualify for a Fee Waiver: A. The applicant meets the criteria for indigency and at least one of the following conditions. Indigence shall be established by the financial hardship process attached (refer to Affidavit of Indigence and Request for Fee Waiver form). 1. There is an immediate need of the services to CDD to protect the applicant's or public's health or safety. 2. Where granting the waiver will create a long term efficiency of a Code Enforcement issue. B. The request is from a nonprofit organization that has encountered an extraordinary hardship that could not have been anticipated in planning for and funding of the project; and the fee waiver will benefit the community. (NOTE: Community Services may be required by the CDD Director for some or all of the waived fees.) Fee Waiver Policy and Form January 2006.doc Page 7 2. EMPLOYMENT AND INCOME Present Employer How Long Occupation Address Phone # ( Hourly wage $ Avg hrs/week Net (after tax) monthly income If unemployed, how long since employed Previous Employer How Long Occupation Address Phone # Spouse's Employer How Long Occupation Address Phone # L~ Hourly wage $ Avg hrs/week Net (after tax) monthly income If unemployed, how long since employed Other income for you and spouse, dependents or household members: for example: Social Security , unemployment, retirement, public assistance, child support, worker's compensation, disability, etc. Source of Income (describe) Amount How long received How often received Other household members who help pay for your living expenses: Name Amount Payment for what? Describe 3. PROPERTY AND ASSETS OWNED BY YOU, SPOUSE AND DEPENTENTS Cash available? Savings Acct# Balance $ Bank/Branch Office Checking Acct# Balance $ Bank/Branch Office Other Acct # Balance $ Bank/Branch Office Real Estate: Address, City Value Amt Owed Equity Real estate payments made Fee Waiver Policy and Form January 2006.doc Page 4 For: 5/14 Economic Development Fund Discretionary Grant Program Organization: Future Business Leaders of America (FBLA) Organization Description:. FBLA is a national organization for student leaders to prepare for careers in business, management, entrepreneurship and information technology. Project Name: Sending 4 FBLA Members to Nationals Project Description: This request is to fund all members who qualified, to represent Oregon through participation in the national conference and competition. Project Period: July 1, 2008 Amount of Request: $2,500 (Total budget $7,980) Previous Grants: None At 64-f 6 OL__ o { Desch utes County Board of Commissioners 1300 NW Wall St., Bend, OR 97701-1960 (541) 388-6570 - Fax (541) 385-3202 - Nvww.deschutes.or~ DESCHUTES COUNTY ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT FUND DISCRETIONARY GRANT PROGRAM APPLICATION Direct Application to: Commissioner Tamely Baney Commissioner Michael M. Daly Commissioner Dennis R. Luke All Three Commissioners y e s Date: 4/23/08 Project Name: Sending 4 FBLA Members to Nationals Project-Beginning Date: 4 23 08 Project End Date: =n s Amount of Request: 2500.00 Date Funds Needed: ASAP Future Business 93-6000393 Applicant/Organization: 'Leaders- of A m e r i c-a - Tax ID Address: P.O. BOX 306 City &Zip: La Pine, 97739 Contact Name(s): Steve Parnell and Telephone: 541-322-5357 Stacey Yeager Fax: 541-322-5352 Alternate Phone: 41-771-183 Email: syeager@bend.k12, r.us On a separate sheet, please briefly answer the following questions: 1. Describe the applicant organization, including its purpose, leadership structure, and activities. 2. Describe the proposed project or activity. 3. Provide a timeline for completing the proposed project or activity. 4. Explain how the proposed project or activity will impact the community's economic health. 5. Identify the specific communities or groups that will benefit. 6. Itemize anticipated expenditures*. Describe how grant funds will be used and include the source and amounts of matching funds or in-kind contributions, if any. If the grant will support an ongoing activity, explain how it will be funded in the future. Attach: See Attached - Proof of the applicant organization's non-profit status. * Applicant may be contacted during the review process and asked to provide a complete line item budget. Amount Approved: By: Declined: By: Date: Date: Deschutes County Economic Development Fund Questions: 1. Describe the applicant organization, including its purpose, leadership structure, and activities. Future Business Leaders of America (FBLA) is the nations premier organization for student leaders preparing for careers in business, management, entrepreneurship, and information technology. State and National websites are; Oregonfbla.org & Fbla-pbl.org. 2. Describe the proposed project or activity. We are seeking support in funding to ensure all students who qualified may participate and represent Oregon at the National conference and competition. 3. Provide a timeline for completing the proposed project or activity. Our Chapter is a year long club. We continually build on our connections to the community. We fundraised throughout the year to support the three main competitions we have. (Regional's, State and Nationals) We leave for Nationals this year on June 23`d 4. Explain how the proposed project of activity will impact the community's economic health. Our FBLA program creates an environment that promotes more interest in and understanding of American Business Enterprise. It encourages students to practice efficient money management and students gain excellent skills that assists them in determining and establishing their occupational goals. 5. Identify the specific communities or groups that will benefit. The students at La Pine High School will benefit the most by building their confidence and their work skills as well as facilitate the transition from school to future work in the La Pine Community. 6. Itemize anticipated expenditures: The program here at La Pine High School increased this year by 47% percent. With that growth we have been unable to fund our program like we did in the past. Our FBLA chapter will be starting a Sports Marketing project next year in our Business Department and Athletic Department. This should start to provide some consistent and substantial funding for us in the future. Until then we are seeking as much community support as possible. *See attached itemization 21 Deschutes County Board of Commissioners, La Pine High School P.O. Box 306 La Pine, OR 97739 "Home of the Business Hawks" Future Business Leaders of America 501c Tax ID# 93-6000393 Your grant will help the La Pine FBLA State finalists attend Nationals in .Atlanta Georgia this year. We had 22 of our students attend the state competition 11 placed in the top 10 and 4 qualified for National's in Atlanta, GA on June 25th. The cost to attend Nationals is $1800 per student. The donation you make will help to assist with the costs associated with registration, accommodations and travel that are necessary to ensure our students can compete at the na- tional level. All our students worked very hard to get to state, and it showed when we had half of who competed place in the top ten. Some of the ways we have raised money this year, are the sales of "Spirit Bags" which we do throughout the year, the annual LPHS Halloween dance, working Athletic concessions and movie nights. We are now planning for spring car washes, a spaghetti dinner, and a bowl-a-thon to raise as much as possible before the event. As a partner with La Pine High School your donation helps our students become better educated citizens who have more self-confidence and leadership skills necessary for today's business world. Our students really appreciate your support. L-R, Spencer Miller (Junior) Help Desk, Erika Janssen (Sophomore), Stacey Harder (Senior) Business Ethics Team and Scott Perkins (Senior) Accounting! Oregon FBLA State Business Leadership Conference Portland, Oregon April 16-18, 2008 0 Senior Scott Perkins -Placed 1st in Accounting Senior Stacey Harder - Placed 2"d in Business Ethics-Team Event Sophomore Erica Janssen - Placed 2nd in Business Ethics-Team Event Senior Nygil McCune - Placed 3rd in Client Services Seniors: Cassie Schulz - Placed 5th Desktop Publishing Audrey Ewing - Placed 5th Desktop Publishing Senior Samantha Bebout - Placed 7th in Desktop Publishing Sophomore Andreya Karrer- Placed 7th in Desktop Publishing Junior Spencer Miller - Placed 2nd in Help Desk Senior Ashley Rose - Placed 3`d in Impromptu Speaking Senior Kayla Morgan - Placed 5th in Personal Finance ` eA Thank you, to all who supported and help prepare our students for trfe'competitions! We did very well. We received the Oregon Chapter Membership Award because we increased our membership by 47% this year. The following stu- dents placed and all who placed in the top 2 are on their way to Atlanta Georgia, June 261h for Nationals! Total number of advisors: 2 Individual price: $ 295.00 Total: $ 590.00 Total number of students: 4 Individual price: $ 295.00 Total : $1,180. 00 Total number of guests: Individual price: $245.00 Total Sub total:$1770.00 1 . Registration: . Reservations for Hotel: II. Ai rfa re: Miscellaneous Expenses: Approximate Traveling Total: $ 7980.00 Number of beds; Number of rooms: Individual cost: Total: $1890.00 2 ea. room 2 $ 315.00 x 6 Sub total:$3660.00 Number of tickets: Airfare costs Taxes & fees Individual costs: Total 6 $571.00 $49.00 $620.00 $3720.00 u oa: .00 Expense Approximate amount: $ 100.00 x6= Traveling from hotel to airport, convention center events, food, Restaurants, supplies, materials, tours, etc. Sub total: $ 600.00