Loading...
2011-42-Minutes for Meeting January 24,2011 Recorded 2/22/2011DESCHUTES COUNTY OFFICIAL RECORDS CJ 2011'42 NANCY BLANKENSHIP, COUNTY CLERK COMMISSIONERS' JOURNAL 1111111 11 111 02/22/201102:10:15 PIS 2011-42 II Do not remove this page from original document. Deschutes County Clerk Certificate Page F's r, -V F_ C3 -A 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 SESION DESCHUTES COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS MONDAY, JANUARY 24, 2011 Present were Commissioners Tammy Baney, Alan Unger and Tony DeBone. Also present were Dave Kanner, County Administrator; Erik Kropp, Deputy County Administrator; and, for a portion of the meeting, Dave Inbody, Assistant to the Administrator; Scot Langton and Eric Sexton, Anna Johnson, Communications; Assessor's Office; Joe Sadony, I. T.; Laurie Craghead, County Counsel; and ten other citizens. Chair Baney opened the meeting at 1:30 p.m. 1. Discussion of Wildlife Habitat Deferral Program. Larry Pecenka of the Oregon Department of Fish & Wildlife came before the Board and explained some of the work he does. The program was implemented in 1998, and EFU zoned properties were allowed to enroll. He took over management of the program in 2004 and started actively monitoring properties at that time. The land is monitored for wildlife habitat purposes but he found that some people want the designation just for tax purposes. Non-compliance was about 39%. It included 114 properties at one time; it is now at 86. Some were removed willingly, and some were not. He said that the compliance process allows the property owner six months to comply. Some are unable or unwilling to comply, if buildings or roads were placed without permission or trees were removed. There is still a lot of interest in the program. It operates from March 31 to April 1, which is the final date for enrollment. Commissioner Unger asked if they are proactive or if they react when they receive a request to be included. Mr. Pecenka replied that during the real estate boom days, there were a lot of requests. They looked at properties in the wildlife overlay areas, which are a natural. He is the only person who handles the program. Not everyone's property qualifies. Minutes of Board of Commissioners' Work Session Monday, January 24, 2011 Page 1 of 7 Pages Commissioner Unger asked about the sage grouse. Mr. Pecenka said that most of that is on federal land and is not a part of the program he handles. It was the intent of the program was to support endangered or at risk species. There are also special features such as rimrock and the river that are covered. Commissioner Unger asked what farm deferral mean and how does that tie into this. Scot Langton stated that his department is the enforcement for most. If someone qualifies under Mr. Pecenka's program, he will place the property under deferral based on the zone. Farm deferral is based on a revenue structure. If there is an issue, his office takes action. This particular program falls under ODF&W. Commissioner Unger asked what the discount is for farm deferral. Mr. Langston said that the house and one acre comes out; the rest can be considered farmland. It depends on the County. Mr. Langton asked if a property is just open space or forested, does that make a difference. Mr. Pecenka stated that there is a plan for each property, which would address juniper treatment, weed issues and more, to get to a habitat benefit. Some that were in farm deferral previously may be able to roll back into it at some point. Commissioner Unger asked if the plan addresses disturbances such as excess noise, ATV use, excessive shooting, and so on. Mr. Pecenka said that if anything is potentially a big problem for the wildlife, it is considered. There are times of the year when some land can be used in different ways. Mr. Pecenka thinks there are 13 counties involved in the program, but many in eastern Oregon including Crook and Jefferson, do not participate. The plan is voluntary, and since it is just for EFU zoning, many are not eligible. To open it up to other zones, the Board has to make the original request. Commissioner DeBone asked if there is something else that needs to be discussed. Mr. Kanner said the issue is adding F-1 zones into the program. Mr. Pecenka said that the three counties allow it. Mr. Kanner stated that even if the Board makes that decision, each property is evaluated on a case-by-case basis. Minutes of Board of Commissioners' Work Session Monday, January 24, 2011 Page 2 of 7 Pages If the piece is forested, you do not have the ability to do anything with it. Therefore, why would there be a tax incentive to do something you already cannot do. Mr. Pecenka said that some work could be done; for instance, brush control. Laurie Craghead said that farm uses could be done on forestland, such as grazing cattle. She added that the governing body could request a designation be removed if it creates an economic burden to the city or county. Mr. Kanner asked how much has been deferred. Mr. Langton said it amounts to about $206,000 total for all of the properties now involved in it. The cost to Deschutes County is about $24,000. Chair Baney asked if they are close to cities and it would bring them out of forest uses. Ms. Craghead said that destination resorts are allowed on F-2 land. Chair Baney asked what the county is trying to achieve, and if it makes sense; and the financial ramifications and use of the land. Commissioner DeBone said the S&W Conservation group is in attendance and he is not sure of their interest. Rex Barber, Chair of the District said he understood that this agenda item was initiated by S&W, and wondered why they were not included. Their mission statement indicates they are to be a conservation partner, and would like the County to explore the possibility of looking at forest zones for the deferral program. There have been discussions with Mr. Pecenka about timber management and wildlife management in these areas. The landowner bears the expense and there should be an incentive for this. They would like the county to consider expanding tax deferral into forest zones. He realizes they have to be eligible and may not obtain the designation. Chair Baney said she thought it ended up on the agenda due to the concerns of a private citizen who was interested in the tax ramifications. Mr. Barber stated that the Soil & Water Conservation District wants to explore this issue, and has been in contact with Mr. Pecenka in the past. Mr. Pecenka said that zoning is an issue, because there can be the same habitat and type of land on one side of a road that is zoned differently across the road. The same applies for land in one county or another. Commissioner Unger asked for his recommendation. Mr. Pecenka stated that if legislation allows for it, he supports it. The property owner needs to be incented to do this. Minutes of Board of Commissioners' Work Session Monday, January 24, 2011 Page 3 of 7 Pages Commissioner DeBone asked if this could greatly increase the program. Mr. Pecenka replied that he has not been contacted by many forest property owners. There is benefit for consolidating the properties so the land is consistent. Chair Baney asked whether a hearing might be appropriate. She wants to know if it interfaces with SB 360, which has certain requirements. Commissioner Unger would like to involve the Forester and the Forest Service. The idea is to help with good planning. Commissioner DeBone supports the idea. Mr. Barber said that Mr. Kuhn has been involved with this for some time, and wants to make a statement in this regard on behalf of the S&W District. Chair Baney said that Mr. Kuhn wears two hats, as he is also a property owner who might benefit from such as action. She believes the idea for a discussion came up because of that. She would rather set up a future meeting where all input could be provided. 2. Update regarding Broadcasting and Streaming of Business Meetings. Mr. Kanner said the question of broadcasting meetings was raised when he first joined the County, but the cost of that and other improvements was too high. Funds have been set aside that now totals about $75,000 for this purpose. The cost of equipment is about $42,000. He explained how the cameras would be arranged. One person, typically a college student getting paid minimum wage, would handle it via a touch screen. The company being considered would archive, etc. The State may begin to require all entities to start recording meetings. Joe Sadony said he contacted other companies and the cost is similar. The charge is for streaming and archiving. The County purchases and installs the equipment. The County would not want to do the archiving as it takes a lot of server space. Dave Inbody said that there is the capability of recording and going live, but also putting it out on cable later. Mr. Kanner stated that the franchise agreement with the cable providers requires that they broadcast the meetings at no cost. Streaming does require funding. The equipment would be fixed in the Boardroom, so the Planning Commission meetings could also be recorded. Mr. Sadony said that an audio recording, without video, could also be done and posted on the site. Commissioner DeBone asked if there is a local provider. Mr. Sadony replied that the City of Bend does this but it costs them about $400 per meeting. Minutes of Board of Commissioners' Work Session Monday, January 24, 2011 Page 4 of 7 Pages Chair Baney stated that the down side is that there will be more of an opportunity for someone to cut out statements and use them inappropriately. Chair Baney stated that there might be those who may be upset by those who do not have the appropriate computer or if there are broadcasting issues. Commissioner DeBone said that the world is moving in this direction. There was discussion about taking public testimony via webcam. Mr. Kanner would want to avoid a situation where someone might not want to identify himself or herself. He also stated that there would be more people wanting to give citizen comment, so the time allowed should be monitored. Regarding raising the dais, the exhibit shows a built-in dais rather than just building a platform and a ramp. Each would cost about $30,000, with almost half of it in custom casework. They could get competitive quotes on this. The recording person and equipment manager would be located in roughly the same location as it is today. Flat screen television screens will be set up in strategic locations throughout the room. Mr. Sadony said a big challenge is recording the audio, since everyone speaks differently and there are background noises that can be a problem. Chair Baney would like to make sure that work is done by local companies whenever possible. Mr. Sadony said that there are not that many companies in this area who do it all. Chair Baney would like to be sure local woodworking companies are made aware of the project. The Commissioners asked that this move forward. 3. Discussion of Spay/Neuter Grant Program. Dave Inbody gave a brief overview of the program. The three bidders were all accepted and Mr. Inbody and three members of the Dog Control Board of Supervisors reviewed the applications. The Commissioners supported the recommendation. Minutes of Board of Commissioners' Work Session Monday, January 24, 2011 Page 5 of 7 Pages 4. Discussion of Proposed Addition to Personnel Rules ("Limited Duration Positions"). Erik Kropp stated that this codifies the position that if a person is hired under a grant program, the position goes away when the grant runs out. In this manner, another position will not be jeopardized in that event. This new definition would clarify this situation. He is waiting to hear back from the union representatives with their questions or concerns. Mr. Kanner thinks AFSCME feels these are an attempt to keep people out of the union. Commissioner Unger asked about parity regarding wages and benefits. Mr. Kropp said that the terms are based more on the grant funds than the classification of the position. Chair Baney asked how pay is determined. Mr. Kropp replied that they ask the departments what the level should be based on qualifications, etc. Chair Baney suggested that perhaps some of the delegation meet with the Board to find out what they think makes sense for the area. Mr. Kanner said that the District Attorney wants to reconfigure some of the space there, including the use of the jury assembly room for District Attorney space. Commissioner DeBone would like a tour of the stone building, where the D.A. wants the jury assembly room to move. 5. Other Items. Economic Forecast breakfast will take place this Thursday. The Commissioners discussed doing the pledge of allegiance at the beginning of meetings. This will likely take place when the work on the dais is completed. Redistricting was discussed at this time. Chair Baney distributed some information, and concerns and potential ramifications were brought up. It possible that the County would be split up into several Senate districts. The population to do this is 128,000, and the County is about 175,000. Minutes of Board of Commissioners' Work Session Monday, January 24, 2011 Page 6 of 7 Pages Bend is too large to be within a single House district now as well. Natural geographic features and community interest are supposed to be the criteria, but this is not always possible. Being no further discussion, the meeting adjourned at 3:50 p.m. DATED this ~=~7✓-> Day of 2011 for the Deschutes County Board of Commissioners. Tammy Baney, Chair ATTEST: -6f lv~~ U~~ Recording Secretary Anthony DeBone, Vice Chair 6VI- Alan Unger, Commissioner Minutes of Board of Commissioners' Work Session Monday, January 24, 2011 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.org WORK SESSION AGENDA DESCHUTES COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS 1:30 P.M., MONDAY, JANUARY 24, 2011 1. Discussion of Wildlife Habitat Deferral Program - Scot Langton, Assessor; Larry Pecenka, ODF& W 2. Update regarding Broadcasting and Streaming of Business Meetings - Dave Kanner 3. Discussion of Spay/Neuter Grant Program - Dave Inbody 4. Discussion of Proposed Addition to Personnel Rules ("Limited Duration Positions") - Erik Kropp 5. Other Items PLEASE NOTE: At any time during this meeting, an executive session could be called to address issues relating to ORS 192.660(2) (e), real property negotiations; ORS 192.660(2) (h), litigation; ORS 192.660(2)(d), labor negotiations; 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. d~ N H L 0 ~ N ~ E o ~ C. M N ✓1 4 c O ~ o ? ~ .0 r d A tx N C co C E ~ ~s z o a 0-7 4k 1 1 a d~ N 0 N L ~ t A N ~ V r ~ o, c o s - ~ ~ ~ a , SK ~ b 4 Ao c x o~ 8 ~ w 4 o 4 ~ J lv H tx c Q ~ i~ L ey'p z v I O V ~ J V SS~~ ((f Q. 0 1! AA", - < Department of Administrative Services Dave Kanner, County Administrator 1300 NW Wall St, Suite 200, Bend, OR 97701-1960 (541) 388-6570 - Fax (541) 385-3202 www. co. deschutes. or. us January 19, 2011 TO: Board of Commissioners FROM: Dave Kanner RE: Wildlife Habitat Conservation Management program Last year, the Board of Commissioners requested a work session discussion of the Wildlife Habitat Conservation Management Program (WHCMP), after a citizen raised questions about it during a Board business meeting. The program provides tax deferral incentives for EFU land that meets certain criteria. That work session is scheduled for January 24. Larry Pacenka of the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife and Scot Langton, County Assessor, will be in attendance. WHCMP is a state program. There are about 125 tax accounts in Deschutes County participating in the program. Attached is some background information about the program provided by ODFW. Enhancing the Lives of Citizens by Delivering Quality Services in a Cost-Effective Manner OREGON Fish & Wildlife WILDLIFE HABITAT CONSERVATION MANAGEMENT PROGRAM (WHCMP) lltti)://www.dfw.St,ItC.ro us/lands/wlicmp overview.html The program's focus is to preserve, enhance or improve the composition, structure, and function of habitat for native wildlife, particularly for wildlife species listed by Oregon as Sensitive, Threatened or Endangered. Emphasis is on native habitats that have been identified as scarce, becoming scarce, of special ecological significance, or areas of special interest within a city or on lands zoned Exclusive Farm Use (EFU) in rural Deschutes county. Homesite location is an important consideration for protection of wildlife habitat values. Locating new dwellings or structural improvements to minimize conflict with existing or proposed habitat keeps quality habitat on a property in as large an undisturbed acreage as possible, one of the conservation and management practices appropriate to achieve the objectives of this program (WHCMP Administrative Rule 635-430-0030 (14)). A new homesite planned to be located in the central area of a property and/or the identified wildlife habitat on that property, does not provide the optimum protection for wildlife habitat, and will not receive favorable consideration for WHCMP plan approval. Due to a backlog of compliance checks on properties already enrolled in WHCMP, ODFW will not be approving any plans for the current year that include livestock, grazing or haying, unless ODFW determines that the property contains high quality and/or quantity of wildlife habitat (WHCMP Administrative Rule 635-430-0050 (6)). These agricultural activities may be better served by agricultural deferral. Plans that identify restoration of acreages previously converted for agricultural purposes back to native wildlife habitat will continue to be considered for approval. For additional information, contact: Larry Pecenka - ODFW Habitat Biologist ODFW High Desert Region 61374 PalTelI Road Bend, OR 97702 (541) 388-6363 larr~.l.pecenlca~i"~.statc.or. us Created on 5/11/2005 10:14:00 AM Department of Fish and Wildlife On?pDn High Desert Region 61374 Parrell Road Bend, OR 97702 MieodmRKutionFsld,C,owmw (541) 388-6363 FAX (541) 388-6281 August 10, 2010 Dear Wildlife Habitat Conservation and Management Program (WHCMP) participants, The Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife (ODFW) hopes this letter finds you well and enjoying the benefits of your property managed for the protection, restoration and enhancement of wildlife habitat. With this letter you will find the results of the questionnaire that is intended to provide some feedback on participating landowners' purpose for WHCMP enrollment and their experience of interaction with ODFW staff. Thank you to those who returned the questionnaire, it is greatly appreciated and will help Deschutes County and ODFW evaluate how this program is being implemented. Explanation of results: The first two questions were to be answered by priority. Not all responders did that, so only the ones that did had their answers recorded. Example: (37) responses indicated "Rural residence for yourself' as their first #1 priority. (4) responses indicated "Rural residence for yourself' as their second #2 priority. And so on. (0) responses indicated "Place for irrigated pasture and/or hay" as their first #1 priority. (4) responses indicated "Place for irrigated pasture and/or hay" as their second #2 priority. And so on. Hope that helps make these recorded results clear. Questions three through nine have a number in parentheses indicating how many chose that answer or statement. Not all respondents answered every question. All "statements" were recorded as written by the landowner on the questionnaire. ODFW thanks all of you who are participating in the WHCMP and your response to this questionnaire helping continue the Deschutes County, ODFW and Private Landowner Partnership to conserve and restore fish and wildlife habitat in Central Oregon. We look forward to our continued partnership for the benefit of wildlife and their habitat needs. Call me if you have any questions about the results of this questionnaire. Thank you for your help, we appreciate your cooperation. Sincerely, Larry Pecenka ODFW Habitat Biologist (541) 388-6444 Ext. 229 Copy: Steven George, ODFW Wildlife Biologist, Deschutes Watershed District Amy Stuart, ODFW Watershed Manager, Deschutes Watershed District Patty Snow, ODFW Land and Water Coordinator, Salem Eric Sexton, Deschutes County Assessor Office Oregon May 12, 2010 Department of Fish and Wildlife High Desert Region 61374 Parrell Road Bend, OR 97702 (541) 388-6363 FAX (541) 388-6281 Dear Wildlife Habitat Conservation and Management Program (WHCMP) participants, The Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife (ODFW) hopes this letter finds you well and enjoying the benefits of your property managed for the protection, restoration and enhancement of wildlife habitat. With this letter you will find a questionnaire that is intended to provide ODFW with some feedback on your purpose for WHCMP enrollment and your experience of interaction with ODFW staff. This information is needed to reassure Deschutes County Commissioners, the Deschutes County Assessor, and ODFW Administration that the WHCMP is a valid reason to provide tax deferral to you as the participating landowner, and to help maintain this program as an opportunity into the future. Your return of the questionnaire is greatly appreciated and will also help ODFW evaluate how we are implementing this program. In Deschutes County, the WHCMP has completed its twelfth year. Last year we sent a letter stating that more than 100 properties were currently enrolled and that approximately 4,000 acres were being managed for conservation and restoration of wildlife habitat as specified in individually signed plans. This amount of acreage dedicated to wildlife habitat conservation and restoration could really make a difference in sustaining the wildlife habitat resources in Central Oregon if all the agreed upon plans were implemented as approved. ODFW thanks all of you who are participating in the WHCMP and your response to this questionnaire will help continue the ODFW, Deschutes County, and Private Landowner Partnership to conserve and restore fish and wildlife habitat in Central Oregon. We look forward to our continued partnership for the benefit of wildlife and their habitat needs. Call me if you have any questions about the questionnaire. Please find a self addressed stamped envelope provided with the questionnaire. Please return the questionnaire by July 1, 2010. Thank you for your help, we appreciate your cooperation. Sincerely, Larry Pecenka ODFW Habitat Biologist (541) 388-6444 Ext. 229 Copy: Steven George, ODFW Wildlife Biologist, Deschutes Watershed District Amy Stuart, ODFW Watershed Manager, Deschutes Watershed District Patty Snow, ODFW Land and Water Coordinator, Salem Department of Fish and Wildlife High Desert Region Orewn 61374 Parrell Road Bend, OR 97702 Theo mRKWmWsl G%emcr (541) 388-6363 FAX (541) 388-6281 March 9, 2009 Dear Wildlife Habitat Conservation and Management Program (WHCMP) participants, The Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife (ODFW) hopes this letter finds you well and enjoying the benefits of your property managed for the protection, restoration and enhancement of wildlife habitat. In Deschutes County, the WHCMP is completing its eleventh year. Last year we sent a letter stating that more than 100 properties were currently enrolled and that approximately 4,000 acres were being managed for conservation and restoration of wildlife habitat as specified in individually signed plans. This amount of acreage dedicated to wildlife habitat conservation and restoration would really make a difference in sustaining the wildlife habitat resources in Central Oregon if all the agreed upon plans were being implemented as approved. Unfortunately, a number of landowners have chosen to make changes in management decisions for their property without approval of ODFW, they are not meeting the agreement in their approved plan or the objectives of WHCMP. ODFW has removed 18 properties from WHCMP enrollment with back- tax consequences to those landowners. Another 10 properties are teetering on the brink of removal. ODFW chose to not continue property enrollment in WHCMP during the past two years due to the workload required to monitor property enrollment and manage landowners in non-compliance with plan implementation. Through continued property inspections, ODFW still finds most participating landowners (-65%) to be following their WHCMP plans and ODFW wishes to thank you for your commitment to your agreements. Likewise, some landowners (-35%) were not following their plans for a variety of reasons, rendering their property development and management to be in non-compliance with the signed plan. This resulted in ODFW continuing to take action to help the landowner get back in compliance or to help the landowner remove their property from program enrollment. Non-compliance issues were as varied as the properties and the landowners enrolled. Some examples of non-compliance issues that have caused property removal from WHCMP are: 1. Failure to implement plan activities as approved with no notice to ODFW, and after a six month period to take corrective action (Oregon Administrative Rule [OAR] 635-430-0090 5, 6, &7), still not fulfilling the agreement as identified in the approved plan. This includes: • Seedings • Plantings • Water developments • Juniper control • Livestock grazing • Fence construction or removal • Haying • Weed control • Pet control • Nest box construction 2. Partitioning the property and adding additional County permitted homesites with no notice to and approval by ODFW. 3. Construction of facilities and structures not identified in their approved plan. 4. Bringing businesses onto the property not identified in the approved plan and that are in conflict with protecting wildlife habitat values on the property. In short, if development or management of a property enrolled in WHCMP wasn't implemented as agreed to in the plan, or development or property management took place that wasn't agreed to in the plan, then the landowner was found in non-compliance. If it's in the ODFW approved plan, it should be on the property. If it's not in the plan, it should not be on the property. There is a process for requesting an amendment to an approved plan to maintain or improve protection or restoration of habitat that may receive ODFW approval. This request must be presented to ODFW in writing and take place riior to making any changes to the property and management as identified in the approved plan. However, proposed amendments that would diminish wildlife habitat value of the property will not be approved. The Department encourages all participating landowners to review and follow the requirements of their approved plan. ODFW wants to work with participants who are dedicated to the conservation of fish and wildlife habitat, while also helping participants who have decided to develop or manage their property for other uses not identified in their plan to opt out of the program. ODFW thanks all of you who are participating in the WHCMP with the intention of conservation and restoration of fish and wildlife habitat in Central Oregon. We look forward to our continued partnership for the benefit of wildlife and their habitat needs. Call me if you have any questions about your participation with WHCMP and compliance with your approved plan. Sincerely, Larry Pecenka ODFW Habitat Biologist (541) 388-6444 Ext. 229 Copy: Steven George, ODFW Wildlife Biologist, Deschutes Watershed District Amy Stuart, ODFW Watershed Manager, Deschutes Watershed District Patty Snow, ODFW Land and Water Coordinator, Salem Wildlife Habitat Conservation and Management Program (WHCMP) Ouestionnaire Use additional sheets if necessary for your response 1. What is your purpose for owning rural property? (Number by priority) Rural residence for yourself Place for irrigated pasture and/or hay _ Place for livestock - Opportunity to protect, restore and enhance fish and wildlife habitat _ Investment property - Other (please be specific) 2. What was your purpose for enrolling in WHCMP? (Number by priority) Protect and manage property for fish and wildlife habitat benefits Tax relief Avoid Farm Deferral back taxes for building a Non-Farm Dwelling _ Other (please be specific) 3. How many years have you been in the WHCMP? 4. Have you initiated contact with ODFW staff after enrollment in WHCMP for advice or a request for an ODFW property visit? Yes _ No If "Yes" please explain the reason for requested ODFW assistance: 5. Has your property been inspected by ODFW staff for compliance with your ODFW approved WHCMP plan? Yes _ No 6. What has been your experience working with ODFW staff? (Please check all that apply) Helpful with WHCMP enrollment _ Knowledgeable about fish, wildlife and habitat management Knowledgeable about WHCMP participation requirements Available when asked for information or to make a property visit _ Not available when needed Difficult to work with, inflexible Unreasonable expectations for WHCMP participation _ Disrespectful, lack of consideration for the landowner _ Other (please be specific) 7. Do you think WHCMP participants should be held accountable to comply with their agreed to plans, allowing modifications to the plan only after having discussed a proposed change and receiving ODFW approval prior to the change of property management? - Yes _ No Please explain: 8. If your property management has been found to be in "Non-Compliance" with your ODFW approved WHCMP plan, what was your experience in working with ODFW staff through the process for coming back into compliance? (Please check all that apply) _ I have not been in Non-Compliance with my WHCMP plan _ ODFW staff was courteous and helpful ODFW staff was willing to work with me to correct the situation ODFW provided in writing the problem(s) of Non-Compliance _ ODFW staff provided clear expectations to correct the situation ODFW staff was not very understanding of the situation _ ODFW staff expects too much from the landowner ODFW should not have the right to tell the landowner what to do _ Other (please be specific) 9. Would you recommend the WHCMP to other eligible property owners? - Yes _ No Please explain: 10. Additional comments? Not required but useful: Name: Mailing address: Phone number: Wildlife Habitat Conservation and Management Program (WHCMP) Questionnaire Use additional sheets if necessary for your response 1. What is your purpose for owning rural property? (Number by priority) Rural residence for yourself #1 (37) #2 (4) #3 (2) #4 (1) #5 (1) Place for irrigated pasture and/or hay #1(0) #2 (4) #3 (5) #4 (6) #5 (1) _ Place for livestock #1 (3) #2 (3) #3 (6) #4 (1) - Opportunity to protect, restore and enhance fish and wildlife habitat #1 (10) #2 (24) #3 (6) #4 (5) Investment property #1 (0) #2 (4) #3 (6) #4 (3) #5 (7) - Other (please be specific) • "We live in Portland and this property provides an opportunity to enjoy and enhance the High Desert habitat. We use the site about 10-20 days a year & the native animals use it the remainder of the time." • "Didn't know this was deer winter range when I moved here. Water rights leased out to restore WhyChus Creek. Opportunity to fulfill estate plans and leave acreage in natural state for wildlife habitat for future generations." • "Horses." • "We were ranching (hay, cows, horses) for 25 years until we learned of the opportunity to join the WHCMP." • "Private property owned for private reasons. With a right to tax deferral as the sole compensation for keeping open space for public benefit. (Philosophical, don't get hung up on Statute and Rule - I think those also miss the mark some.)" • "#1- Best quality of life opportunity." • "#2 - Capture as large an acreage with our budget that could be kept whole and never developed - preferable next to BLM land." • 11#2 - Commitment to Oregon & Deschutes County." • "Share w/community the value of preservation." • "Land close to my parents home." • 11#3 - Privacy & quiet enjoyment of my surroundings." • 11#3 - A healthy, beautiful, natural environment for our family (a habitat that is healthy for what nature put here is healthy for us." • "I enjoy living in a rural setting and plan to establish a residence for myself. I feel that protecting the area and enhancing the valuable natural habitat should be paramount on everyone's priority list. I enjoy the efforts to restore and protect." 0 "Part-time residence, vacation property." 2. What was your purpose for enrolling in WHCMP? (Number by priority) Protect and manage property for fish and wildlife habitat benefits #1 (35) #2 (13) #3 (3) _ Tax relief #1 (8) #2 (30) #3 (7) Avoid Farm Deferral back taxes for building a Non-Farm Dwelling #1 (7) #2 (2) #3 (3) - Other (please be specific) • "The property was overgrazes (now cheatgrass is a problem) and we have cleaned up a lot of the junk previously kept at the site." • "Property not appropriate for farming." • "Fulfill lifelong goal of wildlife habitat improvement and wildlife refuge - return to natural state and leave for future generations." • "The implementation of our WHCMP allowed us to stay in our ranch home & lease part of our water right to the Deschutes Conservancy." • "See above. Don't like the leading question... at all. If you want to collect useable scoop in data integrity, you owe some outlining of the issues as they affect landowners." • "#1- Property was already enrolled but I would have enrolled anyway." • "Property was enrolled when we purchased it." • "We weren't aware of tax situation prior to enrollment. We just continued program of previous owner. Tax benefit is fantastic benefit - makes for enhanced awareness." • 11#2 - Tax relief yes, but was a necessary ingredient to buy as large a parcel as possible with the funds we had access to from previous house sales." • "We purchased the property and this program was already attached to the property." • "When we bought the property it was in the program." • "Primarily to protect the rural lands a little longer. Practice & fulfill good stewardship. " • "Build non-farm dwelling. Could not build any other way even paying tax. Thought it was great way. I have always wanted to be around wildlife and help them survive around development. • 11#3 - To learn more about the ecology and wildlife of this area." • "The WHCMP program outweighs any tax deferrals. In my particular case the county has deemed my property development with the underground infrastructure and moneys spent towards a building permit have been satisfied and would grant a building permit at anytime without a time frame. So, I would have to say that my continued enrolment in the WHCMP is at this time of primary importance to me." • "Purchased after it was enrolled." 3. How many years have you been in the WHCMP? 2 4. Have you initiated contact with ODFW staff after enrollment in WHCMP for advice or a request for an ODFW property visit? Yes (39) - No (25) If "Yes" please explain the reason for requested ODFW assistance: • "To insure we were doing what was expected. To open discussions w/ODFW in future property enhancements." • "Info on native plants & grasses & constructing pond/ideas." • "Obtained wildlife info, plans for bird houses & wildlife advice." • "They contacted me and did inspection." • "I have previous experience and continue to make habitat." • "Confirm split rail fence along driveway was OK for WHCMP, confer regarding restoration of bitterbrush, purchase bird box kits, inquire about bunchgrasses." • "I asked advice on a couple of issues & we have walked the property. I have also consulted BLM & Deschutes Land Trust." • "To get advice & input on tree thinning for fire prevention." • "Compliance." • "Advice on plan." • "I brought some "scat"/droppings to see if it was cougar - they didn't think so." • "I wanted to show that we are conforming with the requirements. Also if there was any other things that needed to be done." • "Questions regarding native plants and bird house construction." • "I.D. species, advise of new species, more ideas for habitat enhancement; problems establishing bitterbrush (have even raised from seed & transplanted). Plan change that originally deemed feasible and then not." • "We built a berm next to Hwy 20. Mr. Pecenka came out, toured the reserve & requested us to make certain additions to our work/restoration project." • "Assistance with juniper management." • "Just to make sure we are complying." • "Information regarding wild turkeys and diminished quail population." • "To get approval to build machine shed instead of barn. Shed was built as per plan. See enclosed." • 111. Noxious weed control information; posted Wildlife Habitat notices for property perimeters; information on badger behavior; juniper sapling control." • "Request for information." • "To discuss plans and obligations." • "Make sure everything was going as planned." • "Needed some advice about quail habitat construction and also frog habitat." • "Guidance in developing better habitat for wildlife." • "Sought advice from State Forester (Stu Otto) on ponderosa trees dieing & on planting 70 new ones. Sought advice from Jim Anderson on design of 35 bird houses and bat houses." 3 • "Discuss plan." • 11niseusc inniner invacinn & enntrnl_" • "Do not know what that is." • "To obtain information on constructing an agricultural storage building on the property." • "Wanting to see how to help species in my area to have the lands (winter range) for deer, bluebirds, water." • "For advice." • "Juniper management." • "Direction & help in developing the best wildlife environment possible." • "A few times for different reasons as we started living on property. Have always had my questions answered and info sent." • "To check on program compliance after building." • "To ask about resources and advice on habitat." • "Help for continueing my desire for complete compliance in any manner." • "Advice." • "Have not had the opportunity for a property visit due to my assignment issues and timing, but have sent mapping of nesting sites, underground habitat shelters and proposed stream/pond locations to the ODFW high desert region.." • "Review approved plan." • "Regarding our fence configuration to accommodate elk passage. Also, advice on Canada geese nesting boxes." • "Talked to Larry about weeds." • "Various." • "This year. Want advice on fire protection. Mainly cutting dead branches that touch the grasses." 5. Has your property been inspected by ODFW staff for compliance with your ODFW approved WHCMP plan? _ Yes (58) - No (5) • "I don't know? But I believe I am in compliance." • "There were a few added suggestions done quite reasonably during the visits as well as some in the original (plan) deemed unnecessary. We have complied with all changes suggested. The inspector was quite pleasant and helpful." • "I have no idea?" • "I believe so." 4 6. What has been your experience working with ODFW staff? (Please check all that apply) Helpful with WHCMP enrollment (54) Knowledgeable about fish, wildlife and habitat management (57) Knowledgeable about WHCMP participation requirements (54) _ Available when asked for information or to make a property visit (53) _ Not available when needed Difficult to work with, inflexible (2) Unreasonable expectations for WHCMP participation (1) _ Disrespectful, lack of consideration for the landowner Other (please be specific) • "Not unreasonable - but a bit "back against the wall" feeling from my perspective. I think do to other participants not complying with the program, so those of us that do, feel the unneeded pressure." • "I feel ODFW does an outstanding job." • "Spent entire afternoon with us on property to make recommendations." • "Great!" • "Staff guided us with our plan and provided opinions on bettering land management at the site." • "All my interactions with ODFW have been very positive & informative." • "They have been extremely helpful & knowledgeable!" • "We found Larry Pecenka's inspection visit very helpful & inspiring. (Letter from 8/18/08 attached.)" • "NOT. (Called to explain, qualify. Larry was out, talked to Steven George.) I like Larry and Steven lots. Good guys." • "Exceptionably knowledgeable about fish, wildlife and habitat management." • "Very Helpful. Very Knowledgeable. Very Available. Our rep is very helpful and encouraging." • "Larry Pecenca has been very helpful & polite and a pleasure to work with. He is extremely knowledgeable & we've learned a lot from him." • "The staff is extremely well informed and very helpful." • "Very knowledgeable." • "Larry Pacenka has been excellent to work with." • "Staff has been very knowledgeable & helpful." • "At the time we did not know this help was available. We paid a biologist to help with our plan (reference to Helpful with WHCMP enrollment). Always helpful. We continue to learn and value the opportunities to do so with knowledgeable staff and also to discuss our specific challenges." • "Was very helpful in correcting small compliance situation." • "ODFW has always answered questions and Larry has taken the time to send various publications to assist with habitat education." • "During inspection Larry was very helpful identifying native species and ideas to better manage the area." • "Larry id great! Relly an expert in his field & we appreciate his input & help whenever we need it." 5 7. Do you think WHCMP participants should be held accountable to comply with their agreed to plans, allowing modifications to the plan only after having discussed a proposed change and receiving ODFW approval prior to the change of property management? - Yes (60) - No (1) Please explain: • "Only yes if approval process is a two way discussion and there are time limits to the process." • "Although minor changes that do not affect wildlife should not need approval." • "As long as ODFW allows me to change something that is OK with County codes!" • "It is a privilege to be accepted, and have put substantial effort to apply and comply with plan. We hold land stewardship to be important now and in the future." • "That's a part of the deal." • "I think it's best to consult with the experts before changing aspects of the plan, which may not be effective habitat enhancements." • "It's a contract like any other contract or agreement - It's the law." • "It is not hard to comply as this is why we agreed to the terms." • "I do think that some modifications could be made under certain instances if required." • "Any changes should be reasonable and mutually agreed upon. Sometimes part of the plan may seem feasible initially then changes beyond landowner's control may require a change to the plan and reassessing a portion of the plan may call for changes. Ultimately the goal should always be to better wildlife habitat." • "This is a partnership." • "Because the property owner has committed to a specific plan that benefits wildlife." • "A deal is a deal - work within the agreement." • "X - Maybe, X - Depends. I think this is a bad question. (Leading, without educating - See typical voters pamphlet regarding gathering "Informed Votes".)" • "It's very hard to control noxious weeds & to grow bitterbrush." • "To help keep a good environment for wildlife." • "But with some flexibility and understanding of individual circumstances." • "We get the benefits therefore we comply - it's a win-win." • "It is only fair to those of us who are in compliance & do the work required that those who don't are held accountable. And it's only fair to the ODFW & the County." • "That was the agreement." • "Definitely!" • "X Maybe. Maybe depending on individual circumstances." • "We feel that WHCMP has been very knowledgeable to advise us." • "Any modifications need to be carried out with someone who knows about flora & fauna - habitat requirements, etc." • "Absolutely!" 6 • "We are in the program to protect wildlife habitat that is constantly being lost to development. Any changes to the property should be evaluated for wildlife impact." • "The plan is there for a reason." • "Those who really care about a wildlife habitat will do the work. Others who only care about the tax break & do nothing should be out." • "ODFW has been very reasonable and helpful in helping us to find solutions or modify parts of our plan that proved difficult for us." • "I believe that sticking to the original plan is important as not to veer away from what a professional wildlife biologist management plan details.. I also feel that as a property develops communication with the WHCMP is also important to adjust or add to the possibility of enhancing habitat for conservation. However, only with ODFW consent." • "This is an excellent way to enhance wildlife habitat. Anyone that does it for tax purposes and does not comply needs to do it right or else pay-up." • "This is the agreement of the program & we're happy to get expert advice." 8. If your property management has been found to be in "Non-Compliance" with your ODFW approved WHCMP plan, what was your experience in working with ODFW staff through the process for coming back into compliance? (Please check all that apply) I have not been in Non-Compliance with my WHCMP plan (43) ODFW staff was courteous and helpful (14) ODFW staff was willing to work with me to correct the situation (11) _ ODFW provided in writing the problem(s) of Non-Compliance (9) _ ODFW staff provided clear expectations to correct the situation (11) ODFW staff was not very understanding of the situation _ ODFW staff expects too much from the landowner (1) _ ODFW should not have the right to tell the landowner what to do (1) - Other (please be specific) • "If you agree to the plan than you should be held to what your plan was." • "Found in compliance but was advised to continue removal of junipers 8' and under. Larry was very helpful & provided excellent information & pamphlets!" • "Extremely understanding direction." • "ODFW is an excellent balance of enforcer and teacher for those who truly wish to provide for our wildlife. Excellent information provided." • "I would hope that before Non-Compliance went into effect that the WHCMP would work through the issues and understand circumstances. After all the loss would hurt the wildlife habitat environment and efforts need to be made to steer it back on tract. If not the wildlife ODFW and the landowner all lose." 7 9. Would you recommend the WHCMP to other eligible property owners? - Yes (62) - No (1) Please explain: • "Preserving habitat for native species & for future generations." • "This is a great program that allows wildlife to remain close to urban areas." • "It is a great program. It helps the wildlife and gives us tax relief." • "We have recommended WHCMP to several people in the Sisters/Cloverdale area." • "Win-Win for wildlife and the tax payer." • "Have recommended." • "Incentive programs work well to accomplish land management goals and free up funds for landowners to spend on enhancement projects." • "ODFW has very helpful with suggestions & ideas for me to better improve wildlife habitat." • "Since most of the land is non-productive for crops, at least I get great pleasure and satisfaction watching the ducks and geese come into the pond, the red-tails diving on gophers, rock chucks, badgers, deer, etc. I have 5 hours of video with over a hundred different verities." • "It is good for owners & wildlife who were here first." • "It is good for wildlife & land preservation." • "Definitely and have. These programs benefit Central Oregon. The state people/tourists come here for the scenery & wildlife - not to view development. This is what makes Central Oregon special and increases tourism • "Yes, but the plan implementation can be expensive." • "This is a very rewarding experience." • "It's important to sustain & enhance the wildlife habitat conservation in Central Oregon to slow the urban growth." • "Saves land for wildlife." • "I understand the program has been closed, in some cases arbitrarily as in the case of irrigated land." • "We need to help nature where we have moved into their home land of many years." • "Great personal pride and benefit." • "Only those who we feel would choose to be part of it with wildlife as the main reason, not just for the tax benefit." • "It is a good idea and I have made such recommendation." • "Only if sincerely interested in habitat." • "If it was the right property." • "I have recommended to others." • "Have got two of my neighbors to join in." • "It gives others the opportunity to have a home and protect wildlife." • "You bet. Our experience w/ODFW staff has been wonderful. We know more about the plants and animals on our property. The tax relief is great too." • "Promotes consideration for/of the environment." • "Absolutely, it's an effective approach to protecting wildlife habitat." • "The program benefits wildlife, & it helps people w/EFU land that is really not practical for actual farm use." 8 • "We need more habitat to counter the development." • "It is an excellent opportunity to enhance their property in harmony with nature, improve Central Oregon as it grows in human population, and have the pleasure of watching wildlife and its signs." • "Yes, As long as they follow the ODFW criteria. The more land we can occupy for habitat and keeping this area in its natural state we would all benefit from it." • "I was one of the first to do it in my area. Several property owners are now participating." • "Have recommended & hope others join." 10. Additional comments? • "To keep the High Desert natural & beautiful - lets not develop into another Palm Springs/Palm Desert." • "I have stopped all hunting on my property. Now hawks, owls and other types of birds and animals are back and doing well. I also have attacked the weed problem and trash that the County allowed to accumulate prior to me purchasing my property." • "It has really helped the quail, doves, songbirds. Not having pets (dogs/cats) or any other livestock on this 20 ac." • "As participants in WHCMP, our enjoyment of our property has been enhanced. We have increased our exposure to and awareness of the wildlife, its interaction with the environment, and our commitments to our land now and in the future. We hope the program will continue and grew with other like minded property owners." • "Great program! Win-Win for property owners & wildlife." • "Keep the program - it helps us a lot, and the wildlife too!" • "I feel, we as a community have taken away from wildlife. So I feel good about giving back to wildlife!" • "Compliance is easy, as we have adapted to the deer & other critters needs. To see how unaffected they are by our presence, check out the traces they leave. Also we love to watch them." • "This plan enables us to reach our goal of increasing native plants & wildlife on our property. ODFW has been very helpful to us." • "As a result of WHCMP - my deer now have increased substantially and new species of birds, mammals etc. continue to show up & are nesting here. Washington and other states implemented plans before Oregon and I was glad to see Oregon become a progressive state too! More folks are viewing wildlife & hunting has continued to drop - setting up plans like this is called progress." • "You are welcome to show our project to county officials, if helpful." • "We are glad we participated. We enjoy the program & appreciate all the help we have been given along the way." • "The wife and I love the rural setting and enjoy all the wildlife and fish (some are up to 7 lbs. now)." • "We look forward to continue working with ODFW in the future." 9 • "MANY. Looks like untrained data collection. I think you should have gotten some landowner input on the questionnaire. Always available to help." • "I think WHCMP enrolled clients should submit an annual report of the activities they have implemented that year to benefit wildlife and a list of names and numbers of species observed - not that this data would benefit ODFW, but to make enrollee more conscious of program." • "I am slowly getting the bitterbrush to grow." • "This is a joint project (partially financial) of the State and Property "Owner"." • "Great program. Keeps my 1/3 mile river frontage pristine." • "The program is extremely important to Oregon and especially Central Oregon." • "Can't answer 6 thru 9 since I don't understand the program." • Copy of letter from 4/8/02 attached thanking Steven George for his prompt approval of the plan, and the landowner's ability to protect their 40 acres as a permanent wildlife park. • 113/4 more bluebirds since boxes & neighbors joined in, deer populations up, fire issues covered, thinning great." • "The program requires a commitment of both time and money. Only those genuinely concerned for wildlife and their habitat should be involved and their plan not compromised - it is a contract!! (Additional attached comments) It's a contract! The clients write their own plans and then ask ODFW for approval, not the other way around. We feel offended that any landowner would take advantage of this program for a tax benefit rather than for management, protection, restoration and enhancement of wildlife habitat. There are many, many opportunities to get back into compliance - almost too many chances to correct the situation. We take our commitment very, very seriously!" • "It's an excellent program, with a real "win-win" for the environment & the property owner. We've seen a noticeable difference in wildlife. I hope you'll continue the program, & expand it." • "We worry about what will happen when our health prevents us from using a chainsaw on junipers and climbing trees!" • "My only contact has been with Larry Pecenka." • "I'd like to see it be a property tax credit as opposed to a deferral." • "This program provides us all with expert advice & knowledge to enhance, restore & preserve our wild & beautiful properties for generations to come. It benefits us & all the wildlife. More states should adopt this program. It truly encourages good stewardship on our lands." 10 Not required but useful: Provided name info (55) No name info (9) Name: Mailing address: Phone number: Condition of landowner compliance history of returned questionnaires: Compliant Landowners: (38) Non-Compliant Landowners (Now back into compliance): (11) Unknown (No name with questionnaire or property not yet inspected): (15) 11 WILDLIFE HABITAT CONSERVATION AND MANAGEMENT PLAN 1. County where property is located: Deschutes 2. Applicant's Name: Lloyd and Julia Olson 3. Physical Address of Property: 17805 Edmundson Road, Sisters, OR 4. Mailing Address of Applicant: P.O. Box 741, Sisters, OR 97759 5. Phone Number of Applicant: 6. Plan prepared by: 7. Consultant Representative: 8. Consultant Address & Phone: (503) 547-5770 Applicant Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife Larry Pecenka, OD) W Wildlife Biologist 61374 Parrell Road, Bend, OR 97702 (541) 388-6350 x 229, or (541) 388-6444 9. Legal Description of Property: 14 1132, Tax Lot 1500 and 15 115 Tax Lot 200 10. Total Acreage of Applicant Property: Net Acres-108.83 Tax Lot 1500- 70.5 Acres Tax Lot 200- 38.33 Acres 11. Acres of each habitat type on property at the time of plan inception: A. Forest/Woodland- Western Juniper, medium density, 65.81 Acres (60% of subject property). The wildlife habitat structure is medium to large trees (8" to 48" dbh), single story, open with 50% canopy cover, and several large Ponderosa Pines. B. Water/Pond-1.5 Acres C. Shrub land or Grassland- 3 Acres including mountain big sage brush is the dominant shrub but bitterbrush and green and gray rabbit-brush are also present. Also present but in lesser amounts are Idaho Fescue, Bottlebrush, Sedge, Blue Bunch Wheatgrass and Sandberg Bluegrass. D. Threatened or Endangered Species Habitat Sites- None. K nregon Sensitive Species or Special Status Wildlife Habitat Sites: None. F. Structures Existing- The structures include an existing home site (3,900 sq. ft.), driveway, and accessory building (equipment storage and shop 3960 sq. ft.). A smooth 4-Wire fence is along the north and south side, and part of the east and west side, the lengths are as follows: South fence line (smooth wire) 1320 feet, North fence line (smooth wire) 990 feet, West fence line (smooth wire) 1200 feet, and East fence line 1320 (neighbor's fence barbed wire). G. irrigation Rights- None. H. Rock Outcroppings/ Broken Lava- 38.52 Acres. 12. Line Drawing Maps of Property as Existing at Time of Plan Inception I A. Map 1- County Tax Lot Map of Property. 108.83 acres will be enrolled in the wildlife habitat conservation and management property. B. Map 2- Soil Mapping Units and Productivity Classifications. For more detailed information see Exhibit `A' 1. 31A, Deschutes Sandy Loam, (0 to 3% slopes): This soil is composed of 85% Deschutes soil and similar inclusions. The contrasting inclusions contain (1) soils that have a loamy sand or gravelly sandy loam surface layer, (2) Redmond soils in swales, (3) Stukel soils on. ridges and (4) Rock outcrops. The Deschutes soils are well drained with moderattely rapid permeability and available water capacity of about 4 inches. The major use of this soil is for irrigated cropland and livestock grazing. The NRCS rates this soil land capability as type 6 soil, if non-irrigated. This soil however, is considered by NRCS as high-value soil capability type 3 if irrigated. This soil classification occupies approximately 36.88 acres or 31.37 percent of the total property area. 2. 63C, Hohnzie-Searles complex (0 to 15% slopes): This soil is composed of 50010 Holmzie soil and similar inclusions, 35% Searles soil and similar inclusions and 15% of contrasting inclusions. The Holmzie soils are well drained with slow permeability and available water capacity of about 5 inches. The Searles soils are well drained with moderately slow permeability and available water capacity of about 3 inches. The major use of this soil is for livestock grazing. The NRCS rate the Hohnzie soil with a land capability as 6e and the Searles soil as 6e. There is no irrigated rating for this soil complex. This soil is not considered by NRCS as high-value soil. This soil classification complex occupies approximately 79.76 acres or 67.83 percent of the total property area. 3. 98A, Plainview sandy loam (0 to 3% slopes): This sol is composed of 85% Plainview soil and similar inclusion, 15% of contrasting inclusions. The contrasting inclusions contain (1) Turnalo soils on outwash plains and (2) soils that have a duripan at the depth of more than 60 inches. The Plainview soils are well drained with moderately rapid permeability and available water capacity of about 5 inches. The major use of this soil is for irrigated cropland and livestock grazing. The NRCS rates this soil land as high value soil capability type 4 if irrigated. This soil classification occupies approximately .92 acres or .8 % of the total property. C. Map 3- Aerial Photo Showing Physical Features of Property at Time of Plan Inception. None of the property is currently managed for forestry. D. Map 4- Existing Physical Structures E. Map 5- Topographical F. Map 6- Wildlife Habitats Existing at Time of Plan Inception. Juniper woodland, broken lava, and rock outcropping habitat is shown. 13. Acres of Each Habitat Type to Be Maintained with Plan Implementation. A. Forest/Woodland- Western Juniper, 65.81 acres. B. Water- One and one half acre pond. C. Shrub land or Grassland- 3 acres. D. Rock Outcroppings/ Broken Lavas- 38.52 Acres. 2 E. Threatened or Endangered Species Habitat Sites- Published range and habitat associations for federal-listed or Oregon-listed species indicate an unlikely occurrences on this property, no management for them is proposed. Oregon Sensitive Species or Special Status Wildlife Habitat Site- None at this time, however 108.83 acres will remain as a possible habitat. G. Structures- Existing fences, pond, driveway and buildings. Existing structures to be retained, which are comprised of a residence of 3900 sq/ft. and a shop of 3960 sq/ft and the following fences: South fence line (smooth wire) 1320 feet, North fence line (smooth wire) 990 feet, West fence line (smooth wire) 1200 feet, and East fence line 1320 (neighbors fence barbed wire). 2. If the landowner decides to partition the property, build additional buildings, fences, ponds, irrigation canals, roads, or other structures besides those that are in this plan sometime in the future, it is required that the landowner contact an Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife (ODFW) representative prior to any changes to discuss the proposed construction, and a plan amendment approved by ODFW will be necessary to accommodate the changes in the wildlife habitat plan for the property. 14. Management Practices and Time Schedule for Achieving/Maintaining Habitat Types Overview- The objective of wildlife habitat conservation and management plan (see www.dfw.state.or.us/Lands/whcmp-overview.html) is to preserve, enhance or improve the structure and function of habitat for native wildlife species, with emphasis on native habitat that: • Have been identified as scarce, becoming scarce, or of special ecological significance within the county. • Have been identified by state or federal resource agencies, local governments, regional governments, watershed councils, conservation organizations, or other qualified entities, as important for ecological restoration to prevent additional loss of native habitats or species. • Are important to achieve the conservation or management objectives for native habitats or species in public or private land management plans covering multiple land ownerships. • Provide for threatened or endangered species. • Provide for state sensitive species. • Are identified as significant wildlife habitat in the Goal 5 elements of county comprehensive plans. "Native" refers to that which is indigenous to the applicant property or to the high plains physiographic province in which the applicant property is located. Shelter and cover will be provided for diverse animal population near the open fields where they feed. The woods on the property provide large migratory routes through the area for the animals. It is the intent of this plan to maintain and in some cases enhance the natural habitat and to minimize negative impact of the presence of people. The landowner is required to provide an annual written report, including photos, to the local ODFW representative, on management practices implementation for the year. This reporting on WHCMP plan implementation will be provided to ODFW no later than October 31 s` of each year. If the land owner decides that some of the practices listed will not be conducted, or if the landowner decides that other practices will be conducted on the property that re not listed here, the landowner must contact an ODFW representative prior to taking actions, to discuss the proposed changes, and a plan amendment approved by ODFW will be necessary to add or delete the changes to the wildlife habitat plan. The following practices will accomplish these goals: A. Juniper Woodland Management- Current tree density, which comprises 60% of property (minus saplings under 6 inches dbh) and plant species composition, will remain on 65.81 acres of existing habitat. Some small groves of concentrated sapling tree will remain. The goal of creating a mosaic of Juniper, including dense concentrations and open areas will be accomplished by thinning or leaving trees 8" dbh or smaller in the already naturally occurring respective areas. All trees larger than 8" dbh will not be removed. This practice will commence in September 2010 and will be finished by May 2013. B. Pond Management- Applicant will grow at least four (4) aspen trees, cattails, lily pads, semi-submerged woody material (log), Idaho fescue bunch grass along edges of pond (which will not be mowed), and maintain pond for aquatic life. No other shrubs are planned for pond area, other than native species that self-seed. There are rock piles at the water inlet, which will not be disturbed. These practices will commence in September 2010 and will be finished by May 2013. C. Woody Material/ Shrub and Grassland- Mountain big sage brush is the dominant shrub but bitterbrush and green and gray rabbit-brush are also present. Also present but in lesser amounts are Idaho Fescue, Bottlebrush, Sedge, Blue Bunch Wheatgrass and Sandberg Bluegrass, other than non-disturbance of these shrubs, no other management practices are planned for said shrubs. Dead fall and dead standing trees will not be removed. 4 brush piles for habitat or refuge will be built (at least 10' in diameter and 6' high) as indicated on Map 7 before May 2013. D. Broken Lava and Rock Outcropping- Current features will remain as possible habitat. E. Noxious Weeds- All noxious weeds, including Russian thistle and knapweed will be eliminated by hand pulling and this procedure will be ongoing. Herbicide may be used on Dalmatian toadflax, if it occurs. There are currently none present. F. Recreational Activities- Recreation within wildlife habitat such as wildlife viewing, photography, plant identification, hunting, snow skiing and walking provide enjoyment of surroundings with little impact on habitat integrity and are encouraged. Other forms of recreation in wildlife habitat such as All Terrain Vehicles (ATVs), Off Road Vehicles (ORVs), snowmobiles, and repetitive discharge of firearms reduce wildlife utilization of area and can cause actual damage to habitat conditions. Destruction of vegetation, soil disturbance and erosion, weed distribution and establishment, and wildlife harassment are potential problems with these types of recreation. Recreation that damages habitat or otherwise reduces habitat effectiveness is not approved under this plan. Recreational activities will be limited to those which have little impact on habitat integrity. Vehicle use, other than that required for the dwelling and for improving wildlife habitat, will be prohibited. The discharging of firearms is prohibited. G. Control of Domestic Pets- This plan designates the following number of cats, dogs and/or other pets that will be kept at property by landowner. A maximum of two dogs and two cats will be allowed. All pets will be in house or strictly supervised. No free-roaming 4 cats, even in vicinity of home site, unless accompanied by and under control of owner, and at fledging time confinement will be more restrictive. H. Grazing Management- This plan designates the following numbers and kinds of livestock that will be allowed on the property. No grazing by domestic animals will be allowed. 1. Fire Protection- Fuels will be reduced along public roads and near the dwelling in accordance with the guidelines set forth by Cloverdale Fire District. This has been implemented and will be on-going. 15. Reproducible Line Drawing Maps of Property as it Will Exist in Plan A. Map 7- Enhanced Wildlife Habitat. Physical features after plan is implemented. 16. This habitat management plan does not authorize violation of federal or state laws or local ordinances, nor does it supersede any requirements to obtain permits or authorizations required by federal, state or local entities. 17. The purpose of this plan is to conserve, enhance, protect and manage wildlife habitat solely on the property identified. This plan is not intended to, nor does it, convey any special status on or otherwise impact in way the lawful use of any adjacent or nearby properties. 18. This plan may be amended in the future if requested in writing by either applicant or Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife. Signatures C. a*z.~ App can perry Owner r~ I. " . 6bV-IIZ) b 20 tI0 D 4e 0 /0 Date V"- 9 Zo 10 ODFW Repres tative/ Title Date ~w 2,010 Project Approv 1 Date Attachments: Maps 1-7 Exhibit `A'- Detailed Soils Description o EDMUND SON ROAD Q I V T7)7)1 1 1 /1 1]) 1 IA SCA LE V -400' I % O 'O N O ~ N M J ~ o ~v O i ° EDMUNDSON ROAD o LE P= 400' O N ` ~ p 4J . Q. Y H M In ~ J ' o Z O 31A-Deschutes sandy loam, 0 to 3 63C-Holmzie-Searles complex, 0 to 15 percent slopes percent slopes Composition Deschutes soil and similar inclusions-85 percent Contrasting inclusions-15 percent Setting Landform: Lava plains Parent material: Ash Elevation: 2,500 to 4,000 feet Native plants: Western juniper, mountain big sagebrush, antelope bitterbrush, Idaho fescue, needleandthread Climatic factors: Mean annual precipitation-10 to 12 inches Mean annual air temperature--47 to 50 degrees F Frost-free period-70 to 90 days Typical ProtUe O to 17inches-grayish brown sandy loam 17 to 31 inches-fight grayish brown sandy loam 31 inches-basalt Soil Properties and Qualities Depth: Bedrock at a depth of 20 to 40 inches Drainage class: Well drained - Permeability. Moderately rapid Available water capacity: About 4 inches Contrasting Inclusions • Soils that have a loamy sand or gravelly sandy loam surface layer • Redmond soils in swales • Stukel soils on ridges • Flock outcrop Major Uses Irrigated cropland, livestock grazing Major Management Limitations Soil depth, surface texture, permeability General Management Considerations Irrigated cropland • Well-managed irrigation systems are needed for deep-rooted crops such as alfalfa. • Because the surface layer is sandy loam, this soil is subject to wind erosion if left unprotected. The included areas of Rock outcrop limit the areas suitable for crops and restrict farming operations. Livestock grazing Holmzle soil and similarInclusions---60 percent Searles soil and similar inclusions--35 percent Contrasting inclusions-15 percent Setting Landform: Hills Parent material: Ash over residuum Elevation: 2,500 to 3,500 feet Native plants: Holmzie soil-western juniper, mountain big sagebrush, antelope bitterbrush, Idaho fescue, needleandthread; Searles soil-Wyoming big sagebrush, bluebunch wheatgrass, Thurber needlegrass, Sandberg bluegrass Climatic factors: Mean annual precipitation-9 to 11 inches Mean annual air temperature--47 to 52 degrees F Frost-free period-70 to 90 days Typical.Profile of the Holmzie Soll 0 to 7 inches-dark grayish brown loam 7 to 19 inches-brown clay loam 19 to 29 inches-reddish brown gravelly clay 29 inches-weathered tuff Properties and Qualities of the Holmzle Soil Depth: Soft bedrock at a depth of 20 to 40 inches Drainage class: Well drained Permeability: Slow Available water capacity.• About 5 inches Typical Profile of the Searles Soil 0 to 7 inches-grayish brown sandy loam 7 to 13 inches--brown loam 13 to 241nches-brown and yellowish brown very gravelly loam and very gravelly day loam 24 inches--basalt Properties and Qualities of the Searles Soll Depth: Bedrock at a depth of 20 to 40 inches Drainage class: Well drained Permeability: Moderately slow Available water capacity. About 3 inches Contrasting Inclusions • Soils that are on ridges and have bedrock at a depth of 10 to 20 inches • Soils that are in swales and have a clay or day loam subsoil over a strongly cemented duripan at a depth of 20 to 40 inches • Rock outcrop Livestock grazing Care should be taken to protect the soil from wind osion when applying range improvement practices. Because the soil is influenced by pumice ash, establishment of the native vegetation is very slow if a;vegetation is removed or deteriorated. pond development is limited"by the soil depth and k of seepage. ~fhe included areas of Rock outcrop limit the areas Table for grazing and restrict accessibility by Composition , Major Use Major Management Limitations Holmzie soil-soil depth, climate Searles soil-soil depth, climate, surface texture General Management Considerations - Care should be taken to protect the Searles soil from wind erosion when applying range improvement practices. • Because the soils are influenced by pumice ash, reestablishment of the native vegetation is very slow if the vegetation is removed or deteriorated. • Pond development on these soils is limited by the soil depth and the steepness of slope in some areas. • The low annual precipitation limits productivity and limits the choice of species for range seeding to drought-tolerant varieties. • The included areas of Rock outcrop limit the areas suitable for grazing and restrict accessibility by livestock. Range Site Holmzie soil-Pumice Flat 10-12pz Searles soil-Droughty 8-12pz 98A-Plainview sandy loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes Composition Plainviewsoil and similar inclusions-85 percent Contrasting inclusions-15 percent Setting Landform: Outwash plains (fig. 9) Parent material. Ash over glacial outwash Elevation: 3,000 to 4,000 feet Native plants: Western juniper, mountain big sagebrush, antelope bitterbrush. Idaho fescue, needleandthread Climatic factors: Mean annual precipitation-10 to 12 inches Mean annual air temperature-47 to 52 degrees F Frost-free period-70 to 100 days Typical Prof/e 0 to 23 inches-dark grayish brown and brown sandy loam 23 to 39 inches-pale brown very gravelly and extremely gravelly sandy loam 39 to 55 inches--light brownish gray very gravelly t, loamy sand 5510 60 inches-very dark grayish brown indurated duripan Soil Properties and Qualities Depth: Glacial outwash at a depth of 20 to 40 inches; duripan at a depth of 50 to 65 inches; bedrock at a depth of 60 inches or more Drainage class: Well drained Permeability: Moderately rapid Available water capacity: About 5 inches Contrasting Inclusions • Tumalo soils on outwash plains • Soils that have a duripan at a depth of more than 60 inches Major Uses Irrigated cropland, livestock grazing Major Management Limitations Surface texture, permeability General Management Considerations Irrigated cropland • Because the surface layer is sandy loam, this soil is subject to wind erosion if left unprotected. Livestock grazing • Care should be taken to protect the soil from wind erosion when applying range improvement practices. • Because the soil is influenced by pumice ash, reestablishment of the native vegetation is very slow if the vegetation is removed or deteriorated. • Pond development is limited by the risk of seepage. Figure g.-Typical area of Plainview sandy loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes, In foreground. Three Sisters Mountains In background. SCALE: M .Y ` ; I n'Mrf t++.xx++~~.~ r 1•r T+u~ y, r nr~ 's,~ <.~M~i .q~ryc,~rx(~/~ t as'(h~~;irtJ I1 O c i aF~ ~ T r'Jf r+rx t Y ~ ~ t -J' ' I t r y f YL n a^i iR''+* R „r ~y Skg ^`t ~'r ~r'_ . n rr.s7~ l~ " ~ II p c1~lV Jf l Ir terry~Fr~~Lyt ~t~rrl7i,.cl~'4''~y rnhrr srk. ! ./h r 4 ~ c l pcy. n ~br r~. Lf 7'<F" I(~17 r /C~ rTiV a.:r C > ..9 n j <ll ~re1 h y'F4,}1 4 ~ ~t i rA. 7 • •J ~F7j i y, ~:rvJ~S"):>•~Y F;~ ~F""'r„~tx~j,~~j a „t nr ''Cif^! i~•,.. r. 1 r1 ~ r F w~ 7 . ~ .r 4 y~1 F'' rL ! . ' µn, 1. n YBA, s., ~F C ~ia~..el._;. a,r3', ..rh t 2 r ..1;. _ A ' 54 ,.r I .2L 11 I I I I Ii it 11 r I I 01 ~SO iz, $ EDMUNDSON ROAD $ I r V V H L SCALE 1"= v v c0 ► - k fl s o Ron v 0~, e6 V a ' 6 ,o 6 q., Uv 10 EDMUNDSON ROAD $ V V SCALE P=4 eiD Q~ w o N ~I Y ~l M 7 ti ~r ei~ 1 e , 6, Ir 't Dept. of Fish and Wildlife-635-430 Page 1 of 20 OREGON SECRUARY[O#F. STRAW HOME:, Oregon State Archives SE"C" CONTACT US leglslallWe re orifs mgmt gen aiagy gov ors ' %ii4i exhli$6 tour holdings state agency !veil! govt 7 The Oregon Administrative Rules contain OARs filed through December 15, 2004 DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND WILDLIFE DIVISION 430 TAX INCENTIVE PROGRAMS Wildlife Habitat Conservation and Management Program 635-430-0000 Purpose The purpose of OAR 635-430-0000 through 635-430-0100, is to implement ORS 308A.400 through 308A.430, Oregon Laws 2003, which allows Oregon cities and counties to develop programs for the conservation and enhancement of wildlife habitat. These rules: (1) Establish criteria and standards for Department review and monitoring of wildlife habitat conservation and management plans; (2) Specify the form and content of a wildlife habitat and conservation management plan and the conservation and management practices that are appropriate to preserve, enhance or improve the structtue or function of wildlife habitat; and (3) Establish a process for adding and removing eligible land Stat. Auth.: ORS 496.012, 496.138, 496.146 & 496.162 Stats. Implemented: Ch. 308A, BB 3616, 2003 Hist.: FWC 23-1994, f & cert. cf. 4-29-94; DFW 11-1998, f. & cert. cf. 2-5-98; DFW 115-2004, f. & cert. of. 11-26-04 635430-0010 Definitions For the purposes of OAR 635430-0000 through 635430-0100 only: (1) "Cooperating agency" means the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, the Natural Resources Conservation Service , the Oregon State University Extension Service or other persons with wildlife conservation and management training meeting the following qualifications: littp://arcweb.sos.statc.or.us/niles/OARS 600/OAR 635/635 430 html 1112/05 Dept. of Fish and Wildlife_635_430 Page 2 of 20 . , (a) A degree or certification from an accredited educational institution in a field of study providing knowledge that may be applied to preserve, enhance or improve habitat for native wildlife. Such fields of study include, but are not limited to, wildlife biology, wildlife management, fisheries management, biology, zoology, limnology, botany, ecology, wetland ecology, forest ecology, ecosystem management, environmental engineering, soil science , other natural science, or landscape architecture; or (b) Certification from a professional society (including but not limited to The Wildlife Society, American Fisheries Society, or Ecological Society of America) or licensure by the state in a field listed in subsection (1)(a) of this rule; or (c) Evidence of professional experience in a field listed in subsection (1)(a) of this rule. (2) "Department" means the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife. (3) "Landowner" means the party or parties having the fee interest in land, except where land is subject to a real estate sale contract where "landowner" means the contract vendee. (4) "Land that is clearly identifiable as containing significant wildlifefiabitat" means land that meets one or more of the criteria identified in OAR 635-430-0020(1) through (5) "Lot" has the meaning given that term in ORS 92.010. (6) "Native vegetation" means vegetation that is indigenous to the subject property or to the physiographic province in which the subject property is located (7) "Parcel" has the meaning given that term in ORS 2:15.010(1). (8) "Subject property" means a lot, parcel or tract that is subject to a wildlife habitat conservation and management plan. (9) "Tract" has the meaning given that term in ORS 215.010(2). (10) "Wildlife" means fish, shellfish, intertidal animals, wild birds, amphibians, reptiles, and wild mammals. (11) "Wildlife habitat conservation and management plan" or "plan" means a plan developed by a cooperating agency and landowner that spocifies the conservation and management pricl.ices, including agricultural and forestry practices, that will be conducted to preserve, enhance or improve the structure or function of wildlife habitat on the subject propeTty- Stat. Auth.: ORS 496.012, 496.138, 496.146 & 496.16: Stats. Implemented: Ch. 308A, HB 3616, 2003 Hist.: FWC 23-1994, f. & cert. ef. 4-29-94; DFW 11-1998, f & cert. ef. 2-5-98; DFW 115-2004, f. & cert. ef. 11-26-04 635-430-0020 Wildlife Habitat Conservation and Management Plain Objectives The objective of a wildlife habitat conservation and management plan is to preserve, enhance or improve the composition, structure or function of habitat for native wildlife species, with emphasis on native habitats that: (1) Have been identified as scarce, becoming scarce or of special ecological significance within the city or county. Sources of information that may be used to identify these habitats include, but are not limited to, the Biodiversity Gap Analysis Program of the USGS Biological Resources Division and the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife, the Metropolitan Greenspaces Master Plan or equivalent Metropolitan Functional Plans, the Oregon Natural Heritage Program, the Oregon Biodiversity Project, the Oregon Habitat Joint Venture, the Oregon Comprehensive Wildlife Conservation Strategy, and the Oregon Plan for Salmon and Watersheds. http://arcweb.sos.state.or.us/rtdes/OARS 600/OAR 635t635 430.html 1112105 a Dept. of Fish and Wildlife-635-430 Page 3 of 20 (2) Have been identified by state or federal resource agencies, local governments, regional governments, watershed councils, conservation organizations or other qualified entities as important habitats for ecological restoration to prevent additional loss of native habitats or species. (3) Are important to achieve the conservation or management objectives for native habitats or species in public or private land management plans covering multiple land ownerships. (4) Provide habitat for threatened or endangered species listed in or pursuant to 16 USC Section 1533, ORS 496.172(2), and OAR 635-100-0125; (5) Provide habitat for state sensitive species listed pursuant to OAR 635-100-0040; or (6) Are identified as significant wildlife habitat in the Goal 5 elements of city or county comprehensive plans. (7) Areas that have been adopted by the Metropolitan Service District (Metro) as significant natural areas, open spaces or fish and wildlife habitats or regional resources under Goal 5 pursuant to OAR 660-023-0080. Stat. Auth.: ORS 496.012, 496.138, 496.146 & 496.162 Stats. Implemented: Ch. 308A, HB 3616, 2003 Hist.: FWC 23-1994, f. & cert. ef. 4-29-94; DFW 11-1998, f. & cert. ef. 2-5-98; DFW 115-2004, f. & cert. ef. 11-26-04 635-430-0025 State Fish and Wildlife Commission Designation of Eligible Land (1) At the request of the governing body of a county, the State Fish and Wildlife Commission may designate any or all of the following land in unincorporated areas within the county as eligible for wildlife habitat special assessment: (a) Any land that is zoned for exclusive farm use, mixed farm and forest use or forest use under a land use planning goal protecting agricultural land or forestland; or (b) Land that is clearly identifiablc as containing significant wildlife habitat. (2) At the request of the governing body of a city, the commission may designate any or all of the following land within the incorporated city as eligible for wildlife habitat special assessment: (a) Any land that is zoned for exclusive farm use, mixed farm and forest use or forest use under a land use planning goal protecting agricultural land or forestland; or (b) Land that is clearly identifiable as containing significant wildlife habitat. (3) With the prior consent of the governing body of a city, the county in which all or a part of the city is located may apply to the commission on behalf of the city for designation of any area that is within both the city and the county as eligible for wildlife habitat special assessment. (4) The Commission may designate land described in subsection (1) or (2) of this section as eligible for wildlife habitat special assessment only if the commission finds that designation will promote the objectives of the program and the implementation requirements of these rules. (5) Any county that did not forbid, by a resolution or other decision of the county governing body, the establishment of wildlife habitat conservation and management plans as of January 1, 2003, shall be deemed to have the land described in OAR 635-430-0025(1) as eligible for wildlife habitat special assessment. (6) The governing body of the city or county that requested designation under section OAR 635-430-0025 may request http://arcweb.ms.state.or.us/rules/OARS 600/OAR 635/635430.html 1/12/05 Dept. of Fish and Wildlife-635-430 Page 4 of 20 that the State Fish and Wildlife Commission remove that designation. (7) The commission shall remove the designation if. (a) The city or county demonstrates that the designation creates an economic burden for the city or county; and (b) The Commission finds that the economic burden is significant. (8) In making its determination under subsection (7) of this section, the Commission shall give significant weight to the demonstration of economic burden made by the city or county. (9) A determination by the State Fish and Wildlife Commission to designate land as eligible for the wildlife special assessment or to remove that designation shall for property tax purposes be effective as of the tax year beginning the July 1 immediately following the determination. Stat. Auth.: ORS 496.012, 496.138, 496.146 & 496.162 Stats. Implemented: Ch. 308A, BB 3616, 2003 Hist.: DFW 115-2004, f. & cert. cf. 11-26-04 635430-0030 Wildlife Conservation and Management Practices Conservation and management practices appropriate to achieve the objectives of OAR 635-430-0020 may include, but are not limited to: (1) Protecting existing native vegetation; (2) planting native trees, shrubs, grasses and other native vegetation; (3) Removing invasive, non-native vegetation that threatens native plant communities; (4) Control of invasive, non-native fish or wildlife that threaten native wildlife species; (5) Burning as prescribed by the Department to maintain fire-dependent native vegetation; (6) Fencing to protect wildlife habitat or plant communities; (7) Increasing habitat diversity by practices such as placing downed, woody material, preserving or creating standing dead trees, creating ponds, or other methods approved by the Department; (8) placing boulders, logs and other appropriate materials in streams to enhance fish habitat; (9) Removing buildings, pavements and other man-made features; (10) Grading altered land areas to restore original hydrology and natural topography; (11) Restoring, enhancing or creating wetlands; (12) Establishing vegetative buffers or structural setbacks adjacent to wildlife habitats; (13) Amending or allowing farming and forestry management practices that preserve, enhance or improve the structure or function of wildlife habitat; http://arcweb.sos.state.or.us/rules/OARS 600/OAR 635/635 430.htm1 1/12/OS Dept. of Fish and Wildlife-635-430 Page 5 of 20 (14) Locating new dwellings or structural improvements to minimize conflict with existing or proposed habitat for native wildlife species; (15) Planting new riparian vegetation or protecting existing riparian vegetation through fencing or other means; (16) Leasing or selling in-stream water rights as an integral part of the wildlife habitat conservation and management practices; or (17) Other efforts that improve water quality, protect and restore fish and wildlife habitats, recover threatened or endangered species, enhance stream flows or maintain or restore long-term ecological health, diversity and productivity on a broad geographic scale. Stat. Auth.: ORS 496.012, 496.138, 496.146 & 496.162 Stats. Implemented: ORS Ch. 308A, HB 3616, 2003 Hist.: FWC 23-1994, f. & cert. ef. 4-29-94; DFW 11-1998, f. & cert. ef. 2-5-98; DFW 115-2004, f. & cert. ef. 11-26-04 635430-0040 Preparation and Content of a Plan A wildlife habitat conservation and management plan shall be developed by the landowner and a cooperating agency as defined in OAR 635-430-0010(1). The plan shall include the following: (1) The signed county eligibility certification described in OAR 635-430-0050(1). (2) The name, home and business addresses and telephone number of the landowner. (3) The name, address, and telephone number of the cooperating agency. (4) The township, range, section and tax lot number(s) of the subject property. (5) The acreage of the subject property. (6) An aerial photograph of the subject property at a scale of 400 feet per inch, unless otherwise authorized by the Department. (7) Map(s) and written descriptions of the physical features, vegetation, and wildlife habitats that currently exist on the subject property. The map(s) shall be reproducible, and shall be at a scale of 400 feet per inch unless otherwise authorized by the Department. The map(s) shall display the following: (a) Rivers and intermittent and perennial streams (including names); (b) Lakes, ponds and other water bodies; (c) Wetlands and riparian areas; (d) Areas that contain threatened or endangered plant species listed under ORS 564.105(2) obtained from existing information available from the Oregon Department of Agriculture, Oregon Natural Heritage Information Center, a cooperating agency, or other source approved by the Department; (e) Areas of native vegetation, such as oak woodlands or grasslands composed of native plant species; (f) Location of federal threatened or endangered wildlife species or their critical habitats listed or identified pursuant to http://arcweb.sos.state.or.ustmies/OARS_600/0AR 635/635 430.htmi 1/12/05 Dept. of Fish and Wildlife 635_430 Page 6 of 20 16 USC Section 1533, obtained from existing information available from the Oregon Natural Heritage: Information Center, a cooperating agency, or other source approved by the Department; (g) Location of state sensitive species identified pursuant to OAR 635-100-0040, state threatened or endangered species listed pursuant to ORS 496.172(2) and OAR 635-100-0125, and sites identified pursuant to ORS 496.182(2) that are critical to the survival of state listed threatened or endangered species, obtained from existing information available from the Oregon Natural Heritage Information Center, it cooperating agency, or other source approved by the Department; (h) Other areas identified in the local comprehensive plan as significant wildlife habitat; (i) Areas currently managed for forestry; 0) Areas currently farmed, including the location of all dikes, drainage ditches, or drainage tiles; (k) Soil map units within the subject property from the Natural Resources Conservation Service Soil Survey. (1) Dwellings, roads, fences and other artificial structures. (m) Areas that have been adopted by the Metropolitan Service District (Metro) as significant natural areas, open spaces or fish and wildlife habitats or regional resources under Goal 5 pursuant to OAR 660-023-0080. (8) A description of (a) The wildlife habitat conservation and management objectives to be achieved; and (b) The conservation and management practices that will be conducted to preserve, enhance or improve the structure or function of wildlife habitat on the subject property. (9) Time frames to implement each conservation and management practice identified in section (8) of this rule. (10) Map(s) and written descriptions of the physical features, vegetation, and wildlife habitats reasonably expected to exist on the subject property after implementation of the conservation and management practices described in section (8) of this rule, including the lomtiuu of areas managed for farming or forestry, existing and proposed dwellings and other proposed structural improvements. The map(s) shall be reproducible, and shall be at a scale of 400 feet per inch unless otherwise authorized by the Department. Stat. Auth.: ORS 496.012, 496.138, 496.146 & 496.162 Stats. Implemented: ORS Ch. 308A, HB 3616, 2003 Hist.: FWC 23-1994, f. & cert. ef. 4-29-94; DFW 11-1998, f. & cert. ef. 2-5-98; DFW 115-2004, f. & cert. cf. 11-26-04 635-430-0050 Plan Submission and Review Procedures The Department will review wildlife habitat conservation and management plans and make decisions as follows: (1) Before preparing or submitting a plan, the applicant must obtain certification from the city or county, on a Department form, that the subject property lies within an area or zone designated for participation in the Wildlife Habitat Conservation and Management Program. (2) The landowner shall simultaneously submit the proposed plan to the appropriate district wildlife office of the Department and the appropriate city or county planning department. (3) The city or county planning department may submiit comments on the proposed plan to the appropriate watershed http://arcweb.sos.state.or.us/ndes/OARS 600/OAR 635t635 43O.html 1112105 . Dept. of Fish and Wildlife 635 430 Page 7 of 20 district office of the Department within 30 working days of the city or county's receipt of the proposed plan. (4) The Department will review a complete plan for compliance with the standards in these rules and evidence of initial implementation. (5) The Department will, within 90 days of receipt of a complete plan, make a decision to either approve, approve with modifications, or reject the plan, and will notify the landowner of its decision in writing. If the plan is rejected, the Department will identify in writing the reasons for its decision. The landowner may accept the Department's proposed modifications or correct plan deficiencies identified by the Department and resubmit the plan for review. (6) The Department may choose to limit the number of plans approved each year due to workload constraints. Preference may be given to those plans with the highest quality and/or quantity of habitat. An application that is not approved due to time constraints shall be held for consideration for approval the following year. (7) Department decisions on plans may be appealed to the Department under the provisions of ORS 183.310 to 183.550 governing contested uses. (8) The Department will send one copy of an approved plan to the appropriate city or county planning department. (9) When a wildlife habitat conservation and management plan is approved by the Department and has been initially implemented, the owner of the land subject to the plan may apply to the county assessor to receive wildlife habitat special assessment. (10) Application shall be made to the county assessor on forms prepared by the Department of Revenue and supplied by the county assessor. (See ORS 308A.42-308A.430 for further tax assessment guidance.) Stat. Auth.: ORS 496.012, 496.138, 496.146 & 496.162 Stats. Implemented: ORS Ch. 308A, HB 3616, 2003 Hist.: FWC 23-1994, f. & cert. cf. 4-29-94; DFW 11-1998, f. & cert. cf. 2-5-98; DFW 115-2004, f. & cert. cf. 11-26-04 635430-0060 Approval Standards for Plans The Department will approve plans that meet the following standards: (1) The property is located on land that has been designated for participation in the program as defined in OAR 635- 430-0025. (2) The plan was developed by the landowner and a cooperating agency as defined in QAR 635-430-0010(1), and contains all of the elements required under OAR 635-430-0040. (3) The plan is consistent with the objectives in OAR 635-430-0020. (4) The wildlife conservation and management practices are appropriate and adequate to carry out the objectives of the plan. (5) The plan emphasizes preservation, enhancement or improvement of native vegetation appropriate to the site. (6) All new dwellings or structural improvements are located to minimize conflicts with existing wildlife habitats and negative impacts to native wildlife species. (7) The plan is consistent with the Fish and Wildlife Habitat Mitigation Policy (OAR chapter 635, division 415) and other applicable Department plans, policies, rules and statutes. http://areweb.sos.state.or.us/rtdes/OARS 600/OAR 635/635 430.html 1/12/05 Dept. of Fish and Wildlife-635-430 Page 8 of 20 (8) The plan's proposed wildlife conservation and manag=ement practices will not increase wildlife damage on adjacent lands. (9) Buffers needed to protect any new habitats created wader the plan will be located on the subject property. Stat. Auth.: ORS 496.012, 496.138, 496.146 & 496.162 Stats. Implemented: ORS Ch. 308A, BB 3616, 2003 Hist.: FWC 23-1994, f. & cert. ef. 4-29-94; DFW 11-1998, f. & cert. ef. 2-5-98; DFW 115-2004, f. & cert. ef. 11-26-04 635-430-0070 Amendments to Approved Plans (1) Landowners may request amendments to approved wildlife habitat conservation and management plans by contacting the appropriate Department watershed district office. (2) The landowner shall provide a copy of the approved plan and a description of the proposed amendments. (3) The Department will follow the procedures in OAR 635430-0050 when reviewing amendments to approved plans. (4) Amendments shall meet the standards in OAR 635-430-0060. _ Stat. Auth.: ORS 496.012, 496.138, 496.146 & 496.162 Stats. Implemented: ORS Ch. 308A, HB 3616, 2003 Hist.: FWC 23-1994, f. & cert. ef. 4-29-94; DFW 11-1998, f. & cert. ef. 2-5-98; DFW 115-2004, f. & cert. cf. 11-26-04 635-430-0080 Implementation of Approved Plans (1) For the purpose of making application to the county assessor for wildlife habitat special assessment under ORS 308A.424 to 308A.430, a landowner may request the Department to dcterniine whether an appruvcd wildlifa habitat conservation and management plan has been initially implemented. (2) The Department will, within 90 days of receipt of such request, physically inspect the subject property and determine whether the plan has been implemented (3) The Department will consider the plan initially implemented when: (a) The landowner is carrying out and maintaining the conservation and management practices identified in the plan in accordance with the time frames established in the plan; and . (b) The conservation and management practices are progressing toward the plan's objectives. (4) If, based on its review, the Department determines the landowner is not implementing the plan as approved, the Department will notify the landowner in writing of the reasons for the decision and the compliance measures he or she must take. The Department will send a copy of this notice to the county assessor. (5) If the Department determines the landowner is implementing the plan as approved, the Department will provide the landowner with a written declaration to this effect. The Department will send a copy of this declaration to the county assessor. Stat. Auth.: ORS 496.012, 496.138, 496.146 & 496.162 http://arcweb.sos.state.or.ustruies/OARS_600/OAR 635,f635 430.html 1/12105 ` Dept. of Fish and Wildlife 635 430 Page 9 of 20 Stats. Implemented: ORS Ch. 308A, BB 3616, 2003 Hist.: FWC 23-1994, f. & cert. cf. 4-29-94; DFW 11-1998, f. & cert. cf. 2-5-98; DFW 115-2004, f. & cert. cf. 11-26-04 635430-0090 Monitoring Approved Plans (1) The Department will monitor an approved wildlife habitat conservation and management plan periodically to determine continued compliance with the plan. (2) The Department's monitoring activities will include a physical inspection of the subject property. (3) The Department will notify the landowner prior to initiating its monitoring activities. (4) If the ownership of the subject property has changed since Department approval of the plan, the Department will provide the landowner with a copy of the approved plan. (5) If, based on its monitoring activities, the Department determines the landowner is not implementing the plan as approved, the Department will notify the landowner in writing and identify the compliance measures that he or she must take within six months. (6) If, at the end of the six-month period, the landowner is still not implementing the compliance measures required by the Department, the Department will notify the landowner and the appropriate county assessor. (7) If the property is disqualified or withdrawn from the program and all other special assessment programs, there is a potential additional tax liability (see ORS 308A.430 and 308A.700-308A.733). Stat. Auth.: ORS 496.012, 496.138, 496.146 & 496.162 Stats. Implemented: ORS Ch. 308A, BB 3616, 2003 Hist.: FWC 23-1994, f. & cert. ef. 4-29-94; DFW 11-1998, f. & cert. ef. 2-5-98; DFW 115-2004, f. & cert. ef. 11-26-04 635-430-0106 Compatibility with Existing Laws or Ordinances (1) Department approval of a wildlife habitat conservation and management plan does not authorize violation of federal or state laws or local ordinances, nor does it supersede any requirements to obtain permits or authorizations required by federal or state laws or local ordinances. (2) New and existing dwellings may be allowed on a lot or parcel subject to wildlife habitat special assessment as provided in ORS 215.799. The fact that a lot or parcel is subject to wildlife habitat special assessment does not make it easier or more difficult for a landowner to obtain approval for a dwelling on the lot or parml. Stat. Auth.: ORS 496.012, 496.138, 496.146 & 496.162 Stats. Implemented: ORS Ch. 308A, BB 3616, 2003 fist.: FWC 23-1994, f. & cert. cf. 4-29-94; DFW 11-1998, f. & cert. cf. 2-5-98; DFW 115-2004, f & cert. ef. 11-26-04 Riparian Lands Tax Incentive Program 635-430-0300 Purpose http://arcweb.sos.state.or.ustmies/OARS 600/OAR 635/635 430.htmi 1/12/05 V 6 (A E c O U cc m - E O O C) U C C O to N Z o n _ U CL O cc U Q. c m a a (D ) ) a o N o n - - - V a) U U U E C - m L U ¢ > E O C O O Q n ° Q .O U U .0 c co c c N t ° ° ° ° ° a a a c n cn z z c n v v v 'cr 0) cO It (0 v co co LO LO LO U) 0 LO 0 m 0 to 0 to 0 w LO 0 LO 0 o N 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Co 0 0 0 0 0 Co 0 0 0 Q 0 Q 0 Q 0 N 0 Q 0 Q 0 Q 0 N 0 N 0 N N N N N N N N N Q N N N N N N N M Fl- I*- M to to N M (O IA V O r ti CO M r N ' v 'o N M N LO T CO O (6 ~ co N Co " N o_0 O Q N N ` N N 0~0 G ~D o~D N O N - to , ^ (p (D T O D ( T T co M T T r T CO CO T r U U_ C) N co N N N N N N N N N N N N N N O o N N N N N N a N N N N N N N O > W fL0 O N 0 00 co O O 0 0 0 r r T r r r T T r r r r T N N N N N N N N } O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O Cl O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Q m 0) 0) CD m N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N E O O O O M C) N C) V v 0 N 0 0 V M m 0 0 0 I- r- 0 a 0 N O ~ I- N ` O O O M (O N cO O O O co m O O O O -Cr O O (O I~ O O O O ti N O O r I N r O O O (p LO 0 0 O N co O O 6 O CA ma rn ti rn 0 0 0 O V N O C> M v I- m 0 0 0 O O N L r 00 v to h M v r v r CO r CO T N v IT r- O r 00 v M N T T v N v T r U a Q V o = o C) co 3 O co ° .c o O as M o m o T T M 0 O M M M r to O CT CD LO Z Cl co c ccn o U LO O m O O T O O r T N 0 0 6 0 L) O O O O T O V tO O O (M O CM V 0 d 2 M 0 O O O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O T _ O O O T CO O N O N 00 0 T N N O M O V O N O (O O CO - LO O O CM 00 O O (M O CO T CD O N O T O T O r O l4 3 O 0 0 0 O C) O c T o 0 o 0 O Cl O O 0 O 0 O 0 O O 0 O O O O V O O op r O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 w o 0 o d o 0 0 0 O o a o 0 o Q o 0 0 0 0 0 0 o O o 0 0 0 0 0 0 d O r O co v to co f- M M CO to ao O M N ~t CO M 0 to O O tC) N U) d O (O 0 v r + O T O M M O O O N M N O N T CM CM O T CO M T O O N M N N O O O T T T O T N N r C T r- N M N r T v 0 T T T N N N O T T CD V T LC) T CO T T (D to T T LC) v T to V- (O T o T 0 T O T O T 0 T (O T fl- T w r ct T d T ti r to r (O T v r 'd' T (O T CO T to T CO T '7 T CO T (O T v to r T T T r r T T r T T T T T r T T T T T T T r T T T T T T T T d W E m C (a U Z (D 4) U) U . - C) E ~ G - a~ c E Z t Y m L Q C a) ' (D ' U O C O 3 O Y = ~ N C3 O d O a O L C) O L tu a C m L U L = ' (o L N Q L (a' M L 4; C C (0 L Y J 2 O N (n m O (a cm MM O N Z tT3 U U O Z M 7 N j O (a 0 C3 O CL ~ C O O :3 U 2 b U o Cl) CO co ~ a U. Q m In F x = J ~ ~ z cn m w U_ 0 T c' cq m "q '0 ue co 00 O M M M M co M 0 ai L T l l N l co v l O O + ti CD o) lll . - , l ll r 1 s - 1 N N N N N N N N N N co M ( 7 M O r rn a T Co N N r N o c z ~ _ E m _ a o (A ca cn co U) 3: w w m (n U U U U U U U U U C N N N t : N C (0 a , 0 COIL = O CL N cx t6 C a f0 (0 CO N L C a) u EL O E O o O O > E O O O O E U Q U U U U -0 < o u U U d c c m c c c c a c m 0 0 0 o m o o o O o o z a z z z z cn a z z z z a c 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 M w m C o ti Ls ao 0o co 0) w ao 00 OD co w w w w w w m m o N 0 0 0 0 0 0 (D 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 T 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 C) CD 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O O O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 U N \ N \ N \ N \ N \ N \ N \ N \ N \ N \ N \ N \ N \ N \ N \ N \ N \ N 0) N N \ N \ N \ (V \ N \ N \ N \ N 1 N \ N \ N \ N \ N \ N M O M V O M 0) 00 N M O N M M M Ln r (A Ln M O - O (A N LO N N CD 0) N 0 N (0 N - 6 p ` N ` N N N 0 ) rn z N z N iz N z N C - O • r T O O r O O N O 00 T T ao aO ti co w 0 M M 00 LO O T M r U LL to N N N to N N N N to V1 N U1 N N N to N N N N N to ~ N to ~ N to O > LlJ " O cc cl. N 0 N 0 N 0 N 0 N 0 N 0 N 0 N 0 M O co O CM p m 0 m 0 m 0 m 0 m 0 (M 0 (M 0 M 0 M 0 M 0 'T 0 g 0 q 0 g v d g v g Q 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 C) 0 0 C) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N O N O O O T W O T 'IT CO r It O O M CO O T- M I` C) 0 0 0 ~ w O O O d' co r Lo O V ) O O O V M O O Ln rt O LO ) O O N I'- O T7 O lo: O O O Ln O CO O T Cl 0 0 0) Up O C - O W O Ln 0 0 1 - O 0) 0) 0) 0 q La O r N O p r o 0 (D CD co CA 0 CD 0 0) O co 0) 0 ~ N M V T N 4 T T r M CM CO q T r N O N N 00 O N T T 00 r T tf r r CL ¢ v 3 .c ~ ' p o -j 0 t x O O U N T L O M 0 0 00 0 r 0 O N N O co 0 LC') C) q M (0 0 O O N N N N co T O [t' O T O (p 0 0 0 0 0) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 N O O O O O O O O O O Q O 0 C) 0 0 p 00 N I` tp N N 'T N ti ti N I` O p d' r, C) CO 'It 00 CA T- to CO Ln CO CO T M M M r Co (o O C) T 0 O 0 O 0 T 0 T 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 T 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 v 0 N O T O N O O O (o O O O O O O O O O T O T O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 C) c) 0 0 C) 0 0 0 0 0 C) 0 O O O O O O O O O W 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O O O O O Q O 0 0 0 c) O 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 O Ci O O O O N O M O O O co PI- U3 IT N 0) CO LO 0 CD 0 'It O M O Ln O IT It IT N O) N IT O N I` M M M r 00 N O 0 0 r M M N O N T- T M r O r 0 0 O T T r T O M cn N T T co T = N N M OO N Cl) N T O M M T O C) O N O M O N CM N N O N T w r 00 T I` v r v r 00 0 0 r It r I T It fl T Ln T to Iq ti T LO T T ~ (D CD (o r Ln r CO T ti r (D O Lp u) I- 00 T T T T r r r r T r r r r r r T r r r r r YQ/ N E MM C W 00 Z CO m C "J N Cn N Fi n 'C 0 N (C0 O Q Z - D m - c c L- w w cc -N te C O N a co C7 c t0 N N ►y 7 C ? C Y to C Y 'U N (0 to C 0) N C C CU C m 7 c a . 0 a. c o rn c c O 3 m N a co c c Cn c Y C $ ~ ~ ~ W Z F~-- ~ ~ U U ~ ~ a(D w 0 ~ E f (n H H ~ m m m 00 0 2 2 Y ~ ~ Z Fo F3- r N co ~t O T N M ~t to tD t-- 00 O O r N M ~ Ln CD ~ 00 CA ' O r N M ~ LO Co I~ 00 O O T N M , LA ~t d [t ~t V d ~t 't LA L() LO 0 In to LO M LO U ) (o (D co co co w Co co CD co I%- r I` ~ I- ti M O N N CF) N 4 r O N N T n7 4 M N rn N a 0 N N r 4 w E 3 CO) a V V N fA mod.. V (A D r' r > v v v v v v v v IT v co tt) tp to to ub ) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o O C) 0 O o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o O o 0 0 0 N N N N N N N N N Lo N N N c) c) N N N M I- I~ t\ t` N co m O CO 0 0 O ` N N OD aD N O N O N = ` r N co N O N tp co O O) r 0) N r M r to 00 M r C N 00 00 E U = U > O O f0 N = U N _ E - (n -r3 E O r u _ 0) O O E = r+ O ~ z C.) 0 T ea s y ~ . c c V c i R O 2 o c o 0 N N to to to N to to to N to to v) v) m (1) to to El CO) U) N N rn m v) N 2 O ~a t3 co O 00 0) O to to to to O O O O O O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O O O O O O O O O O O N 0 N 0 N 0 a 0) rn 0) o 0) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o 0 0 o o o 0 o 0 0 (D 0 . r r r N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N O O C) O M O O v v O O M O v O O 00 0 0 0 I`- U') O v O N O 0 0 N co O O O ao O O O o) v O 0 O O O O x 0 0 0 f~ N O CO O I~ O I~ O O to O O O N (o C) LO 0) 0) co [I- O Oi 0 O N 0 CD 0 v N a m O rn O N O I-- y r CO 'd• to I- M y r r M M to r N N N v O r v to M y v t0 V Q C) O W O C) O M O C) O v O J x M co O O r Cl N 0 T N Q O co O) O O O 00 r M a O 0 O 0 O r r O N 0 t 0 O O N O e- O - m F- 0 0 0 O O J ~~Cp) O O ~ p Op OS Tl- J 0 ! V- J 0 O N co LO O ~ ONy J ms- OQ t f w ~(Oyy J O 9 M - 1 w J O J C 0i - NJ NON J O co C) O N O co t Oti J F^ J J J h- F- F- ~ 7 F- e JI ~ J F- - . F- - , 0 - J ~ ~ d (D co M t, O 00 t0 ~ 00 M u') c0 to vi 00 V N d co r o M M tt) tD r- N N m q u O, N 2 g w T v) e-° M e- th N tv) T © 00 I- r ~ Q - c O w r f r r r f N f N f N V- W t'M T W r V- Ir N O r N t r T- LW " r Y _ r r Of v , N r ly O r w e- T C1~ T T OG 4 a- 0L - r , r , r T N ~ w d o " I 6 0 - 0 ~ 'S N v o ~ r- O to c0 c0 I, tq v ~t v ~ tp r H co r I- (D r F- - L r H e~ I- r H r H t0 r F- c r F- 0 r F- 1 T F- c0 r H t~ r I~ r c0 r H r r H c r F- r 1- r F- C r F- r H r I- T I- T F- r F- r H r to r r• H r r r F- r T r a c N a) c ? C ( -p m ~ w c ` c > c Y c O 0 0 r 0) LO Co C N I so O - N N ~ O 0 ~ N a) CL E E :3 Z >1 co O O 0 1 Co 5; U N O c n O O 4 O E m 'a C N cn O IL I- o N I- 7 I- Q m a m U IL U a (n Z ~ 0 cn ) c~ Y O F- ~ Q E Z a) N C C -a a_ C N C a_ Y c O N O z ~ m O > Y N C N o D J E LO o f ] a) i= O O E a C - N Z3 L x C N 7 _ § O a_ ~ N G 0 0 N 0) N N 0) O (0 U) V cra U cn,<; O LL. N a t0 0 N F- ` ~ F- 0 <C 03 'm 0 OC1 : m [2 U O u. N u. = = O = Q) Y ~ ~ ~ _ 2 O Z W1 O 0 0 N v? cp O F c < C 0) in O vl- a) rn N a r O N N Ir- cc E 7 CO) CL 3 w 0 JOR d w s t, N O O O O O O O O O O O O O CO o O Cl O o 0 o O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O N N N N N N Q Q N N N N O co O co u, 00 T M d' O CO ~ 0~0 co ~ 0 O O N p) _ N C-4 0) 0) O y c r T 0 r T tll 0 0 E U E C) C) O N U - p N N E O O ,G C: i O N t- N N m L O O Z F- a m 't7 U N 0 w w to 0 w w to to N N N N M o t m o- O o aoi Q c N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N (V N N M CM M m co M M M M M M m M M M M O o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 EL 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O o Cl 01 0 0 0 0 0 0 o l o 0 0 N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N O Go O fl- N O M O O O N 0 0 0 r O O O M N O O O V M tp T O ~i O O O T O I- N O (q 0 0 0 ll~ 0 0 0 ll;t M O O O O O r O "T 0 0 0 0 0 O N c tp N O O cr f1 w 0 0 0 0 o m O m 0 0 0 0 0 0 m N O O to m m O O O d O O N T- A N T T T-- N 'T V T.- N M V, ~ N CM V CO CO T r r' r T- M M fb V• a O O M OO C) C• O O rl- O M M 0 m T 't C~- CD J 00 O O O O T T CO -J CD CO 0 M CO O O O J F- N N a 0 C) 0 ~V• a ~t O o O J H F- F- J O O J LO X O Cop p O Z J J 9 J J p N U t +f nj CD O 't O U tD U O ~ U M ti U F- ~ ~ O tp f C N N O O N N O 0 CO O J O O T 7. M O T (V V 0) J V= Cl) O T ~ ll! 8 9 P 8 / 1 `M I, ~ / ~ iY Y O 0 US F- 6 T O T r- J ~ L 8 8 N 8 t0~ cU~ w 00 W W - ~ M ~ O W [n W ~ (y~~ (A f(~~ ,t [/J ~ N c o O O g o O gOp pOp 0 0 ro O S r - 0 W ~y (U/~J (/1 0 fn O O M - - N O N O T ~ r' N i M M ~ M N V- M T M r O O O F- O O O 0 O O O O O T O O r O N 0 00 r N r r W W r W r Cr- T T r r O O O l T N O ix O T U N N N N U C6 O O O O O O r N r N M O O M M N M O N r Cl) N m 0 0 M T tD N T CO .4 V ~O w w F- V 0 C~ + V t6 r T T T r r T T T a V (6 ,0 -n 1 T i (p ,r-- T d• t~ ~ T F- r F- T F- r F- T F- T F- r- T F- T F- T F- T F- T F- l~ F- r F- T z- ~ r T T T r r- F- - F- F- F- ~ N -0 E 0 O L N C 0 0 c m j (/1 N of C to O 0 0 _ E N m O to 0 (n 0 f2 N N to c m _ t a) c N C N J 3 c 0 0 L c 75 o c (D (D 9 19 0 2 0 c c 0 > v Z 1 c c 1 1 0 1 o a LL (t) 0 2 0 0 cn in ii > a ¢ ¢ m m U O 2 M M a. w w a) ~ c O L a> -Nc z o 03 C L L M N O V E ~ M N .0 O) 0 fj) L' 0 rj) 0 U) N L O N - C13 N C N C N J to c ca a~ C 2 c N 0 _ C c - C o N a CO) to -p 0 1- a> L N N ' o N B N E L to 1y c c 3 C O O - 7 3 U V Z o U U N m j N N 0 = -0 C a c 0 N O O N W 7 N O O t m m Gl u. u . C9 ~ O 0 v~ co cn v) Z r- > ? ? a Q a m m U U U 0 S Z a cr ~ cq O N N t~ N a T O N N r cc E 7 N CL V V (A _a t m r Q o E Q U L o ~ c o a~ Cf) -p U O N C ff) 2 O CL L- N Q C N M M co M M `d' V V IT V V V' IT IT IT V' IT V V' IT 'T V' V V' IT V IT O d 0 N 0 N 0 N 0 N 0 N 0 N 0 N 0 CD 0 N o C:l 0 o 0 o 0 N 0 N 0 N 0 N 0 N 0 N 0 N 0 N 0 CO 0 N 0 N 0 N 0 N 0 N 0 N 0 o N O N I R P IR R P N I N l N N N O (O r 0 1- O 0 O w a O O O t- r 00 0 0 00 V) C) 0 V' co 00 O to In In O qT 00 'T r- CD ~ C) V7 f~ V . OR 0 1~ O O O LO O d) M O O r ~ O 0 0) r 9 9 OO tn 1~ O (9 T- O O r- O V" O M 0 0 0 0 (O OO O r O O 0) 0 0 0 CO 0 0 qqt 0 0 0 , r N r N 00 N N N CO 0 N r r' r 0 OD V' r V' r r M IT N M r (0 M U r N r Q o N O O O 0 O In r r o (O H O 0 M 0 0 0 O C) 0 0 (O N O N r N 0 M r 0 N 0 V e- O N 0 0 0 0 r' N 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1__ CL C:) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O 1 O d r r 0 0 0 N N r 0 r co V' C) N o O O E 0 M 0 0 (D O 04 - r M 0 0 N 0 M r ( Y) O cv) It O O (p O ~ 9 O M N CF) (Y) X) qT 4 CY) 0 0 0 O O O O O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 C a Q o c) 0 0 0 0 - 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O Q o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o0 O o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 V' co co O co IT 0 U') co V V V N M 0 N V M M o N CD t- 0 LO M W C) r r r M O N CO O o N r r r r M O r M M M N N r O r N T' O O M N N co M co r r (O V I N CD t7' N O M N M M I N O N r l +r l r l N M N r r r r r V r I- r In r V' r O r fl- r 0 r Cp r 0 r 0 r 1- l r 0 r LO r 1~- r 0 r N r v r w r U') r V r LO r W r w r O r OO r V' r U) r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r ~ r r r r r r r r r r r r r r N -0 C O N Z N v (NV J N C N N N 0) N X (0 N N y ~ C: I C: N N a) (a ~ C C N L C 0 E N L _ 5 'L s N J Y J U ~ J O m (p U O m m m m m ❑ 2 Y Y ~ Z (f7 H m N c ca N N Z .C _ N N Y U N N N N N ~ p p N N J N N L N E M N +y N C U p N c t c }N U ` N > N E O m N L C cfs m 'C O O N (o a) 7 c`o j N M U 2 p N 0 a 7 - ~ N m O co m co U - - (n l- > S Q m m m m m m U ❑ 2 2 2 Y Y J J z (0 I- O M N ZT N (L O V' N r v c N E 0 U a~ a~ a U N fA M C ° to - a m r- o O Cl. N Q a } Lo Lo Lo co 0 O O 0 0 0 0 0 _ 0 ~ 0 C) N N N N N N ' N N O C) r- C) 0 0 C) C) ~ 0 K O N IT' g oo 0 0 ~ 00 (p M tp O H O r- M CO M r N It C%j W I~T N cM N 0 r- 0 ~ Q Q 0 pOp N 0 M p 0Q 0 ~ W E pp O N p a C) C) C) Q O 0 ) O O 0 N 0 v o U Q ~ C) M 0 N C 0 4 !0 _ C-O r- Nr CD v co V I- Ict v qT co LO N a _ O O N CO J N 7 E O C E TO W 2 0 C N C y ~ cnn 0 O 0 c C a) N C) N O Z N (n E (a w (D O v a~ rn m a r r 0 N N r Z o o 3 O 4 A r~ 1 ~ O ru L A O O R V L O 1.L CO) U C 3 y ~r.~:'r {L. r 'a X1 f -yam 1 ( ' k C o 70 i+ C 3 (6 j c c a) M .LO-. > C U p O 0 Q _ a) 3: N 0 0 U Z ` C) c- C -0 O > T C Q V C p p O (6 x (1) U Q O) .U Y N j a3 Q O O U U L R U p p) U U U> 0 00 Q :t U C (n (B Q Q O 70 -C E Q a) U) W CL t U C O U "U O L O> i C m O 0- 0 C~- 0 LL tZ 0 > (n 0 0 a) O c6 t~ C p a) o C) OL cl. - a) 41 3Mc-0 ca-p-a)- aLyp a) oM>, m M CL 3t 0 -r- co E - u- c: (n -0 m E T -C vi co: a~ E o L c j, C C W L > Co CU c' D U cis 3 c° p a 4) -0 3 ° C U 0 in c 3 o U p Mc c6 L-0 0 w a) -0 0 - y O m a) c 0 0 ca a) E Q C L ~ o f Q p m o M CL 4) LL L co a, E 'o o op v o 3 a Q c O _ c c> 00 O c aL a.~ E c-`° C a) -0 M M (n a) U O > L O U a) O a) _0 c N _ U L 0 a) > E C E a) O C _ a) cu 0) 0 v Co p` O " 7 a) O 0 o a) co a) O ~ 07 C O 0) U O L W 0 C L p a) U Q Q _ Q 76 E L V 7 U a) ~ U a) 7 (0 O E Q W -0 c C O a) U) (B O U (p C L p L C) c a) co co M tf C L a) L > " :5 0 0 C r= M C C Q O r _ ' U C 4 C , a) U Q N 0 'O N O 7 (6 c E L) p cn W _ N .0) CL E -p CU W p L 0 ca a) W L X 0 0 U-0 -cu L 3 O 0 Q ~ a) a) 0 _0 70 0 (0 ~ N -d N - _ E L C6 CB C L c (ts C (6 -p > ( > • U C d 7 O U CO _0 0O CO p U m uj C N C U C N .0 O a) N TD (D ZT Q (0 O U C c0 4) C U a) > 0 O O N .U (B L a) U -0) 0 o 0 t0 a) C E U E N •C C C O ~F 3: • „ c Q L _ L 0 0) a) C 0 C c6 O C U - D C N Ca O a) U [Q O N a) 0 0 L LL p a) m 6 E L 0 a) C •a) U C C L a) Q C c0 _a U O rn O 41 cD O cu L C M O O L' O a) Q '0 O) ca L > H E U 0 0 N N U m • C Co O a) U) U a) c~~a p - O 6 a p a) cn L o - L) a) Q 0 ~ O OI C M W- Co 0 0 - C.- t~ U a)~L- 0) Q 0 Z O Z s 2 a) E L) a) X o L- 0 p 0 ) m w° E 'gin 0 v Q a .w 3 a) -0 L cn _ E U c 0 M "C (9 C ([S CY) U L-C C p L Co (B C (Q p N a) 0 L O C O N C E C6 L 0~ 0 C_ i a) (D 0 o E ` N E t +L _0 0 a) O j C Ca- U r -0 a) M Q rn L LL O N N o 0Evo3 OD-0~cl 70 a) C 0 O - U C O O C a) C d L N 0 0 0 0 _p cu C: w a) U L C 0 a) -0 CQ M cc N a) cu QM Co iZ_0-0 w-0 0 + :E -0 p a E p (B It- "O N x m -0 fn w C 3 O lA 0 U co a) co (D (D W O a) >i OL t-- co N (B C 0 C E6 m ~ co M a) m L Cc Ca J O p M• L+ -C> a) a c ° `o) a) E is m aa)) -0 LL 0 O rn cca n 0 Co m ac) c Q M C°n Q' cn O Cn > c -0 0 a) 0 0 3 > in CU O C rn w C) X cEa c a) p d co 'C a) ? ErnU c~ o tea) w-0 0 ao N M 0) O co 0) O E ca 7 c: E O `O O L U o CL cn a) Q a) cv C7 'r- CO t o a) z m c 0 3 cs E L C CU O) L a) L O L p a) . L 2 0 v> H y 0 a- H D U cn O a) ?i 0 Eg cu O L 0 00 -Fu U L N (6 a) O U Q~ C a -cO 0 p m E c~- > ~ c ~ L E al O O L a) a) co 3: ` O o E- 0!t= O E -0 o CL > E L c C s -C c L a) (6 .-3: E E c E (n 0 U) a) E C) ° L cn •J o cn p .p > O C: 0 C 00 u0) ° C: ai 'p U NU Q) a) S C L a) 0 ui ..~EC~ cn u) E~cu x 3 0 Q 3 a) Cn- ~a 0 - 0 0 0 0 U uj r- -0 Z cu N O a) U C O co c U X n ca V ca y, cr c -M Cn -0 N O Vi ~ L C L O - D O 0 } U 3o Ea) - O -c C M .r- C co N N C Q C c~ Q U a) a; 0 c L E C M Q cu Q o QL p O -0 to U U ~ U L E C ca >1 _0 c Q. O_ -0 U - C U M v--. M r (n a) Q) L L \ O O cn Q U 0) L U` C C O N C p c C C 7 a) c Q C ;a c a ° o c E cn a a) N in C a . cu V C 0) U o M 0 0 E a0 7 rn ~ ~ ~ ~ E 3 L U C 0 = O ca ZC2 cu -a) .D Ua > O -TES Department of Administrative Services Dave Kanner, County Administrator 1300 NW Wall St, Suite 200, Bend, OR 97701-1960 (541) 388-6570 - Fax (541) 385-3202 www.co.deschutes.or.us January 19, 2011 TO: Board of Commissioners FROM: Dave Kanner RE: Broadcasting and streaming BoC business meetings At your January 24 work session, staff would like to continue the discussion with you regarding broadcasting/streaming of Board business meetings, as well as the possibility of raising the dais in the Barnes Room. As to the latter subject, attached to this memo are two drawings that show generally how a raised dais (12" high) would appear in the room. The front right corner of the dais in both of these drawings comes out to where the podium is now located. (The podium will have to be moved.) The front center of the dais is about the same distance from the back wall as the current dais. The difference between these two drawings is the location of the step up to the dais next to the entry door. In option A, it is located to the side, resulting in a bit of a cramped condition for the seat at the far right. In option B, it is located to the rear, which pushes the wheelchair ramp farther east, resulting in less room for a wheelchair to turn around, although this arrangement is still compliant with ADA. We do not yet have cost estimates for this work, but I must caution that if it proves to be too expensive, I would either recommend not doing it or considering it in the context of a capital improvements plan in the FY '12 budget, where it would have to compete with other capital needs. The other discussion item involves the installation of cameras, sound equipment and mixing equipment to facilitate the broadcasting of Board business meetings over local cable systems and streaming those meetings over the internet. As you know, I have been setting aside money in the General Projects Fund (fund 142) for several years in order to pay for this equipment. Current cost estimates are $35,000-$40,000. This includes a new sound system and a laptop computer for character generation. Meetings would be streamed on-line through a service provider by the name of Granicus, which serves hundreds of other jurisdictions across the country. Granicus would also archive the meetings in a searchable format. The monthly cost of the Granicus service is about $500. Enhancing the Lives of Citizens by Delivering Quality Services in a Cost-Effective Manner 0 DESCHUTES COUNTY FLOOR PLAN COUNCIL CHAMBER REMODEL _ g= GGL o I s ' 1300 NW WALL Fv 5 SEND, OREGON N rn n q O Z n rn z m rn r_ Z rn T Z7 O Z --i rn -r rn D O Z n z n i - z G Z 0 nm N rn n O Z n rn z mrn r_ Z rn T O Z < D O Z D - r - ❑ FLOOR PLAN DESCHUTES COUNT d Y 7 sae GG N i COUNCIL CHAMBER REMODEL - q L 0 1300 NW WALL S S _ - BEND,OREGON \1 I b Z D TO: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS FROM: DAVEINBODY SUBJECT: FY 2011 SPRAY AND NEUTER GRANT AWARDS DATE: 1/19/2011 CC: DAVE KANNER, ERIK KROPP Background Beginning in November 2007, the Deschutes County Dog License and Pet ID Application provided for licensees to contribute additional funds to spay and neuter programs in Deschutes County. These funds are offered in the form of grants to non-profit organizations in Deschutes County offering spay and neuter services. In November 2008, the first spay and neuter grants were awarded to the Bend Spay and Neuter Project and the Humane Society of Redmond totaling $4,000. These grants were funded by $2,000 from licensee contributions and a $2,000 match from the Board of Commissioners through the Video Lottery Fund. In 2009, a total of $5,000 was awarded consisting of $2,500 from licensee contributions and a $2,500 match from the Board of Commissioners. Funding Obiectives This grant has the following three primary objectives: 1. Expand spay and neuter services in Deschutes County in an effort to reduce the number of unwanted dogs and cats in the county 2. Provide promotion or education associated with spay and neutering services 3. Outreach to provide services for those who would not otherwise undertake the procedures due to financial constraints or physical limitations. Eligibility for Grants Requirements for applicants to the community grant program: • The applicant must be a 501(c)(3) tax-exempt organization. • The organization must be located in Deschutes County. • The proceeds from the grant must be utilized in support of Deschutes County residents. • All proceeds must be used for expenses associated with direct spay and neuter services or spay and neuter education or promotion. FY 2011 Grants This year contributions from dog licensees and pet ID applicants totaled $2,397.60. The Board of Commissioners approved $10,002.40 in additional funds for a total of $12,400 in available funds. The criteria for selection was as following: 1. Stability and solvency of the organization 2. Ability of funds to provide leverage for receipt of additional funding 3. Program connection to grant funding objectives Recommendations Three applications were received for Spay and Neuter Grants. These applications were reviewed by two members of the Dog Board, Norma Brenton and Laurel Pierson, as well as Dave Inbody, Assistant to the County Administrator. All reviewers were asked to rate each applicant on the criteria as described above. Additionally, each reviewer was asked to indicate whether they felt the applicant should receive a grant. All three reviewers recommended that all three applicants should receive a grant. Reviewers were also asked to recommend how the $12,400 in funding should be distributed between the applicants. It is recommended that the Spay and Neuter Grant funding be distributed based on the average of the three recommended grant amounts from the reviewers. These amounts are as follows: • Bend Spay and Neuter Project $4,800 • Cat Rescue, Adoption & Foster Team $4,033 • Humane Society of Redmond $3,567 December 13, 2010 TO: Dave Kanner, County Administrator Re: Spay/Neuter Grant Application On Pages 8 and 23 of the Public Officials' Guide, it is stated that not-for-profit organizations and the officers of nonprofits are exempt from conflict of interest disclosure. I am an employee of Deschutes County, and am also on the board of directors of Cat Rescue, Adoption & Foster Team (CRAFT) as a volunteer, unpaid officer. This local nonprofit has recently applied for spay/neuter grant funds, and the application for those funds is to be considered at an upcoming Board work session. In the interest of full disclosure, whether necessary or not, I would like the Board of Commissioners to be aware of this fact. Thanks, Bonnie Baker Date: January 19, 2011 To: Board of County Commissioners From: Erik Kropp, Deputy County Administrator 4 Re: PROPOSED ADDITION TO THE PERSONNEL RULES Attached are proposed additions to the Personnel Rules for discussion at the January 24, 2011 work session (the changes are underlined and shaded). The proposed change adds a new type of position to the Personnel Rules called a "limited duration position." The limited duration position would be used for new positions funded by a discrete revenue source with a defined expiration date. The purpose of this addition is to codify the County's past practice of terminating the employment of the employee hired into a grant funded position if/when the grant expires. Please let me know if you have any questions on this proposed addition to the Personnel Rules. Dave Kanner, County Administrator Title 3. DESCHUTES COUNTY PERSONNEL RULES Chapter 3.08. DEFINITIONS "Grieve" means to initiate a grievance. "Hourly Employee" is an employee who works less than half time on a year-round basis. "Job-Share Employees" are employees who job-share are part-time employees who share a full-time position normally held by one employee, on an equal basis. It is not two separate half-time positions. "Lead worker" is an employee delegated limited supervisory duties in writing by the employee's department head. Limited supervisory duties include distribution of work assignments, oversight of work performed, maintaining a balanced workload among a group of employees, reviewing completed work, and maintenance of records of work production and attendance by employees. Lead workers do not impose discipline or conduct performance evaluations. "Limited 'Duration Position" isa position funded by 'a discrete revenue source with a known expiration date. .An employee in alimited duration;position may be terminated on the date the funding expires and such termination shall' be considered a voluntary termination.. Based upon the terms of the funding sorirce the conditions of compensation and benefits may differ from the compensation and benefits payable to regular 'County employees performin- substantially similar work. The term of employment o an individual in a limited duration position may exceed 18 months without conferring with the individM The County mav_ in its sole discretion and based upon additional discrete revenue. extend the term of employment past the initial funding expiration date and such extension shall not change the limited duration status of the employee. "Length of Service" is an employee's continuous full-time or part-time service with a County department. "Longevity" is an employee's continuous full-time or part-time service as a County employee. "Merit Step Increase" is an increase in an employee's pay from one step of the pay grade for the employee's position to a higher step of the pay grade for the employee's position. "Non-Exempt Employee" is an employee subject to the overtime provisions of the Fair Labor Standards Act and/or State of Oregon overtime laws. "Non-Represented Employees:" All employees who are not represented members of a bargaining unit. "On-Call Employee" is an employee who does not have regular hours of work or a regularly assigned work schedule and who is available to work on an as-needed bases. There is no guarantee of any hours of work for any on-call employee. "Part-time Employee" is an employee who works at least one-half (1/2) time. "Pay grade" is the range of pay assigned to a Position Description on the salary schedule. "Pay step" is one of the established levels of pay within a pay grade. "Personal Services Contract" is a contract between the County and an independent contractor to perform personal services for the County. "Personnel Department" is the County department designated by the County Administrator to administer the Personnel Rules and all other human resource matters for the County. "Personnel File" is any file maintained by the County which contains employment records of an employee. Page 1 of 3 DRAFT UPDATE - December 10, 2010 "Personnel Rules" are the rules, policies, and procedures set forth in Deschutes County Code, Title 3. "Personnel Services Manager" is the person charged by the County Administrator with the responsibility of coordinating and overseeing all personnel management for the County. "Position" is two or more descriptions grouped by an occupation, discipline, or type of work. "Position Authorization" is authorization for a specific position as approved in the adopted County budget. "Position Description" is a written statement of the nature of the work to be performed, indicating duties and responsibilities, representative examples of work and general minimum recruiting qualifications. This is also referred to as a "Job Description." The Position Description may also be referred to by Position Title. "Position Title" is the name assigned to a Position Description. "Probation" or "Probationary Period" is a period of trial service during which an employee's work performance and standing to become a regular employee is evaluated by the County. "Regular employee" is a full-time or part-time employee who has successfully completed probation and who works on a year round basis. "Regular full-time employee" is a regular employee who is scheduled to work the established hours for a full-time position on a regular year-round basis. "Regular part-time employee" is a regular employee who is scheduled to work at least one-half of the established full-time work schedule for the particular position on a regular, year-round basis. "Represented Employees" are employees who are members of a recognized bargaining unit. "Retiree" is an individual who has retired from County service. "Seniority" is an employee's continuous full-time or part-time service in a particular position with the County. "Supervisor" is defined as an employee who has authority over hiring, salary administration, evaluation, transfer, promotion, demotion, discipline, grievance adjustment, or recommendations on any personnel action, as well as day-to-day supervisory responsibilities. "Temporary employee" is a person who has been hired by the County to work for a period not to exceed 18 months. Some temporary positions may also be limited duration positions. "Volunteers" are persons who perform services for the County and do not receive from the County salary, wages or any other form of remuneration for services performed. (Ord. 2007-017, §2, 2007; Ord. 86-011, §1, 1986; Ord. 81-053, §1, 1981) Page 2 of 3 DRAFT UPDATE - December 10, 2010 Chapter 3.16. RECRUITMENT AND APPOINTMENT OF EMPLOYEES 3.16.010. Recruitment of Employees. 3.16.020. Probationary Period. 3.16.030. Hiring Former Employees. 3.16.040. Hiring Relatives, Domestic Partners and Personal Acquaintances of Employees. 3.16.010. Recruitment of Employees. It is the policy of Deschutes County to recruit and select the most qualified individuals for employment with Deschutes County. Recruitment and selection shall be conducted to ensure open competition, provide equal employment opportunity, and to prohibit discrimination because of race, color, national origin, sex, religion, age, marital status, family relationship, sexual orientation, physical or mental disability (provided reasonable accommodation can be made for any such disability), political affiliation, or any other classification protected by Oregon or Federal law. The Personnel Department is responsible for overseeing and administering the recruitment and selection of County employees in accordance with the County's Recruitment and Selection Policy. (Ord. 2007-017, §2, 2007; Ord. 86-011, §1, 1986; Ord. 81-053, §1, 1981) 3.16.020. Probationary Period. A. Represented employees. For employees who are covered by a collective bargaining agreement, the length and conditions of probationary (trial service) periods are provided in and governed by the applicable collective bargaining agreement. B. Non-represented employees. All newly hired and newly promoted non-represented employees shall be on probationary (trial service) status until the employee completes at least twelve (12) full months of continuous employment with the County and has received from his or her and department head or supervisor a written one-year performance evaluation for which the employee is given an overall rating of meets or exceeds standards. An employee on probationary status is not eligible to be removed from probation and assigned regular employee status if the employee does not receive an overall rating of meets or exceeds standards on the employee's one-year performance evaluation. 1. Each probationary employee shall be given a written performance evaluation at approximately two (2) and six (6) months into the employee's probationary period. Each probationary employee shall also receive a performance evaluation at twelve (12) months. The probationary evaluation schedule may not be modified except by mutual agreement between the employee and his or her department head. 2. An employee on probationary status is an at-will employee and as such, may resign from his or her position at any time, with or without cause and with or without notice, and may have his or her employment terminated by the County at any time, with or without cause and with or without notice. Discipline of or the termination of employment of a probationary employee may not be grieved. 3. If a department seeks to extend the probationary period for an employee on probationary status, a request for extension of probation shall be made by the department head to the County Administrator and may only be granted by the County Administrator. Extensions of probation will only be granted in unusual circumstances, and shall be in 30-day increments, not to exceed a maximum of 90 days. 4.- Employees in limited duration positions whose positions are exteiided for subsequent limited duration time periods shall not by the virtue of the extension serve another probationary period. Page 3 of 3 DRAFT UPDATE - December 10, 2010 LEGISLATIVE ADMINISTRATION Basics about Redistricting 2011 Erin Seiler, Legislative Committee Services April 2010 What is redistricting? Committee Services Redistricting is the process of redrawing legislative and congressional district lines following the decennial U.S. Census. The lines are redrawn so that districts are of roughly equal population as required by the Constitutions of Oregon and the United States. Who is responsible for redistricting and when is it done? The Oregon Legislature is responsible for redistricting the state's 60 House districts and 30 Senate districts, as well as the five U.S. Congressional districts. As with all legislative enactments, redistricting plans are subject to the veto authority of the Governor. The 76`x' Legislative Assembly will be responsible for drafting redistricting plans during the 2011 Legislative Session, upon receipt of the 2010 Census data. The Census Bureau is required by federal law to provide population counts to states by April 1, 2011. However, data is expected to arrive in Oregon in March. Article IV Section 6 of the Oregon Constitution and ORS 188.010 contain the criteria, timeline, and authority for conducting and completing legislative redistricting. If the legislature fails to enact a legislative redistricting plan by July 1, the Governor vetoes the plan, or if a court successfully challenges its plan or a portion of it, the responsibility for drawing legislative districts lines, or for correcting a specific problem, falls to the Secretary of State. There is no corresponding timeline for congressional redistricting because there are no statutory or constitutional deadlines for the legislature to complete the congressional redistricting plan. The practical deadline is in time for candidates filing for the 2012 primary election. Currently, the Oregon Constitution and the U.S. Constitution do not provide a redistricting mechanism if the Legislative Assembly fails to complete a congressional plan. The only available mechanism for redress is for an affected individual or group of individuals to petition the courts to address the inequality in district populations based on the new census data. What are the criteria for drawing district lines? The criteria for consideration by the Legislative Assembly or the Secretary of State for redistricting legislative and congressional districts are listed in ORS 188.010. The criteria require that each district, as nearly as practicable, shall: • Be contiguous; • Be of equal population; • Utilize existing geographic or political boundaries; • Not divide communities of common interest; and • Be connected by transportation links. State Capitol, 900 Court St. NE, Rm 453, Salem OR 97301 • (503) 986-181 3 LEGISLATIVE ADMINISTRATION Committee Services In addition, no district shall be drawn for the purpose of favoring any political party, incumbent legislator or other person or be drawn for the purpose of diluting the voting strength of any language or ethnic minority group. Finally, Article IV Section 6 of the Oregon Constitution requires that two House districts be "nested' in one Senate district. While all the criteria are significant, equalizing populations in districts is the basic purpose of redistricting. Redistricting is based on total population, not just the voting-age population. ORS 188.010 specifies that each district "as nearly as practicable shall" be of equal population, and court decisions have not specified a maximum deviation. Generally, the smaller the plan's deviation, the less prone it is to being challenged. Redistricting in 2001 resulted in a maximum deviation in state legislative districts of less than tone percent. For congressional districts the deviation was only plus or minus a few people. (Since districts were over 500,000 in population, this is essentially zero percent deviation.) What is the recent legislative history of redistricting? Following is a history of the chamber of origin for measures relating to congressional reapportionment and Legislative redistricting, from 1951 to 2001. 1951 Congressional No measures introduced by either chamber. reapportionment Legislative The Senate introduced SB 101 and SB 392, and the House introduced HB 117 redistricting and HB 148. No plan adopted by the 1951 Legislative Assembly. 1961 Congressional No measures introduced by either chamber. reapportionment Legislative The Senate introduced SB 500 and the House introduced HB 1665. HB 1665, redistricting B-Eng. version was adopted by both chambers and signed by the Governor on May 22, 1961. In 1961 the legislature enacted a redistricting plan that was challenged and overturned because of underrepresentation in Multnomah and Lane Counties. The Supreme Court approved adjustments made by the Secretary of State. 1971 Congressional The Senate introduced SB 471, SB 707 and SB 730, and the House introduced reapportionment HB 3055. SB 730 B-Eng. version was adopted by both chambers and signed by the Governor on July 2, 1971. Legislative The Senate introduced SB 470, SB 707, SB 710 and SB 729, and the House redistricting introduced HB 3059. SB 470 would have redistricted only the senate chamber. Plan drawn by Secretary of State. LEGISLATIVE ADMINISTRATION Committee Services In 1971 the legislature did not enact a legislative plan; therefore, responsibility for preparing a plan fell to the Secretary of State. 1981 Congressional The Senate introduced SB 962 and the House introduced HB 2002. SB 962 reapportionment B-Eng. version was adopted by both chambers and signed by the Governor on August 22, 1981. Legislative No measures introduced by the Senate. The House introduced HB 2001 B- redistricting Eng.*, which was adopted by both chambers and signed by the Governor on June 30, 1981. In 1981 the legislature enacted a legislative redistricting plan that was challenged and overturned because one district was left without a Senator for two years. The Supreme Court approved adjustments made by the Secretary of State. 1991 Congressional No measures introduced by the Senate. The House introduced HB 2001 and reapportionment HB 3581. U.S. District Court ordered adoption of Interim Special Joint Committee plan effective December 18, 1991. Legislative The Senate introduced SB 1000. No measures introduced by the House. Plan redistricting drawn by Secretary of State. In 1991 the legislature did not enact a legislative redistricting plan; therefore, responsibility for preparing a plan fell to the Secretary of State. After court challenges and minor modifications, the Secretary of State's legislative district plan was approved by the Supreme Court. 2001 Congressional The Senate introduced SB 500 and SB 501. No measures were introduced by reapportionment the House. SB 500 was adopted by both chambers and vetoed by the Governor. Plan drawn by the Secretary of State Legislative The House introduced HB 2001 and HB 2849. No measures were introduced redistricting by the Senate. HB 2001 was adopted by both chambers and vetoed by the Governor. Plan drawn by the Secretary of State. In 2001 the legislature adopted legislative and congressional redistricting plans. However, both plans were vetoed by the Governor, therefore, responsibility for preparing a plan fell to the Secretary of State. The Supreme Court sustained one court challenge because the prison population in Sheridan was put outside the city by the federal census. Upon correction, the Secretary of States' plan was approved. 3 r V - Q N L. N N C V N 'O I.I. L O Q) co (6 'ca ~m> J U) U Q C O O U U ~ u cu C N Q r V ca d O a.+ N ;.r N J L' C M O Q ~ rn ~ c U J J L (n O m L C_ U a N N a) O C t6 a N r.+ V c d L d J a o oU Q O U.) C5 a) r 3 E 3 U a) U Q O C cc a L% 15 U ZEE a) ~ C cC a) E fl.. C 3 O U) "a E-oar') (1) r ' j k.:) Q 0 Z) O O a a) C O aU ca a) 0 U Q- a) N a) LO N M W cj o in 2 0 M CL U ~ n o c) a) 3r C a) -a a) Q O N to C E '~f L O 5 ~ Lo 7 - ~ O f4 _d U rn w m a) = U O O0 U ~ E O U c a~ L c6 a oQ C -E5 .o m a) w 0 O Q 10 O N E N :O O c C a co U C a) r U U U WAN M a 0 "O U > ~ o O 0 a) ZUo' E4 O O Q U M O a1 U*) U N N= a) C W CL) E (L) O ~ CO Cl) D W C/) w fa O' 0 c U w~ : OiR a Z Ua CL O a) 0 O E U C w d af a) O C Eaa) 4= W a) E C O m a c L' 3 0 cn w f L a LLJ ( cin cu cn a) LE5 D o 'O d N N O C c a=+ d IL U C LO a) U Q O U L.u U N co O W -t o d O a) W U a U a) u' E O 0.. 3 U) - m a O ~ U N N V- U a) . a) o m u 0 ) N m cp a) 'C a) Co d C O o CL C O o cwM c cAa z a 3 N O oU L a) a) a) E r O W m'Z^U) v/ w o 0 C OcvQ U Z+ /la^) L) vJ L 0 U O ~U a) ~cn E ~ E N a' Q m W c W o 3 0 C: W cu Q- U a) cn a) LO U N C O N aL E U Lo 0 W 3 co m E a) 'C a) w 3 c W 0 U Y O E E a) -0 C: Q M L a) L C O U a) ~ aL E U Lo 0 OC n vii W 3 ca E -cf aa)) C W 30 Se O U Z E E c Q ca ) N M T" O N r 3 C N V a~ N d Y m C CL (A d v ,L d V) dM m9 ~ o M E •E o O U c d ~ A N d J Oregon State Redistricting Page 1 of 2 State of Oregon Redistricting Frequently Asked Questions What is Redistricting? Redistricting is the process of redrawing legislative and congressional district lines following the decennial U.S. Census. The lines are redrawn so that districts are of roughly equal population as required by the Oregon Constitution and the U.S. Constitution. Who is Responsible for Redistricting and When is it done? Top of Page The Oregon Legislature is responsible for redistricting the state's 60 House districts and 30 Senate districts, as well as the five U.S. Congressional districts. As with all legislative enactments, redistricting plans are subject to the veto authority of the Governor. The 76th Legislative Assembly will be responsible for drafting redistricting plans during the 2011 Legislative Session, upon receipt of the 2010 Census data. The Census Bureau is required by federal law to provide population counts to states by April 1, 2011. However, data is expected to arrive in Oregon in March. Article IV Section 6 of the Oregon Constitution and ORS 188.010 contain the criteria, timeline, and authority for conducting and completing legislative redistricting. If the legislature fails to enact a legislative redistricting plan by July 1, the Governor vetoes the plan, or if a court successfully challenges its plan or a portion of it, the responsibility for drawing legislative districts lines, or for correcting a specific problem, falls to the Secretary of State. There is no corresponding timeline for congressional redistricting because there are no statutory or constitutional deadlines for the legislature to complete the congressional redistricting plan. The practical deadline is in time for candidates filing for the 2012 primary election. Currently, the Oregon Constitution and the U.S. Constitution do not provide a redistricting mechanism if the Legislative Assembly fails to complete a congressional plan. The only available mechanism for redress is for an affected individual or group of individuals to petition the courts to address the inequality in district populations based on the new census data. What is the Statutory Criteria for Conducting Redistricting Requirements? Top of Page The criteria that the legislature or the Secretary of State use for redistricting legislative and congressional districts are listed in ORS 188.010. The criteria to be considered requires that each district, as nearly as practicable, shall: • Be contiguous; • Be of equal population; • Utilize existing geographic or political boundaries; • Not divide communities of common interest; and • Be connected by transportation links. In addition, no district shall be drawn for the purpose of favoring any political party, incumbent legislator or other person or be drawn for the purpose of diluting the voting strength of any language or ethnic minority group. Finally, Article IV Section 6 of the Oregon Constitution requires that two house districts be "nested' in one senate district. While all the criteria are significant, equalizing populations in districts is the basic purpose of redistricting. Redistricting is based on total population not just the voting-age population. ORS 188.010 specifies that each district "as nearly as practicable shall" be of equal population, and court decisions have not specified a maximum deviation. Generally, the smaller the deviation, the less prone to challenge a plan is considered to be. As a result of redistricting in 2001, the maximum deviation in Oregon legislative districts was less than t1%. For congressional districts the deviation was only plus or minus a few people. (Since districts were over 500,000 population, this is essentially 0% deviation.) Key Redistricting Dates: TQp-Qf Page http://www.leg.state.or.us/redistricting/fags.htrn 1/24/2011 Oregon State Redistricting Page 2 of 2 • April 1, 2010 - National Census Day • April 1 - July 31, 2010 - Census Takers Visit Homes • December 31, 2010 -Census Bureau delivers population data to President for Reapportionment • April 1, 2011 - Census Bureau completes delivery of population data to states for redistricting • July 1, 2011 - Deadline for Legislature to complete redistricting http://www.leg.state.or.us/redistricting/faqs.htrn 1/24/2011