The URL can be used to link to this page

2009-1432-Minutes for Meeting July 23,2009 Recorded 8/20/2009DESCHUTES COUNTY OFFICIAL RECORDS yJ 20090IJ32 NANCY BLANKENSHIP, COUNTY CLERK COMMISSIONERS' JOURNAL 0812012009 09;45;03 AM 11ill! 11111111111111 III III III 1433 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 JOINT MEETING DESCHUTES COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS and DESCHUTES COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION WEDNESDAY, JULY 239 2009 Present were Commissioners Tammy Baney, Dennis R. Luke and Alan Unger. Also present were Planning Commissioners Keith Cyrus, Todd Turner, Ed Criss, Richard Klyce; Merle Irvine; and Susan Quatre; Mark Pilliod and Laurie Craghead, Legal Counsel; Nick Lelack, Peter Gutowsky and Kristen Maze, Community Development; and approximately twenty other citizens. Planning Commissioner Christen Brown was not present. At 5:35 p.m., Chair Baney opened the meeting on behalf of the Board of Commissioners; and Keith Cyrus opened the meeting on behalf of the Planning Commission. The individuals then introduced themselves and gave brief information on their background. Mark Pilliod distributed a copy of a memo previously provided to the Board of Commissioners regarding ethics requirements. The Planning Commission is also subject to the rules of the Ethics Commission. A revision is expected, which will be more comprehensive, but probably will not be available until after the first of the year. Most of the changes will not take effect until then. There was an emergency clause adopted in April, but this applied to only one section having to do with people who failed to report in 2009. He provided a copy of the memo, with important issues highlighted. One potential problem for public officials is the legislative or administrative interest definition. By the virtue of mere membership on a board, contacts and whether favors are received was subject to scrutiny. It now really has to do with involvement in a particular issue that may be subject to a person's vote or influence. Minutes of Joint Meeting of Board of Commissioners and Planning Commission Wednesday, July 23, 2009 Page 1 of 15 Pages It takes out the portion regarding non-Planning Commission items, such as how someone runs a business. He does not know if the discussion regarding destination resorts directly affects any members, but the public expects that those who have influence should be in a position to report on any money or other remuneration received regarding that topic. Commissioner Unger asked if reporting has to be done during discussions or just when there are hearings or decisions. Mr. Pilliod said that the reporting in the land use context is when a member has received some ex parte communication with bearing on that issue, and the rest of the members have not been a part of that contact. It should be reported at the first opportunity at a hearing or meeting. This is not the reporting requirements to which he is referring, which are financial reports that show principle sources of income and any contributions received. The reports are necessary for members and, if significant enough, family members as well. Commissioner Luke said that it is now an annual report and not quarterly, which simplifies the issue. Mr. Pilliod said that if there are any questions about a particular situation, contacting the Ethics Commission is a good way to get proper feedback. They are quick to respond and focus on the particular question. Chair Keith Cyrus asked if there were comments from the Planning Commission or Board of Commissioners at this time. Commissioner Baney stated that she felt the meeting on July 22 with the Department of Environmental Quality in La Pine regarding groundwater protection issues was a good start and positive. The DEQ will take the lead from this point on in establishing meetings and setting forth a plan. Susan Quatre asked if the reception was warm. Commissioner Baney stated that it was clear the community wants the DEQ to take the lead. Another question was whether the DEQ should take over the onsite inspection program. The answer was that as far as feasibility studies, inspections and so on are concerned, they can be separate, but it is not clear if the DEQ would want to take over this responsibility for the entire County. Minutes of Joint Meeting of Board of Commissioners and Planning Commission Wednesday, July 23, 2009 Page 2 of 15 Pages The community was positive in that many citizens were open to following the process. Some questions were brought up regarding validating the studies done by the DEQ and the USGS, and the DEQ indicated some openness to the idea. It will be a decision the DEQ will have to make, however. Mr. Cyrus asked Laurie Craghead if he should be involved as a member of the Planning Commission in discussions regarding destination resorts. She indicated that he could certainly remain where he is until such time deliberations or decision- making takes place. Peter Gutowsky said he and Nick Lelack would conduct a PowerPoint presentation giving an overview of the destination resort remapping issue. He said a staff report was generated to try to keep the issue simple, but it is a very complicated one nonetheless. The slides are to give an overview of the next steps in this process. Commissioner Luke asked for an update on the destination resort bill that did not pass. Nick Lelack said that HB 2227 died in committee after approval in some form by both House and Senate. The destination resort bill would have taken regulations out of statute and into rule making, with parameters and requirements in a variety of issues. It was not adopted by the Legislature, so everyone is left with the current rules. Commissioner Luke stated that many properties would have come under that bill, changing significantly the work program now being conducted by the County. Mr. Gutowsky then conducted the presentation. Commissioner Unger noted that Deschutes County never adopted the small destination resorts plan. He asked if the mapping would be the same. Todd Turner asked how properties are determined to be suitable or unsuitable. Mr. Gutowsky said that properties that are not suitable would be un-mapped, and large destination resort areas would be re-mapped. Minutes of Joint Meeting of Board of Commissioners and Planning Commission Wednesday, July 23, 2009 Page 3 of 15 Pages Mr. Gutowsky said that there are several potential forms to be considered for the ordinance: map amendment process - ineligible land alternatives; map amendment proposals - a comprehensive plan amendment; destination resort development standards - zoning text amendment. The results would be a new destination resort process, a new destination resort map and updated development standards. Commissioner Luke said that a suggestion was to get rid of the map entirely. He believes the map was created when Eagle Crest came forward years ago. He asked if an applicant could come in and have a new map designed. Mr. Lelack said that someone could come in with an application and go through the process. Mr. Turner said that with the cities expanding, the UGB lines might affect this issue; he asked if this could affect this process in a few years. Mr. Gutowsky stated that the city expansions would be complete probably in five or six years. There should be no roadblocks because the plan can only be amended every thirty months. That means the County will be able to amend it only a couple of times. The criteria are that urban reserves under Rule cannot be up-zoned. Once Bend has a new UGB, they can designate an urban reserve area; but those cannot converge or go through a process to become a destination resort. Commissioner Luke stated that an applicant could still pursue this ordinance even if the Board of Commissioners did not adopt one before then. Mr. Gutowsky then detailed the comprehensive plan amendment process, with the appurtenant requirements. Commissioner Luke stated that the three miles from another County was selected for Jefferson County originally. Mr. Cyrus said that he believes it should cover all county lines. Mr. Turner asked what is meant by a small parcel or lot. Mr. Gutowsky said it would be anything under 160 acres when relating to destination resorts. Commissioner Luke stated nothing says that you cannot bring several pieces together to make up the 160 acres. Mr. Gutowsky said that the smallest destination resort in the County is Caldera Springs at 390 acres. Minutes of Joint Meeting of Board of Commissioners and Planning Commission Wednesday, July 23, 2009 Page 4 of 15 Pages In regard to small destination resorts, Mr. Gutowsky stated that if a property has been on the map for a number of years, the owners might want to be able to develop a resort. Once ineligible lands are eliminated, you would then seek to find out what is eligible. A macro level analysis is desired by the community, to understand worst-case scenarios such as a critical transportation corridor that may not be able to accommodate this type of development. Mr. Gutowsky said that the TSP might have to be amended, especially if there are significant traffic impacts. The idea is to have a broad-brush transportation analysis to identify those areas that might be impacted. The parcel size could be raised to 350 acres; at least $2 million in 1992 dollars would have to be committed to onsite improvements, so not everyone can or would be willing to make that kind of investment. Ms. Quatro said she is trying to figure out what a small destination resort could be; an RV park with a pool or a hotel? Mr. Gutowsky said that as long as they spend $2 million in 1992 dollars, it fits, and it is easy to spend that much money. Ms. Craghead said that she attended a presentation by people who develop small destinations with a hotel and some recreational units. Mr. Gutowsky said that a parcel has to be at least 20 acres but could have multiple owners. Ms. Quatre said that this type of thing would bring visitors and not permanent residents like the larger destination resorts tend to do. Commissioner Unger asked if a water park could be sited in this fashion, or perhaps an equestrian center. Commissioner Luke said that perhaps a casino and hotel with recreational amenities could fit in this category. Mr. Gutowsky stated that this concept has not been brought before the public yet. No one has been promoting this idea but it was felt it is a possibility. There could be many options. In 1992 when the large resort properties were mapped, there was no market or expressed interest in small destination resorts. However, it would be difficult to know how many properties would fit into this. Minutes of Joint Meeting of Board of Commissioners and Planning Commission Wednesday, July 23, 2009 Page 5 of 15 Pages Mr. Turner said that the primary purpose of destination resorts was to develop them in rural areas that have compatible uses. Mr. Gutowsky said that an application would be required by a set date, if they want to be added to the map. Then all destination resort remapping requests will be consolidated. A variety of hearings would be conducted, and large and small destination resort properties could be identified. Ms. Quatro asked if someone has forty acres used as a dude ranch, if they wanted to hold ceremonies of various types on their property, would this be permissible. Mr. Gutowsky said if it is on non-resource land, it might be, if they have the proper accommodations. Things could be blended together. Mr. Gutowsky said not a lot of time has been spent on considering what kind of improvements might be required. Commissioner Luke said he would like more information on this. It might simplify the process. However, potential impacts to the neighbors and traffic would have to be considered. Mr. Gutowsky stated that development standards could include a variety of criteria, including water management, economic impacts, wildlife mitigation, housing impacts, how nearby jurisdictions might be affected, and transportation and infrastructure issues. Mr. Turner said that there needs to be at least 25 but less than 75 rooms. He asked if the revenue received from destination resorts goes to mitigation transportation improvements. Mr. Lelack said SDC's are sometimes used. Commissioner Luke stated that there could be requirements to improve roads. Mr. Gutowsky asked for direction for staff. whether the County should initiate a legislative process to amend destination resort mapping; and if it should initiate a 2009 tax mailer, notifying affected property owners of a fall public hearing. If so, staff needs to know how to present this idea. He would like to schedule a work session in September to talk about a map amendment process and destination resort development standards. The timeline would be to initiate the process; initiate an ordinance and perhaps bundle development standards, possibly this calendar year. At that time the formal process to amend the map could begin with hearings and other community activities. Minutes of Joint Meeting of Board of Commissioners and Planning Commission Wednesday, July 23, 2009 Page 6 of 15 Pages Commissioner Luke said that he likes the idea of doing the mailing in the tax statements, but if it is mailed in October but hearings would not start until January, would that work. Mr. Gutowsky stated that it would announce a November public hearing with minimal information, just to give people an advisory. This would allow time to get the ordinance adopted. Commissioner Luke said that if the requirements are set for 160 acres or more, could people be advised that this would happen. Mr. Gutowsky replied that if small resorts would be included, that would need to be explained as well. Mr. Turner asked if there would be two maps showing large and small destination resort properties. Mr. Gutowsky said that the public would be alerted as to where the resorts might be feasible or eligible. Ms. Quatre said if small resorts are to be considered, that should be discussed now. There are many twenty-acre parcels but not all would be applicable. Mr. Cyrus stated that a lot might be bumped from large destination resorts, but might fall into the smaller category. Ms. Quatre stated that the smaller ones would bring in a lot of visitors with minimal impacts, and she likes the idea. Mr. Lelack stated that two maps might be preferred, or one map could have two designations indicated. Also, he does not want staff to get specific directions at this time but just an idea of where they should go. Mr. Cyrus stated that a lot of road improvements used to come from timber receipts. Commissioner Luke stated that this has gone down over the years and is being phased out. Some funding comes from gas taxes. Mr. Russell said that cities go by population and the counties go by the number of registered vehicles. Commissioner Luke said that this has been looked at before, but they held off because of Measure 37. He feels the current map is very inaccurate. It is worth the process to make it more accurate. Destination resorts will never go in where all the areas now mapped are. Mr. Klyce stated that the maps show 112,000 acres in this category, but most of that land is not truly eligible. Therefore, perhaps no action needs to be taken. Mr. Turner went over the criteria for a small destination resort at this time. Minutes of Joint Meeting of Board of Commissioners and Planning Commission Wednesday, July 23, 2009 Page 7 of 15 Pages Mr. Gutowsky presented a slide showing the 112,000 acres, with about 15,058 acres that are truly eligible. This is an 87% reduction. However, this includes individual parcels of less than 160,000 acres, but does not consider those that might be contiguous and could be combined. He said that an ordinance has to be adopted before anyone could initiate a map change. Mr. Cyrus stated that if someone is currently mapped but this could be changed, they would have to notify the County that they wish to remain mapped. There is more than one potential map: one that shows individually owned properties that are mapped, and contiguous properties that are mapped. If someone wants to be retained, there have to be clear criteria for this. The same criteria would need to be used for all lands. The first ordinance would be to find out if someone wants to be retained, what is needed from the owner and what the criteria is at this point. Ineligible lands would be removed from the map based on their characteristics. Commissioner Baney said this sounds confusing and wondered if it might be easier to develop something that people could challenge if they wish to do so. Mr. Gutowsky stated that the draft amendments could be kicked off in 2010. If there was feedback, development standards and review criteria would be developed, taking that into account. Commissioner Luke said that it might be easier than it sounds. Many owners will never want to be a destination resort or their properties are truly not appropriate. There will be few who even know they are zoned for a destination resort. Getting the map down by a big percentage will make it easier to analyze and deal with. Ms. Quatro stated that it would help to make clear the economic possibilities of the small destination resorts and how they might look. In keeping it too simple, people might not realize they can group together to make a small destination resort. She said they should be asked if they want to be this or not, as they will not know of the possibilities. Commissioner Luke pointed out that using 160 acres would be tough. Since remapping can be done every thirty months, maybe they should deal with the big areas first. Ms. Quatro said that she does not want people to miss an opportunity. Commissioner Luke said there could be community outreach at that point. He feels twenty acres would be too small. Minutes of Joint Meeting of Board of Commissioners and Planning Commission Wednesday, July 23, 2009 Page 8 of 15 Pages Ms. Quatro thinks that people should be aware that there are possibilities beyond the big resorts. Mr. Lelack said this could be a way to appease people who might be taken off the large-scale map but left on the small-scale map, to be addressed in the future. The map changes would be bundled together at the end. Mr. Gutowsky said at first this would be pursued to generate feedback. While they are in the community talking about the comprehensive plan update, this could be discussed as a placeholder for the future. Mr. Cyrus would like to see both worked on at the same time. If someone is going to be down-zoned, they need to know that they might have another option. They might be more willing to drop from a large resort designation in that case. He is concerned about the size, twenty acres, being too small. He said that many small resorts scattered around the community might have greater traffic impacts and other problems than a well-developed large resort. Mr. Gutowsky said that small resorts are not allowed on resource lands, such as EFU and forest land, under State statute. And the $2 million required for amenities would be more than most people could or would want to invest. Mr. Turner said that the criterion used is where this will be narrowed. If they focus on the criteria first, the maps will follow. The criteria will help to evaluate all properties. Ed Criss said that his property is mapped for this but there is no way the subdivision fits. He would like to see a proper map from the beginning. It is hard for the public to figure out what applies and what is truly eligible. Mr. Gutowsky said the ordinance would contain the criteria to determine what lands are truly eligible. Ultimately a map will be produced that revises the one now in place. Staff could work with the Planning Commission first and bring it to the Board, but staff needs some general direction. Commissioner Luke would like to see a mailing included with the tax statements. He feels that the Board should step back and let the Planning Commission refine the ideas that were presented. Minutes of Joint Meeting of Board of Commissioners and Planning Commission Wednesday, July 23, 2009 Page 9 of 15 Pages Commissioner Unger appreciates the discussion and would like to see the lands that are truly ineligible addressed first; this is where it should start. The next discussion could be on eligible lands. Commissioner Baney agreed, and would like to methodically check things off the list. Their focus could narrow and eventually a map will result. Commissioner Unger likes the ideas presented by Option B except the three-mile limitation that was originally established specifically for one particular issue. Mr. Gutowsky said there was a lawsuit in 1992 that established these criteria, which had to do with high-value farmland. Now Crook and Klamath have this analysis and Jefferson has submitted a plan, so it can be determined if there is this type of land there. Mr. Klyce said that if this was kept out, they could move forward from there. Mr. Gutowsky stated that it is State law and findings would have to be established. Mr. Lelack said that one thing they could do is assume the map is blank. Then they could focus on the eligible criteria, notify those that fit into this category, and go from there, rather than focusing on those who are already ineligible. Commissioner Luke asked how that would work for those in single ownership. Mr. Lelack stated that they should allow those who could work together. Mr. Turner would like to see the acreage consider multiple ownerships, not just single ownership. The group took a break at 7:45 p.m., returning at 8:00. Ms. Quatro asked about potential inclusion at some point. Someone might purchase land and not realize that the potential is there. Commissioner Unger said that the map is here, and it should be made more realistic. Commissioner Luke had the same concerns. The map should be addressed as is and corrected. If they start with a blank map, someone who wants to be added might question this process. Mr. Lelack said all property owners can be notified and they could figure out a way to notify others that might be eligible; it is a complex issue. Mr. Cyrus stated that everyone would be notified and could ask to be retained or added. A lot of acreage might go away. Commissioner Luke said that even if someone wants to be included does not mean they will be. It can be determined if they even come close to meeting the criteria. This could be an opportunity for them to combine properties with the neighbors as well. Minutes of Joint Meeting of Board of Commissioners and Planning Commission Wednesday, July 23, 2009 Page 10 of 15 Pages Mr. Turner asked if notification would occur, with public input to help establish the criteria; or should they establish the criteria first? Commissioner Luke said there will not be time to do the criteria before the mailing. Mr. Gutowsky said it comes back to what the goal is. If they wish to use the mailing and have a new map in 2010, for a draft proposal some decisions have to be made soon. Feedback will be the range of the spectrum and staff will have to distill the options at that point. Staff needs to know what the expectations are. He assumed there would be enough direction soon so that a draft text amendment could result, notice sent out and a public hearing date established. Commissioner Baney asked if a destination resort map legislative process should be initiated. Mr. Turner said that the current map is not working, so needs to be addressed. It needs to be fixed. (There was agreement that this needs to occur.) The next question is whether the tax mailer should be used to alert owners of a public hearing. Commissioner Luke said the mailing should occur no matter what. Commissioner Baney noted that only those property owners that can be potentially affected should be notified to avoid confusion. Mr. Gutowsky said that they have the ability to target only those property owners that fit. Mr. Turner said he would like to notify everyone. He would not want someone saying they were not notified when they should have been. Commissioner Unger said that everyone should be as it is a community issue. Commissioner Luke stated that the notice should go to anyone who might be affected. The notice could be simple. Commissioner Baney stated that if someone is not aware of the process, they could become very confused by this. Mr. Gutowsky stated there are ways to direct people to obtain more information. Commissioner Luke said that there is no reason to notify people within the urban areas. Commissioner Unger stated that city residents might be concerned about the impacts as well. In regard to the criteria to follow, should the ineligible lands alternatives apply, with the exception of single ownership. Commissioner Luke said that it might be easier to let people know what is not eligible. Mr. Cyrus stated that people need to understand that they might be eligible if they combine forces with a neighbor. Minutes of Joint Meeting of Board of Commissioners and Planning Commission Wednesday, July 23, 2009 Page 11 of 15 Pages Mr. Gutowsky said that once the criteria are in place, they can follow the procedures. They would not be excluded immediately. Commissioner Luke suggested that if people are unmapped but have a change of heart, there might be an expedited way to get them back on the map. Mr. Gutowsky stated that the criteria might be worded to allow for this. Mr. Klyce asked if they come back in within the appropriate timeframe with a neighbor, perhaps that would work. Mr. Gutowsky said that the thirty months is State law. Once the process goes through the legislative hearings and is adopted, they have to wait thirty months before this is reopened. Mr. Klyce indicated that these properties could still be on the map as a sub-zone perhaps. Commissioner Baney added that this might take away the concerns of someone thinking that their land might be devalued. Mr. Cyrus said that he thinks that a 160-acre parcel for this purpose is not viable. Commissioner Baney noted that it might not be their job to decide if someone can do this; they should be allowed to try if they choose to do so. The consensus was that properties that might be eliminated but could be combined with others should be left on the map in some fashion, to allow those property owners an opportunity to apply if they combine their acreages in some way. Mr. Gutowsky indicated that there is not a long line of people waiting to be able to develop their land in this fashion. Ms. Quatro stated that the small destination resorts might be of more interest. Mr. Gutowsky said that only rural residential or MUA-10 properties would fit, not EFU or forest land, so there would be few of them. Mr. Turner feels that the small destination resorts might have a greater overall impact. It was pointed out that with the requirement of $2 million in 1992 dollars for improvements, most property owners would not be interested. Mr. Gutowsky discussed what constitutes wildlife priority areas and winter deer range, which includes a large amount of acreage. All of these areas are identified in the comprehensive plan as being unsuitable for destination resorts. Minutes of Joint Meeting of Board of Commissioners and Planning Commission Wednesday, July 23, 2009 Page 12 of 15 Pages Commissioner Baney then brought up the eligible lands alternative. Mr. Gutowsky said that high-value farm land cannot be included per State law, but the County does not have any. The County prohibits destination resorts on property on which a portion of the land has been irrigated. Forest use (F-2) lands, EFU lands and non-resource lands are eligible. Commissioner Unger would like to include all EFU, and then look at the limiting factors. Mr. Gutowsky said there have to be text amendments to be able to hold a public hearing. Some of the ineligible properties will be weeded out during this process. He asked if the new map should be in place in 2010; if so, there has to be a hearing soon. Commissioner Baney stated that they need to talk eligible and ineligible, and give the public a chance to testify in this regard. Mr. Cyrus stated that he would like to see this on the fast track but wants to know if it is feasible. Commissioner Luke indicated that he would like to see the map be accurate as soon as possible. After the new map is identified, the Planning Commission can start hearings about adding other properties to it. It does not have to be all or nothing. The proposed ordinance covers most of the aspects and would result in a more accurate map. Mr. Gutowsky said if the goal is to have a functional map, and the existing criteria subject to the changes as discussed, it could be followed through with discussions regarding small destination resorts and EFU land. There would then be time to work on the EFU and small destination resort concepts for when the map can be again updated. Ms. Quatro stated that EFU lands might need to be classified as something other than EFU if the land is not suitable for farming. There is a lot of it that should be examined. Commissioner Unger said that doing the basic map update followed by refinements would work for him. Mr. Klyce added that thirty months is not a long time when talking about land use. He would like to avoid making mistakes. Commissioner Baney stated that she does not want to lose local control of lands. She cautioned that she does not want to set things back too far, putting the County in a position of being reactive rather than proactive. Commissioner Unger feels that if discussions are being conducted in good faith, the legislature will not feel compelled to take any draconian actions. Minutes of Joint Meeting of Board of Commissioners and Planning Commission Wednesday, July 23, 2009 Page 13 of 15 Pages Commissioner Baney stated that she feels the easiest way is to wait first. She said no one knows for sure what the comprehensive plan update will look like and does not know how Community Development will be able to handle the workload. Commissioner Baney said she went into the process to take out but also to add lands to the map. Commissioner Luke stated that to make the map accurate with the existing criteria, it makes more sense to get rid of the lands that do not fit. Mr. Gutowsky said that it could be a two-step process. First, get this to a functional position based on the criteria with the changes discussed. Then this would allow those who are interested in remapping to go forward. Step 2 would be the role of other EFU land and whether it would be suitable. This would start in late 2010 and by the thirty month point the Code could be changed to add or subtract the applicable criteria. Commissioner Luke added that they could take a look at whether the land should even be zoned EFU. Commissioner Baney asked if this gets them there. Mr. Gutowsky said it would. If the option discussed is selected, with changes, this would be a manageable program for public hearings in the fall. If EFU is added to this, it has a potential for long, drawn-out hearings. Mr. Criss asked about the transportation component. Mr. Gutowsky stated that there would be criteria. It would not be review criteria, but would detail if there are significant transportation issues that might need to be addressed. The TSP (transportation system plan) might have to be upgraded at this point as well. Mr. Criss stated that the transportation aspect is the only difference between the current rules and the suggested ones. The first step would be a correct map, and most of the criterion is in place already. Other issues could be addressed after that point. Mr. Turner said that there would still be nothing to prevent an applicant trying to include EFU land. Commissioner Unger stated that if land has been rezoned, it could be eligible. Mr. Gutowsky said that there will be criteria to determine if it is eligible. A public process would follow and a determination would be made as to entitlement. Mr. Criss said that if the map is as correct as possible, during the public outreach process they could address EFU properties and other aspects. This might help streamline the process. Minutes of Joint Meeting of Board of Commissioners and Planning Commission Wednesday, July 23, 2009 Page 14 of 15 Pages Mr. Gutowsky stated to keep in mind that once the criterion is in place, staff will have to act on those criteria. Applicants can try to change the map if desired. Mr. Cyrus said that there were hearings on changing the maps previously and those were contentious because people thought land was going to be added. The message needs to get across that this is not the case. It will be challenging no matter what they do. Commissioner Luke asked if the 160 aspect should be changed now. Mr. Criss said that he feels it should be kept the same, so it remains relatively simple at this point. Staff felt that adequate direction had been given, and will proceed with the appropriate work as discussed. Being no further discussion, the meeting adjourned at 9:15 p.m. DATED this 23rd Day of July 2009 for the Deschutes County Board of Commissioners. oe:~01 ATTEST: /r' 6ftu~' I~ , ' Recording Secretary Tammy Baney, Chair Dennis R. Luke, Vice Chair OIL AILI UW'141c- Alan Unger, Commissioner Minutes of Joint Meeting of Board of Commissioners and Planning Commission Wednesday, July 23, 2009 Page 15 of 15 Pages 0 , eA Community Development Department ( Planning Division Building Safety Division Environmental Health Division 117 NW Lafayette Avenue Bend Oregon 97701-1925 (541)388-6575 FAX(541)385-1764 http://www.co.deschutes.or.us/cdd/ AGENDA DESCHUTES COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION AND BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS DESCHUTES SERVICES CENTER 1300 NW WALL STREET, BEND, OREGON, 97701 JULY 23, 2009 - 5:30 P.M. 1. CALL TO ORDER II. PUBLIC COMMENTS AND CONCERNS III. DESTINATION RESORTS Planner. IV. OTHER ITEMS OF CONCERN VI. ADJOURN Nick Lelack, Planning Director; Peter Gutowsky, Principal NEXT MEETING - August 27, 2009, at 5:30 p.m. at the Deschutes Services Center, 1300 NW Wall Street, Bend, OR 97701 NOTE: Items included in the packet for Planning Commission meetings can be located on the Community Development Department website: www.co.deschutes.or.us/cdd. Click on the calendar for the date of the meeting in which you are interested. The meeting location is wheelchair accessible. For the deaf or hearing impaired, an interpreter or assistant listening system will be provided with 48 hours' notice. For other assistance, please dial 7-1-1, State Relay Service. Quality Services Performed zvith Pride Community Development Department Planning Division Building Division Environmental Health Division 117 NW Lafayette Bend, Oregon 97701-1925 (541) 388-6575 FAX (541) 385-1764 http://www.co.deschutes.or.us\cdd STAFF REPORT TO: Deschutes County Board of County Commissioners Deschutes County Planning Commission FROM: Peter Gutowsky, Principal Planner Nick Lelack, Planning Director DATE: July 10, 2009 MEETING: July 23, 2009 SUBJECT: Destination Resort Remapping / Next Steps The Deschutes County Board of Commissioners (Board) and Planning Commission will convene a work session on July 23, 2009 at the Deschutes Service Center, starting at 5:30 p.m. to discuss the destination resort remapping work program. ISSUE: Shall staff initiate legislative amendments to Deschutes County Code (DCC) later this fall, creating three separate ordinances that define the process and procedures for amending the County's Destination Resort (DR) map, formally add and remove lands from the DR map, and revise certain resort siting criteria. The Board and Planning Commission need to provide direction on the following: A. 1. 2. 3. 4. BOARD AND PLANNING COMMISSION DIRECTION Whether or not to initiate legislative amendments to the DR map. Select or identify a preferred alternative (or as modified by the Board or Planning Commission) for un-mapping unsuitably large destination resort properties. Select or identify a preferred alternative (or as modified by the Board or Planning Commission) for remapping lands for large destination resorts. Initiate a legislative amendment to allow small destination resorts. Three potential ordinances are summarized below and described in more detail starting on Page 4. Ordinance (1) would define the legislative process for amending the Deschutes County DR map and the review criteria for approving such an action. This ordinance must be adopted before any formal DR remapping proposals can be considered. Destination Resort Remapping Work Session July 23, 2009 -1- • Ordinance (2) would remove unsuitable properties while private parties would be allowed to request that their properties be retained or added to the DR map. This ordinance would be initiated following the adoption of Ordinance (1). • Ordinance (3) would amend DCC, Chapter 18.113, Destination Resort Combining Zone by revising certain siting criteria. This ordinance would follow the same legislative timeline as Ordinance (1) or Ordinance (2). BACKGROUND: On March 3, 2009 the Board directed staff to engage residents, government agencies, and stakeholders to ascertain their opinions about amending the DR map and the type of processes that are available to use. Staff held several community conversations from March to July, using PowerPoint to describe the existing DR map, a map amendment process, and a legislative timeline (Attachment A). During this five month period, staff met with twenty-nine organizations (Attachment B). Opinions spanned the political spectrum (Attachment C). The strongest opinions, voiced at several well attended community meetings in Tumalo and Southern Deschutes County, advocated prohibiting new resorts, removing all un-entitled properties on the current DR map, or requiring stronger mitigation measures to offset their related impacts. Business organizations tended to remain neutral, while members of the Deschutes Farm Bureau and Water for Life underscored their economic benefits. B. DESCHUTES COUNTY DESTINATION RESORT MAP A destination resort chapter was added to the Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan in 1992 at the request of Eagle Crest Resort.' Table 1 lists the mapping criteria used by the County to determine resort eligibility. As demonstrated in Table 1, the County supplemented the state's criteria by excluding certain large agricultural and forest parcels, and resource lands within one Table 1 - Deschutes County Destination Resort Map Criteria (1992) Agency Criteria Excluded Lards • Within 24 air miles of an urban growth boundary (UGB) with an existing population of 100,000 or more unless residential uses are limited to those necessary for the staff and management of the resort. • On a site with 50 or more contiguous acres of unique or prime farmland identified and mapped by the United States Natural Resources Conservation Service, or its State of predecessor agency. Oregon2 • On a site within 3 miles of a high value crop area unless the resort complies with the requirements of ORS 197.445 (6) in which case the resort may not be closer to a high value crop area than 1/2 - mile for each 25 units of overnight lodging or fraction thereof. • On predominantly Cubic Foot Site Class 1 or 2 forestlands as determined by the State Forestry Department, which are not subject to an approved goal exception. • In an especially sensitive big game habitat area as determined by Oregon Department of Fish & Wildlife in July 1984 or as designated in acknowledged comprehensive plan. ' http://www.co.deschutes.or.us/dccode/title23/docs/chapter%2023.84.doc 2 http://www.leg.state.or.us/ors/197.html Destination Resort Remapping Work Session July 23, 2009 -2- Excluded Lands • All resource (farm and forest) lands within one mile of a UGB. Deschutes County • Forest Use 2 (F-2), Multiple Use Agriculture (MUA-10), and Rural Residential (RR-10) zones. • Unirrigated EFU lands. • Irrigated EFU lands less than 40 acres of contiguous irrigation under one ownership. • Irrigated EFU lands with 60 acres or less of non-contiguous land in the same ownership. • Irrigated Exclusive Farm Use (EFU) lands greater than 40 acres of contiguous irrigation under one ownership. • Irrigated EFU lands greater than 60 acres of non-contiguous land in the same ownership. • All Forest Use 1(F-1) zoned property. • Wildlife: a) Tumalo & Metolius deer winter range; b) antelope winter range east of Bend; c) antelope winter range near Millican; d) elk range; e) sage grouse range. Included Lands mile of a UGB. The mapping was done in a phased sequence, based on pending farm and forest studies. Additionally, as a result of a court case, lands within three miles of the county border were also excluded since most of the lands in Jefferson and Crook counties had not yet been evaluated. At that time it could not be demonstrated they contained high value crop areas excluded by Statewide Planning Goal 8 (Goal 8) and Oregon Revised Statutes (ORS). If a property was not excluded from the map by state or county criteria, it was automatically designated on a DR overlay map. The DR map and subsequent regulations enable a resort to be sited on rural lands without having to initiate statewide planning goal exception processes. Today, there are 112,448 acres in Deschutes County mapped for destination resorts. A vast majority are unsuitable for resort development because they are irreversibly committed to platted subdivisions, rural residential development or small lots. Notable statistics include: • 10% of mapped area (10,931 acres) is developed or planned as a destination resort or resort community (Sunriver, Black Butte, Inn of 7th Mountain/Widgi Creek); and, • 54% of mapped area (60,175 acres) contains properties less than 160 acres, including several platted subdivisions. 1. Large Destination Resorts Goal 8 and ORS allow large and small scale destination resorts.3 Large destination resorts must be located on a site of 160 acres or more to establish residential uses and real estate sales. The DCC only permits large destination resorts.4 Table 2 lists the destination resorts in Deschutes County while Table 3 lists those in Crook and Klamath counties. As both tables indicate, since 1992 only large destination resorts have been approved in Central Oregon. 3 http://egov.oregon.gov/LCD/docs/goals/goal8.pdf 4 http://www.co.deschutes.or.us/dccode/titiel8/docs/chapter%2018 113 doc Destination Resort Remapping Work Session July 23, 2009 -3- TABLE 2 - DESTINATION RESORTS IN DESCHUTES COUNTY Resort Date Approved # Acres Eagle Crest 1, II, 111 1931, 1993, 2001 1,772 Pron horn 2001 640 Tetherow _ 2004 706 Caldera Springs 2005 390 Thorp bur h Pendin _ 1,970 Total 5,478 TABLE 3 - DESTINATION RESORTS IN DESCHUTES COUNTY Resort Date Approved # Acres Running Y Ranch Klamath) 1996 3,520 Brasada (Crook) 2004 1,800 Remir7 tam Ranch (Crook) 2007 2,000 Hidden Canyon (Crook) 2007 3.600 Crossing Trails (Crook) Pending 586 Total 11,506 2. Small Scale Destination Resorts The DCC does not allow small scale resorts. Small resorts must be located on a site of twenty (20) acres or more, but residential uses are limited to those necessary for the staff and management of the resort. Therefore, real estate is not permitted. Direction: Staff seeks direction on whether this work program should include amending the DCC to allow small destination resorts. Please note that staff has not engaged the public on this particular issue. C. PURPOSE OF REVISING DESTINATION RESORT MAP Originally, an acknowledged DR map could only be amended during a state periodic review process. In 2003, that changed when the Oregon Legislature amended ORS exempting counties from periodic review. New language was added allowing counties to remap, not more frequently than once every thirty (30) months.5 Remapping is now dependent on creating a process for collecting and processing all DR map amendments made within a thirty (30) month planning period. D. REMAPPING ALTERNATIVES The following section provides several different alternatives for the Board and Planning Commission to consider for amending Deschutes County's DR map. Any of these alternatives or others like them would be encompassed in Ordinance (1) and then upon adoption, applicants would initiate formal DR map amendment requests, that if approved by the Board, would ultimately be codified in Ordinance (2). Figure 1 illustrates the interrelationship between Ordinances (1) and (2) that ultimately create a new County DR map. 5 See note 2. ORS 197.455(2) Destination Resort Remapping Work Session July 23, 2009 -4- Figure 1 - Destination Resort Remapping Process Ordinance (1) - Map Amendment Process & Criteria • Specifies DR map can only be amended every 30 months • Describes the legislative process for applicants to formally initiate a DR map amendment request • Establishes a fixed time period for submitting a DR remapping request- Describes the criteria for County to review and approve DR map changes 1. Removing Unsuitable Properties Ordinance (2) - Formal Request to Amend Destination Resort Map • Upon adoption of Ordinance (1), County initiates process for DR map requests • County is one of the applicants, requesting removal of unsuitable lands from the existing resort map based on criteria identified in Ordinance (1) • PC & Board hold hearings • Board adopts Ordinance (2), establishing a new DR map Table 4 lists three potential approaches to removing unsuitable properties from the County's DR map. Staff will refine the preferred approach once the Board provides direction, with input from the Planning Commission. Table 4 - Un-mapping Unsuitable Large Destination Resort Properties Alternatives Alternative A Alternative B Alternative C Un-mapping Criteria • Remove all properties with the exception of entitled destination resorts. • Use tax mailer to notify affected properties giving owners the opportunity to 'request maintaining their designation either with or with meeting specified criteria. • All individually owned properties less than 160- acres. • All platted subdivisions. • All public lands. • High priority deer migration area. • Resource lands within 1-mile of a UGB. • All lands within Redmond's Urban Reserve Area. • Use tax mailer to notify affected properties giving owners the opportunity to request maintaining their designation. Same as Alternative B, but excluding: • All individually owned properties less than 160- acres. Adding: • All individually owned contiguous properties less than 160-acres. • Use tax mailer to notify affected properties giving owners the opportunity to request maintaining their designation. Result • 10,931 acres committed to destination resorts or resort communities; • 00% reduction from existina maD • 15,058 eligible acres; • 87% reduction from existing DR map • 47,631 eligible acres; • 58% reduction from existing DR map Destination Resort Remapping Work Session July 23, 2009 -5- 2. Adding Suitable Lands for Large Destination Resorts Any remapping requests to add land to the County's DR map must be based on specific approval criteria that are identified in an adopted ordinance (Ordinance (1)). Before examining different alternatives for adding lands to the County's DR map, it is important to reexamine the County's Destination Resort Combining Zone, DCC 18.113 to understand the burden of proof placed on an applicant seeking conceptual master plan (CMP) approval. Table 5 lists some of those CMP requirements, including the consultants that must be retained to provide an adequate factual base. A complete overview of DCC 18.113 is provided in Attachment D. Table 5 - Destination Resort Combining Zone Burden of Proof s Consultants I Requirements • f=indings of fact. • Open space deed restrictions. • Use of public facilities and amenities on site. • Proposed order of phasing and timing. • Method for providing emergency medical services and facilities and public safety services and facilities (fire I police). • Wildfire prevention. control and evacuation plans. • Interim development including temporary structures related to sales and development. • Owners associations and related transition of responsibilities and transfer of property. • Methods of ensuring that all facilities and common areas within each Land use law phase will be established and will be maintained in perpetuity. attorney Survey of housing availabilityfor employees based upon income level and commuting distance. • Description of the system to be used for the management of any individually owned units that will be used for overnight lodging and how it will be implemented. • Development will not create the potential for natural hazards identified in the County Comprehensive Plan. • Adequate public safety protection will be available through existing fire districts or will be provided onsite according to the specification of the state fire marshal • Resort will mitigate any demands it creates on publicly-o,.nmed recreational facilities on public lands in the surrounding area. • Adequate open space, facility maintenance and police and fire protection shall be ensured in perpetuity in a manner acceptable to the County. • Resource protection plan. Wildlife • Open space management plan. biologist • Natural resources inventory. • Management prescriptions. 6 See note 4 above. Destination Resort Remapping Work Session July 23, 2009 -6- Table 5 - Destination Resort Combining Zone Burden of Proof 6 Consultants Requirements • Negative impact on fish and wildlife resources will be completely mitigated so that there is no net loss or net degradation of the resource. • Important natural features will be maintained. Traffic engineer Civil engineer Water law attorney Hydrologist Agricultural specialist Economist • Traffic Study. • Destination resort developrnents that significantly atfect a transpurtatiori facil'ty shall assure that the development is consi~-tent with the identified function, capacity and level of service of the facility. • Description of method of providing all utility systems, including the location and sizing. • Water conservation plan. • Wastewater disposal plan. • The wastewater disposal plan includes beneficial use to the maximum extent practicable. • Sewage disposal methods. • Erosion control plan. • Solid waste management plan. • Resort will be served by an on-site sewage system approved by DEQ and a water system approved by the Oregon State Health Division. • Availability of water for estimated demands at the destination resort. • Adequate water available for all proposed uses at the destination resort, based upon the water study and a proposed_~,vater conservation plan. • Estimate water demands for the destination resort at maximum build-out. • Identification of the proposed sources. • Identification of all available information on ground and surface waters relevant to the determination of adequacy of water supply for the destination resort. • Identification of the area that may be measurably impacted by the water used by the destination resort (water impact area) and an analysis supporting the delineation of the impact area. • Statistically valid sampling of domestic and other wells within impact area. • Site designed to avoid or minimize adverse effects on adjoining property. Development will riot force a significant change in accepted farm or forest practices or significantly, increase the cost of accepted farm or forest practices on surrounding lands devoted to farm or forest use. • Site improvements will be located and designed to avoid or minimize adverse effects of the resort on the surrounding land uses. • Analysis addressing the economic viability of the proposed development. • Fiscal impacts of the project including changes in employment, increased tax revenue, demands for new or increased levels of public services, housing for employees and the effects of loss of resource lands during the life of the project. • Necessary financial resources are available for the applicant to undertake DCC 18.113.070(0). Except where connection to an existing public sewer or water system is allowed by the County Comprehensive Plan Destination Resort Remapping Work Session July 23, 2009 -7- Table 5 - Destination Resort Combining Zone Burden of Proof s Consultants Requirements the development consistent with minimum investment requirements. • Appropriate assurance has been submitted by lending institutions or other financial entities that the developer has or can reasonably obtain adequate financial support for the proposal once approved. • Resort will provide a substantial financial contribution which positively benefits the local economy throughout the life of the entire project considering changes in employment, demands for new or increased levels of public service, housing for employees and the effects of loss of resource land. • Natural amenities of site considered together with identified developed recreation facilities to be provided with the resort, will constitute a primary attraction to visitors, based on economic feasibility analysis. - ----k 1 I • IllUstration!s and graphncs to scale. Landscape Architect Design guidelines. Three remapping alternatives are provided in Table 6. Each one is based on clear and objective criteria. The reasons for promoting this type of an approach are three fold: • As demonstrated in Table 5 and Attachment D, applicants' seeking CMP approval for a resort incur substantial costs to hire the necessary consultants to satisfy the burden of proof stipulated in the Destination Resort Combining Zone, DCC 18.113. Reason (9): Staff does not believe it is necessary to duplicate the rigorous findings required for siting a resort at the DR remapping stage. The land use process for obtaining the entitlements to establish a destination resort can face significant community opposition or be delayed by appeals and litigation. Crook County repealed its destination resort map in October 2008, in response to an advisory vote approved by voters in May 2008. Alternatively, the Thornburgh Resort CMP, originally approved by the Board in May 2006, faces its ninth appeal as it is now up for review by the Oregon Supreme Court. The final master plan is also on appeal. Reason (2): Staff does not believe it is necessary to apply discretionary criteria for DR remapping requests that can be subject to different interpretations and therefore litigation. Destination resorts will likely remain controversial in Deschutes County. Anyone applying for a DR map amendment recognizes that community concerns and the possibility of legal challenges are distinct possibilities if and when a resort is formally proposed. • Recent case law now requires any new destination resort to construct the first 50 overnight lodging accommodations prior to the sale of any residential lots.8 This requirement, coupled with other statutory obligations dealing with recreational s DCC 18.113.060(A(1)(a) was amended in 2007 based on a decision by the Oregon Court of Appeals in Annuziata Gould v. Deschutes County and Thornburgh Resort. Destination Resort Remapping Work Session July 23, 2009 -8- amenities and public facilities, may create significant financial impediments for siting future destination resorts in Deschutes County. Reason (3): Staff does not believe it is necessary to further encumber the DR remapping process. Applicants interested in siting a destination resort already face substantial challenges, from first obtaining the necessary land use entitlements to constructing associated infrastructure, ranging from recreational amenities, overnight lodging, water and wastewater facilities, and transportation improvements. Table 6 - Remapping Criteria for Large Destination Resorts Alternatives 11 Criteria Alternative 1 Ineligible Lands • Within 24 air miles of a UGB with an existing population of 100,000 or more unless residential uses are limited to those necessary for the staff and management of the resort. • On a site with 50 or more contiguous acres of unique or prime farmland identified and mapped by the United States Natural Resources Conservation Service, or its predecessor agency. U • On a site within three miles of a high value crop area unless the o resort complies with the requirements of ORS 197.445 (6) in which case the resort may not be closer to a high value crop area than co 1/2 mile for each 25 units of overnight lodging or fraction thereof. • On predominantly Cubic Foot Site Class 1 or 2 forestlands as determined by the State Forestry Department, which are not subject to an approved goal exception. • In an especially sensitive big game habitat area as determined by ODFW in July 1984 or designated in an acknowledged Comp Plan. • All resource lands within one mile of a UGB. • All public lands. • All lands within an Urban Reserve Area. • Irrigated EFU lands greater than 40 acres of contiguous irrigation under one ownership. • Irrigated EFU lands greater than 60 acres of non-contiguous land in the same ownership. • All F-1 zoned property. Wildlife: a) Tumalo deer winter range; b) Metolius deer range; c) U antelope winter range east of Bend; d) antelope winter range near o Millican; e) elk range; f) sage grouse range; g) Deer migration _J priority wildlife migration area. Eligible Lands • F-2, MUA-10, and RR-10 zones. • Unirrigated EFU lands. • Irrigated EFU lands less than 40 acres of contiguous irrigation under one ownership. • Irrigated EFU lands with 60 acres or less of non-contiguous land in the same ownership. Destination Resort Remapping Work Session July 23, 2009 -9- Table 6 - Remapping Criteria for Large Destination Resorts Alternatives Alternative 2 Alternative 3 Criteria Parcel Size • Minimum of 160 acres under one or multiple owners in one DR remapping request. Transportation Analysis • Require a "macro-level" transportation analysis that examines the rezoned property and the impact to major transportation facilities if build-out.occurs during a twenty year period. It alerts applicant, community, and agencies of potential impacts to county or state transportation facilities and the mitigation measures that will likely be required if and when a destination resort is formally proposed. Ineligible Lands Same as Alternative 1, but excluding: • Irrigated Exclusive Farm Use (EFU) lands greater than 40 acres of contiguous irrigation under one ownership. • Irrigated EFU lands greater than 60 acres of non-contiguous land in the same ownership. LO m U a~ CU 06 CU U O J CO Z •L U U • O J Eligible Lands Same as Alternative 1, with the following additions All irrigated EFU land. Parcel Size Minimum of 160 acres under one or multiple owners in one DR remapping request. Transportation Analysis Same as Alternative 1. Ineligible Lands • Variations of Alternative 1 and 2. c~ L U a~ c~ U) 06 U O J Eligible Lands cu l • Variations of Alternative 1 and 2 Parcel Size L U Minimum of 350 acres under one or multiple owners in one DR M remapping request. Transportation Analysis • Same as Alternative 1. Destination Resort Remapping Work Session July 23, 2009 -10- E. REVISING LARGE DESTINATION RESORT SITING CRITERIA Water Management Plan The Deschutes Basin Board of Control, an intergovernmental unit composed of seven irrigation districts, recommended during the Community Conversations that the Board and Planning Commission consider amending the Destination Resort Combining Zone to add a new siting criterion. The new criterion would require an applicant proposing a destination resort to obtain a Water Management Plan (WMP) from an irrigation district, as part of an application if surplus irrigation water (surface water right) is being transferred to meet groundwater mitigation credits. A WMP is a contract between the resort developer and the affected irrigation district, addressing among other things: water distribution, timing of water need, access easements, water holdings, and drainage and tail water. The purpose of requiring a WMP as an integral criterion is to diffuse the ongoing controversy associated with water availability for a destination resort. It will demonstrate to the various constituents, organizations, and local officials that water supply is being adequately addressed at the front end of the land use process, thereby minimizing misunderstandings during a forthcoming public hearing. 2. Others Many residents expressed an interest in modifying other destination resort requirements. The following list summarizes other potential criteria that could be integrated into the Destination Resort Combining Zone, DCC 18.113. • Provision for work force housing • Conversion of cluster development • Provision of fire fighting facilities and services • Independent review of wildlife plans and inventories • Mitigation for impacts on cities 3. Timeline If supported by the Planning Commission and the Board, text amendments to the Destination Resort Combining Zone would be embodied in Ordinance (3) and be processed concurrently with either Ordinances (1) or (2). F. REMAPPING TIMELINE Table 7 provides a timeline for initiating Ordinances (1), (2), and (3) and the opportunities for public involvement. Destination Resort Remapping Work Session July 23, 2009 -11- Table 7 - Remapping Timeline Ordinance I Content • Specifies DR map can only be amended once every 30 months • Describes the legislative process for applicants to formally initiate a DR map Ordinance amendment (1) Establishes a fixed time period for submitting a DR remapping request • Describes the criteria to review and approve DR. map changes Ordinance (2) • Upon adoption of Ordinance (1), County initiates formal process for to amend DR map • County is one of the applicants, requesting removal of unsuitable lands from the existing DR map based on criteria identified in Ordinance (1) • Opportunities for private property owners to request adding their property or keeping it on the DR map Revises destination resort siting criteria, such as • Requires an applicant proposing a destination resort to obtain `a WMP from Ordinance < an irrigation district, as part of an (3) applicationif surplus irrigation water (surface water right) is being transferred to meet groundwater mitigation credits Attachments: Public Outreach • Initiate DLCD 45-Day Notice -in September for Ordinance (1) • Reengage organizations from Spring / Summer 2009` Community Conversations in the fall • First evidentiary hearing with the Planning Commission in November 2009 • County's unmapping proposal available for Fall 2009 Community Conversations • Use tax mailer to notify affected properties being considered for unmapping and opportunities to comment • Initiate DLCD 45-Day Notice in January for Ordinance (2) • First evidentiary hearing with the Planning Commission in March 2010 • Initiate DLCD 45=Day Notice in September for Ordinance (3) the same time as Ordinances (1) or (2). • Reengage organizations from Spring / Summer 2009 Community Conversations in the fall • First evider tiaryhearing in November 2009 or concurrently with Ordinance (2) in March 2010 A. Community Conversation Remapping PowerPoint Presentation B. Community Conversation Gantt Chart C. Community Input Summary D. Destination Resort Combining Zone Summary Destination Resort Remapping Work Session July 23, 2009 -12- T" at - o ~ Z v~o~ N M It Lr) d!" I c m -r ra - C1N w '1 t - W ri 4 a ~ E M 0 2 c ~ ~ 'f " :c 7iF~l a~ n ~p h S C 0 S C fu~ A-1 - fA C m a W C IiIA N G g d 1{ ~ C C 83~~ 3 I ° Document Reproduces Poorly (Archived) } Document Reproduces Poorly (Archived) N Documen! P' F~-, , cduces Poorly (Arcnived) co Dor;p,ment Reproduces Poorly -It (Archived) g d o~ b 3 oo .O All m n~ `7 • e N~ 1i 3 `I FJ b YF, ire e rn - o : n (I 19 <5 ~ ~ i Docum(. m' Peproduces Poorly (Archived) ,I a u m a of e I. ~ g ~ E 3 < S c a I~ fi t l t<<: bz °ddaj~€~ ~4S 3 I P ~ C y • ~ d C N I ' k1y31" ~ E k a' 2 w = S I p q q ~s °a ga7~~$ d u N 1 v~AJ ~ s N y ~ l9 I ,I ~ ? I f.. + l'.: 1 ON 7 l g S I 3 n a N ~ OI g ~ . g y,~ a 8~ 0 LO Document Reproduces Poorly (Archived) C O 'a O Q N m N EE E N Q) DI ~ C o a (n Ca c a`3 N C 0 c~ N r ~ 0 o- N c ~I cc~ 61 a' 0 P (o N M tO M N I M q V, r a ,LLI ~I LL, ~ N r L1 m N I I~ d ~ i P N P P P ~ ~ In i N V i+ _N _N N N ' P P v v ® Q a M I y 1 ~ 0 ® C t CU m C U C O d .U ` N 0 O W C O a) O (0 O O f N us V tip, c C o • E ~ N O_ r T O : m N U . > C a) O a`> E v N y V N c o O N C U O = O 0 O m e J p O a ~ O o E E o N . rn c N c o ! UU CO o c U CO E ~u~, o E E .2 m o U E o N M O E C O 3 m 0 > U d i C C LL W N R m ~ E o - c L ® c c O O 0> O d J N >c6 > w c - c s U O O a~ C C v~ c LL . C o c U c a 0 C m J U n O n o c n a~ > E o N Q O O C O C . Z ~ c -E L) :3 m c E y m N N (5 0 N C Qf U C 12 O c - E O > - i O O m O L E d m m d E E i CO a .E w c o o a m '0 U m a~i U m L 6 E d > „ y, V) C U U y D > O w y C o rn a, t/1 to U7 t U p U i V L d 1 V E 3 a) C U r- C O U . L ~ C ~ to C O j O O °C3 O > ' E a ` ` ~ U L L O L -c C ~ (D C Ca -D C, a, • N N N N d C 2 v7 f; s=: O C9 N 0 O N 0 m i to Fn O z U i7 lD Y 2 O O z O v 0 a a) o in a. O Q1 o a 41 o 3 m u~ U E m o Y~_ m tts R r - I z O O M O ' mmv)COn.c ~ f C d66CiU,LL ~--I II I IM Ito ItO CD I~ ~N N ;m ;M . N M !V U') IV t0 t` l~ .d d 0) V O to :to N ~t0 M LO eT IU I8J itn ~(0 Itn P ~t1> :06 t0 'Q1 ~Lf) O CO lD N to M (0 ~ "ifJ ~G4 ~f9 t0 I7~ CO ;CO CO Docwm(;-,,. Reproduces Poorly ;Q ~ M N I I~ OI 1 dp i0 I N i O r M ~ N O P a ~ Q `ml ~I aI m 0 0 LL 'a a cv m ~ E E N O I CL o I o I N I C O O. ~ N ~ c Y 0 V v Q O O s m v (n O U a) Q R N O G .N E O 'O 'C d 11 T C N N O o m ~ O o E f Q a E , . E ca 0 C E O U p ;C V o c E c c U Co ~ c E w~ v :J m E c c r ~ E Im v ®e U I? Q' m` a y cC ~ C ~ O N I -4 p 0) 10 h ti In I In j~ i - i N N m f6 a 7 Q C E O U c .Q LZ m d O N N m r_ AN W C O U 0 N Q -c c O O (Q E . O U U N cn O • E ~ E o E a p O o E U U E m a 0 - 0 O LY 0 75 E U N u) E m W ¢ O ~ ~ Y ~ Y E .U C 'C N (B O m m 2 E E E 0) o ,uEr- E a O O O Y Q O 0 (p L L 2O co U ~ J L O• L O E m O o CO n3 cn - ' V U E~ N 3 . . 0) LLJ 0 N O ¢ N L N U E N E O 7 O 7 2:1 2 E - - c cu - cm c m E L. E 0 s rn 0 . E E m 3 N E 1 ¢ , 2 E o v 0 o p O Q C N I- U U N N 0 CU a i 0 p O N Q\ " N > N , m a) c0 m Ej E a) L > o.~ E E m m o (n o -0 H~ L O m t~ ~ U) cl- C: m E m o 0 0 O .i c6 U Lo C ) p -0 -O C co 0 U a O (6 3 a) c x E 0 E pin O N a) C O N 70 (4 L .O L C O CO a) N ~ N 0 CL O N N N-~ E E C co Q O Cl 0 ~Z) UC WZO a c 0 'U O N N ¢ T m E E O U O m E m Fv co .3 C 0 N >R LL 0 ~ a) L a) 0 Q L p N m E a U O (6 N N a) N ¢ ca - ,V W _ .m C "O UE E V- N-0 Q U N L N a) O c -0 ° E--4- m caH,E~ in 3 a) (n _0 W O u O N 3 ccu c c0 o 0 E N N U N N L Q (0 E N N a co c a) (D c0 (o°'°'E E g o = i) a) N U a) E O O •a~ ~UU a) J O in ~ C N (a LL m 0 E C) a) cm C0 U E N N U m 7 cu 0 .5 a) U cu CD N N m a) . L O ca O E (D N i Co Co ~ c0 ,2 m • LL N L m L O J m m _ 0) N m a)" m o L ELc) L a" O E L N p L N LL L) U L p cn ; > y m N\ N a) LL a p N 0') - v C a) O N a) a) a) a) =3 C/) EM J m J co N L LL U c m t C c O p C L r N ca cn a) U O N O O L . ` O y c0 L a) p j c6 a) - O N O \ a) °7 a,., a3 _ N i N C 6 N N 0) •C co 'L- _ U c0 'tt '0 -0 N O m m m L (n C N a) a) U > p- ca f6 0 "0 L, m r o ' (n L E m L N (D 0) 0 L L C N O 0 - N O N co a) o " m LL C) r- CL Q N L 0- --M a) ~5 N U) m .S 3 m > N c0 0) a) E N D S cc -?-l Cc c: CL N , CA L U CA C m m L a) a v 3 E o N .a m- • d N a) cm LL C.) Q N M Q cn (D (C0 0 p U 0 U (0 U O N N t .m+ (6 m l~ Q 3 m 0 ~ L p Q L 75 F= U T+ U 0 fn N C w - :3 a) CL 'O a c6 Q Q_ i p m C (n a) 0 7 N Y p -O E C a) a) LL E o C O N :3 0 O_ _ N .L CL 6 co m N Z -C cn _0 0 N C O -c C OC ~ co O 6 a a) L M U) C O a) rn cn •C N m cQ N a w Z3 C p t (6 CL O Q a) m -LC3 N N m E cn m U U o .S m ui U L~ -O C o ) aa)i (n 3 3 n o LL 0 N W U -0 N L) C N a) E 0 L p O O co s O N N ~ U O (0 C C - . • N N v - p C7 M H cu Q) = c6 Q - N > L > a) \ (na O CA O N C 7 - Cl L -0 o (0 - U v N 0 - a) E C , 0 0 N m O -a f0 > p m N L ( L ¢ O N - f U U v N (6 CU c6 N (n n N a) 0) 4-- -0 cu - U M U) E E= W a) 0) (n m C= U O (D ¢ C C m m C cn u L O m E N CL p L 0 w •L a) U m N p i 7 (Nn E 3: O E N a (n a) C C E ca "O O a E 0 3 0 C U C O O N N O7 ~ 0 ~ Y O N N L LL C a) 70 O E U U L - m a) Z O > N N C2 O) Z LL O J a) (n E v N O 6 y u) C C ' O O m ~ O Q O aU~o~zo O N LL aU~W N N N N Q' c- a LLLY~~o~¢U a c -C 0 0 0 rn r c ~ c 0 c ' c Y ~ 'a m c 0 m m 3 cm c > m L m a co L m Q- m a CL , L L Q a) 1 U O O d C> c .C _0 Co cu c c (n E U) m = N N m m o S t rn U m a) c o c 0 C= aEi a `u c U o m o L m E m m , L Q CD CD O m y ca v> Y (n T O) 3 m c CD c a) L Q .c c Z m ) o o _N J O _a) .-T co N (A a cn U) O M Q o w V U c a) m J }C O m O L E E 0 C U ai cn E m _ U) o E 0 T M cn (n o Q 0 s a a L o U c o c ^ 0 m T C= :3 c a) E 0 o j 5 c o O a) O c c 'y c 0 m c m m- U 0 0 a`ni v m o :3 co E t -0 Z 0) L~ E 0 0 0 can' E c 5 a) c 3 o E a -f-- c c a) E Y o ~ c o= ~j c ~ i o° 3° 0 Co U m C7 (n - m m m a CD a) U c o~ o ~ c 'C " d - c a> m 0) a) cn -0 N w ti c CD Eo CD a) ~ 3 0 E o c y a) m E E o w L CZ :3 =3 N U c U 0 aa) O 0 m a 0 CD O c U o _7 p c T co - U) min c o a) O L •Co cn !n ~ to N c EO O m a) 0. a) O w m O O J O U U) (J 0- c 'Q o .S c 3 o L o Cc _ N 0 m Y a) 0 E E 0 0. W CU o m a a Co m o s= m a) vi ° 0) o(n m c CD c° o .(n a°~ -0 E L c a) L m m 0. a) -00 m m° a-oi c m a r m a) m a _0 " 0) o U) 2~1 - a 7 E Z N c m a`ni cn a U a) 3 m m Y~ o 0.~0 L c L-0 cn 16=0 0 0 L _U c= Z3 C C' w0 c c c 30 Q 0° 0 O m (n U L .0 In c 0 c 0 a) m L a) 0 m c .0 ..T. ^ r. L Q m 0- 3~~•~m c°aa) -00 m3cc - °c•°m E c o a? aE c m o U 3 m 0 a) - a) L u) m 0 (n ° c 0 L E 0 L) a) m m` 0 y i) a CY) 0 E. cn m ell a CCs Q C) 0 m a m o o Q m m 'm c>u -0 -0 c E m m T O 0 (D M Y m cn o m v m o CT c„o U vi ° a) E -0 c~ -0 a) . J cn m - m o m - a) m E a o a) '-0 E r c w c 3 -o vi . 7-0 U m :3 0 a) L CD .0) ° m O Y 0 c m m .O ° E m m y N L a) y ° m 0 0 0" O v~ E E E E 0 cn E E 0 am) ° m e E c° 0 0 E is w cmi Y E L E m o m Q cn L CD a) a) c U _m F- E o _ c c c j E c? U ca N m c 0> m O O a) - a m E U d ° c 0 O 4z 0 .U 0 0 0 T" 0 0) O m m ~ a fn c6 N> m-> CD O O H c U~ r-L u) Co M U N"occuEu) c0-°'0m u)UMma),-a cM0a) E~ mo`0 M a) L) H C°a ° r :0 -0 -o a) 0 o E 0 E 2 to E m a 0. m n o 3 0 m m O C o o m N- "o m m m m c n c 0 o m c 0 0_Y 3 0 w Cca a ac•a' .c a /mc0 L V) m 7 0 U c m a) I L L L c U c> 0 m 0 Q' a 00 m o 0 U C)) - E a) (1) .0 L g @ .L m 3 0 0 0 3 0 ~ c cn c L 0 } N o-0 (1 d m Co U N U C a) ~ m 0 m m a) = 7 0 E° m` c o w a~0i o m n a) c •E m s o U o c m U m (D Y c X c(n Q E a') m a) - > ca o w U) LL - °c) _0 ° ° o o a) a E c a) c m c Cs - 0 co c m 0 0 n 0 c0 0. c X u) > C 2? a) c L) m y m a) m. c O 0 ` c E m r- a) HUB oU EQZ)w a) W Z) a-0W0 mw aHF=HUly- -1U 2CLxLu Y C f0 m a) >f6 U O C _ (6 f0 V C N O Q m 'c E m 0 7 U L U O U f9 a) E 7 L U) L O (D O O c O O - Q co _ c t a) 70 O) a> U w 7 O N a) L O U f6 N L Q C c a 3`°= °a aa) o - c 3 0) co -0 ` a) a>a-0 is ~ L L O a ~ U N m ° co a C co co _ m L (6 0 L a) n 3 O U (1) N c U U cu a) cLu O U 3 L m o U L a) (n 0 CO cn c U) a) o a) cn T - o 0 (D = a) W T5 ao n O CL -°o r c m c N O m r o CL O m Lr) (D a c N o i E ° U _ (n 0 o c n3 r 0_0 cn c n ~O c T a) 7 (D U O_ Q ~c a) O m a) - o a) (u c3 T 'E p -O U O a) O -0 N C 7 E L c 7 o U U) >1- O O • _ 0) C Q E O CD .75 cu a) 0 L L a) c6 U O U N C O U L U > , C a) :3 C T > U) c CD O c6 y N O p cu O c6 E . (n C 0 to C ~j 0 co N "O c N Q m E cu -O ° r- 0 3 'O O a) C U Q L a) -0 c .0 >1 ~ Fn > 0 r_ CU 0 a) >1 7 > O Q O_ -0 a) C •C LL p N C U Z U L CL 7 CL Q C c6 a) E a) Y E= (n LL O -p ) E E c6 ° 0) - cu c6 e Q O E U ca 0 3 a) CD c _ m m a -0 a) (6 O O O p - m LL 0 a) E N U a) Q U) N N > i) =3 U m ?i O 7 O O as V 0 ° O N (n 0 r_ 0 O 0 U) C a) -0 U p 7 O fn 0. i= =3 a) O U . a) a) ° j U m L c6 E N Uwe m C a)° C w a) N a) _ c6 U a) m a) C cu c6 0) 0 0) E N _ co - a) (n E -0 m a) (4 O U O ° 0 L C a) a) ° N (D ° 0 a) 0 L -0 (6 0 o Lm~ ) V cu w -C O ° n o cn - '0 -C (D c 0) U U (n c ' C (D - E 0 O - a) E ) . ° ° i co O N O o U 0 L 3 m 0 c Er LL ° a) C) cl- p Y ° ° U) -0 0 o L:. U S ° °'o > m cis - cn _0 a) c, O cu 0 0 70 (D r C ' O LL ~ L L Q. N N (DO C- (6 > (6 O cu L " N N C O c6 LL N O U - O _j a N > > U CU _0 a) C ~ a • a a) a) L Q T O ° C O O U O O a) Q U L O C U O L cn a) Q (D U a) ) i X a) N O) .N C cL6 U O C a ,N U n to > (n -0 L LL N a) c6 a) fn 0 E _ a) cu n -0 cu Q j U O O 00 m cn (n C c6 •U y c-0 n 0 -p C C L a) LO Co t 0 > U- cu a s m cn ) E U c V_ o c c6 0 CU '0 (n c " cn L c 3 'n , N N - M C a Q E u i ) U) " c 3 a) -0 U _10 c C) a) O m CO U U O C 0 C c6 O O Cam. a) L L c ° O o a) c6 ' a) "O X N T 6) O E O a) a) L U U _ M c c E° $ a) O o t C U N i6 o a) ° c m (D o N 0) c Y a c (D U) CD d aa) _ - ° m cn L -0 v to cn CD U C L E a) a) " m cn C 0 3 3 7 N U o a) m m c in as a) 0 0 m O C 7 U a) o o O (n a) c° 0 3 a > l) c6 L (n 2 co N a) U co 0 0 L a) a ° X cn :3 0 En CL E u) 70 o N i C C o a) a) > 3 O 7 Q 7 U ' O (n _ y O' O U) L C C U' ) C ~ C a) C c (A O N 7 C(Dm ° L O Q ° 0 a i •o ' cc 0 a) m ~ ? > ° E i > m m a C -C ° ~ O 6) 0 w a) C ' - (6 N a) > a) a) X N ° a) • 3: N • 6) O a) N c6 N •3 LL N ~ E i C 7 0 U Q O (D ° y p C~ 7 Y "c Z E O) > _ C E (n t 0 E n a) w 63 c6 a) c c 2 L N 0 U E -C U a) mn a) c O co (n O •L N a) a) cn ° w O C O . M y 0 ° a) N c6 O O L N . + C ~ 1 E c6 E U N m 6) O c c c U f6 O (6 Q E E N c6 V _ N 6 c E Q O c 3: a) 3: L O E L Q Ov C 0 o in ca n c E 3 3> N s - C E n _ • N c E E a) O 2 O 2 (L y y 3 > a) QQa ~ N C O N ~OUw 0 0 0 a) U22~ O O O o E - O a) O L mUDU c60 ~ O ci 3 00 63 N ~U» m N O z °x C7 c U) > L11 Q a o a O > U ca a) U (n E O Co 0) C) V) >y a) L ca O L ° Q c m a) Y a) a/~ 7 O L L O C (n ca C y a) N O -C C L 7 a) 3: to -a C: X C y 05 a) a ca c6 cn O y a c OC 7 7L m a) c c 'II 0 3: .L fa O ca O 0 U co O N L a) L O L O O c U O a a) a) (n 2 U U ) x (n U O p y .L E C a) 2 fLLd CO Q _0 -0 m (n a) O U) a) E S a> 3 (n (D a) ca c a CL rn '0 -a -a U) m .L ca - U o a) o m m a) m N o~ 1) - 46 _ E m ° a m a) 0 C.) E w -0 U O c 3° - ° o Y _0 (D U N f.Y6 a a) a) 0 \ c C 0 m O N o L w L a) _7 C cn c O C O a) ca a) a) a) CD r U CD C U E a) I C 0 ca a) c U) cc m E rn O C E N a? a) > 5 o U CU L ~ _ m o o cn . vi c O 0 m ac) m CD ° ca 3: -0 a) > a) L -C CL 2 ° c o E c a) E~ M C o 0 m 0 --oo o m .3 ~ a) a m o c) y co 3 cca Cl. cn U ° E C O a) O m.0 m ti O "w °'ca o) m a ° a U) O L L c >1 a C L (D C 'L . a) CL o 5' 75 M >1 C N -2' a) CD _0 0 U a a) a •m o ° r .o o Q c O c C O LO p c v°) r :3 > C a) a U 7 :3 o co rn o ca a) to O O a O ° w 9 4-- cn C O U a) C w j U) Q f6 c a) ° O a) E a L a) a) " c C a) v co a C o E o v ~ aa)) a) S cri n a c o E o c o a) - n m _a) m c !E C 0) co -0 a) cu > (D E L o O N O L a O y " m 3 D o U E - a m o c a a a) U E 5 ° o E E a) N o m c E en (D CL c6 -O cn p -C i :3 a C Q) > O a) _o C c vi a) E cn ° F- W 'a) ° U C N c o r c c r N° a) c`a ° a) ° O > c a) -C C: a. O _N m -a _a) N cn U O 4 O~ C' V N a) a U U) cn ca 0 O N a) CL C: °-0 CO _N N n. O in - a) Co N U O U c 75 M a) cD CL CL 0 r ca E O O O U O a) p r O O T a) ca U •C _O ~ N 'C U o cu Q c_ cn O .N C U 7 N -C a c c a a c°n E c c m n o 0 O a o o U Co aa) ~ a U a°) 'c f6 - a ca o ° .0 m U .S a a) o cn a M a) CU o -a o c E E o ` a a) _0 a> o 0 o a) aa)) CL 0) a) 0 0 w cn •E •S o° O a c x o o° Y rn cn o a a) 0 a) c y a) aL- a) L Q U Q L 75 (D 0 L c i o a N L a) Q- ° ac U L a) o ;CF6 O ti N , a) a°) o w a) _ ca U O N " r y a) U O -0 rl- a) a -0 ~ m. o w a C) co n a C y S c c a in -0 cn c: -c°N°0 aa)yma° V'~a)0MD0'0M° 4- o - U oc o~ >1U) •3 w N x) a) ° Q a o° c a) a a c a r C O LO .0 2-0 O a0j O O° CL.!:: j> E E 40 U aa) N o U Co M -0 co q a, 0 0 (n C :3 CL -0 O ca = •v O ~ Q a O C -0 a) a) U co O O Cm O 0- O a) C _O N a a) p = ~ a a) O u) O E U 0 a) O a ° N N ~ C N a) ~ cn a) 6 E a) a) > m C > U w o S E a m a o > g n cNa > o 5) p ° c N c°° '3 r -o ° rn o a o ca ° o L a-- ° N r° r o 0--a o ° c cn o aa) N co U U a N vLOi p U o c N p L 3 o ca co a) ate) V :3 (n ° a) cu m O s r E a) m r a T o r Ln a E. a 0 x ° w a) cn m m L E o o U ° (n a) Q a) F- ° O r N c n O ?i N a) a o r r o E a) m a) o U a y -n o n e -o L c m a O u) c c CL a) U) - N o cn c o C o o aYi c°n m a N o° c 3 (n 70 a o o E 0) cn 4 _o m N o> U n a) w o m r Q. E N o O ° o N m- m- m o U w (n Q ax)~Ew °o m o( ) M0) ° w> mm`~ cam ooaa)E >Ccna mNEma)Ua°°a)a) Q cNca3m U>o 3: E a) ° E 70 co a o a n> ° •E o a) m 70 ° ao c m o o a°) v°) a) ° o o t a) n o E Q cn a s > a- c a) m = s r a) aa)) .L aCOi ° o aa)) a v ° :3 0 > cn a>i o L o U) > o O a) U) * CL CL Q Er- -0 CL Destination Resort Combining Zone Consultants: Land use attorney Architect Wildlife biologist Traffic engineer Civil engineer Water attorney Hydrologist Agriculture / Business expert Economist (Legal findings, deed restrictions) (Illustrations and graphics to scale, design guidelines) (Habitat Evaluation procedures) (Transportation Impact Analysis) (Public Utility system design) (Water rights) (Groundwater Mitigation for potential impacts to Deschutes River (Impacts to agricultural practices) (Economic impact and feasibility analysis) FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW Chapter 18.113, Destination Resorts Zone - DR DCC 18.113.050. Requirements for Conditional Use Permit and Conceptual Master Plan Applications. A. Illustrations and graphics to scale, identifying: 1. Location and total number of acres to be developed as a planned destination resort; 2. Subject area and all land use adjacent to the subject area; 3. Topographic character of the site; 4. Types and general location of proposed development uses, including residential and commercial uses; 5. Major geographic features; 6. Proposed methods of access to the development, identifying the main vehicular circulation system within the resort and an indication of whether streets will be public or private; 7. Major pedestrian, equestrian and bicycle trail systems; 8. Important natural features of the site, including habitat of threatened or endangered species, streams, rivers, wetlands and riparian vegetation within 200 feet of streams, rivers and wetlands; Specialists, Illustration graphics 9. All uses proposed within landscape management corridors identified by the comprehensive plan or zoning ordinance; 10. Location and number of acres reserved as open space, buffer area, or common area. Areas designated as "open space," "buffer area," or "common area" should be clearly illustrated and labeled as such; 11. All proposed recreational amenities; and 12. Proposed overall density. B. Further information as follows: 1. Description of natural characteristics of the site and surround areas, including a description of resources and the effect of destination resort on resources; * Methods employed to mitigate adverse impacts on resources; 2 Description of Natural characteristics * Analysis of how the overall values of the natural features of the site will be preserved, enhanced or Natural features utilized in the design concept for the destination resort; analysis and, * Proposed resource protection plan to ensure Resource important natural features will be protected and protection flan maintained. Factors to be addressed include: a. Compatibility of soil composition for proposed development(s) and potential erosion hazard; b. Geology, including areas of potential instability; c. Slope and general topography; d. Areas subject to flooding; e. Other hazards or development constraints; f. Vegetation; g. Water areas, including streams, lakes, ponds and wetlands; h. Important natural features; i. Landscape management corridors; and, j. Wildlife A traffic study addressing (1) impacts on affected Traffic study County, city and state road systems and (2) transportation improvements necessary to mitigate any such impacts. The study shall be submitted to the affected road authority (either County Department of Public Works or ODOT, or both) at the same time as the conceptual master plan and shall be prepared by a licensed traffic engineer to the minimum standards of the road authorities. 3. Description of how the proposed destination resort will satisfy the standards and criteria of DCC 18.133.060 and 18.133.070. 4. Design guidelines and development standards defining Design Guidelines visual and aesthetic parameters for a. Building character b. Landscape character c. Preservation of existing topography and vegetation d. Siting of buildings; and, e. Proposed standards for minimum lot area, width, frontage, lot coverage, setbacks and building heights 5. Open space management plan which includes: Open space plan. a. Explanation of the how the open space management plan meets minimum standards of DCC 18.133 for each phase of the development; b. Inventory of important natural features identified in inventory of the open space areas and any other open space important natural and natural values present in the open space; features c. Set of management prescriptions that will operate to maintain and conserve in perpetuity any identified Natural features important natural features and other natural or open r» anagement space values present in the open space; prescriptions d. Deed restriction that will assure that the open space areas are maintained as open space in perpetuity; open space ` maintained in 6. Explanation of public use of facilities and amenities on perpetuity the site; and, 7. Description of proposed method of providing all utility utilities systems, including the location and sizing of the utility systems. 8. Description of proposed order and schedule for phasing, if any, of all development including an explanation of when facilities will be provided and how they will be secured if not completed prior to closure of sale of individual lots or units. 9. Explanation of how destination resort has been sited or designed to avoid or minimize adverse effects or Minimize adverse impacts conflicts on adjacent lands. The application shall identify surrounding uses and potential conflicts between the destination resort and adjacent uses within 660 feet of the boundaries of the parcel or parcels upon which the resort is to be developed. The application shall explain how any proposed buffer area will avoid or minimize adverse effects or conflicts. 10. Description of the proposed method for providing Method of providing emergency medical facilities and services and public Emergency Medical safety facilities and services including fire and police Service protection. 11. Study prepared by a hydrologist, engineering geologist , or similar professional certified in the State of Oregon Hydrological study describing: a. Estimate of water demands for the destination resort Water demands at maximum buildout, including a breakdown of estimated demand by category of consumption, including but not limited to residential, commercial, golf courses and irrigated common areas. b. Availability of water for estimated demands at the Water availability destination resort, including (1) identification of the proposed sources; (2) identification of all available information on ground and surface waters relevant to the determination of adequacy of water supply for the destination resort; (3) identification of the area that may be measurably impacted by the water used by the destination resort (water impact area) and an analysis supporting the delineation of the impact area; and (4) a statistically valid sampling of domestic and other wells within the impact area. c. Water conservation plan including an analysis of water conservation available measures which are commonly used to Plan reduce water consumption. This shall include a justification of the chosen water conservation plan. The water conservation plan shall include a wastewater disposal plan utilizing beneficial use of reclaimed water to the maximum extent practicable. For the purposed of DCC 18.133.050, beneficial uses shall include, but are not limited to: i. Irrigation of golf courses and greenways; ii. Establishment of artificial wetlands for wildlife habitation. 12. Erosion control plan for all disturbed land, as required by ORS 468. This plan shall include storm and melt water erosion control to be implemented during all phases of construction and permanent facilities or practices for the continuing treatment of these waters. This plan shall also explain how the water shall be used for beneficial use or why it cannot be used as such. 13. Description of proposed sewage disposal methods; 14. Wildfire prevention, control and evacuation plans; 15. Description of interim development including temporary structures related to sales and development; 16. Plans for owners' associations and related transition of responsibilities and transfer of property; 17. Description of the methods of ensuring that all facilities and common areas within each phase will be established and will be maintained in perpetuity. 18. A survey of housing availability for employees based upon income level and commuting distance. 19. An economic impact and feasibility analysis of the proposed development prepared by a qualified professional economist(s) or financial analyst(s) shall be provided which includes: Erosion Control Plan Sewer Disposal Wildfire Plan Facilities /Common areas maintained in perpetuity Survey of housing availability for employees based on income & commute Economic Impact & Feasibility Analysis a. Analysis which addresses the economic viability of the proposed development; Economic Viability b. Fiscal impacts of the project including changes in employment, increased tax revenue, demands for new or increased levels of public services, housing Fiscal impacts for employees and the effects of loss of resource lands during the life of the project. 20. A solid waste management plan; Solid Waste Management Plan 21. Description of the mechanism to be used to ensure that the destination resort provides an adequate supply of overnight lodging units to maintain compliance with the 150-unit minimum and 2 to 1 ratio set forth in DCC 18.133.060(D)(2). The mechanism shall meet the requirements of DCC 18.113.060(L). 22. If the proposed destination resort is in a SMIA combining zone, DCC 18.56 shall be addressed 23. If the proposed destination resort is in an LM combining zone, DCC 18.84 shall be addressed. 24. A survey of historic and cultural resources inventories on an acknowledged Goal 5 inventory. STANDARDS FOR DESTINATION RESORTS (DCC 18.113.060) The following standards shall govern consideration of destination resorts. A. Destination Resort shall, in the first phase, provide for an include as part of the CMP the following minimum requirements: At least 150 separate rentable units for visitor- oriented overnight lodging as follows: a. The first 50 overnight lodging units must be constructed prior to the closure of sales, rental or lease of any residential dwellings or lots. b. The resort may elect to phase in the remaining 100 overnight lodging units as follows: i. At least 50 of the remaining 100 required overnight lodging units shall be constructed or guaranteed through surety bonding or equivalent financial assurance within 5 years of the closure of sale of individual lots or units, and; ii. The remaining 50 required overnight lodging units shall be constructed or guaranteed through surety bonding or equivalent financial assurance within 10 years of the closure of sale of individual lots or units. iii. If the developer of a resort guarantees a portion of the overnight lodging units required under subsection 18.113.060(A)(1)(b) through surety bonding or other equivalent financial Management of Overnight lodging assurance, the overnight lodging units must be constructed within 4 years of the date of execution of the surety bond or other equivalent financial assurance. iv. The 2:1 accommodation ratio required by DCC 18.113.060(D)(2) must be maintained at all times. c. If a resort does not chose to phase the overnight lodging units as described in 18.113.060(A)(1)(b), then the required 150 units of overnight lodging must be constructed prior to the closure of sales, rental or lease of any residential dwellings or lots. 2. Visitor-oriented eating establishments for at least 100 persons and meeting rooms which provide eating for at least 100 persons. 3. The aggregate cost of developing the overnight lodging facilities, developed recreational facilities, and the eating establishments and meeting rooms shall be at least $7,000,000 (in 1993 dollars) 4. At least $2,333,000 of the $7,000,000 (in 1993 dollars) total minimum investment required by DCC 18.113.060(A)(3) shall be spent on developed recreational facilities. 5. The facilities and accommodations required by DCC 18.113.060(A)(2) through (4) must be constructed or financially assured pursuant to DCC 18.113.110 prior to closure of sales, rental or lease of any residential dwellings or lots or as allowed by DCC 18.113.060(A)(1). B. All destination resorts shall have a minimum of 160 contiguous acres of land. Acreage split by public roads or rivers or streams shall county toward the acreage limit, provided that the CMP demonstrates that the isolated acreage will be operated or managed in a manner that will be integral to the remainder of the resort. C. All destination resorts shall have direct access onto a state or County arterial or collector roadway, as designed by the Comprehensive Plan. D. A destination resort shall, cumulatively and for each phase, meet the following minimum requirements. $7 M on developed recreational facilities Minimum of 160 acres of contiguous land Direct Access 1. Resort shall have a minimum of 50 percent of the total acreage of the development dedicated to permanent open space, excluding yards, streets and parking areas. Portions of individual residential lots and landscape area requirements for developed recreational facilities, visitor-oriented accommodations or multi-family or commercial uses established by DCC 18.124.070 shall not be considered open space. 2. Individually-owned residential units that do no meet the definition of overnight lodging in DCC 18.04.030 shall not exceed two such units for each unit of visitor- oriented overnight lodging. Individually-owned units shall be considered visitor-oriented lodging if they are available for overnight rental use by the general public for at least 38 weeks per calendar year through one or more central reservation and check-in service(s) operated by the destination resort or by a real estate property manager, as defined in ORS 696.010. E. Phasing. A destination resort authorized pursuant to DCC 18.113.060 may be developed in phases. If a proposed resort is to be developed in phases, each phase shall be as described in the CMP. Each individual phase shall meet the following requirements: Each phase, together with previously completed phases, if any, shall be capable of operating.in a manner consistent with the intent and purpose of DCC 18.113 and Goal 8. 2. The first phase and each subsequent phase of the destination resort shall cumulatively the minimum requirements of DCC 18.113.060 and DCC 18.113.070. 3. Each phase may include two or more distinct noncontiguous areas within the destination resort. F. Destination resorts shall not exceed a density of one and one-half dwelling units per acre including residential dwelling units and excluding visitor-oriented overnight lodging. G. Dimensional Standards: The minimum lot area, width, lot coverage, frontage and yard requirements and building heights otherwise applying to structures in underlying zones and the 50% of total acreage of development dedicated to open space provisions of DCC 18.116 relating to solar access shall not apply within a destination resort. These standards shall be determined by the Planning Director or Hearings Body at the time of the CMP. In determining these standards, the Planning Director or Hearings Body shall find that the minimum specified in the CMP are adequate to satisfy the intent of the comprehensive plan relating to solar access, fire protection, vehicle access, visual management within landscape management corridors and to protect resources identified by LCDC Goal 5 which are identified in the Comprehensive Plan. At a minimum, a 100-foot setback shall be maintained from all streams and rivers. Rimrock setbacks shall be as provided in DCC Title 18. No lot for a single-family residence shall exceed an overall project average of 22,000 square feet in size. 2. Exterior setbacks. a. Except as otherwise specified herein, all development (including structures, site-obscuring fences of over three feet in height and changes to the natural topography of the land) shall be setback from exterior property lines as follows: i. Three hundred fifty feet for commercial development including all associated parking areas; ii. Two hundred fifty feet for multi-family development and visitor-oriented accommodations (except for single-family residences) including all associated parking areas; iii. One hundred fifty feet for above-grade development other than that listed in DCC 18.113.060(G)(2)(a)(i) and (ii); iv. One hundred feet for roads; v. Fifty feet for golf courses; and vi. Fifty feet for jogging trails and bike paths where they abut private developed lots and no setback for where they abut public roads and public lands. b. Notwithstanding DCC 18.113.060(G)(2)(a)(iii), above-grade development other than that listed in DCC 18.113.060(G)(2)(a)(i) and (ii) shall be set back 250 feet in circumstances where state highways coincide with exterior property lines. C. The setbacks of DCC 18.113.060 shall not apply to entry roadways and signs. H. Floodplain requirements. The floodplain zone (FP) requirements of DCC 18.96 shall apply to all developed portions of a destination resort in an FP Zone in addition to any applicable criteria of DCC 18.113. Except for floodplain areas which have been granted an exception to LCDC goals 3 and 4, floodplain zones shall not be considered part of a destination resort when determining compliance with the following standards: 1. One hundred sixty acre minimum site; 2. Density of development; 3. Open space requirements. A conservation easement as described in DCC Title 18 shall be conveyed to the County for all areas within a floodplain which are part of a destination resort. 1. The Landscape Management Combining Zone (LM) requirements of DCC 18.84 shall apply to destination resorts where applicable. J. Excavation, grading and fill and removal within the bed and banks of a stream or river or in a wetland shall be a separate conditional use subject to all pertinent requirements of DCC Title 18. K. Time-share units not included in the overnight lodging calculations shall be subject to approval under the conditional use criteria set forth in DCC 18.128. Time- share units identified as part of the destination resort's overnight lodging units shall not be subject to the time- share conditional use criteria of DCC 18.128. L. The overnight lodging criteria shall be met, including the 150-unit minimum and the 2 to 1 ratio set forth in DCC 18.113.060(D)(2). Failure of the approved destination resort to comply with the requirements in DCC 18.113.060(L)(2) through (6) will result in the County declining to accept or process any further land use actions associated with any part of the resort and the County shall not issue any permits associated with any lots or site plans on any part of the resort until proof is provided to the County of compliance with those conditions. 2. Each resort shall compile, and maintain, in perpetuity, a registry of all overnight lodging units. a. The list shall identify each individually-owned unit that is counted as overnight lodging. b. At all times, at least one entity shall be responsible for maintaining the registry and fulfilling the reporting requirements of DCC 18.113.060(L)(2) through (6). c. Initially, the resort management shall be responsible for compiling and maintaining the registry. d. As a resort develops, the developer shall transfer responsibility for maintaining the registry to the homeowner association(s). The terms and timing of this transfer shall be specified in the Conditions, Covenants & Restrictions (CC&Rs). e. Resort management shall notify the County prior to assigning the registry to a homeowner association. f. Each resort shall maintain records documenting its rental program related to overnight lodging units at a convenient location in Deschutes County, with those records accessible to the County upon 72 hour notice from the County. g. As used in this section, "resort management" includes, but is not limited to, the applicant and the applicant's heirs, successors in interest, assignees other than a home owners association. 3. An annual report shall be submitted to the Planning Division by the resort management or home owners association(s) each February 1, documenting all of the following as of December 31 of the previous year: a. The minimum of 150 permanent units of overnight lodging have been constructed or that the resort is not yet required to have constructed the 150 units; b. The number of individually-owned residential platted lots and the number of overnight-lodging units; c. The ratio between the individually-owned residential platted lots and the overnight lodging units; d. The following information on each individually- owned residential unit counted as overnight lodging. i. Who the owner or owners have been over the last year; ii. How many nights out of the year the unit was available for rent; iii. How many nights out of the year the unit was rented out as an overnight lodging facility under DCC 18.113; iv. Documentation showing that these units were available for rental as required. e. This information shall be public record subject to ORS 192.502(17). 4. To facilitate rental to the general public of the overnight lodging units, each resort shall set up and maintain in perpetuity a telephone reservation system.. 5. Any outside property managers renting required overnight lodging units shall be required to cooperate with the provisions of this code and to annually provide rental information on any required overnight lodging units they represent to the central office as described in DCC 18.113.060(L)(2) and (3). 6. Before approval of each final plat, all the following shall be provided: a. Documentation demonstrating compliance with the 2 to 1 ratio as defined in DCC 18.113.060(D)(2); b. Documentation on all individually-owned residential units counted as overnight lodging, including all of the following: i. Designation on the plat of any individually- owned units that are going to be counted as overnight lodging; ii. Deed restrictions requiring the individually- owned residential units designated as overnight lodging units to be available for rental at least 38 weeks each year through a central reservation and check-in service operated by the resort or by a real estate property manager, as defined in ORS 696.010; iii. An irrevocable provision in the resort Conditions, Covenants and Restrictions ("CC&Rs) requiring the individually-owned residential units designated as overnight lodging units to be available for rental at least 38 weeks each year through a central reservation and check-in service operated by the resort or by a real estate property manager, as defined in ORS 696.010; iv. A provision in the resort CC&R's that all property owners within the resort recognize that failure to meet the conditions in DCC 18.113.060(L)(6)(b)(iii) is a violation of Deschutes County Code and subject to code enforcement proceedings by the County; v. Inclusion of language in any rental contract between the owner of an individually-owned residential unit designated as an overnight lodging unit and any central reservation and check-in service or real estate property manager requiring that such unit be available for rental at least 38 weeks each year through a central reservation and check-in service operated by the resort or by a real estate property manager, as defined in ORS 696.010, and that failure to meet the conditions in DCC 18.113.060(L)(6)(b)(v) is a violation of Deschutes County Code and subject to code enforcement proceedings by the County APPROVAL CRITERIA DESTINATION RESORTS (DCC 18.113.070) In order to approve a destination resort, the Planning Director or Hearings Body shall find from substantial evidence in the record that: A. The subject proposal is a destination resort as defined in DCC 18.040.030. B. All standards established by DCC 18.113.060 are or will be met. C. The economic analysis demonstrates that: 1. The necessary financial resources are available for the applicant to undertake the development consistent with the minimum investment requirements established by DCC 18.113. 2. Appropriate assurance has been submitted by lending institutions or other financial entities that the developer has or can reasonably obtain adequate financial support for the proposal once approved. 3. The destination resort will provide a substantial financial contribution which positively benefits the local economy throughout the life of the entire project, considering changes in employment, demands for new or increased levels of public service, housing for employees and the effects of loss of resource land. Economic Analysis demonstrates financial resources Documentation of financial support Demonstration of substantial` financial contribution to local economy 4. The natural amenities of the site considered together with the identified developed recreation facilities to be Natural amenities provided with the resort, will constitute a primary constitute a primary attraction to visitors, based on the economic feasibility attraction analysis. D. Any negative impact on fish and wildlife resources will be No net loss or net completely mitigated so that there is no net loss or net degradation of fish and degradation of the resource. wildlife resources E. Important natural features, including but not limited to significant wetlands, riparian habitat, and landscape management corridors will be maintained. Riparian Important natural vegetation within 100 feet of streams, rivers and resources maintained significant wetlands will be maintained. Alterations to important natural features, including placement of structures, is allowed so long as the overall values of the feature are maintained. F. The development will not force a significant change in accepted farm or forest practices or significantly increase the cost of accepted farm or forest practices on surrounding lands devoted to farm or forest use. G. Destination resort developments that significantly affect a transportation facility shall assure that the development is consistent with the identified function, capacity and level of service of the facility. This shall be accomplished by either: No significant change in farm / forest practices Assure development is consistent with transportation facility function, capacity and LOS. 1. Limiting the development to be consistent with the planned function, capacity and level of service of the transportation facility; 2. Providing transportation facilities adequate to support the proposed development consistent with Oregon Administrative Rules chapter 660, Division 12; or 3. Altering land use densities, design requirements or using other methods to reduce demand for automobile travel and to meet travel needs through other modes. A destination resort significantly affects a transportation facility if it would result in levels of travel or access that are inconsistent with the functional classification of a facility or would reduce the level of service of the facility below the minimum acceptable level identified in the relevant transportation system plan. a. Where the option of providing transportation facilities is chosen, the applicant shall be required to improve impacted roads to the full standards of the affected authority as a condition of approval. Timing of such improvements shall be based upon the timing of the impacts created by the development as determined by the traffic study or the recommendations of the affected road authority. b. Access within the project shall be adequate to serve the project in a safe and efficient manner for each phase of the project. H. The development will not create the potential for natural hazards identified in the County Comprehensive Plan. No Natural Hazards structure will be located on slopes exceeding 25 percent. A wildfire management plan will be implemented to ensure that wildfire hazards are minimized to the greatest extent practical and allow for safe evacuation. With the exception of the slope restriction of DCC 18.113.070, which shall apply to destination resorts in forest zones, wildfire management of destination resorts in forest zones shall be subject to the requirements of DCC 18.40.070, where applicable, as to each individual structure and dwelling. 1. Adequate public safety protection will be available Adequate public safety through existing fire districts or will be provided onsite protection - fire districts or onsite according to the specification of the state fire marshal. If the resort is located outside of an existing fire district the developer will provide for staffed structural fire protection services. Adequate public facilities to provide for necessary safety services such as police and fire will be provided on the site to serve the proposed development. J. Streams and drainage. Unless otherwise agreed to in writing by the adjoining property owner(s), existing natural drainages on the site will not be changed in any manner which interferes with drainage patterns on adjoining property. All surface water drainage changes created by the development will be contained on site in a manner which meets all standards of the Oregon State Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ). The erosion control plan for the subject development will meet all standards of ORS 468. K. Adequate water will be available for all proposed uses at the destination resort, based upon the water study and a proposed water conservation plan. Water use will not reduce the availability of water in the water impact areas identified in the water study considering existing uses and potential development previously approved in the affected area. Water sources shall not include any perched water table. Water shall only be taken from the regional aquifer. Where a perched water table is pierced to access the regional aquifer, the well must be sealed off from the perched water table. L. The wastewater disposal plan includes beneficial use to the maximum extent practicable. Approval of the CMP shall be conditioned on applicant's making application to DEQ for a Water Pollution Control Facility (WPCF) permit consistent with such an approved wastewater disposal plan. Approval shall also be conditioned upon applicant's compliance with applicable Oregon Administrative Rules regarding beneficial use of waste water, as determined by DEQ. Applicant shall receive approval of a WPCF permit consistent with this provision prior to applying for approval for its Final Master Plan under DCC 18.113. M. The resort will mitigate any demands it creates on publicly-owned recreational facilities on public lands in the surrounding area. Adequate water available for all proposed uses based on water study and water conservation plan Wastewater disposal plan - Water Pollution Control Facility Permit Mitigate demands on publicly-owned recreation facilities on public lands N. Site improvements will be located and designed to avoid or minimize adverse effects of the resort on the surrounding land uses. Measures to accomplish this may include establishment and maintenance of buffers between the resort and adjacent land uses, including natural vegetation and appropriate fences, berms, landscaped areas and similar types of buffers; and setback of structures and other developments from adjacent land uses. 0. The resort will be served by an on-site sewage system approved by DEQ and a water system approved by the Oregon State Health Division except where connection to an existing public sewer or water system is allowed by the County Comprehensive Plan, such service will be provided to the resort. P. The destination resort will not alter the character of the surrounding area in a manner that substantially limits, impairs or prevents permitted or conditional uses of surrounding properties. Q. Commercial, cultural, entertainment or accessory uses provided as part of the destination resort will be contained within the development and will not be oriented to public highways adjacent to the property. Commercial, cultural and entertainment uses allowed within the destination resort will be incidental to the resort itself. As such, these ancillary uses will be permitted only at a scale suited to serve visitors to the resort. The commercial uses permitted in the destination resort will be limited in type, location, number, dimensions and scale (both individually and cumulatively) to that necessary to serve the needs of resort visitors. A commercial use is necessary to serve the needs of visitors if: 1. Its primary purpose is to provide goods or services that are typically provided to overnight or other short- term visitors to the resort, or the use is necessary for operation, maintenance or promotion of the destination resort; and 2. The use is oriented to the resort and is located away from or screened from highways or other major through roadways. Site improvements designed to avoid or minimize adverse effects of surrounding land uses Served by on-site sewage system R. A plan exists to ensure a transfer of common areas, facilities such as sewer, water, streets and responsibility for police and fire protection to owners' associations or similar groups if contemplated. If such transfer is not contemplated, the owner or responsible party shall be clearly designated. Adequate open space, facility maintenance and police and fire protection shall be ensured in perpetuity in a manner acceptable to the County. S. Temporary structures will not be allowed unless approved as part of the CMP. Temporary structures will not be allowed for more than 18 months and will be subject to all use and site plan standards of DCC Title 18. T. The open space management plan is sufficient to protect in perpetuity identified open space values. Adequate open space, facility, maintenance and police and fire protection ensured in perpetuity DESCHUTES COUNTY LEGAL COUNSEL MARK E. PILLIOD Legal Counsel W388-6625 TO: Board of County Commissioners Date: July 23, 2009 RE: Amendment to the Oregon Government Ethics Laws Out of the 2009 Legislative Assembly File No. 3/1-001 The following is a summary of the more significant changes adopted by the 2009 Oregon Legislature to the Oregon Government Ethics Statutes, ORS 244. This summary is based upon Senate Bill 30 which was adopted by the Legislature on April 14th, and signed by the Governor on April 15'h. While the bill contained an emergency clause and thus became effective upon adoption, the provisions of Sections 24 through 29 delayed the effective date of most provisions to January, 2010. The net effect is that certain reporting obligations under current law will no longer apply. Generally the format of this memo will track the provisions of the Bill from beginning to end. The B-Engrossed (Adopted) version is attached to this memo. A separate piece of legislation, House Bill 2518, was also adopted and will be discussed separately. Section 1 amends ORS 244.010, which expands on the purpose of the Oregon Government Ethics Statute generally. The Legislature has added six new purpose statements, which focus on the obligation of public officials to adhere to the highest ethical standards and to avoid private promises that are binding upon the duties of public officials. Section 2 amends the definition section of ORS 244.020 to include a definition for the term "Candidate," which means a person who is a declared candidate or one for whom a nominating petition or certificate of nomination to public office has been filed. The description of what the term "Gift" does not include has been amended to provide an additional catch-all provision, which reads: Anything of economic value offered•to or solicited or received by a public official or candidate, or a relative or member of the household of the public official or candidate: Page 1 of 4 (i) As part of the usual and customary practice of the person's private business, or the person's employment or position as a volunteer with a private business, corporation, partnership, proprietorship, firm, enterprise, franchise, association, organization, not-for-profit corporation or other legal entity operated for economic value; and (ii) That bears no relationship to the public official's or candidate's holding of, or candidacy for, the official position or public office. The definition of "legislative or administrative interest" has been amended by deleting the general references to bills, resolutions, regulations, proposals or other matters, and replacing them with the following: (a) Any matter subject to the decision or vote of the public official acting in the public official's capacity as a public official; or (b) Any matter that would be subject to the decision or vote of the candidate who, if elected, would be acting in the capacity of a public official. This change makes clear that a legislative or administrative interest derives from the public official's taking action by way of a particular decision or vote in their official capacity that would result or could affect their economic interests. Corresponding amendments to ORS 244.025 make it clear that legislative or administrative interests are derived not from occupying an official position, but more narrowly, from the opportunity to influence some result on account of a vote or decision. The definition of "relative" has been expanded to include the children of a candidate or the candidate's spouse or domestic partner, siblings, spouses of siblings, or parents of the candidate or of the candidate's spouse or domestic partner. Finally, the definition of relative has been expanded to include "any individual from whom the candidate receives benefits arising from that individual's employment." Under Section 3 ORS 244.025 continues the $50 gift limitation. However, since the definition of "legislative or administrative interest" has been amended, subsection (4) has been deleted. That subsection previously had included a broadly stated prohibition on the receipt of gifts of any value by a public official or a candidate for public office from any single source that could be known to have a legislative or administrative interest in the aoencv. Section 5 amends ORS 244.050 to expand the list of all officials at the state level who are now required to file a statement of economic interest with the Oregon Government Ethics Commission. Section 6 amends ORS 244.060. No longer will statements of economic interest be required to include the name of each member of the household or relative of the person who is 18 years of age or older. However, this section continues to require reports concerning public officials, members of public officials' households, their businesses and principal sources of income that produce 10% or more of the total annual household income. In addition, the report must include: Page 2 of 4 (5) all expenses with an aggregate value exceeding $50 received by the public official when participating in a convention, mission, trip or other meeting, including the name and address of the organization, the nature of the event and the date and amount of the expense. (6) all expenses with an aggregate value exceeding $50 received by the public official when participating in a mission, negotiation or economic development activities, including the name and address of the person paying the expenses, the nature of the event and the date and amount of the expenditure. Another significant change in reporting requirements concerns expenses, honoraria and income reporting, which under 244.100 and 244.105 were required to be reported quarterly. These reports now will be made part of the annual statement of economic interest. In brief this information includes: (7) all honoraria and other items allowed under ORS 244.042 with a value exceeding $15 received by the public official, candidate or member of the household of the public official or candidate during the preceding calendar year, the provider of each honorarium or item and the date and time of the event for which each honorarium was received. (8) the name, principal address and brief description of each source of income exceeding an aggregate amount of $1,000, whether taxable or not taxable, received by the public official or candidate or member of the household of the public official or candidate, if the source of that income is derived from an individual or business that has a legislative or administrative interest or that has been doing business, does business or could reasonably be expected to do business with the governmental agency of which the public official holds, or the candidate if elected would hold, an official position. Section 7 amends ORS 244.070 to modify the current income reporting requirements for public officials or candidates, using the narrower definition of legislative or administrative interest. Officials must still report sources of income, loans, beneficial interests and fees for services exceeding $1,000, provided such sources have a legislative or economic interest. Section 8. The amendments to ORS 244.100 continue to require the reporting to the official or candidate by organizations and/or persons of the payment of expenses exceeding $50 and honoraria exceeding $15. However, as mentioned earlier, this information will need to be reported annually, not quarterly. Section 12 amends ORS 244.282 in the areas of penalties and the defense of reliance on staff advisory opinions. Under these amendments, the ethics commission may only issue letters of reprimand, explanation or education for any good faith action a person takes in reliance on a staff advisory opinion. However, if it is determined that the person omitted or misstated material facts in making the request, the commission may impose penalties. The remaining sections are somewhat technical rules concerning implementation. Of particular interest is Section 27 which provides an exception to the public records disclosure of the names of relatives and members of the household of public officials who reported such information between January 1, 2008 and January 1, 2010. The Ethics Commission is also prohibited from sanctioning any public official who did not supply the names of relatives or Page 3 of 4 members of the public official's household prior to January 1, 2010. This is the only provision of the bill that takes effect immediately; all other provisions become effective January 1, 2010. The Oregon Legislature also adopted HB 2518. HB 2518 made slight adjustments in the definition of gift. Also, the definition of "Relative" has been changed to delete references to the domestic partner of the public official or candidate. This bill clarifies the prohibition on a public official leaving office and within two years obtaining a direct financial interest in a contract that was authorized by the public official while in office. This bill also repeals certain possible sanctions from the Oregon Ethics Commission, including directing the public body to withhold compensation and the elections clerk to remove a candidate's name from the election ballot. This summary is intended for general advice on the new law. Since County Legal Counsel represents only the County's interests and not of its particular public officials, if a more specific question pertaining to a particular official is presented, then it should be directed to the Oregon Ethics Commission or the Director of the Ethics Commission. cc: Dave Kanner Page 4 of 4 75th OREGON LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY--2009 Regular Session Enrolled Senate Bill 30 Printed pursuant to Senate Interim Rule 213.28 by order of the President of the Senate in conform- ance with presession filing rules, indicating neither advocacy nor opposition on the part of the President (at the request of Senate Interim Committee on Rules and Executive Appointments) CHAPTER AN ACT Relating to government ethics; creating new provisions; amending ORS 171.745, 171.750, 244.010, 244.020, 244.025, 244.040, 244.042, 244.050, 244.060, 244.070, 244.100, 244.105, 244.110, 244.255, 244.282, 244.290, 244.320, 244.350, 244.380, 244.390, 293.708 and 441.540 and sections 8b and 9e, chapter 877, Oregon Laws 2007; and declaring an emergency. Be It Enacted by the People of the State of Oregon: SECTION 1. ORS 244.010 is amended to read: 244.010. (1) The Legislative Assembly declares that service as a public official is a public trust and that, as one safeguard for that trust, the people require all public officials to comply with the applicable provisions of this chapter. (2) The Legislative Assembly recognizes and values the work of all public officials, whether elected or appointed. (3) The Legislative Assembly recognizes that many public officials are volunteers and serve without compensation. [01 (4) The Legislative Assembly recognizes that it is the policy of the state to have serving on many state and local boards and commissions state and local officials who may have potentially conflicting public responsibilities by virtue of their positions as public officials and also as members of the boards and commissions, and declares it to be the policy of the state that the holding of such offices does not constitute the holding of incompatible offices unless expressly stated in the enabling legislation. (5) The Legislative Assembly recognizes that public officials should put loyalty to the highest ethical standards above loyalty to government, persons, political party or private enterprise. (6) The Legislative Assembly recognizes that public officials should not make private promises that are binding upon the duties of a public official, because a public official has no private word that can be binding on public duty. (7) The Legislative Assembly recognizes that public officials should expose corruption wherever discovered. (8) The Legislative Assembly recognizes that public officials should uphold the principles described in this section, ever conscious of the public's trust. SECTION 2. ORS 244.020 is amended to read: 244.020. As used in this chapter, unless the context requires otherwise: Enrolled Senate Bill 30 (SB 30-B) Page 1 (1) "Actual conflict of interest" means any action or any decision or recommendation by a per- son acting in a capacity as a public official, the effect of which would be to the private pecuniary benefit or detriment of the person or the person's relative or any business with which the person or a relative of the person is associated unless 'the pecuniary benefit or detriment arises out of circumstances described in subsection [(11)] (12) of this section. (2) "Business" means any corporation, partnership, proprietorship, firm, enterprise, franchise, association, organization, self-employed individual and any other legal entity operated for economic gain but excluding any income-producing not-for-profit corporation that is tax exempt under section 501(c) of the Internal Revenue Code with which a public official or a relative of the public official is associated only as a member or board director or in a nonremunerative capacity. (3) "Business with which the person is associated" means: (a) Any private business or closely held corporation of which the person or the person's relative is a director, officer, owner or employee, or agent or any private business or closely held corpo- ration in which the person or the person's relative owns or has owned stock, another form of equity interest, stock options or debt instruments worth $1,000 or more at any point in the preceding cal- endar year; (b) Any publicly held corporation in which the person or the persons relative owns or has owned $100,000 or more in stock or another form of equity interest, stock options or debt instru- ments at any point in the preceding calendar year; (c) Any publicly held corporation of which the person or the persons relative is a director or officer; or (d) For public officials required to file a statement of economic interest under ORS 244.050, any business listed as a source of income as required under ORS 244.060 (3). (4) "Candidate" means an individual for whom a declaration of candidacy, nominating petition or certificate of nomination to public office has been filed or whose name is printed on a ballot or is expected to be or has been presented, with the individual's consent, for nomination or election to public office. [(4)] (5) "Development commission" means any entity [which] that has the authority to purchase, develop, improve or lease land or the authority to operate or direct the use of land. This authority must be more than ministerial. [(5)(a)] (6)(a) "Gift" means something of economic value given to a public official, a candidate or a relative or member of the household of the public official or candidate: (A) Without valuable consideration of equivalent value, including the full or partial forgiveness of indebtedness, which is not extended to others who are not public officials or candidates or the relatives or members of the household of public officials or candidates on the same terms and conditions; or (B) For valuable consideration less than that required from others who are not public officials or candidates. (b) "Gift" does not mean: (A) Contributions as defined in ORS 260.005. (B) Gifts from relatives or members of the household of the public official or candidate. (C) An unsolicited token or award of appreciation in the form of a plaque, trophy, desk item, wall memento or similar item, with a resale value reasonably expected to be less than $25. (D) Informational material, publications or subscriptions related to the recipient's performance of official duties. (E) Admission provided to or the cost of food or beverage consumed by a public official, or a member of the household or staff of the public official when accompanying the public official, at a reception, meal or meeting held by an organization [before whom the public official appears to speak or to answer questions as part of a scheduled program] when the public official represents state government as defined in ORS 174.111, a local government as defined in ORS 174.116 or a special government body as defined in ORS 174.117. Enrolled Senate Bill 30 (SB 30-B) Page 2 (F) Reasonable expenses paid by any unit of the federal government, a state or local govern- ment, a Native American tribe that is recognized by federal law or formally acknowledged by a state, a membership organization to which a public body as defined in ORS 174.109 pays membership dues or a not-for-profit corporation that is tax exempt under section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Re- venue Code [and that receives less than five percent of its funding from for-profit organizations or entities), for attendance at a convention, fact-finding mission or trip, or other meeting if the public official is scheduled to deliver a speech, make a presentation, participate on a panel or represent state government as defined in ORS 174.111, a local government as defined in ORS 174.116 or a special government body as defined in ORS 174.117. (G) Contributions made to a legal expense trust fund established under ORS 244.209 for the benefit of the public official. (H) Reasonable food, travel or lodging expenses provided to a public official, a relative of the public official accompanying the public official, a member of the household of the public official accompanying the public official or a staff member of the public official accompanying the public official, when the public official is representing state government as defined in ORS 174.111, a local government as defined in ORS 174.116 or a special government body as defined in ORS 174.117: (i) On an officially sanctioned trade-promotion or fact-finding mission; or (ii) In officially designated negotiations, or economic development activities, where receipt of the expenses is approved in advance. (I) Food or beverage consumed by a public official acting in an official capacity: (i) In association with the review, approval, execution of documents or closing of a borrowing, investment or other financial transaction, including any business agreement between state govern- ment as defined in ORS 174.111, a local government as defined in ORS 174.116 or a special govern- ment body as defined in ORS 174.117 and a private entity or public body as defined in ORS 174.109; (ii) While engaged in due diligence research or presentations by the office of the State Treasurer related to an existing or proposed investment or borrowing; or (iii) While engaged in a meeting of an advisory, governance or policy-making body of a corpo- ration, partnership or other entity in which the office of the State Treasurer has invested moneys. (J) Waiver or discount of registration expenses or materials provided to a public official or candidate at a continuing education event that the public official or candidate may attend to sat- isfy a professional licensing requirement. (K) Expenses provided by one public official to another public official for travel inside this state to or from an event that bears a relationship to the receiving public official's office and at which the official participates in an official capacity. (L) Food or beverage consumed by a public official or candidate at a reception where the food or beverage is provided as an incidental part of the reception and no cost is placed on the food or beverage. (M) Entertainment provided to a public official or candidate or a relative or member of the household of the public official or candidate that is incidental to the main purpose of another event. (N) Entertainment provided to a public official or a relative or member of the household of the public official where the public official is acting in an official capacity while representing state government as defined in ORS 174.111, a local government as defined in ORS 174.116 or a special government body as defined in ORS 174.117 for a ceremonial purpose. (O) Anything of economic value offered to or solicited or received by a public official or candidate, or a relative or member of the household of the public official or candidate: (i) As part of the usual and customary practice of the person's private business, or the person's employment or position as a volunteer with a private business, corporation, part- nership, proprietorship, firm, enterprise, franchise, association, organization, not-for-profit corporation or other legal entity operated for economic value; and (ii) That bears no relationship to the public official's or candidate's holding of, or candi- dacy for, the official position or public office. Enrolled Senate Bill 30 (SB 30-B) Page 3 [(6)] (7) "Honorarium" means a payment or something of economic value given to a public offi- cial in exchange for services upon which custom or propriety prevents the setting of a price. Ser- vices include, but are not limited to, speeches or other services rendered in connection with an event. [(7)] (S) "Income" means income of any nature derived from any source, including, but not lim- ited to, any salary, wage, advance, payment, dividend, interest, rent, honorarium, return of capital, forgiveness of indebtedness, or anything of economic value. [(8)] (9) "Legislative or administrative interest" means an economic interest, distinct from that of the general public, in [one or more bills, resolutions, regulations, proposals or other matters subject to the action or vote of a person acting in the capacity of a public official.]: (a) Any matter subject to the decision or vote of the public official acting in the public official's capacity as a public official; or (b) Any matter that would be subject to the decision or vote of the candidate who, if elected, would be acting in the capacity of a public official. [(9)] (10) "Member of the household" means any person who resides with the public official or candidate. [(10)] (11) "Planning commission" means a county planning commission created under ORS chapter 215 or a city planning commission created under ORS chapter 227. [(11)] (12) "Potential conflict of interest" means any action or any decision or recommendation by a person acting in a capacity as a public official, the effect of which could be to the private pecuniary benefit or detriment of the person or the person's relative, or a business with which the person or the person's relative is associated, unless the pecuniary benefit or detriment arises out of the following: (a) An interest or membership in a particular business, industry, occupation or other class re- quired by law as a prerequisite to the holding by the person of the office or position. (b) Any action in the persons official capacity which would affect to the same degree a class consisting of all inhabitants of the state, or a smaller class consisting of an industry, occupation or other group including one of which or in which the person, or the person's relative or business with which the person or the person's relative is associated, is a member or is engaged. (c) Membership in or membership on the board of directors of a nonprofit corporation that is tax-exempt under section 501(c) of the Internal Revenue Code. [(12)] (13) "Public office" has the meaning given that term in ORS 260.005. [(13)] (14) "Public official" means any person who, when an alleged violation of this chapter occurs, is serving the State of Oregon or any of its political subdivisions or any other public body as defined in ORS 174.109 as an elected official, appointed official, employee[,] or agent [or otherwise], irrespective of whether the person is compensated for the services. [(14)] (16) "Relative" means: (a) The spouse of the public official or candidate; (b) The domestic partner of the public official or candidate; (c) Any children of the public official or of the public official's spouse or domestic partner; (d) Any children of the candidate or of the candidate's spouse or domestic partner; [(d)] (e) Siblings, spouses of siblings or parents of the public official or of the public official's spouse or domestic partner; (f) Siblings, spouses of siblings or parents of the candidate or of the candidate's spouse or domestic partner; [(e)] (g) Any individual for whom the public official or candidate has a legal support obligation; [or] [)9] (h) Any individual for whom the public official provides benefits arising from the public official's public employment or from whom the public official receives benefits arising from that in- dividual's employment[.]; or (i) Any individual from whom the candidate receives benefits arising from that individ- ual's employment. Enrolled Senate Bill 30 (SB 30-B) Page 4 [(15)] (16) "Statement of economic interest" means a statement as described by ORS 244.060[,] or 244.070 [or 244.100]. [(16)] (17) "Zoning commission" means an entity to which is delegated at least some of the dis- cretionary authority of a planning commission or governing body relating to zoning and land use matters. SECTION 3. ORS 244.025 is amended to read: 244.025. (1) During a calendar year, a public official, a candidate [for public office] or a relative or member of the household of the public official or candidate may not solicit or receive, directly or indirectly, any gift or gifts with an aggregate value in excess of $50 from any single source that could reasonably be known to have a legislative or administrative interest [in any governmental agency in which the public official holds, or the candidate if elected would hold, any official position or over which the public official exercises, or the candidate if elected would exercise, any authority]. (2) During a calendar year, a person who has a legislative or administrative interest [in any governmental agency in which a public official holds any official position or over which the public of- ficial exercises any authority] may not offer to the public official or a relative or member of the household of the public official any gift or gifts with an aggregate value in excess of $50. (3) During a calendar year, a person who has a legislative or administrative interest [in any governmental agency in which a candidate for public office if elected would hold any official position or over which the candidate if elected would exercise any authority] may not offer to the candidate or a relative or member of the household of the candidate any gift or gifts with an aggregate value in excess of $50. [(4) Notwithstanding subsection (1) of this section:] [(a) A public official, a candidate for public office or a relative or member of the household of the public official or candidate may not solicit or receive, directly or indirectly, any gift of payment of ex- penses for entertainment from any single source that could reasonably be known to have a legislative or administrative interest in any governmental agency in which the public official holds, or the candi- date if elected would hold, any official position or over which the public official exercises, or the can- didate if elected would exercise, any authority.] [(b) A person who has a legislative or administrative interest in any governmental agency in which a public official holds any official position or over which the public official exercises any authority may not offer to the public official or a relative or member of the household of the public official any gift of payment of expenses for entertainment.] [(c) A person who has a legislative or administrative interest in any governmental agency in which a candidate for public office if elected would hold any official position or over which the candidate if elected would exercise any authority may not offer to the candidate or a relative or member of the household of the candidate any gift of payment of expenses for entertainment.] [(5)] (4) This section does not apply to public officials subject to the Oregon Code of Judicial Conduct. SECTION 4. ORS 244.040 is amended to read: 244.040. (1) Except as provided in subsection (2) of this section, a public official may not use or attempt to use official position or office to obtain financial gain or avoidance of financial detriment for the public official, a relative or member of the household of the public official, or any business with which the public official or a relative or member of the household of the public official is as- sociated, if the financial gain or avoidance of financial detriment would not otherwise be available but for the public official's holding of the official position or office. (2) Subsection (1) of this section does not apply to: (a) Any part of an official compensation package as determined by the public body that the public official serves. (b) The receipt by a public official or a relative or member of the household of the public official of an honorarium or any other item allowed under ORS 244.042. (c) Reimbursement of expenses. (d) An unsolicited award for professional achievement. Enrolled Senate Bill 30 (SB 30-B) Page 5 (e) Gifts that do not exceed the limits specified in ORS 244.025 received by a public official or a relative or member of the household of the public official from a source that could reasonably be known to have a legislative or administrative interest [in a governmental agency in which the official holds any official position or over which the official exercises any authority]. (f) Gifts received by a public official or a relative or member of the household of the public of- ficial from a source that could not reasonably be known to have a legislative or administrative in- terest [in a governmental agency in which the official holds any official position or over which the official exercises any authority]. (g) The receipt by a public official or a relative or member of the household of the public official of any item, regardless of value, that is expressly excluded from the definition of "gift" in ORS 244.020. (h) Contributions made to a legal expense trust fund established under ORS 244.209 for the benefit of the public official. (3) A public official may not solicit or receive, either directly or indirectly, and a person may not offer or give to any public official any pledge or promise of future employment, based on any understanding that the vote, official action or judgment of the public official would be influenced by the pledge or promise. (4) A public official may not attempt to further or further the personal gain of the public official through the use of confidential information gained in the course of or by reason of holding position as a public official or activities of the public official. (5) A person who has ceased to be a public official may not attempt to further or further the personal gain of any person through the use of confidential information gained in the course of or by reason of holding position as a public official or the activities of the person as a public official. (6) A person may not attempt to represent or represent a client for a fee before the governing body of a public body of which the person is a member. This subsection does not apply to the per- son's employer, business partner or other associate. (7) The provisions of this section apply regardless of whether actual conflicts of interest or po- tential conflicts of interest are announced or disclosed under ORS 244.120. SECTION 5. ORS 244.050 is amended to read: 244.050. (1) On or before April 15 of each year the following persons shall file with the Oregon Government Ethics Commission a verified statement of economic interest as required under this chapter: (a) The Governor, Secretary of State, State Treasurer, Attorney General, Commissioner of the Bureau of Labor and Industries, Superintendent of Public Instruction, district attorneys and mem- bers of the Legislative Assembly. (b) Any judicial officer, including justices of the peace and municipal judges, except any pro tem judicial officer who does not otherwise serve as a judicial officer. (c) Any candidate for a public office designated in paragraph (a) or (b) of this subsection. (d) The Deputy Attorney General. (e) The Legislative Administrator, the Legislative Counsel, the Legislative Fiscal Officer, the Secretary of the Senate and the Chief Clerk of the House of Representatives. (fl The Chancellor and Vice Chancellors of the Oregon University System and the president and vice presidents, or their administrative equivalents, in each institution under the jurisdiction of the State Board of Higher Education. (g) The following state officers: (A) Adjutant General. (B) Director of Agriculture. (C) Manager of State Accident Insurance Fund Corporation. (D) Water Resources Director. (E) Director of Department of Environmental Quality. (F) Director of Oregon Department of Administrative Services. (G) State Fish and Wildlife Director. Enrolled Senate Bill 30 (SB 30-B) Page 6 (H) State Forester. (I) State Geologist. (J) Director of Human Services. (K) Director of the Department of Consumer and Business Services. (L) Director of the Department of State Lands. (M) State Librarian. (N) Administrator of Oregon Liquor Control Commission. (O) Superintendent of State Police. (P) Director of the Public Employees Retirement System. (Q) Director of Department of Revenue. (R) Director of Transportation. (S) Public Utility Commissioner. (T) Director of Veterans' Affairs. (U) Executive Director of Oregon Government Ethics Commission. (V) Director of the State Department of Energy. (W) Director and each assistant director of the Oregon State Lottery. (X) Director of the Department of Corrections. (Y) Director of the Oregon Department of Aviation. (Z) Executive director of the Oregon Criminal Justice Commission. (AA) Director of the Economic and Community Development Department. (BB) Director of the Office of Emergency Management. (CC) Director of the Employment Department. (DD) Chief of staff for the Governor. (EE) Administrator of the Office for Oregon Health Policy and Research. (FF) Director of the Housing and Community Services Department. (GG) State Court Administrator. (HH) Director of the Department of Land Conservation and Development. (II) Board chairperson of the Land Use Board of Appeals. (JJ) State Marine Director. (KK) Executive director of the Oregon Racing Commission. (LL) State Parks and Recreation Director. (MM) Public defense services executive director. (NN) Chairperson of the Public Employees' Benefit Board. (00) Director of the Department of Public Safety Standards and Training. (PP) Chairperson of the Oregon Student Assistance Commission. (QQ) Executive director of the Oregon Watershed Enhancement Board. (RR) Director of the Oregon Youth Authority. (h) Any assistant in the Governor's office other than personal secretaries and clerical personnel. (i) Every elected city or county official. 0) Every member of a city or county planning, zoning or development commission. (k) The chief executive officer of a city or county who performs the duties of manager or prin- cipal administrator of the city or county. (L) Members of local government boundary commissions formed under ORS 199.410 to 199.519. (m) Every member of a governing body of a metropolitan service district and the executive of- ficer thereof. (n) Each member of the board of directors of the State Accident Insurance Fund Corporation. (o) The chief administrative officer and the financial officer of each common and union high school district, education service district and community college district. (p) Every member of the following state boards and commissions: (A) Board of Geologic and Mineral Industries. (B) Oregon Economic and Community Development Commission. (C) State Board of Education. Enrolled Senate Bill 30 (SB 30-B) Page 7 (D) Environmental Quality Commission. (E) Fish and Wildlife Commission of the State of Oregon. (F) State Board of Forestry. (G) Oregon Government Ethics Commission. (H) Oregon Health Policy Commission. (I) State Board of Higher Education. (J) Oregon Investment Council. (K) Land Conservation and Development Commission. (L) Oregon Liquor Control Commission. (M) Oregon Short Term Fund Board. (N) State Marine Board. (O) Mass transit district boards. (P) Energy Facility Siting Council. (Q) Board of Commissioners of the Port of Portland. (R) Employment Relations Board. (S) Public Employees Retirement Board. (T) Oregon Racing Commission. (U) Oregon Transportation Commission. (V) Wage and Hour Commission. (W) Water Resources Commission. (X) Workers' Compensation Board. (Y) Oregon Facilities Authority. (Z) Oregon State Lottery Commission. (AA) Pacific Northwest Electric Power and Conservation Planning Council. (BB) Columbia River Gorge Commission. (CC) Oregon Health and Science University Board of Directors. (q) The following officers of the State Treasurer: (A) Chief Deputy State Treasurer. (B) Chief of staff for the office of the State Treasurer. (C) Director of the Investment Division. (r) Every member of the board of commissioners of a port governed by ORS 777.005 to 777.725 or 777.915 to 777.953. (s) Every member of the board of directors of an authority created under ORS 441.525 to 441.595. (2) By April 15 next after the date an appointment takes effect, every appointed public official on a board or commission listed in subsection (1) of this section shall file with the Oregon Govern- ment Ethics Commission a statement of economic interest as required under ORS 244.060, 244.070 and 244.090. (3) By April 15 next after the filing deadline for the primary election, each candidate [for public office] described in subsection (1) of this section shall file with the commission a statement of eco- nomic interest as required under ORS 244.060, 244.070 and 244.090. (4) Within 30 days after the filing deadline for the general election, each candidate [for public office] described in subsection (1) of this section who was not a candidate in the preceding primary election, or who was nominated for public office described in subsection (1) of this section at the preceding primary election by write-in votes, shall file with the commission a statement of economic interest as required under ORS 244.060, 244.070 and 244.090. (5) Subsections (1) to (4) of this section apply only to persons who are incumbent, elected or appointed public officials as of April 15 and to persons who are candidates [for public office] on April 15. Subsections (1) to (4) of this section also apply to persons who do not become candidates until 30 days after the filing deadline for the statewide general election. (6) If a statement required to be filed under this section has not been received by the commis- sion within five days after the date the statement is due, the commission shall notify the public of- ficial or candidate and give the public official or candidate not less than 15 days to comply with the Enrolled Senate Bill 30 (SB 30-B) Page 8 requirements of this section. If the public official or candidate fails to comply by the date set by the commission, the commission may impose a civil penalty as provided in ORS 244.350. SECTION 6. ORS 244.060 is amended to read: 244.060. The statement of economic interest filed under ORS 244.050 shall be on a form pre- scribed by the Oregon Government Ethics Commission. The public official or candidate [for public office] filing the statement shall supply the information required by this section and ORS 244.090, as follows: (1) The names of all positions as officer of a business and business directorships held by the [person] public official or candidate or a member of the household of the [person] public official or candidate during the preceding calendar year, and the principal address and a brief description of each business. (2) All names under which the [person] public official or candidate and members of the household of the [person] public official or candidate do business and the principal address and a brief description of each business. (3) The names, principal addresses and brief descriptions of the [five most significant] sources of income received [at any time] during the preceding calendar year by the [person and by each] public official or candidate or a member of the household of the [person, a description of the type of income and the name of the person receiving the income] public official or candidate that produce 10 percent or more of the total annual household income. (4)(a) A list of all real property in which the public official or candidate [for public office] or a member of the household of the public official or candidate has or has had any personal, beneficial ownership interest during the preceding calendar year, any options to purchase or sell real property, including a land sales contract, and any other rights of any kind in real property located within the geographic boundaries of the governmental agency of which the public official holds, or the candi- date if elected would hold, [any] an official position or over which the public official exercises, or the candidate if elected would exercise, any authority. (b) This subsection does not require the listing of the principal residence of the public official or candidate. [(5) The name of each member of the household of the person who is 18 years of age or older.] [(6) The name of each relative of the person who is 18 years of age or older and not a member of the household of the person.] (5) All expenses with an aggregate value exceeding $50 received by the public official during the preceding calendar year when participating in a convention, mission, trip or other meeting described in ORS 244.020 (6)(b)(F), including the name and address of the organiza- tion, unit of government, tribe or corporation paying the expenses, the nature of the event and the date and amount of the expense. (6) All expenses with an aggregate value exceeding $50 received by the public official during the preceding calendar year when participating in a mission, negotiations or economic development activities described in ORS 244.020 (6)(b)(H), including the name and address of the person paying the expenses, the nature of the event and the date and amount of the expenditure. (7) All honoraria and other items allowed under ORS 244.042 with a value exceeding $15 that are received by the public official, candidate or member of the household of the public official or candidate during the preceding calendar year, the provider of each honorarium or item and the date and time of the event for which the honorarium or item was received. (8) The name, principal address and brief description of each source of income exceeding an aggregate amount of $1,000, whether or not taxable, received by the public official or candidate, or a member of the household of the public official or candidate, during the pre- ceding calendar year, if the source of that income is derived from an individual or business that has a legislative or administrative interest or that has been doing business, does busi- ness or could reasonably be expected to do business with the governmental agency of which Enrolled Senate Bill 30 (SB 30-B) Page 9 the public official holds, or the candidate if elected would hold, an official position or over which the public official exercises, or the candidate if elected would exercise, any authority. SECTION 7. ORS 244.070 is amended to read: 244.070. A public official or candidate [for public office] shall report the following additional economic interest for the preceding calendar year only if the source of that interest is derived from an individual or business that has a legislative or administrative interest or that has been doing business, does business or could reasonably be expected to do business with[, or has legislative or administrative interest in,] the governmental agency of which the public official holds, or the candi- date if elected would hold, [any] an official position or over which the public official exercises, or the candidate if elected would exercise, any authority: (1) Each person to whom the public official or candidate [for public office] or a member of the household of the public official or candidate owes or has owed money in excess of $1,000, the in- terest rate on money owed and the date of the loan, except for debts owed to any federal or state regulated financial institution or retail contracts. (2) The name, principal address and brief description of the nature of each business in which the public official or candidate [for public office] or a member of the household of the public official or candidate has or has had a personal, beneficial interest or investment, including stocks or other securities, in excess of $1,000, except for individual items involved in a mutual fund or a blind trust, or a time or demand deposit in a financial institution, shares in a credit union, or the cash surrender value of life insurance. (3) Each person for whom the public official or candidate [for public office] has performed ser- vices for a fee in excess of $1,000, except for any disclosure otherwise prohibited by law or by a professional code of ethics. SECTION 8. ORS 244.100 is amended to read: 244.100. [(1) A public official or candidate for public office who is required to file a statement of economic interest under ORS 244.050 shall file with the Oregon Government Ethics Commission, ac- cording to the schedule set forth in ORS 244.105, a statement showing for the applicable reporting pe- riod:] [(a) Any expenses with an aggregate value exceeding $50 received by the public official when par- ticipating in a convention, mission, trip or other meeting described in ORS 244.020 (5)(b)(F). The statement shall include the name and address of the organization or unit of government paying the expenses, the nature of the event and the date and amount of the expenditure.] [(b) Any expenses with an aggregate value exceeding $50 received by the public official when par- ticipating in a mission or negotiations or economic development activities described in ORS 244.020 (5)(b)(H). The statement shall include the name and address of the person paying the expenses, the nature of the event and the date and amount of the expenditure.] [(c) All honoraria allowed under ORS 244.042 exceeding $15 received by the public official, can- didate or member of the household of the official or candidate, the payer of each honorarium and the date and time of the event for which the honorarium was received.] [(d) Each source of income exceeding an aggregate amount of $1,000, whether or not taxable, re- ceived by the public official or candidate for public office, or a member of the household of the public official or candidate, if the source of that income is derived from an individual or business that has been doing business, does business or could reasonably be expected to do business with, or has legis- lative or administrative interest in, the governmental agency of which the public official holds, or the candidate if elected would hold, any official position or over which the public official exercises, or the candidate if elected would exercise, any authority.] [(2) In addition to statements required under subsection (1) of this section:] [(a)] (1) Any organization, [or] unit of government, tribe or corporation that provides a public official with expenses with an aggregate value exceeding $50 for an event described in ORS 244.020 [(5)(b)(F)] (6)(b)(F) shall notify the public official in writing of the amount of the expense. The or- ganization, [or] unit, tribe or corporation shall provide the notice to the public official within 10 days [from] after the date the expenses are incurred. Enrolled Senate Bill 30 (SB 30-B) Page 10 [(b)] (2) Any person that provides a public official or candidate, or a member of the household of [a] the public official or candidate, with an honorarium or other item allowed under ORS 244.042 with a value exceeding $15 shall notify the public official or candidate in writing of the value of the honorarium or other item. The person shall provide the notice to the public official or candidate within 10 days after the date of the event for which the honorarium or other item was received. SECTION 9. ORS 244.105 is amended to read: 244.105. Statements required to be filed with the Oregon Government Ethics Commission under ORS [244.100 and] 244.217 shall be filed in each calendar year: (1) Not later than April 15, for the accounting period beginning January 1 and ending March 31; (2) Not later than July 15, for the accounting period beginning April 1 and ending June 30; (3) Not later than October 15, for the accounting period beginning July 1 and ending September 30; and (4) Not later than January 15 of the following calendar year, for the accounting period begin- ning October 1 and ending December 31. SECTION 10. ORS 244.110 is amended to read: 244.110. (1) Each statement of economic interest required to be filed under ORS 244.050, 244.060, 244.070[,] or 244.090 for 244.100], or by rule under ORS 244.290, and each trading statement required to be filed under ORS 244.055 shall be signed and certified as true by the person required to file it and shall contain a written declaration that the statement is made under the penalties of false swearing. (2) A person may not sign and certify a statement under subsection (1) of this section if the person knows that the statement contains information that is false. (3) Violation of subsection (2) of this section is punishable as false swearing under ORS 162.075. SECTION 11. ORS 244.255 is amended to read: 244.255. (1) The Oregon Government Ethics Commission shall estimate in advance the expenses that it will incur during a biennium in carrying out the provisions of ORS 171.725 to 171.785 and 171.992 and this chapter. The commission shall also determine what percentage of the expenses should be borne by the following two groups of public bodies: (a) Public bodies in state government; and (b) Local governments, local service districts and special government bodies that are subject to the Municipal Audit Law. (2) The commission shall charge each public body for the public body's share of the expenses described in subsection (1) of this section for the biennium. The amount to be charged each public body shall be determined as follows: (a) The commission shall determine the rate to be charged public bodies in state government. The same rate shall be applied to each public body described in this paragraph. To determine the amount of the charge for each public body, the commission shall multiply the rate determined under this paragraph by the number of public officials serving the public body. (b) The commission shall set the charge for local governments, local service districts and special government bodies that are subject to the Municipal Audit Law so that each local government, local service district or special government body described in this paragraph pays an amount of the total expenses for the group that bears the same proportion to the total expenses that the amount charged to the local government, local service district or special government body for the municipal audit fee under ORS 297.485 bears to the total amount assessed for the municipal audit fee. (3) Each public body shall pay to the credit of the commission the charge described in this section as an administrative expense from funds or appropriations available to the public body in the same manner as other claims against the public body are paid. (4) All moneys received by the commission under this section shall be credited to the Oregon Government Ethics Commission Account established under ORS 244.345. (5) The commission shall adopt rules specifying the methods for calculating and collecting the rates and charges described in this section. Enrolled Senate Bill 30 (SB 30-B) Page 11 (6) As used in this section: (a) "Local government" and "local service district" have the meanings given those terms in ORS 174.116. (b) "Public body" has the meaning given that term in ORS 174.109. (c) "Public official," notwithstanding ORS 244.020 [(13)] (14), means any person who, on the date the commission charges the public body under this section, is serving the public body as an officer or employee. (d) "Special government body" has the meaning given that term in ORS 174.117. (e) "State government" has the meaning given that term in ORS 174.111. SECTION 12. ORS 244.282 is amended to read: 244.282. (1) Upon the written request of any person, the executive director of the Oregon Gov- ernment Ethics Commission may issue and publish written staff advisory opinions on the application of any provision of this chapter to any proposed transaction or action or any actual or hypothetical circumstance. (2) Not later than 30 days after the date the executive director receives the written request for a staff advisory opinion, the executive director shall issue either the opinion or a written denial of the request. The written denial shall explain the reasons for the denial. The executive director may ask the person requesting the advisory opinion to supply additional information the executive di- rector considers necessary to render the opinion. The executive director may extend the 30-day deadline by one period not to exceed 30 days. The executive director shall clearly designate an opinion issued under this section as a staff advisory opinion. (3)(a) Except as provided in [this subsection] paragraph (b) of this subsection, unless the staff advisory opinion is revised or revoked, [before imposing any penalty under ORS 244.350 or 244.360, the commission shall consider whether the action that may be subject to penalty was taken] the com- mission may only issue a written letter of reprimand, explanation or education for any good faith action a person takes in reliance on a staff advisory opinion issued under this section. (b) [If a penalty may be imposed] The commission may impose, for an action that is subject to a penalty and that is taken in reliance on a staff advisory opinion issued under this sec- tion, a penalty under ORS 244.350 or 244.360 on the person who requested the opinion[, the com- mission is not required to consider reliance on the opinion] if the commission determines that the person omitted or misstated material facts in making the request. (4) At each regular meeting of the commission, the executive director shall report to the com- mission on all staff advisory opinions issued since the last regular meeting of the commission. The commission on its own motion may issue a commission advisory opinion under ORS 244.280 on the same facts or circumstances that form the basis for any staff advisory opinion. SECTION 13. ORS 244.290 is amended to read: 244.290. (1) The Oregon Government Ethics Commission shall: (a) Prescribe forms for statements required by this chapter and provide the forms to persons required to file the statements under this chapter or pursuant to a resolution adopted under ORS 244.160. (b) Develop a filing, coding and cross-indexing system consistent with the purposes of this chapter. (c) Prepare and publish reports the commission finds are necessary. (d) Make advisory opinions issued by the commission or the executive director of the commis- sion available to the public at no charge on the Internet. (e) Accept and file any information voluntarily supplied that exceeds the requirements of this chapter. (f) Make statements and other information filed with the commission available for public in- spection and copying during regular office hours, and make copying facilities available at a charge not to exceed actual cost. (g) Not later than February 1 of each odd-numbered year, report to the Legislative Assembly any recommended changes to provisions of ORS 171.725 to 171.785 or this chapter. Enrolled Senate Bill 30 (SB 30-B) Page 12 (2) The commission shall adopt rules necessary to carry out its duties under ORS 171.725 to 171.785 and 171.992 and this chapter, including rules to: (a) Create a procedure under which items before the commission may be treated under a consent calendar and voted on as a single item; (b) Exempt a public official who is otherwise required to file a statement pursuant to ORS 244.050 from filing the statement if the regularity, number and frequency of the meetings and actions of the body over which the public official has jurisdiction are so few or infrequent as not to warrant the public disclosure; (c) Establish an administrative process whereby a person subpoenaed by the commission may obtain a protective order; (d) List criteria and establish a process for the commission to use prosecutorial discretion to decide whether to proceed with an inquiry or investigation; (e) Establish a procedure under which the commission shall conduct accuracy audits of a sample of reports or statements filed with the commission under this chapter or ORS 171.725 to 171.785; (f) Describe the application of provisions exempting items from the definition of "gift" in ORS 244.020 [(5)(b) and the application of the prohibition on entertainment contained in ORS 244.0251; (g) Specify when a continuing violation is considered a single violation or a separate and dis- tinct violation for each day the violation occurs; and (h) Set criteria for determining the amount of civil penalties that the commission may impose. (3) The commission may adopt rules that: (a) Limit the minimum size of, or otherwise establish criteria for or identify, the smaller classes that qualify under the class exception from the definition of "potential conflict of interest" under ORS 244.020; (b) Require the disclosure and reporting of gifts or other compensation made to or received by a public official or candidate [for public office]; (c) Establish criteria for cases in which information relating to notices of actual or potential conflicts of interest shall, may not or may be provided to the commission under ORS 244.130; or (d) Allow the commission to accept the filing of a statement containing less than all of the in- formation required under ORS 244.060 and 244.070 if the public official or candidate [for public office] certifies on the statement that the information contained on the statement previously filed is unchanged or certifies only as to any changed material. (4) Not less frequently than once each calendar year, the commission shall: (a) Consider adoption of rules the commission deems necessary to implement or interpret pro- visions of this chapter relating to issues the commission determines are of general interest to public officials or candidates [for public office] or that are addressed by the commission or by commission staff on a recurring basis; and (b) Review rules previously adopted by the commission to determine whether the rules have continuing applicability or whether the rules should be amended or repealed. (5) The commission shall adopt by rule an electronic filing system under which statements re- quired to be filed under ORS 244.050[, 244.100] and 244.217 may be filed, without a fee, with the commission in an electronic format. The commission shall accept statements filed under ORS 244.050[, 244.1001 and 244.217 in a format that is not electronic. (6) The commission shall make statements filed under ORS 244.050[, 244.100] and 244.217, in- cluding statements that are not filed in an electronic format, available in a searchable format for review by the public using the Internet. SECTION 14. ORS 244.290, as amended by section 9d, chapter 877, Oregon Laws 2007, is amended to read: 244.290. (1) The Oregon Government Ethics Commission shall: (a) Prescribe forms for statements required by this chapter and provide the forms to persons required to file the statements under this chapter or pursuant to a resolution adopted under ORS 244.160. Enrolled Senate Bill 30 (SB 30-B) Page 13 (b) Develop a filing, coding and cross-indexing system consistent with the purposes of thi; chapter. (c) Prepare and publish reports the commission finds are necessary. (d) Make advisory opinions issued by the commission or the executive director of the commis- sion available to the public at no charge on the Internet. (e) Accept and file any information voluntarily supplied that exceeds the requirements of this chapter. (f) Make statements and other information filed with the commission available for public in- spection and copying during regular office hours, and make copying facilities available at a charge not to exceed actual cost. (g) Not later than February 1 of each odd-numbered year, report to the Legislative Assembly any recommended changes to provisions of ORS 171.725 to 171.785 or this chapter. (2) The commission shall adopt rules necessary to carry out its duties under ORS 171.725 to 171.785 and 171.992 and this chapter, including rules to: (a) Create a procedure under which items before the commission may be treated under a consent calendar and voted on as a single item; (b) Exempt a public official who is otherwise required to file a statement pursuant to ORS 244.050 from filing the statement if the regularity, number and frequency of the meetings and actions of the body over which the public official has jurisdiction are so few or infrequent as not to warrant the public disclosure; (c) Establish an administrative process whereby a person subpoenaed by the commission may obtain a protective order; (d) List criteria and establish a process for the commission to use prosecutorial discretion to decide whether to proceed with an inquiry or investigation; (e) Establish a procedure under which the commission shall conduct accuracy audits of a sample of reports or statements filed with the commission under this chapter or ORS 171.725 to 171.785; (f) Describe the application of provisions exempting items from the definition of "gift" in ORS 244.020 [(5)(b) and the application of the prohibition on entertainment contained in ORS 244.0251; (g) Specify when a continuing violation is considered a single violation or a separate and dis- tinct violation for each day the violation occurs; and (h) Set criteria for determining the amount of civil penalties that the commission may impose. (3) The commission may adopt rules that: (a) Limit the minimum size of, or otherwise establish criteria for or identify, the smaller classes that qualify under the class exception from the definition of "potential conflict of interest" under ORS 244.020; (b) Require the disclosure and reporting of gifts or other compensation made to or received by a public official or candidate [for public office]; (c) Establish criteria for cases in which information relating to notices of actual or potential conflicts of interest shall, may not or may be provided to the commission under ORS 244.130; or (d) Allow the commission to accept the filing of a statement containing less than all of the in- formation required under ORS 244.060 and 244.070 if the public official or candidate [for public office] certifies on the statement that the information contained on the statement previously filed is unchanged or certifies only as to any changed material. (4) Not less frequently than once each calendar year, the commission shall: (a) Consider adoption of rules the commission deems necessary to implement or interpret pro- visions of this chapter relating to issues the commission determines are of general interest to public officials or candidates [for public office] or that are addressed by the commission or by commission staff on a recurring basis; and (b) Review rules previously adopted by the commission to determine whether the rules have continuing applicability or whether the rules should be amended or repealed. Enrolled Senate Bill 30 (SB 30-B) Page 14 (5) The commission shall adopt by rule an electronic filing system under which statements re- quired to be filed under ORS 244.050[, 244.1001 and 244.217 must be filed, without a fee, with the commission in an electronic format. (6) The commission shall make statements filed under ORS 244.050[, 244.100] and 244.217 avail- able in a searchable format for review by the public using the Internet. SECTION 15. ORS 244.320 is amended to read: 244.320. (1) The Oregon Government Ethics Commission shall prepare and publish a manual on government ethics that explains in terms understandable to legislative and public officials and the public the requirements of this chapter and the commission's interpretation of those requirements whether stated by rule or in an opinion. The manual shall set forth recommended uniform reporting methods for use by persons filing statements under this chapter. The manual, and any updates to the manual made under subsection (3) of this section, must be approved by a vote of a ma- jority of the members of the commission. (2) In preparing the manual, the commission shall consider the format of the manual prepared by the Attorney General to guide public officials and the public in the requirements of ORS chapter 192. (3) The commission shall update the manual as often as the commission believes necessary but no less frequently than once every four years. (4) The commission shall make copies of the manual available in an electronic format on the Internet. (5) The commission may not impose a penalty under ORS 244.350 or 244.360 on a public official or candidate for any good faith action the public official or candidate takes in reliance on the manual, or any update to the manual, approved by the commission under this section. SECTION 16. ORS 244.350 is amended to read: 244.350. (1) The Oregon Government Ethics Commission may impose civil penalties not to ex- ceed: (a) Except as provided in paragraph (b) of this subsection, $5,000 for violation of any provision of this chapter or any resolution adopted under ORS 244.160. (b) $25,000 for violation of ORS 244.045. (2)(a) Except as provided in paragraph (b) of this subsection, the commission may impose civil penalties not to exceed $1,000 for violation of any provision of ORS 192.660. (b) A civil penalty may not be imposed under this subsection if the violation occurred as a result of the governing body of the public body acting upon the advice of the public body's counsel. (3) The commission may impose civil penalties not to exceed $250 for violation of ORS 293.708. A civil penalty imposed under this subsection is in addition to and not in lieu of a civil penalty that may be imposed under subsection (1) of this section. (4)(a) The commission may impose civil penalties on a person who fails to file the statement required under ORS 244.050[, 244.100] or 244.217. In enforcing this subsection, the commission is not required to follow the procedures in ORS 244.260 before finding that a violation of ORS 244.050[, 244.100] or 244.217 has occurred. (b) Failure to file the required statement in timely fashion is prima facie evidence of a violation of ORS 244.050[, 244.100] or 244.217. (c) The commission may impose a civil penalty of $10 for each of the first 14 days the statement is late beyond the date set by law, or by the commission under ORS 244.050, and $50 for each day thereafter. The maximum penalty that may be imposed under this subsection is $5,000. (d) A civil penalty imposed under this subsection is in addition to and not in lieu of sanctions that may be imposed under ORS 244.380. (5) In lieu of or in conjunction with finding a violation of law or any resolution or imposing a civil penalty under this section, the commission may issue a written letter of reprimand, explanation or education. SECTION 17. ORS 171.745 is amended to read: Enrolled Senate Bill 30 (SB 30-B) Page 15 171.745. (1) A lobbyist registered with the Oregon Government Ethics Commission or required to register with the commission shall, according to the schedule described in ORS 171.752, file with the commission a statement showing for the applicable reporting period: (a) The total amount of all moneys expended for food, refreshments and entertainment by the lobbyist for the purpose of lobbying. (b) The name of any legislative or executive official to whom or for whose benefit, on any one occasion, an expenditure is made for the purposes of lobbying, and the date, name of payee, purpose and amount of that expenditure. This paragraph applies if the total amount expended on the occa- sion by one or more persons exceeds $50. (2) Statements required by this section need not include amounts expended by the lobbyist for personal living and travel expenses and office overhead, including salaries and wages paid for staff and secretarial assistance, and maintenance expenses. If the amount of any expenditure required to be included in a statement is not accurately known at the time the statement is required to be filed, an estimate of the expenditure shall be submitted in the statement and designated as an estimate. The exact amount expended for which a previous estimate was made shall be submitted in a subse- quent report when the information is available. (3) A statement required by this section shall include a copy of any notice provided to a public official or candidate under ORS 244.100 [(2)]. (4) For each statement required by this section, an entity comprised of more than one lobbyist may file one statement that reports expenditures by the entity and not by individual lobbyists. SECTION 18. ORS 171.750 is amended to read: 171.750. (1) Any person on whose behalf a lobbyist was registered, or was required to register, with the Oregon Government Ethics Commission at any time during the calendar year shall file with the commission, according to the schedule described in ORS 171.752, a statement showing for the applicable reporting period: (a) The total amount of all moneys expended for lobbying activities on the person's behalf, ex- cluding living and travel expenses incurred for a lobbyist performing lobbying services. (b) The name of any legislative or executive official to whom or for whose benefit, on any one occasion, an expenditure is made for the purposes of lobbying by the person, and the date, name of payee, purpose and amount of that expenditure. This paragraph applies if the total amount expended on the occasion by one or more persons exceeds $50. This paragraph does not apply to information reported in compliance with ORS 171.745. (c) The name of each registered lobbyist or entity comprised of more than one lobbyist to whom the person paid moneys for lobbying activities on the person's behalf, excluding living and travel expenses incurred for a lobbyist performing lobbying services, and the total amount of moneys paid to that lobbyist or entity. (2) A statement required under subsection (1) of this section shall include a copy of any notice provided to a public official or candidate under ORS 244.100 [(2)]. SECTION 19. ORS 293.708 is amended to read: 293.708. (1) As used in this section: (a) "Business" has the meaning given that term in ORS 244.020. (b) "Business with which the person is associated" has the meaning given that term in ORS 244.020. (c) "Relative" has the meaning given that term in ORS 244.020. (2) When a person who is a member of the Oregon Investment Council becomes aware that action on a matter pending before the council might lead to private pecuniary benefit or detriment to the person, to a relative of the person or to a business with which the person or a relative of the person is associated, the member shall notify in writing the State Treasurer or the Chief Deputy State Treasurer that any action, decision or recommendation by the member might constitute an actual or potential conflict of interest. The member shall provide the notice not later than three business days after the member becomes aware of the possibility of an actual or potential conflict. Enrolled Senate Bill 30 (SB 30-B) Page 16 (3) Subsection (2) of this section does not apply if the pecuniary benefit or detriment arises out of circumstances described in ORS 244.020 [(11)(a) to (c)] (12). (4) Complaints of violations of this section may be made to the Oregon Government Ethics Commission for review and investigation as provided by ORS 244.260 and for possible imposition of civil penalties as provided by ORS 244.350 or 244.360. (5) Nothing in this section excuses a member of the council from compliance with ORS 244.120. SECTION 20. ORS 441.540 is amended to read: 441.540. (1) An authority shall be managed and controlled by a board of directors, who shall be appointed by the governing body. The directors may be removed for cause or at the will of the governing body. The directors shall serve without compensation. However, the authority may re- imburse the directors for their expenses incurred in the performance of their duties. (2) The board of directors shall adopt and may amend rules for calling and conducting its meetings and carrying out its business and may adopt an official seal. All decisions of the board shall be by motion or resolution and shall be recorded in the board's minute book which shall be a public record. A majority of the board shall constitute a quorum for the transaction of business and a majority thereof shall be sufficient for the passage of any such motion or resolution. (3) The board may employ such employees and agents as it deems appropriate and provide for their compensation. (4) Notwithstanding the exception for pecuniary benefit or detriment described in ORS 244.020 [(11)(0] (12)(c), a director is a public official subject to the requirements of ORS chapter 244 based on an actual conflict of interest or a potential conflict of interest arising out of the director's re- lationship with a nonprofit corporation that is tax-exempt under section 501(c) of the Internal Re- venue Code, including employment with the nonprofit corporation or a relationship with a foundation that provides assistance to the nonprofit corporation. SECTION 21. ORS 244.042 is amended to read: 244.042. (1) Except as provided in subsection (3) of this section, a public official may not solicit or receive, whether directly or indirectly, honoraria for the public official or any member of the household of the public official if the honoraria are solicited or received in connection with the of- ficial duties of the public official. (2) Except as provided in subsection (3) of this section, a candidate [for public office] may not solicit or receive, whether directly or indirectly, honoraria for the candidate or any member of the household of the candidate if the honoraria are solicited or received in connection with the official duties of the public office for which the person is a candidate. (3) This section does not prohibit: (a) The solicitation or receipt of an honorarium or a certificate, plaque, commemorative token or other item with a value of $50 or less; or (b) The solicitation or receipt of an honorarium for services performed in relation to the private profession, occupation, avocation or expertise of the public official or candidate. SECTION 22. ORS 244.380 is amended to read: 244.380. (1) If the Oregon Government Ethics Commission has imposed a civil penalty under ORS 244.350 on a public official or candidate for failing to file a statement of economic interest required under this chapter or a resolution adopted under ORS 244.160 and the public official or candidate continues to refuse to file the statement, the following apply: (a) The commission shall notify the Oregon Department of Administrative Services or the local public body, as defined in ORS 174.109, that the public official serves of the failure to file a state- ment of economic interest. Except for judges, during the period beginning on the date the depart- ment or public body receives notice from the commission and ending on the date the public official files the statement of economic interest, the department or public body may not pay compensation to the public official and the public official may not begin or continue to exercise the official duty of the public official. In the case of a public official who does not receive compensation, the public official may not begin or continue to exercise the official duty of the public official until the public official files the statement of economic interest. Enrolled Senate Bill 30 (SB 30-B) Page 17 (b) In the case of a candidate [for public office], the commission shall notify the appropriate chief elections officer of the candidate's failure to file the statement required by this chapter. The chief elections officer shall: (A) If the notice is received on or before the 61st day before the date of the election, cause the name of the candidate to be removed from the ballot on which the name of the candidate would otherwise appear; or (B) If the candidate has been nominated or elected, refuse to issue a certificate of nomination or election. (2) If the name of a candidate [for public office] is removed from the ballot as provided in sub- section (1) of this section, the name shall be removed in accordance with ORS 254.165. (3) As used in this section, "chief elections officer" has the meaning given that term in ORS 254.005. SECTION 23. ORS 244.390 is amended to read: 244.390. (1) A penalty or sanction imposed by the Oregon Government Ethics Commission under this chapter is in addition to and not in lieu of any other penalty or sanction that may be imposed according to law. (2) Before making a finding that there is cause to undertake an investigation under ORS 244.260 and before imposing a civil penalty under ORS 244.350 or 244.360, the commission shall consider the public interest and any other penalty or sanction that has been or may be imposed on the public official as a result of the same conduct that is the subject of action by the commission under ORS 244.260. (3) Nothing in this chapter is intended to affect: (a) Any statute requiring disclosure of economic interest by any public official or candidate [for public office]. (b) Any statute prohibiting or authorizing specific conduct on the part of any public official or candidate [for public office]. SECTION 24. Section 8b, chapter 877, Oregon Laws 2007, is amended to read: Sec. 8b. The amendments to ORS 171.772 by section 8a, chapter 877, Oregon Laws 2007, [of this 2007 Act] become operative January 1, [2010] 2013. SECTION 25. Section 9e, chapter 877, Oregon Laws 2007, is amended to read: Sec. 9e. [If House Bill 2595 becomes law,] The amendments to ORS 244.290 by section 9d, chapter 877, Oregon Laws 2007, [of this 2007 Act] become operative January 1, [2010] 2013. SECTION 26. Not later than February 1, 2011, the Oregon Government Ethics Commis- sion shall report to the Seventy-sixth Legislative Assembly regarding the implementation of the electronic filing system described in ORS 171.772 and 244.290. SECTION 27. (1) The Oregon Government Ethics Commission may not disclose the names of any relatives or members of a household of a public official or candidate supplied on statements of economic interest filed on or after January 1, 2008, and before January 1, 2010. (2) The Oregon Government Ethics Commission may not impose a civil penalty under ORS 244.350 or take action in response to a complaint filed or proceed on its own motion under ORS 244.260, and a person may not file a complaint under ORS 244.260, against a public official or candidate because the public official or candidate did not supply the name of a relative or a member of the household of the public official or candidate on a statement of economic interest filed before January 1, 2010. SECTION 28. (1) Section 26 of this 2009 Act, the amendments to sections 8b and 9e, chapter 877, Oregon Laws 2007, by sections 24 and 25 of this 2009 Act and the amendments to OAS 171.745, 171.750, 244.010, 244.020, 244.025, 244.040, 244.042, 244.050, 244.060, 244.070, 244.100, 244.105, 244.110, 244.255, 244.282, 244.290, 244.320, 244.350, 244.380, 244.390, 293.708 and 441.540 by sections 1 to 23 of this 2009 Act become operative on January 1, 2010. (2) The Oregon Government Ethics Commission may adopt rules or take any other action before the operative date specified in subsection (1) of this section that is necessary to enable Enrolled Senate Bill 30 (SB 30-B) Page 18 the commission to exercise, on or after the operative date specified in subsection (1) of this section, all the duties, functions and powers conferred upon the commission by this 2009 Act. SECTION 29. (1) The amendments to ORS 244.025 and 244.040 by sections 3 and 4 of this 2009 Act apply to gifts solicited, received or offered on or after January 1, 2010. (2) The amendments to ORS 244.060, 244.100 and 244.350 by sections 6, 8 and 16 of this 2009 Act apply to statements filed with the Oregon Government Ethics Commission on or after January 1, 2010. (3) The amendments to ORS 244.050 by section 5 of this 2009 Act apply to statements required to be filed with the Oregon Government Ethics Commission for reporting periods beginning on or after January 1, 2010. (4) The amendments to ORS 244.282 and 244.320 by sections 12 and 15 of this 2009 Act apply to activities that occur on or after January 1, 2010. SECTION 30. This 2009 Act being necessary for the immediate preservation of the public peace, health and safety, an emergency is declared to exist, and this 2009 Act takes effect on its passage. Passed by Senate April 1, 2009 Repassed by Senate April 14, 2009 Secretary of Senate President of Senate Passed by House April 14, 2009 Received by Governor: . M.................. Approved: . M............................................. Filed in Office of Secretary of State: M.,............................................ 2009 2009 Governor 2009 Speaker of House Secretary of State Enrolled Senate Bill 30 (SB 30-B) Page 19