2010-2628-Minutes for Meeting May 12,2010 Recorded 6/8/2010FZCZAL NANCYDESCHUBLANKENSHZPTES COUNTY CLERKS lid 201007678
COMMISSIONERS' JOURNAL 06/08/2010 08:30:43 AM
111111111111111111111111111111111
2010-21128
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 at the request of
[give reason]
previously recorded in Book _
or as Fee Number
to correct
and Page
Deschutes County Board of Commissioners
1300 NW Wall St., Suite 200, Bend, OR 97701-1960
(541) 388-6570 - Fax (541) 385-3202 - www.deschutes.org
MINUTES OF WORK SESSION
DESCHUTES COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
WEDNESDAY, MAY 129 2010
Present were Commissioners Dennis R. Luke, Alan Unger and Tammy Baney.
Also present were Dave Kanner, County Administrator; and, for a portion of the
meeting, Erik Kropp, Deputy County Administrator; Joe Studer, County Forester;
George Kolb, Road Department; Tom Anderson, Eric Mone, Anthony Raguine and
Peter Russell, Community Development; Laurie Craghead, County Counsel; and
Hillary Borrud of the Bulletin. No other citizens were present.
Chair Luke opened the meeting at 1:30 p.m.
1. Before the Board Approval of a Grant Agreement regarding Utilizing
Woody Biomass for the Production of Renewable Energy.
Joe Studer gave a brief overview of the agreement. It is for approximately
$6769000, and the funds have to be spent within a few months. This work will
tie in neatly with other grants and projects now underway.
BANEY: Move Chair signature.
UNGER: Second.
VOTE: BANEY: Yes.
UNGER: Yes.
LUKE: Chair votes yes.
2. Before the Board was Review and Approval of Commission on Children &
Families' Revised By-laws.
Hillary Saraceno provided a review of the document. Mr. Kanner indicated that
it is an accurate version of what should be the final document.
Minutes of Board of Commissioners' Work Session Wednesday, May 12, 2010
Page 1 of 7 Pages
UNGER: Move approval of the final version as approved by the Board of the
Commission on Children & Families.
BANEY: Second.
VOTE: BANEY: Yes.
UNGER: Yes.
LUKE: Chair votes yes.
3. Before the Board was a Discussion of a Code Revision to Allow Mitigation
Identified in Traffic Studies to Become Approval Criterion & Setting
Parking Ratios for Land Uses at Airports.
Anthony Raguine explained that this is staff-initiated and only applies to the
Bend Airport, since it is the only one in the airport combining zone. The
criterion has been historically used, but was just not codified. The Planning
Commission supports this Ordinance.
4. Discussion of a Code Revision Defining Performance Standards for County
Roads, Intersections and ODOT Ratios.
Anthony Raguine said that existing site plan criteria does not necessarily cover
all that needs to be addressed. This change allows for a conditional approval
relating traffic issues and correcting safety deficiencies.
Laurie Craghead stated that this is in the traffic study Code, but she is
concerned that it acts as a moratorium and statutorily cannot do so. It already
says the same traffic study Code be applied in a different section. She would
like to avoid having that language in two places in the event that it is not
accurate.
Discussion took place as to discrepancies. Mr. Raguine said that it is already in
Title IT, so this just duplicates what is there to make it easier for the planners
and the public. Peter Russell said that the traffic study is part of the land use
application process already.
Ms. Craghead indicated that she would prefer they not duplicate information
that might not be accurate. It needs further analysis. Mr. Kanner added that
this appears to be a de facto moratorium on development. Chair Luke observed
that if there is a real or perceived de factor moratorium, it is against State law.
Minutes of Board of Commissioners' Work Session Wednesday, May 12, 2010
Page 2 of 7 Pages
Laurie Craghead said that she feels that revisions may be needed. There have
been issues that did not always match up, especially when dealing with traffic
situations.
Mr. Raguine will bring the package back, and Title 17 will be addressed at that
time. He added that as a planner, he feels that it is much easier to have it in
both places. At this time, it would be referenced as it has been.
In regard to text amendment 10-2, which would update Title 17, Mr. Russell
said that when traffic approvals were updated, ODOT went to a different way of
looking at volume capacity. County roads will remain at "level of service"
needs; but for State highway systems, ODOT standards would apply.
The Commissioners indicated that this is appropriate.
Mr. Russell updated the Board on the Bend area transportation plan and pointed
out areas of risk. (He referred to an oversized map at this time) Most involve
the State highway system. Burgess Road west of La Pine is the only one on just
the County system. In regard to intersections, the ODOT methodology is used.
He explained what could be done to accommodate additional traffic, short of
installing signals.
Commissioner Unger said that there does not seem to be a way to get around
Bend easily. He would like to see people have more choices on how they get
where they want to go.
Mr. Russell stated that each city and county has a model that shows alternatives.
The Technical Advisory Committee looks at each and decides which ones are
appropriate and useful. There will be public meetings where they would get
more input, and stakeholder meetings for the same reasons, and to further
define that information.
Public meetings in Terrebonne, Bend and Sisters were held in May. It was
almost all about bicycling in Sisters, especially regarding passing lanes on
Highway 20. The La Pine hearing is planned for next week.
Minutes of Board of Commissioners' Work Session Wednesday, May 12, 2010
Page 3 of 7 Pages
A large group in Sisters would like to pave Sisemore Road, but it has to be built
to County standards and the cost would be high, especially because there is a
bridge and a canal to accommodate. It does not pencil out based on the use.
The group wants a non-highway route between Sisters and Bend.
Some of the public feels that portions of Lower Bridge Road are dangerous
because of the lack of sight distance. Some improvements have been made, and
drivers just have to get used to the changes.
The Bend meeting consisted mostly of residents from Tumalo, as the meeting
addressed Highway 20 at Tumalo. ODOT has some short-term solutions
regarding three uncontrolled intersections. Right-in and right-out may be useful
for some of those. The left turn out from Bailey will not be allowed due to a
raised median. Connectivity is the main concern, and potential loss of access
for businesses. Cook Avenue will be reclassified from a collector to an arterial.
The other locations of concern are O'Neill Junction, Quarry at Highway 97, the
High Desert Museum access, and Highway 97 between Bend and Redmond.
5. Update of Commissioners' Meetings and Schedules.
Commissioner Baney will be in Salem on Friday for several meetings. She was
nominated to the Oregon Housing Council and the appointment is scheduled for
the morning of May 24.
Commissioner Unger is speaking on Thursday with a group involved in ADA
issues.
6. Before the Board was Discussion of Support for Temporary Restaurant
Vendors at Community Events.
Commissioner Baney said that alterations were made regarding restaurant
vendor licensing. There are individual events that happen one time, and a
single fee is required. The number one priority is health, and all agree with
that. The Saturday Market aspect was discussed, and an equitable inspection
and license plan was reviewed. The requirements are not easy to determine.
Minutes of Board of Commissioners' Work Session Wednesday, May 12, 2010
Page 4 of 7 Pages
She has been told that small vendors cannot participate in these events due to
the cost. The event promoters say that it is bad for the events to not be able to
include the smaller vendors.
Commissioner Luke said that he wants to be sure the public is safe; therefore,
the correct number of inspections should be done, and the cost needs to be
covered. He said that the event vendors are asking to pay less than the
restaurants in the same area that pay the full amount. The fees need to be
covered. The bigger restaurants should not have to subsidize the temporary
vendors. The cost of the employees has to be averaged out
Commissioner Baney stated that it is not that cut and dried. The question is
whether the fee structure should be adjusted to eventually be a one-time fee
each one. Commissioner Luke stated this is being addressed at the legislative
level, and any change in the law would take some time to be effective. The
County has to follow State law.
Commissioner Baney said that restaurants often benefit from the event activity.
The vendors ask, is the food less safe if there are five vendors or twenty.
Commissioner Unger stated that the small businesses have a hard time with
other fees as well, and it needs to be affordable or they will not participate. The
event organizers might consider reducing costs as well, or figuring out how they
can have enough vendors to lower the cost to each one.
Commissioner Baney stated that they say they have cut their costs by at least
30%. There is a possibility of bundling or the organizers working together to
cut down on costs. Also, there is the problem of other groups wishing to be
subsidized in some fashion. However, if it is allowable and does not burden the
County, some kind of help should be considered.
Commissioner Unger said that there is not much profit for the small vendors. It
does not help the organizers if they cannot get participants, and the public
misses out. Benevolent organizations already get a break.
Eric Mone said that a vendor could sell hot dogs at the Les Schwab
amphitheater on three different nights for three different venues, and ends up
having to buy three permits. A burrito vendor has to get a permit every week
for a Saturday market. Even though that might be the cost of the service, it is
cost prohibitive to many of these small vendors. If there are too many vendors,
none of them will make enough money at some of these events.
Minutes of Board of Commissioners' Work Session Wednesday, May 12, 2010
Page 5 of 7 Pages
Commissioner Baney asked if the food is any safer if there are six or more
vendors. She said that perhaps some of the transient lodging tax might be used.
These are community events and should be supported. Commissioner Unger
noted that people often come to the area to attend these events and people who
live in the community go there as well. Commissioner Baney feels that these
events and vendors do not have a big negative impact on established restaurants
and, in fact, they may benefit overall from people coming to the area.
Commissioner Luke said that room tax revenue is down also, and that may be
having a general negative impact. Commissioner Unger stated that costs keep
going up, fees keep going up, and there is a point when people will stop
participating or making those investments.
Mr. Kanner suggested a meeting with the Bend City Council to address this
issue. Most of the events are held within the City of Bend, and that is who
should be approached by the vendors and promoters. The City of Sisters
already has handled this issue without County involvement.
7. Other Items.
Commissioner Baney previously brought up a loan program for small
businesses. She met with EDCO and Clark Jackson, and the State had
introduced House Bill 98 establishing funds for small businesses. She was told
it would not fill the gap of what is needed. She would like to look at ways to
assist by perhaps running the funds through a bank or credit union, so that it can
help businesses.
Commissioner Luke stated that he would like to talk with EDCO, the Chambers
of Commerce and others about this issue. Emphasis needs to be made on
retaining small businesses. Commissioner Baney said that the County is the
next opportunity to do this. She encouraged a group setting to discuss this
further.
Commissioner Unger said that COIC has a fund to support small businesses.
They have had to write off loans, however, for businesses that were thought to
be stable.
Minutes of Board of Commissioners' Work Session Wednesday, May 12, 2010
Page 6 of 7 Pages
Commissioner Baney suggested that the Small Business Association and the
Central Oregon Builders Association might be included. Commissioner Unger
asked if there is a specific focus for the meeting, a starting point.
Commissioner Luke stated that the question is what is the best use of the dollars
that are available. Commissioner Baney added that it would be good to know
how much is needed. She has been told that there are no funds available from
any entities.
Commissioner Baney stated that she would make the appropriate arrangements.
At 3:15, the Board went into executive session under ORS 192.660(2)(h),
pending or threatened litigation. The session ended at 3:30 p.m. There was not
adequate time available to address the other executive session items listed on
the agenda.
Being no further items addressed, the meeting adjourned at 3:35 p.m.
DATED this 12th Day of May 2010 for the Deschutes County Board of
Commissioners.
D is R. Luke, Chair
&~a, . t&e---
Alan Unger, Vice Chair
ATTEST:
(tzi4~ (go Tammy Baney, Co issioner
Recording Secretary
Minutes of Board of Commissioners' Work Session Wednesday, May 12, 2010
Page 7 of 7 Pages
Deschutes County Board of Commissioners
1300 NW Wall St., Suite 200, Bend, OR 97701-1960
(541) 388-6570 - Fax (541) 385-3202 - www.deschutes.ora
WORK SESSION AGENDA
DESCHUTES COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
1:30 P.M., WEDNESDAY, MAY 12, 2010
1. Approval of a Grant Agreement regarding Utilizing Woody Biomass for the
Production of Renewable Energy - Joe Studer
2. Review and Approval of Commission on Children & Families' Revised By-
laws - Hillary Saraceno
3. Discussion of a Code Revision to Allow Mitigation Identified in Traffic Studies
to Become Approval Criterion & Setting Parking Ratios for Land Uses at
Airports - Peter Russell
4. Discussion of a Code Revision Defining Performance Standards for County
Roads, Intersections and ODOT Ratios - Peter Russell
5. Update of Commissioners' Meetings and Schedules
6. Discussion of Support for Temporary Restaurant Vendors at Community Events
- Tom Anderson
7. Other Items
• Executive Session, under ORS 192.660(2)(e), real estate negotiations
. Executive Session, under ORS 192.660(2)(d), labor negotiations
PLEASE NOTE: At any time during this meeting, an executive session could be called to address issues relating to ORS 192.660(2) (e), real
property negotiations; ORS 192.660(2) (h), pending or threatened litigation; or ORS 192.660(2) (b), personnel issues
Meeting dates, times and discussion items are subject to change. All meetings are conducted in the Board of Commissioners' meeting rooms at
1300 NW Wall St., Bend, unless otherwise indicated.
If you have questions regarding a meeting, please call 388-6572.
Deschutes County meeting locations are wheelchair accessible.
Deschutes County provides reasonable accommodations for persons with disabilities.
For deaf, hearing impaired or speech disabled, dial 7-1-1 to access the state transfer relay service for TTY.
Please call (541) 388-6571 regarding alternative formats or for further information.
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/
MEMORANDUM
TO: Deschutes County Board of County Commissioners
FROM: Peter Russell, Senior Transportation Planner
DATE: May 12, 2010
SUBJECT: Status report on update of Deschutes County Transportation System Plan (TSP)
BACKGROUND
Staff has held several meetings with Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT) staff both
from Salem and Bend regarding the land use assumptions and traffic information for ODOT's
development of the 2030 traffic volume projections. Staff has also held public meetings to
gather input on transportation issues and coordinated with the Deschutes County Bike and
Pedestrian Advisory Committee (BPAC) on non-motorized issues.
2030 Traffic Volumes
The model calculates average daily traffic volumes, which are then compared to the performance
standards of ODOT or the County, depending on which jurisdiction is the road authority.
State highway segments were ranked based on volume/capacity ratios of between 0.60 and
0.80. The segment thresholds were:
• v/c < or = 0.60: Low risk
• 0.60 < v/c < 0.80: Medium risk
• v/c > or = 0.80: High risk
The County defines Level of Service (LOS) D as acceptable for existing County roads. The
County for a roadway segment defines LOS D as between 5,700 and 9,600 ADT. Therefore,
roadway segments under the Deschutes County jurisdiction:
• Below LOS D threshold: Low risk
• Within LOS D: Medium risk
• Above LOS D: High risk.
The results for the roadway segments are shown in the attached map. Essentially, the bulk of
the congestion occurs on the state highway system. The primary congested areas are
• U.S. 97 between Terrebonne and Redmond
• U.S. 97 Sunriver to Paulina Lake
• U.S. 20 from about Suttle Lake to Sisters
• U.S. 20 Gerking Market to Tumalo
• U.S.20 Bend to Hamby/Ward
• OR 126 from Cline Falls to Redmond
• OR 126 and Redmond to the Crook County line
Quality Services Performed zvith Pride
For County roads, the only problematic segment is Burgess Road west of La Pine from
Huntington to Meadow.
To assess intersections, ODOT's Preliminary Signal Warrant (PSW) was used to evaluate
signalization at an ADT level for an unsignalized intersection. Meeting the warrant does not
mean a signal will be installed, but it indicates that the minor approaches will experience
excessive delay or have substantial difficulty in entering or crossing the major street at an
unsignalized intersection. The PSW process was used to rank unsignalized intersections based
on the approach's ADT volumes. Exceeding certain thresholds could indicate when an
intersection improvement (not just including signals - i.e., roundabouts, turn restrictions,
interchanges, etc.) would be necessary. Because of the sensitivity of the model volumes and
the normal fluctuations in volumes, the following warrant thresholds to rank deficiency were
used:
• Between 60% and 80% of threshold: Low risk
• Between 80% and 100% of threshold: Medium risk
• Greater than 100% of threshold: High risk
Not surprisingly the intersections with the greatest operational challenges involve state
highways. The only intersections ranked high that involved County roads solely were South
Century/Abbott and Neff/Powell Butte Hwy/Alfalfa Market.
Old Bend-Redmond Hwy / US20
High
Powell Butte Hwy / US20
High
Hamby Rd / US20
High
US97 SB On/Off Ramp / Baker Rd
High
Knott Rd / US97 NB Off Ramp / Baker Rd
High
Butler Market Rd / Powell Butte Hwy
High
Cook Ave / US20/ O B Rile Rd
High
Neff Rd / Powell Butte Hwy / Alfalfa Market Rd
High
OR126/ SW Helmholtz Way / NW Helmholtz Way
High
O'Neil Hwy / Pershall Way / US97
High
US97 / Vandevert Rd
High
US97 / Lower Bridge Way
High
US97 / Smith Rock Way
High
South Century Dr / Abbott Rd
High
Hamehook Rd / Deschutes Market Rd
Medium
Butler Market Rd / Hamehook Rd
Medium
South Century Dr / Vandevert Rd
Medium
South Century Dr / Spring River Rd
Medium
OR31 (Hwy No. 19 / US97
Medium
Issues identified in May public meetings
Staff has held public meetings in Sisters, Terrebonne, and Bend in the first week of May and will
be meeting in La Pine on Monday. Below is a summary of the major issues identified in each of
these community meetings and topics raised by ODOT. I basically recapped the 2030 traffic
volume results, the Three Sisters Scenic Bikeway proposal, then took comments on any and all
transportation topics.
2
Sisters
Bicycling issues dominated the meeting, which eight attended. The specific topics or
suggestions were:
• Pave Sisemore Road so it could become a non-US 20 alternate between Sisters and Bend
• County needs to have a standard for wider shoulders on County roads within three miles of
Sisters so more children might bike or walk to school
• Concern about additional passing lanes NW of Sisters and wanted to know if there were any
non-construction alternatives
• If grant money could be found to pave Sisemore, would the County then pave it
• The financial benefits of cycling tourism should be used when setting the County's priorities
for road projects
• If/when Skyline Forest develops, could that offer an opportunity to find a non-US 20 link for
cycling between Sisters and Bend?
Terrebonne
The two public members raised the following topics:
• Smith Rock Way has too many trucks
• Dislike the new bioswales along 97 as they eliminated a refuge in case you needed to
swerve, but like the sidewalks now, although they didn't initially
• Concerns about future of Lower Bridge Way
• The northbound left turn from 97 onto Lower Bridge Way is challenging due to the slight
skew of Lower Bridge
Bend
The nine members of the public were all from Tumalo with the exception of a Bicycle
Transportation Alliance (BTA) member from Portland whose area is Central Oregon. The major
topics were US 20 in Tumalo, accommodating cyclists on State and County roads, and
transportation system development charges (SDC's).
• Tumalo needs to be addressed in the planned TSP Tech Memo 4, "Alternatives and
Mitigation"
• Speed limit needs to be lowered
• Why isn't the county representing what its citizens want instead of deferring to ODOT
• Bend-Sisters corridor study of US 20 is needed
• Long range solution to Tumalo will need to ensure functional classification of county roads is
correct or updated
• Concern about negative economic impacts to the community from ODOT's short term and
long term projects
• Why not an interchange at Gerking Market with frontage roads leading to Tumalo
• 19th Street will become an Eastside Bypass
• Do other ODOT regions allow traffic signals in similar situations or is Region 4 just being
difficult?
• If Skyline Forest is built and that access is required to be on US 20, will that affect the
priority of solving Tumalo's transportation problems?
• Bike/ped safety and economic benefits of biking all need to be factored into road project
prioritization
• What's the legal status of horses using county roads, especially if a bike/ped trail is built
along the Deschutes River between Tumalo State Park and Tumalo or a bike/ped
underpass is built at 5th in Tumalo
• Are any roads being reclassified in Tumalo as part of TSP? (I said the TSP would propose
reclassifying Cook to an arterial)
3
• Long range transportation solutions need to build on the short term and minimize throwaway
• Wouldn't advance signage make a signal work in Tumalo
• Need to develop roadside environment to make Tumalo more visible to driver entering the
community
• Reclassify US 20 to a lower functional classification such as a Regional or District Highway
from its current Statewide classification
• Can US 20 from Pinehurst to Robal be designated as a Safety Corridor
• When will ODOT's short term project be built
• Why isn't the county collecting SDC's for land uses in Tumalo
• How will the TSP ensure Tumalo has connectivity
• The short term solution must include signage to direct drivers and bicyclists through these
new routes
ODOT issues
Staff has coordinated with ODOT both in the TSP process and the three community plans
(Terrebonne, Tumalo, and Deschutes Junction) to identify major transportation issues for the
TSP. The following topics were not already identified above in the public meetings:
• O'Neil Junction improvements, especially if City of Prineville Railway develops an
intermodal facility, which will require an exception to Statewide Planning Goal 3,
Agriculture
• Extending Helmholtz to Quarry Road/97 intersection, which will require an exception to
Statewide Planning Goal 3, Agriculture
• Future of U.S. 97 access to High Desert Museum
• U.S. 97 at north end of Bend
• Frontage roads for 97 and their phasing
• Improvements on 97 between Bend and Redmond that relate to safety rather than
congestion
TSP timeline
ODOT is planning to extend grant timeline past June 30, 2010, but keeping the same funding
levels. The traffic analysis has taken longer than expected. Planning Commission will hold a
TSP work session this Thursday and staff anticipates the formal public hearings will begin on
Sept. 9, 2010.
Staff is working to complete a first draft by June 30, 2010.
4
C
3
0
U
y ~
J U ~
~ ~ ~ 3 m rn
C U ~ 2
G1 •
J j
00 1
N
0
o a,~
~o
oG
_
C ~ Y
i ~
0 Co
ya
2 S
rr c
N ~
V
d
Ice Caje
o
Ed%S N
N
O ~
2 m
Sa~ie~ app
O Se
0
.4 t y, w
DATE: May 12, 2010
Community Development Department
Planning Division Building Safety Division Environmental Health Division
117 NW Lafayette Avenue Bend Oregon 97701-1925
MEMORANDUM (541)388-6575 FAX (541)385-1764
http://www.co.deschutes.or.us/cdd/
TO: Board of County Commissioners
FROM Dave Kanner, County Administrator
Scott Johnson, Health Services Director
Tom Anderson, Community Development Director
SUBJECT: Support for Temporary Restaurant Vendors at Community Events
Background:
There are a number of community based events that are held throughout Deschutes County
each year that provide both economic as well as community building benefit to the County.
Examples would include events such as the Bite of Bend, Munch-N-Music, Concerts on the
Green, the Sisters Quilt Show, and La Pine Frontier Days, to name just a few. It has been
suggested by event organizers that some of these events may be in jeopardy due to what are
perceived as inordinately high fees charged by the County for temporary food vendor permits.
The purpose of the discussion today is to determine whether the County should modify fees in
some way to preserve and assist these events.
Fees are set within the Environmental Health Licensed Facility Division of Community
Development (the division is being transferred to the Health Services Department as of July 1,
2010) to pay for the cost of providing division services. These services include permanent and
temporary restaurant licensing and inspections, as well as licensing and inspection of public
pools, tourist facilities and day care centers. School cafeterias are also inspected through
contracts with the school districts. Currently, fees for benevolent food service providers and
benevolent events are partially or wholly subsidized by the Board of Commissioners. Options for
modifying temporary restaurant license fees for community events are summarized below.
Discussion Points:
• Reductions in level of service may be legally restricted and undesirable due to minimum
inspection standards required under state law. Reducing costs in order to reduce fees
may therefore not be possible.
• It is also largely prohibited under state law to increase fees for one set of customers in
order to reduce the fees for another.
• Fees for temporary restaurant licenses were reduced as part of the FY 09-10 budget
adoption process. Fees for large events having six or more vendors were reduced from
$80 to $70, and for intermittent events at the same location, applicants were allowed to
purchase four event permits for the price of three.
Quality Services Perfonned with Pride
• Some may perceive that it is inequitable to reduce the fees for one set of for-profit
businesses and not others or all. i.e., permanent restaurants, building contractors,
garbage haulers, etc.
• The State is discussing changes to the way fees are charged for temporary food vendors
under certain circumstances (see attached draft legislative concept), which may address
the issue under discussion for at least some events. This may provide a statutory
remedy as early as July 2011 but will provide no assistance prior to that date.
• Since these events also benefit the cities in which they are located, it may be desirable
to approach them to assist in helping events stay viable prior to legislative action.
• Many temporary restaurant applicants (75-100) have already paid fees for summer 2010
events. Any change at this time that created inequities with current paid applicants
would likely require further administrative work and corrective action.
Fee Modification Options:
Revenues from temporary restaurant license fees are estimated to be $55,000 in FY 09-10.
Fees are currently $70 (single large events) or $80 for temporary food service permits obtained
at least seven days prior to the event.
Option A: 1. Reduce fees for all temporary restaurant operators to equal fees charged to
benevolent organizations ($40). Cost: $27,500 annually. OR
2. Reduce fees for all temporary restaurants to $20 (suggested by event
organizers). Cost: $41,250 annually. OR
3. Waive fees for all temporary restaurants in 2010. Cost $55,000.
Options/Issues:
■ Waive/reduce fees for only certain events based on submitted application.
■ Waive/reduce fees for only certain applicants based on submitted
application.
Option B: Implement an 'Actual Cost of Service' program
• Charge an hourly rate based on the actual time spent at the event.
• Event organizer would 'bundle' license applications for all vendors together
and serve as the master applicant.
• Organizer pays a deposit up front-once actual costs are determined, either
refund the difference or invoice the balance. Deposit based on the number of
vendors.
• Organizer could potentially reduce cost by overseeing vendors during set-up
to minimize county inspection time.
• Cost savings unknown
• Adds administrative staff time, will be difficult to set up on short notice.
• All 2010 events or only certain events based on application?
Requested Action: Discuss and provide direction to staff on if and how to proceed.