2010-2923-Minutes for Meeting October 13,2010 Recorded 11/3/2010COUNTY
NANCYUBLANKENSHIP,P000NTY CLERKDS vd ~~~0.79~3
COMMISSIONERS' JOURNAL 11/03/2010 02;16;48 PM
11111111111111111111111111111111
2010-2023
Do not remove this page from original document.
Deschutes County Clerk
Certificate Page
6
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, OCTOBER 13, 2010
Present were Commissioners Dennis R. Luke, Alan Unger and Tammy Baney.
Also present were Dave Kanner, County Administrator; Erik Kropp, Deputy
County Administrator; and, for a portion of the meeting, Joe Studer, County
Forester; Laurie Craghead, Steve Griffin and Mark Pilliod, County Counsel; Tom
Anderson, Todd Cleveland and Nick Lelack, Community Development; George
Ponte of the Oregon Department of Fish & Wildlife; John Allen of the U.S. Forest
Service; and Debbie Norton of the Bureau of Land Management. No
representatives of the media were in attendance.
Chair Luke opened the meeting at 1:30 p.m.
1. Forester Update.
George Ponte explained that over the latest fire season in the region, there were
85 fires, fewer than average. Deschutes County had 29 fires, 64% of average,
21 of which were human caused, mostly due to improper burning of debris.
Commissioner Unger asked about the status of the Skyline Forest activities
relating to the Rooster Rock fire. Mr. Ponte said the property owners have done
some harvesting and have cleaned up the damaged timber, and he feels they are
doing a good job of managing the property.
Mr. Ponte said they have had some staff reductions and are having to do more
with less. The rate for fire reduction services paid by property owners in this
area is the highest in the state, and appeals are starting to occur, mostly from
ranchers .who own timberland and grazing land. With the current economy,
these property owners are struggling to pay for fire protection.
Efforts are underway to try to find other funding sources that are more stable,
but the group analyzing the issue was not able to come to any conclusions or
agreement. The State forest program is supposed to be self-sustaining, but
because of the forest products industry slowdown, this is not possible. It could
take ten years to bring this back up.
Minutes of Board of Commissioners' Work Session Wednesday, October 13, 2010
Page 1 of 4 Pages
John Allen stated that due to some bond and stimulus fund money, they were
able to put in a new Sisters office and one in John Day.
In regard to slash burning and smoke intrusion, they did field some complaints.
Joe Studer said that a lot of discussion is occurring regarding forest land
classifications. Mr. Ponte stated that the Classification Committee is doing this
work, which is a county effort guided by the Department of Forestry, and is
charged with examining which lands meet the definition of forest lands, what
kind of forest lands exist, and then determining the fire protection rates paid by
the property owners.
Classification is independent of zoning; property just has to meet the definition
of forest land. There has not been a forest lands classification done in
Deschutes County for probably thirty years. Some people pay for structural fire
protection (their rural fire protection district) and also wildfire protection.
Debbie Norton stated they are continuing the education programs. Also, some
BLM properties are on the market, but no bids came in on some of them. The
bid amount is to be at least the appraised amount. The BLM still owes the State
about 1,600 acres, which they want mostly from Deschutes County.
Regarding Cline Buttes, a decision was signed for right of way access for seven
landowners needing access, plus another for fuel breaks. Funding for the Eagle
Crest program is on the top of the program, about $20,000. Not all lots are lots
of record, so the efforts to dispose and acquire properties is very confusing,
There are several other properties involved.
Discussion occurred regarding solutions to the lot of record issue, with
clarification added by Laurie Craghead.
She said that the West Butte project, which is located partly on Crook and
Deschutes counties, involves wind energy, but there are issues relating to
endangered species such as eagles. There is a wind energy summit scheduled
for Bend in November, sponsored by Governor's Office. There will be limited
access.
Mr. Allen said his agency is moving forward on trying to get grants. He
thanked Commissioner Unger for his efforts in traveling to Washington D.C. to
talk with federal agency staff about the situation here, to try to get funding. He
feels this was successful.
Minutes of Board of Commissioners' Work Session Wednesday, October 13, 2010
Page 2 of 4 Pages
2. Continuation of Discussion of Implementation of Senate Bill 360 -
Defensible Space.
Joe Stutler provided an updated memo (a copy of which is attached for
reference). He said that since the last time, some grant efforts have been
delayed. An administrative process seems to be preferable over a legal process.
The problem is fires occurring in unprotected areas will not be quickly handled,
if at all. If the fire spreads onto another owners' land, there is liability for the
cost incurred to handle the fire.
Dave Kanner noted that there is no mechanism in place to prosecute.
Commissioner Unger stated that they need to move forward with the process
and adjust it as needed.
Mr. Stutler will work with Legal Counsel to develop the Ordinance for
implementation. Steve Griffin observed that there are models available in other
areas, with possibly Washington County's being the best example.
3. Update of Commissioners' Meetings and Schedules.
The Board discussed the Thousand Days Roadmap for economic development
and a request for funding. Commissioner Baney stated that she would meet
with them soon and find out more.
October 25 work session, tour of Poe Sholes facility.
Meetings still on the calendar for November 22, including a BOCC/department
directors' luncheon.
4. Other Items.
Executive Session, under ORS 192.660(2)(h), pending or threatened litigation.
The Board went into Executive Session at 3:1Op. m.
Being no further items discussed, the meeting adjourned at 4:15 p.m.
Minutes of Board of Commissioners' Work Session Wednesday, October 13, 2010
Page 3 of 4 Pages
DATED this Day of
Deschutes County Board of Commissioners.
ATTEST:
Recording Secretary
2010 for the
Dennis R. Luke, Chair
-aZ24-t- (~4~
Alan Un er, Vice Chair
Tammy Baney, Commissioner
Minutes of Board of Commissioners' Work Session Wednesday, October 13, 2010
Page 4 of 4 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.org
WORK SESSION AGENDA
DESCHUTES COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
1:30 P.M., WEDNESDAY, OCTOBER 13, 2010
1. Forester Update - Joe Studer & Representatives from the Forest Service, BLM
and ODF&W
2. Continuation of Discussion of Implementation of Senate Bill 360 - Defensible
Space - Joe Studer
3. Update of Commissioners' Meetings and Schedules
4. Other Items
Executive Session, under ORS 192.660(2)(h), pending or threatened litigation -
Steve Griffin & Laurie Craghead
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.
!f 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-t-I to access the state transfer relay service for TTY.
Please call (541) 388-6571 regarding alternative formats or for further information.
N
y
N
E
O
" 3
1
L
~
l~
~
l
-
~p
S
N
fy~
4
J
=
Q
cl
rIn
tic
N
C
°J
cco
4-
O
O
Z
I
a
MEMORANDUM
DATE: October 13, 2010
TO: Deschutes County BOCC
FROM: Joe Stutler, Deschutes County Forester
RE: Forester Update
For the months of July-September the following projects and issues have either been
accomplished or addressed:
1. We are implementing the ODF grant agreement, we are approximately 50%
complete and have already exceeded both our acre and green ton targets and
continue with work in Central Oregon to treat wildland fuels and convert into
biomass.
2. We continue working with a FEMA contractor to complete the environmental
document for the new $3 million grant which we'll being implementing in 2011.
Additionally we plan to apply for a fourth grant opportunity with partners from
Crook and Klamath Counties, the deadline for application is November 15, 2010.
3. We continue our work of fuels treatment in South County, Ponderosa Pines and
numerous low income/disabled citizens performing defensible space work on
both vacant lots and properties with homes. By the end of this calendar year we
will have treated every county owned lot from Sunriver south to the county line
except for those classified as wetland. Our plans with the wetlands are to
develop a comprehensive plan with ODF and State of Oregon Waterways to treat
the remaining vacant lots and other private lots in neighborhoods that have the
wetlands issue.
We continue to implement partnership opportunities with Awbrey Glen, Sunriver
and High Desert Museum which treats fuels with matching funding and efforts. In
total those three partnerships alone will treat over 700 acres and provide both
defensible space and biomass. This fall we plan a FireFree event with Bailey's
@ Knott Landfill and will have sweat equity programs in the following areas which
will be used for biomass:
a. Deschutes River Woods
b. Awbrey Glen
c. Lane Knolls
d. Tillicum Village
e. Eagle Crest
4. The Sunriver CWPP was completed and we have had the initial meeting with
Bend with a scheduled completion of January 15, 2011.
5. Project Wildfire/FireFree Programs-we continue to meet monthly and provide
education opportunities to both existing neighborhoods and adding new ones
who want to participate in our programs. FireFree has officially evolved into a
year long effort using the annual spring cleanup to kick off the campaign before
the summer fire season.
6. The Deschutes National Forest was awarded our proposal which will essentially
create a healthy forest and treat fuels on approximately 130,000 acres in the
Bend watershed and areas in the Three Creeks and lands south and west of
Sisters.
7. During the Roster Rock wildland fire in August we capitalized on the teachable
moment and conducted a press conference at the Incident Command Post to
illustrate defensible space, fuels treatment and smoke from unwanted wildland
fires. The impacts from the fire and taking advantage of that incident have
significantly increased the demand for information, education and neighborhoods
wanting to do their part.
8. On September 29, 2010 1 met with the BOCC to discuss the defensible space
ordinance in the unprotected lands in Deschutes County. The BOCC requested
time to study the proposal and is considering the policy questions outlined in the
presentation. Preliminarily the BOCC is considering a public hearing on the
matter and will decide direction to move forward with the policy questions
regarding the proposed ordinance.
Joe Stutler
Deschutes County Forester
DATE: September 22, 2010
TO: Deschutes County BOCC
FROM: Joe Stutler, Deschutes County Forester
RE: Defensible Space Ordinance Policy Options
For the last six years Deschutes County has worked closely with the Oregon
Department of Forestry (ODF) implementing the Oregon Forestland-Urban
Interface Fire Protection Act (SB-360) enacted in 1997. In 2004, Deschutes
County was one of two counties in Oregon to classify private lands protected by
ODF using one of three classification ratings; high, extreme and high density
extreme. During the classification process it became evident that since ODF
protects approximately 177,000 of private lands there were many more private
lands in the county protected by municipalities and fire districts without defensible
space standards, the striking acreage was the unprotected lands in Deschutes
County which is approximately 175,000 acres which also had no defensible
space standards other than recommendations in the Community Fire Plans.
In 2009 as we began the re-classification (a requirement of every,five years is
specified in the legislation) the classification committee worked with the
municipalities and fire districts to seek approval of classifying private lands using
the SB-360 rating systems and received universal support. It was also a wise
decision to include all the private lands that were unprotected which effectively
gave all private lands in the County a SB-360 rating.
In the 2007 SB-360 legislation for lands protected by ODF the consequences for
non-compliance was as follows:
• Treating fuels and certification is a property owner responsibility, if the
property owner chooses not to perform the defensible space work and not
certify the property and send the certification back to ODF, there are no
consequences.
• If on the same property (without certification and defensible space) a
wildland fire originates and spreads beyond the property boundary, and
the ODF and cooperating agencies suppressed the wildland fire the
property owner could be liable up to $100,000 for suppression costs.
In Deschutes County with the approximately 175,000 acres of unprotected lands
it made logical sense to develop an ordinance similar to SB-360 utilizing the
same standards based on the classification which focused on education and
voluntary compliance. Currently we have an ordinance which regulates open
burning on unprotected lands (DCC 8.20) with emphasis on education but
ultimately a Class A violation.
In developing the defensible space ordinance we considered the nature of
unprotected lands (no structural or wildland agency will respond), the fact that we
have lost both structures and private property from wildland fire in these areas in
past years due to little or no defensible space, the fact that we have an open
burning ordinance with consequences, and in the unprotected lands we have
approximately 150 homes scattered throughout the county with approximately
400 people who potentially could be impacted from a wildland fire.
Consequently we developed six possible options for the defensible space
ordinance for unprotected lands:
1. Match the requirements in SB-360 exactly with the only consequences
being after a fire started in a non-treated property, with Deschutes County
seeking suppression costs.
2. Based on a complaint scenario, work with property owners to treat the
fuels and if non-compliance the County would treat the property to SB-360
standards and bill the property owner.
3. Based on a complaint scenario, work with the property to treat the fuels
and if non-compliance the county would issue a citation (Class A violation)
and continue working with the property owner until proper fuels treatment
occurred, additional citations may be required. This approach is currently
being used successfully by the City of Bend.
4. A combination of Alternatives 1 and 2.
5. A combination of Alternatives 1 and 3.
6. No action.
Based on the nature of unprotected lands and the wildland fire occurrence my
recommendation is Alternative 5.
Not recommending the other Alternatives is based on the following:
1. With Alternative 1, matching SB-360 exactly takes away the strategy of
preventing a wildland fire by proactively working with the property owner.
Because there is no wildland or structural fire response, something
stronger than collecting suppression costs seems necessary.
2. With Alternative 2, if Deschutes County assumed the responsibility of
treating fuels on private land for a property owner not in compliance and
resisted efforts to assist with the fuels treatment, the liability the county
would assume both directly and vicariously seemed more than necessary
and fails to have the property owner redeem their responsibilities. This
Alternative alone would not recover suppression costs thus reducing
another incentive for treating fuels.
3. With Alternative 3, citations alone and after working with the property
owner to treat the fuels can serve as a prevention tool and incrementally
deliver fuels treatment to the desired results. Again, this Alternative alone
would not recover suppression costs thus reducing another incentive for
treating fuels.
4. With combining Alternatives 1 and 2 the county would still have the liability
of treating fuels on private lands which seem unnecessary not only from a
liability perspective, the home owner still has not redeemed their
responsibilities and the program management workload of
accomplishment of work through contracts, administratively billing the
property owner and tracking those activities does not appear to be a
sound investment.
5. With combining Alternatives 1 and 3 the county would be able to collect
suppression costs (like SB-360), utilize citations as a prevention tool only
after all proactive methods failed and ultimately the property owner
redeems their responsibilities and the citizens and property owners in the
unprotected are better served from a wildland fire perspective thru this risk
management technique.
6. No Action, with the wildland fire issues in Deschutes County combined
with the cumulative successful efforts delivered in education, prevention,
fuels treatment, completing seven community fire plans, collaboration with
open burning, ODF collaboration with SB-360 classification, and the
potential liabilities the county assumes with this alternative, we should
consider stronger measures to proactively address defensible space
measures to prevent wildland fires in the unprotected areas.
From a policy perspective I am requesting the Deschutes County Board of
County Commissioners consider these Alternatives and decide which direction
we should proceed.
/s/ Joseph E. Stutler
JOSEPH E. STUTLER
Deschutes County Forester
DATE: October 13, 2010
TO: Deschutes County BOCC
FROM: Joe Stutler, Deschutes County Forester
RE: Defensible Space Ordinance Policy Options Addendum
On September 22, 2010 my presentation regarding the proposed Defensible
Space Ordinance and subsequent policy request from the Board of
Commissioners concluded with the perception left by me that Deschutes County
may have a legal liability for fire suppression costs on unprotected lands. That is
an inaccurate perception, after extensive legal review of both ORS and Oregon
Administrative Rule there is no language or statute that gives or infers that
liability.
Deschutes County has the authority and jurisdiction in statute to regulate both
open burning (DCC 8.20) and if decided by the County Commissioners also
regulate defensible space in the unprotected lands.
Consequently my recommendations have been modified to the following:
1. Proceed with a policy decision to implement a defensible space ordinance
for the unprotected lands.
2. In Deschutes County develop an administrative process for resolving
violations rather that a judicial process as per SB 915.
3. In the proposed ordinance define that an administrative process will be
used to deal with non-compliance.
4. For any costs incurred by the County as a result of a wildland fire on
unprotected land the Deschutes County Board of County Commissioners
could authorize either a civil lawsuit and/or authorize an administrative
process to assess recovery costs. In reality if a wildland fire burns from
unprotected lands to the jurisdiction of agencies with suppression
responsibilities that agency with legal jurisdiction would take the
appropriate action for cost recovery.
Joe Stutler
Deschutes County Forester