Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
2016-62-Minutes for Meeting January 27,2016 Recorded 2/16/2016
D % Ts c0�. ;, DESCHUTES COUNTY OFFICIAL RECORDS r 1 NANCY BLANKENSHIP, COUNTY CLERK �d 2016 62 o o COMMISSIONERS' JOURNAL OZ/1612016 08:05:09 AM , 1 16 " 2016 , 111111111111111111111111111 0 V ER'is 1 -52 .411r101,_:::: Deschutes County Board of Commissioners 1300 NW Wall St., Bend, OR 97701-1960 (541) 388-6570 - Fax (541) 385-3202 -www.deschutes.org MINUTES OF WORK SESSION DESCHUTES COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 27, 2016 Present were Commissioners Alan Unger, Tammy Baney and Anthony DeBone. Also present were Tom Anderson, County Administrator; Erik Kropp, Deputy County Administrator; Dave Doyle, County Counsel; and,for a portion of the meeting, Nick Lelack, Will Groves and Matt Martin, Community Development; George Kolb, Road Department; Ed Keith, County Forester; Jane Smilie, Health Services; David Givans, Internal Auditor; Judith Ure, Administration; Whitney Malkin, Communications; and about a dozen other citizens. No representatives of the media were in attendance. Chair Unger opened the meeting at 1:30 p.m. 1. Update on Jericho Road Activities. Don Senecal and Kenny Larking, Board of Jericho Road came before the Board. Mr. Senecal stated that his group only treats the symptoms of hunger and homelessness around Redmond. The need has grown and its 200 volunteers have never worked harder. (He read a statement, a copy of which is attached.) Nearly 90% of funding goes to core programs. Minutes of Board of Commissioners' Work Session Wednesday,January 27, 2016 Page 1 of 15 2015 saw amazing changes. Jericho Table found a new home in the Church of God, and this has been mutually beneficial. Partnerships include visits by Mosaic Medical, the shower van and obtaining a better quality of food, and they now can offer soap, toilet paper, socks, basic essentials, plus pet food. A growing challenge is the ongoing loss of affordable housing. The number of seniors visiting for meals increased along with those who are marginally employed. This is more evident as the housing crisis grows. He invited the Board to come by between 4:30 and 6 to share a meal and meet the people. They are the only organization providing a food program of this magnitude in the Redmond area. They are into their seventh school year of providing bags of food to students every day, including for the weekend. Some of this is shared with family. They cover all Redmond schools including Terrebonne. They used to distribute 10-20 bags a week in September, but last year it was 74 the first week, and is now up to 170. They need 61 volunteer hours to get this done. During 2012, they distributed a total of 1,783 packs. Now they provide 120 lunches each day during the summer, through the library. A true need exists. The emergency assistance program provides immediate assistance for short- term needs: financial, gas, temporary shelter, auto repairs, electric bill and so on. Day to day challenges are snowballing, causing minor setbacks that can roll into the loss of a job, homelessness and more. They provide mentoring and assistance with budgeting and smart shopping. About 70 families & 118 children averted serious issues last year because of this. Volunteers go into the camp areas to distribute propane tanks, clothing and more; and deal with providing cold weather shelter through Shepherd's House personnel for the second year. They have partnered with incredible groups and individuals to deal with hard times. The heart of Jericho Road is volunteers. They have about 200 on a regular basis and could not exist w/out them. Fourteen different church congregations support Jericho Road in some fashion. This is the Largent group of its kind in the state of or outside of the Portland metro area, and is award-winning. Mr. Senecal thanked the Board for support over the years. The challenge is to put these groups out of business, when they are no longer needed. Minutes of Board of Commissioners' Work Session Wednesday,January 27, 2016 Page 2 of 15 They have recorded progress and effectiveness over time. They have never asked for anything beyond support and to be able to compete for grants. This year they are asking for a structure in the Redmond area for offices, meeting space, storage and mentoring space. They know it is hard to find. Relying on donated church space is no longer viable. They welcome all suggestions. Kenny Larkin said he moved here in 1970, and Chair Unger's father was their family doctor. He is a financial planner with Raymond James, and he is passionate about this group. He believes in accountability. They have a working board, all volunteer except the grant writer. About 10% of revenue is for insurance, rent and other overhead. It is a challenge to coordinate 200 people, bouncing around from one church to another. This places a burden on churches as well. They would love to have the old Catholic church building, and did talk with Father Todd Unger. Shower truck availability is hit and miss. They met with the City, but a building is the biggest need. The can do a lot for individuals, but often there are not enough funds and the volunteers chip in. If there is an opportunity to partner, they want to do it. Commissioner Baney said it sounds like how things were at Bethlehem Inn some time ago. She understands they are at the crossroads. Under- and unemployment are not calculated well enough. There is a lack of affordable housing in the area, as well as transit issues. She cannot think of a building, but asked if there might be connections with Bethlehem Inn to learn from their efforts. Mr. Senecal stated that they meet with Bethlehem Inn folks often, but both face difficult situations. If they had a particular place that they could transition into, they could start that conversation. Commissioner Baney asked if they could pursue some CGBD funding. Mr. Seneca responded that they need to have a certain administrative structure just for reporting purposes. The grant application is difficult. A lot of their clients will not fill out any forms, and the volunteers are doing all they can. Bethlehem Inn can just now afford to take care of administrative details. Erik Kropp said he can check with Property & Facilities, but most County- owned properties do not have that much space, and the County already has to lease in Redmond. Mr. Senecal noted that it is the same sad stories, and they have to focus on programs. Fewer funds are available for Redmond due to its population being much less than Bend's. Minutes of Board of Commissioners' Work Session Wednesday,January 27,2016 Page 3 of 15 Commissioner DeBone stated that they are doing great work. Crossroads will happen and the community will come together. Tom Anderson added that if anyone hers of grant opportunities, to let Mr. Seneca know. Commissioner Baney asked if they have an annual fundraiser. Mr. Senecal replied that it is hard to coordinate something like this with volunteers. Some types of events are cost prohibitive. Ridgeview High School started an empty bowls event. It has happened twice and they hope to build on this. They have a team looking at other events and perhaps they can partner with another group. Chair Unger thanked them for their leadership doing God's work. There is so much involved and they do a remarkable job of dealing with it. He is confident they will be able to move forward. 2. Review of 2015 Title III Expenditures and Chair Signature of Certification. Ed Keith explained the item, as required each year by the Forest Service. Funds can be expended in three categories. BANEY: Move approval of signature of the certification. DEBONE: Second. VOTE: BANEY: Yes. DEBONE: Yes. UNGER: Chair votes yes. 3. Health Services Update. Jane Smilie updated the Board on department activities. She said there is a big initiatives moving forward. The Excellence in Mental Health Act requires accreditation, and this is intended to transform the process, and address what is needed for mental health is so much more than just health. You get money up front and are expected to help everyone regardless of ability to pay. There are four required services. The rest you have to provide yourself, or through others using a memorandum of understanding. This is meant to deal with people who are severely or persistently mentally ill, homeless, in jail or veterans. The first year involves a planning grant, with federal guidance but they allow some flexibility. The proposals are due from the State by October 2016. Minutes of Board of Commissioners' Work Session Wednesday,January 27,2016 Page 4 of 15 The second phase will have eight states carry out the plan. They are required to have both an urban and rural clinic. Then this will roll out into a national mental health system. Ms. Smilie thinks Deschutes County would count as rural. Advocates say there would be few, but those would be robust. They would get the payment system in place. This is a huge vision for mental health, and the timing might be right for this. Oregon would be looked at carefully because of its health changes. Commissioner DeBone stated that he does not support this. In his view, this is saying that they should give everything to anybody. He understands the `severe and persistent' language, but there are words that they will take anyone, including those who might just be having a bad day. He feels this is very political. Ms. Smilie explained that the focus is on the last and the least. It is intended for those who have fallen through the cracks. Commissioner Baney asked if this is different from a school-based health center, and if the County would be taking on more of a role. They may not end up being the one who takes this on. It could end up being federal. Ms. Smilie said they are already poised for part of it with, for instance, the mobile crisis team. She feels it is really worth watching. With the current state of affairs, there will be more change but it will be incremental. This will take more of a bold step, moving out of the insurance claim business. Oregon has to get its act together and be selective. Organizations have to apply, and there is a lot to it. It represents a federal effort to address the mental health situation. This is about a continuum of services and having things work together. The emphasis needs to be on outcomes and data. This is the future. Commissioner Baney stated that there are a lot of touch points to come on this. Oregon may not even make it. Lots of people have no families or church support. If people get help for substance abuse or other issues, it can keep it from cycling into more. Commissioner DeBone emphasized that he does not like the fact that it seems to offer help to everybody. Minutes of Board of Commissioners' Work Session Wednesday,January 27,2016 Page 5 of 15 Chair Unger said he likes to see federal money to help build an infrastructure, like with workforce efforts. There are some who need help to avoid using other services. It trickles down to their children as well. This might relieve some of the local demands. Behavioral health touches everything. It is the fundamental cause of a lot of other problems, and addressing it should be regional. Commissioner Baney stated that the feds do not often come up with new dollars, so it might come from the State community health fund. A lot of research shows that those who need outreach are those who will not come to you. She is an advocate of health care, but the burden cannot end up falling on the County. Ms. Smilie said that public health modernization is now in the assessment phase. The County is required to complete this. She talked to with representatives of Crook County but not Jefferson County yet. She wants to finish the assessments separately, then sit down, and review capacity, knowledge and expertise. Some services can be shared regionally and this might provide an anchor for regional efforts. Commissioner Baney noted that she does not think they have a choice. The premise is to make sure it is grassroots and not directed, and that they will do what is needed. WEBCO is the vehicle for this. Ms. Smilie stated that the Mosaic bridges program for medically complex folks, is also working on a pilot project that seems to be doing well. PacificSource did some analytic work on outcomes at the downtown clinic through Mosaic for the mentally challenged. This resulted in a big reduction in emergency room admissions. Integration of peer supports a new addition, and helps with medical appointment attendance. They went from 13% attendance to 72%. They are adding dental services through Advantage. There is a new project at the La Pine Community Health Clinic to get physician services there for mental and physical health. They have a contract with COPA and Mosaic for pediatric services and a pediatric psychologist. They have a health educator embedded in Redmond and Bend OB clinics. The continuum of care that was started in November provides intensive in- home services, through the County, Jefferson County, WEBCO and St. Charles. They also have emergency room diversion for children at St. Charles. Minutes of Board of Commissioners' Work Session Wednesday,January 27, 2016 Page 6 of 15 They are expanding the continuum of care with funds for strategic investments through WEBCO, for sober and detox programs. One is for jail diversion services, and the other for crisis respite. They are making a strategic investment for operations that should last seven years. They want a crisis receiving station, a `sober station'. Jefferson County is writing for this as well. This will help to keep people out of jail and hospitals. She said a lot depends on grants. BestCare will do longer term care and respite but needs a physical space in Bend or Redmond, for up to 14 days. Chair Unger stated that St. Charles is reviewing development plans this spring. Ms. Smilie added that there is a lot of energy around this project. It is felt to be a key piece. She has asked for an increase in FTE for developmentally disabled programs, since the caseload is up 30%. Results from the search grant will bring Pacific Source, the County, DOHC and Mosaic together. Redmond has the first people to go through the diabetes prevention program, which reduces it by 60%. Commissioner Baney noted that this is one of the top five achievable goals for the region. Ms. Smilie said that electronic referrals to the quit line will improve, and the State will do the IT work for this. They will be better track smoking and utilization of the quit line. With the drug-free communities grant, they are able to hire a coordinator. The Bend High school-based health clinic had its grand opening. They continue to remove the County from this responsibility. Chair Unger noted that he has supported the SBHC and then learned it is a good platform for other things. They cannot step completely away from this. It is more integrated now. Commissioner Baney said that they are partnering in different ways. Ms. Smilie added that this has been pushed mostly to the medical sponsors. Ms. Smilie stated that they are heavily involved in assessing the data of the regional health improvement plan priorities. This will provide a platform for all partners to work towards shared priorities. The CCO and HOHC are committed to funding some of these priorities. Minutes of Board of Commissioners' Work Session Wednesday,January 27,2016 Page 7 of 15 Commissioner Baney said that this alignment is happening at Mosaic, St. Charles, PacificSource and others, so that all are following the same kind of model. This makes the information collected more valuable. Ms. Smilie noted that they are working on workplace culture. They met with all staff at the fairgrounds. Three is recognition that there was not enough clarity about supervision and oversight goals. She is concentrating on leadership training for this reason, and is making progress. There is more structure regarding project management. Everything they can put on OCHIN is integrated. The last frontier is the front desk, consolidation, which they hope to address soon. 4. Marijuana Advisory Committee Update and Process. Matt Martin and Nick Lelack gave an overview of the item and the process. They received over 40 applications. The group may meet as early as Feb. 10, with the fifth meeting being a tour or site visit. They discussed the selection process, and talked about timeframe and facilitation, and where to conduct the meetings. Commissioner DeBone noted that there are diverse interests and various parts of the County involved. Chair Unger added that he likes seeing categories, areas of interest and geographic areas. Commissioner Baney said that she is appreciative of those who applied. Most kept their personal opinion out of it, and seemed to look at trying to find a way to get through this together. There is a push to get this done. Commissioner DeBone said he has not been able to review everything yet. Mr. Lelack stated that they need to provide input to staff by the end of the day Friday, so they can bring it back with areas of agreement. Or, this can come to a Board meeting if they are in alignment. It was determined they would discuss this further on Wednesday, February 3, at the work session. Mr. Lelack asked if the Board is supportive of hiring a facilitator. They will want to know the goal and general direction. Chair Unger said he wants a thorough vetting of the complex issues, a recommended path for rulemaking, the ability to tweak, and a look at a final product. They are waiting for the legislative session to work on this as well. He wants to hear from stakeholders and hope they can reach consensus. Minutes of Board of Commissioners' Work Session Wednesday,January 27,2016 Page 8 of 15 Commissioner Baney stated that she is looking for consensus as well. There might be some things that cannot be agreed upon. The Planning Commission had difficulty getting to this. Commissioner DeBone said they need to talk about appealing the ordinance and putting rules in. This is time sensitive. Chair Unger noted they can opt in regulations and weigh this against opt out. He does not want to have to scramble later if it goes to the voters. Commissioner DeBone agreed that there might be different views that will not come together, but he wants the facts to base decisions on. Commissioner Baney said she wants clarity on the medical side of things. She asked how much they can regulate starting March 1. The Planning Commission did not deal with this, but felt it needed review. If someone is hoping this is all going to go away, they are wrong. Mr. Martin asked if they want to view medical and recreational together. Commissioner Baney replied that for many that are new to the issue, some think it is all recreational. They think an opt out will make it all go away. However, medical has been legal for years. Chair Unger supports hiring a facilitator. Mr. Lelack said that this is still a significant role for CDD. Mr. Anderson suggested that CDD be made whole for the cost of a facilitator. The Board agreed. Commissioner Baney asked what they are seeking in terms of a facilitator. Mr. Lelack replied that it needs to be someone who has worked with dynamic groups that have diverse and strong opinions. They should be local and in tune with local issues. There needs to be a sense of region, values and culture, and understand the value of achieving consensus. Chair Unger asked if the Board supports sending letters to the legislature. There are many questions regarding farm crop issues, how to regulate, how to move forward on EFU land. There are a lot of hobby farms here. The County needs a path to get through these issues. Minutes of Board of Commissioners' Work Session Wednesday,January 27,2016 Page 9 of 15 Commissioner DeBone said that making marijuana exempt from the right to farm law is a strong statement. Commissioner Baney stated that they need language changes to the legislation. It is supposed to be a lawful crop. She wonders what the Farm Bureau folks will support. This narrows and defines that this crop is different. Commissioner DeBone said he is not ready to make this statement. Mr. Lelack stated that they should clarify and define reasonable time, place and manner in relation to right to farm law. No one knows what this means. Some think it can be regulated, but others feel it is outright farm use and not to be regulated. The question is, can the State define this, or can LUBA. They want to avoid a challenge. Clackamas County's rules were appealed but it was withdrawn. Jackson County is proceeding with regulations. Deschutes County might be the one that gets challenged. There is not enough clarity. Commissioner Baney noted that the industry seems to want this to be reasonable. They need to think differently about the language being a barrier. However, this is a short session and she hopes they deal with it. If it is protected by the right to farm law, this protects odor, noise, etc. It has to be reasonable; they just cannot say no one can do anything. Mr. Lelack said that they want to provide some local control. The OHA and OLCC are involved, and most people do not know which agency to contact. This should have been integrated for consistency and efficiency. Item #4 is more specific about how to classify. They could make them all conditional uses but there will be little support for this, especially the medical. It is a big ask. Commissioner DeBone supports getting something to the legislature. He added that a lot of rural counties that are not concerned about this at all. Mr. Lelack said the intent of items #1, 2 and 4 is for the most control possible. Some of this might not be warranted. Chair Unger noted that they have to be in touch with the legislators and anyone who has some influence in Salem. Mr. Lelack said that #2, exempt rec from right to farm law, needs clarification. Commissioner DeBone noted that it has been against the law and is high value. It is different from other farm crops. Minutes of Board of Commissioners' Work Session Wednesday,January 27,2016 Page 10 of 15 Commissioner Baney said that within the farm bill it talks about being lawful; she wonders what was meant by this. No one anticipated this issue at the time. Many of our lands with marginal to awful soils are still classified as farmland, EFU,just like in the Willamette Valley. They have become hobby farms because they cannot really grow a crop. We have allowed a different type of uses because of tis. Now there is an opportunity to grow a profitable crop there. She asked how they are going to handle the non-resource lands issue. The agricultural lands look different here. Soils are not good and it is costly to reclassify and get land rezoned. The average person cannot do it, and it is not right to require this. The issue is a lot of land use that applies to the whole state but does not help with the uniqueness of this area. This area does not have the makeup of large farms elsewhere. The Board agreed that there needs to be discussion regarding regional land use. 5. Discussion on Whether to Hear an Appeal— Dreifuss — Non-conforming Structures. Will Groves provided an overview of the item, having to do with docks, decks and fill in a wetlands area. He presented a 1989 aerial photo showing a small structure. The owner built it for RV use and asked for a septic for this. They wanted a bathhouse later. The owner said he asked the County and they felt that he could hook up the RV to it. No permit was required, as this was unclear in the 1970's. They added a faucet and a sink. In 2008, there was a new owner. The remnants of a dock were there and the new owner replaced the dock. The County received a complaint, and this was determined to be illegal. The present owner built several structures. They added other structures, a dock, decks and rock along the river, with no permits. The applicant is seeking permits after the fact. The Hearings Officer said they could not be obtained. The bathhouse was built during PL-5 and this did not support RV use. Decks are within 100 feet of the river. Viewing platforms are low but are close to the river. The Hearings Officer found the gravel was lawful, as maintenance. The garage/boathouse stood alone as approvable. There is a 150-day period for decision, which the applicant has allowed through April 29. The applicant has requested a de novo review. Minutes of Board of Commissioners' Work Session Wednesday,January 27, 2016 Page 11 of 15 There are various assignments of error. Flood plain maps have limited accuracy, and this is confusing to staff because the regulations apply whether or not property is in the flood plain. There is a question about nonconforming use in place since the 1970's, and a question as to whether the planner would have said it is okay. There is a question about the dock standards. On the Deschutes River, a lot needs to be 200 feet wide to have an individual dock. The property does not have this but other decisions per the Hearings Officer said it could vary if you do nook and cranny surveys, not a direct line from lot line to lot line. This can add feet to the measurement along the river. Dock standards are in place regarding marine life protection. There are a lot of docks in the area. The Hearings Officer talked about the septic system, built in 1976. It is probably contaminating at this point, but the Hearings Officer said this is a DEQ issue. There are systems that might make this better. There is concern over the work that was done. The bathhouse was expanded into a bunkhouse, and previously had people there using an RV. There is no kitchen, so it is not a dwelling, but increased loading is a concern. The biggest obstacle is the 100-foot setback from the river. It would be grandfathered if it is lawful. The Hearings Officer found it was not. The only structure able to expand the footprint is a dwelling. But it is not a dwelling, so is not covered. They seem unable to approve it. There are any number of nonconforming structures along the river in this area. Commissioner Baney said it has land use ramifications so wants to hear it. The other Commissioners agreed. Commissioner Unger noted that there are houses on either side that are closer to the river than this one is, and there are docks everywhere. Mr. Groves said there might be some bad feelings, as others have asked for similar things and have been told no. He asked if this might set precedence. Things change over time, so every property is different. Mr. Anderson suggested looking at the dates when things were build and possibly grandfathered in. BANEY: Move to hear the appeal. DEBONE: Second. Minutes of Board of Commissioners' Work Session Wednesday,January 27, 2016 Page 12 of 15 VOTE: BANEY: Yes. DEBONE: Yes. UNGER: Chair votes yes. 6. Update on Historic Landmarks Commission Meeting Topics. Nick Lelack and Matt Martin said there is a deadline of February 5 for comments going to the National Parks Service. Commissioner DeBone presented a draft letter from the Historic Landmarks Com p Commission. He was at their meeting to observe and hear whether it equates to what the Board is thinking. Commissioner Baney noted that the work seems piecemeal. She is supportive of this. Chair Unger said that he does not want this nominated today, as there are other processes moving forward. Mr. Martin added that the HLC wants to do its own letter, different from what the Board would send. DEBONE: Move approval of a letter from the Board to the National Parks Service. BANEY: Second. VOTE: DEBONE: Yes. BANEY: Yes. UNGER: Chair votes yes. 7. Other Items. George Kolb and Erik Kropp discussed an event for Skyliners Road—the USA Triathlon. They have talked to federal highways representatives as well. High Desert Aggregate plans to complete the paving project by June. The event is June 25. There could be a hold harmless agreement that indemnifies the agencies and the contractor. Mr. Kolb noted that the contractor has a big airport project as well as one at Wickiup Junction, so will be anxious to get the Skyliners project done quickly. Mr. Kropp said Visit Bend is involved and will not allow the road to be closed. A resolution would be limited to those listed, and others would need to be expressly approved by the Board. Mr. Kolb said that once the work is done, the resolution would not be needed. Minutes of Board of Commissioners' Work Session Wednesday,January 27, 2016 Page 13 of 15 BANEY: Move approval of the event, and direct Road and Risk to secure the appropriate indemnification and hold harmless agreements. DEBONE: Second. VOTE: BANEY: Yes. DEBONE: Yes. UNGER: Chair votes yes. Judith Ure asked for clarification on the County Goals and Objectives. They were reviewed at this point, and a few minor changes made. Mr. Anderson said he will send them to the departments with a memo. The departments have to figure out how to tie this into their work. He asked the Board to show up at the next department head meeting to encourage this. Mr. Kropp stated that Commissioner Baney has asked about security in the building and on the campus. Capts. Utter and McMaster said that they would add an FTE to the court security team if the Board will share half of this position, to provide security for the campus. There should also be a broader security plan with other departments. Chair Unger noted that the courts need more security at times. However, he would suggest the person not be retired. There are issues in this area relating to behavior health and other problems. The person should be supervised by the Sheriff's Office, as they would take up much of the time. Commissioner Baney said that the County invests little in security as an organization. The current Sheriff and those in the past have all said it is not as secure as it should be. If there is a potential issue and something happens, then what. It is a small cost to cover potential liability. Commissioner DeBone stated that there might be recommendations from that person who sees things that others do not notice. This person could also attend board meetings if a large audience is expected. Mr. Anderson said it would be an indirect expense, based on usage. Mr. Kropp will talk to court security and figure out when this might start. Minutes of Board of Commissioners' Work Session Wednesday,January 27, 2016 Page 14 of 15 8. Adjourn. Being no further discussion, the meeting was adjourned at 4:40 p.m. DATED this � Day of -(igK17 2016 for the Deschutes County Board of Commissioners. Alan Unger, Chair N �.. Y�..L„l.\ f Tammy Baney,_ e Chair ATTEST: J��c Anthony DeBone, Commissioner Recording Secretary Minutes of Board of Commissioners' Work Session Wednesday,January 27, 2016 Page 15 of 15 b .,. t 1 i ....„..i 0---)`-' i' 4 , 1 4 4 -'?, IA i _ ~ 4J l ---9:. I r �I 1 \\ VJ JCS w1)I 1 c°I! ' ,� I 1 v'1 _ ' III 1'i 1 `-� 1 1:k �"' c� , ! \ c_..) �%' JMI III ca 1 1 I '4 5 i oti ,,f-- ii czts 0 ;)47:4 1 4 ,,,...j, _ i 1 m o sue. ti::-4___o , v-,l i,� �� ,11"Q vI i� ;—�rl ��C; ' L) os co 7- vfn P:1-- ' 'ate , ,I � Q 1: � I'Fl�II \,- '�- ) �� N,r)-i r A l �/S �7 I r \ik �] V C �j !� �U i J ---- I ...., ----5-5 ' V, ''''' N in ICI �' --3 ‘4 4:t— '--' ';' �?' El. '' c+4,-,)j I— �j Zi 1 f' r �)11 x'''. %._ -4— i ,I...51) (\AL___C/ .1_', ',. L J 1:4 co o. tokir 1 Deschutes County Board of Commissioners ��� � 1300 NW Wall St., Bend, OR 97703-1960 (541) 388-6570 - Fax (541) 385-3202 - www.deschutes.org WORK SESSION AGENDA DESCHUTES COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS 1:30 P.M., WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 27, 2016 Pursuant to ORS 192.640, this agenda includes a list of the principal subjects anticipated to be addressed at the meeting. This notice does not limit the ability of the Board to address additional subjects. Meetings are subject to cancellation without notice. This meeting is open to the public and interested citizens are invited to attend. Work Sessions allow for the Board to discuss items in a less formal setting. Citizen comment is not allowed, although it may be permitted at the Board's discretion. If allowed, citizen comments regarding matters that are or have been the subject of a public hearing process will NOT be included in the official record of that hearing. Work Sessions are not normally video or audio recorded, but written minutes are taken for the record. 1. Update on Jericho Road Activities —Don Senecal 2. Review of 2015 Title III Expenditures and Chair Signature of Certification—Ed Keith 3. Health Services Update —Jane Smilie 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 encourages persons with disabilities to participate in all programs and activities. To request this information in an alternate format please call (541) 330-4640, or email anna.iohnson Adeschutes.org. Board of Commissioners' Work Session Agenda Wednesday, January 27, 2016 Page 1 of 2 4. Marijuana Advisory Committee Update and Process --Nick Lelack 5. Discussion on Whether to Hear an Appeal — Dreifuss —Non-conforming Structures — Will Groves 6. Update on Historic Landmarks Commission Meeting Topics —Nick Lelack 7. Other Items These can be any items not included on the agenda that the Commissioners wish to discuss as part of the meeting, pursuant to ORS 192.640. At any time during the 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; ORS 192.660(2)(b),personnel issues; or other executive session categories. Executive sessions are closed to the public; however, with few exceptions and under specific guidelines, are open to the media. 8. Adjourn 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 encourages persons with disabilities to participate in all programs and activities. To request this information in an alternate format please call (541) 330-4640, or email anna.johnson(@deschutes.org. Board of Commissioners' Work Session Agenda Wednesday, January 27, 2016 Page 2 of 2 r...EH ELTER Ti x m � m Jericho Road 1 January 27, 2016 Deschutes County Commissioners 1 1300 Wall St. Bend, Oregon 97701 Honorable Commissioners, Once again another year has flown and Jericho Road has remained steadfast in its efforts to assist those members of our community who are struggling with the challenges of poverty. This report attempts to I relate some of the events, programs and statistics our wholly volunteer organization has generated in implementing these efforts. Our Mission Statement is: "To provide tangible support to the homeless and those in need within the Redmond, Oregon area. This includes providing emergency assistance and mentoring to homeless families with children as well as providing meals for those in need in our community". Jericho Road would like to thank the Deschutes County Commissioners for their continued support and encouragement over the years and we look forward to continued service to our community in the best possible spirit of respect and concern. Most Sincerely, reSx,,m.a•-0-4") Eleanor Bessonette, Chair Jericho Road Board of Directors r: 1 Jericho Road Document Reproduces Poorly (Archived) JERICHO ROAD ANNUAL REPORT TO OUR COUNTY COMMISSIONERS, 2015 We are proud of the work we have accomplished at Jericho Road - helping those in need in our community. Jericho Road is the largest ecumenical social service effort east of the Oregon Cascades. Fourteen local congregations not only provide regular financial support but also the volunteer workers who make Jericho Road a success. We could not serve without their support. Since 2008, when Jericho Road received its non-profit status, our programs have expanded to meet the increasing needs of our neighbors and friends. • Emergency Assistance: The emphasis on immediate needs has taken a higher priority recently. Simple challenges for some become game changers or worse when resources are not available. We assist with temporary shelter, fuel, repairs, food, medicine, clothing and many other short-term challenges. The mentoring for families assists with setting personal goals such as education, health and hygiene, nutrition,job search and family dynamics. Dozens of families have moved on to re-enter society as contributing citizens with healthy families. • Bags of food every Friday. During the school year bags of food are distributed to hungry students at all schools in the Redmond School District. These packs go home to families where there may be younger brothers and sisters, grandparents and extended family. Recently a note was returned in one of the packs. It simply stated, "Thank you so much, sometimes we need the help!"Another note stated, "Your ministry touches the ever present need in our students'lives. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you". What more needs to be said? II � y This program offers an Adopt-A-Student program to help support the supply of food to students. The weekend food bags usually include: 1 box of cereal, 1 box of crackers, 1 jar of peanut butter, 1 box of tuna or chicken salad, 2 applesauce cups, 1 other fruit cup, 1 Austin cheese or peanut butter cracker, 1 cereal bar, 1 granola bar. Sometimes we can add Craisins, trail mix, pretzels, goldfish crackers, a can of Vienna Sausage, packets of jelly or plastic jar of jelly. We pack all bags/backpacks the same and include a slip of paper to each pack that says, "Foods in this package contain allergens including, but not limited to peanuts, tree nuts, fish, milk, soy, dyes and wheat". • Free, hot meals. Jericho Table provides meals at the Redmond Senior Center twenty to twenty-five nights a month to everyone who comes in the door. Volunteers help serve meals, wash the dishes, pots and pans, and clean the facility. They also provide social inter-action with the guests each evening. Jericho Table, at their new location at the of Church of God's Fellowship Hall, has also become the gathering place for some remarkable activities and newer programs such as: O Portable shower stalls that visit on a regular basis and are supplied by Icon City and the Foundry Church of Bend. O Successful Flu Vaccine Clinic by Deschutes County Health Department held at September 29th Jericho Table meal. O Scheduled visitations by Mosaic Medical. O Food bags& personal hygiene packets provided by Vital. Provisions. O Extra Friday meals and the Saturday Pizza Parties coordinated through City Center Church and Word of Victory Church. O Added fresh fruit through support of the Central Oregon Hunger Coalition. 0 Distribution of clothes through Full Circle Ministries. O Distribution of propane, sleeping bags and other supplies through Central Oregon Veteran's Outreach. • Community Outreach: Each week, volunteers go into the outlying areas around Redmond to distribute propane and other essentials to people living in camps, cars, trailers, etc. • Winter Warming Shelter Service: In cooperation with the Shepherd's House personnel, we offer emergency shelter in Redmond consistently for the first time. Previously, attempts at providing cold weather protection for the homeless were sporadic and without coordination. People come to Jericho Table hungry, cold and alone. They experience friendship, love, food, companionship and hope. We are truly blessed to be able to help those who are in such need. And in helping, we ourselves are lifted spiritually and emotionally. 11,, 2012,. Jericho R . ad reeer,..oi ��� ... ;Ili,.f .as tk $. � .�'., •,®. nz:?k�k� .�. "' know:, s`t entra1 Oreoti u . at:'I rto lc.il2es t i;:' ill ;. b IT1 $$.r. t°hAierig,,, )f°. ' ,xr soctetl r±i?a.l gratitude 14=i ', g Mg,. t'cr; ' 4btt oh-it h(;::li"t`. ..i1nd 0-tilers by their eta t drat 201;5i JE"t-tchfb lOra1{i thy d }1koe'r �_,�r.Rxiir ,?�.: Fd� ' t.4r;p11am s11.t.•°; hf nor an n iigitoion of the p m e r)t Jericho Road acknowledges that,just as we could never exist without our volunteer support and congregational generosity, there are others who we want to thank as well... The community partners: Homeless Leadership Coalition, Alliance Professionals, LLP, Central Oregon Council on Aging, Central Oregon Old Car Club, Central Oregon Retired Educators, Church World Service Crop Walk, City of Redmond, Crooked River Ranch Lions, Deschutes county Juvenile Department, Deschutes County Sheriff's Department, Family Access Network, Homeless Leadership Coalition, Hunger Prevention Coalition, Icon City, Tim Car penter(storage space), Diane Cardwell, Les Schwab, Mosaic Medical, Neighborlmpact Food warehouse and supply, Oregon Food Bank, Order of the Eastern Star, Chapter 105, Perception Alpha Omega, Presbytery of the Cascades, Raymond James and Associates, Inc., Redmond Faith Network, Redmond Senior Center, Redmond Kiwanis, Redmond Lions, Redmond Parks and Recreation District, Redmond Police, Redmond Realtors fund, Redmond School District, Ridgeview High School Pottery and Culinary students, Redmond Service League, Redmond VFW, St. Vincent De Paul, Sun& Snow Extension Group, Thursday Book Group, Trinity Bike Shop, Vital Provisions, Redmond Walmart, Trader Joe's, Redmond Safeway, Redmond Fred Meyer, Bend Pet Express, PETCO, PetSmart, Grocery Outlet, Dollar Tree, Hub Motel, Valero Service Station, Eberhards Dairy. Of significant importance and pride in our younger citizens is that 2015 saw another in a series of yearly events created by and administered by the teachers and students of Ridgeview High School, a great partnership. Jericho Road was selected by art and culinary students of Ridgeview to be the recipient of their winter Empty Bowls event. Once again more than $2,000 was raised to help feed the homeless and hungry. Beyond that, these students created the beautiful bowls and the delicious soups that were served to a grateful public. Empty Bowls is becoming a tradition that is readily recognizable in the community and is also a great example of true humanitarian efforts by the youth of our community. We thank those foundations, organizations, businesses and corporations that have given generously to help support Jericho Road programs: Mid-Oregon Credit Union,Autzen Foundation, First Story, Hunger Coalition, Les Schwab, SELCO, Cow Creek Foundation, St. Charles Foundation, Wells Fargo, Deschutes County Discretionary Funds, Ronald McDonald House, Deschutes Brewery, Central. Oregon Assoc. of Realtors, Umpqua Bank, Reser Foundation. The Redmond area congregations who support Jericho Road through their prayers, generosity and sense of community: All Peoples United Christian Church,Amazing Grace Bible Fellowship, Berean Bible Church, Church of God 7th Day, City Center Church, Community of Christ Church, Community Presbyterian Church, Highland Baptist Church, Redmond Assembly of God, Redmond Seventh Day Adventist Church, St. Alban's Episcopal Church, Word of Victory Church, Zion Lutheran Church and The Foundry Church. Finally, Jericho Road would like to thank each and every one of our volunteers who so graciously and lovingly give of their time and their resources to help those who, like the traveler along the Road to Jericho so many centuries ago, needed help. Those who are served may never know who they are but their lives have been and will continue to be improved because of what they do! 1 '; rr I II Ili h .41 Oft Jericho Road Volunteer Appreciation Luncheon, 2015 JERICHO ROAD BY THE NUMBERS, 2015 Total number of meals served: 11,208(adults=10,160; children-1,048): 2014 total was 7,067. Total number of bags and packs of Weekend Student Food Program: 1,783 Total number of children served through various programs: 3,077 Total number of people receiving assistance and emergency support: 70 families (130 adults; 118 children). Total number of personal item bags distributed: 400 Number of volunteers: Approximately 200 Number of volunteers hours: Approximately 6,000 Number of volunteers hours times Oregon State minimum wage ($9.25) = $55,500* * It should be noted that for grant-writing purposes, the average wage used to compute volunteer in-kind is usually $1..1.28 (for food preparation, sorting or serving) or higher depending on the tasks. That would compute to $67,680! Never let anyone tell you that volunteering isn't valuable! " ! R t. OMB Rio.0596-0220 Expires 06130/2016 w ..¢u�§r''°" Sure Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act of 2000 Certification of Title I.11 expenditures by participating county The Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act of 2000(the Act), reauthorized in Public Law 110-343 and Public Law 1 12-14I, requires the appropriate official of a county that receives funds under title III of the Act to submit to the Secretary concerned(the Secretary of Agriculture, or the Secretary of the Interior,as appropriate)an annual certification that the funds expended have been used for the uses authorized under section 302(a)of the Act. The Secretary concerned also is requiring the appropriate official to certify the amount of title III funds received since October 2008 that have not been obligated as of September 30 of the previous year. The appropriate official of each participating county may use this form (see page 2) to report information to meet the requirements of the Act. Certification must be made by February 1 following each year title Ill funds are expended. Certain counties in Oregon receive title Ill payments initiated by both the Department of Agriculture and the Department of the interior. If the county received Secure Rural Schools Act title III payments from more than one agency, the county must certify separately to each Secretary regarding the separate payment initiated by that agency. Submit the certification to the appropriate address below for the respective agency. r+. All counties expending title 111 funds received from Forest Service payments are to submit the annual certification by one of the following methods: Mail: e-mail: FAX: Secretary of Agriculture asc asr @fs fed.us 877-6 -.......__....... _ 84-1422 do U.S. Forest Service Payments to States Coordinator # y. Albuquerque Service Center, B&F SWAM/IAS/ASR 101B Sun Avenue NE Albuquerque, NM 87109 Certain counties in western Oregon expending title III funds received from payments from the Department of Interior for lands administered by the Bureau of Land Management are to submit a separate annual certification about the separate title III funds by one of the following methods: Mail: e-mail: FAX: Secretary of the Interior (none available) 503 808-6021 c/o BLM Oregon State Office State Director Office(OR931) Attn: Secure Rural Schools Coordinator P.O. Box 2965 Portland, OR 97208 Secure Rural Schools Act Certification ot'Title Ill expenditures by participating county Page I of 01,1 -- 7 OMB No.0596-0220 Expires 06/30/2016 Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act of 2000 County's Certification of Title lit Expenditures and Unobligated Funds. Name of participating county and state: Deschutes County,Oregon Calendar year for which this report is 2015 — submitted: EXPENDITURES Amount of title Ill funds expended carry out authorized $62,694.45 — this year to activities under the Firewise Communities program: Amount of title III funds expended this year to reimburse the $41,796.30 participating county for emergency services performed on Federal land,as defined in the Act,and paid for by the participating county: Amount of title III funds expended this year to develop community $20,000.00 wildfire protection plans in coordination with the appropriate Secretary: Total amount of title III funds expended this year for authorized $124,490.75 uses: _..._.. FUNDS NOT OBLIGATED Amount of title III funds received since October 2008 not obligated by September 30 of the year for which this report is submitted. — --` CERTIFICATION The expenditures reported above were for the uses authorized under section 302(a)of the Act, The proposed uses had a publication and comment period and were submitted to the appropriate Secure Rural Schools Act resource advisory committee(s)as required in Section 302(b)of the Act. The amounts reported as unobligated on September 30 are accurate and consistent with the county's accounting practices. Signature of certifying official: Z141-14--- Print or type name and title of certifying official: Date of certification: Alan Unger,Chair Deschutes County Board of Commissioners Secure Rural Schools Act Certification of Title Ill expenditures by participating county Page 2 of Deschutes County Health Services GRANT APPLICATION REQUEST Official Grant Title: Strategies for Policy And EnviRonmental Change, Tobacco Free(SPARC Tobacco Free) Source of Grant Funds: ,State of Oregon, Oregon Health Authority Funding Amount(include amount January 4, 2016 to June 30, 2017. This application is per year if multiple years): requesting $75,000. Required Matching Funds (if Not applicable applicable): Application Due Date and January 27th, 2016, 3 PM, via email Submission Method: FTE Required and Cost of FTE: The proposal does not request new FTE, but does request funding to support staff time. Staff Responsible: Penny Pritchard Grant Administrator Of awarded): Tom Kuhn Please answer the following questions: 1. Briefly summarize what work the grant is intended to accomplish: The funds will be used to convene a workgroup to assess the impact of implementing a tobacco retail licensing program throughout Deschutes County. The workgroup will consist of county staff(Health Services and Administrative Office), staff from each of the incorporated cities, youth, and a representative of the Central Oregon Health Council. A contractor will be hired to facilitate the workgroup, conduct interviews with retailers, conduct a fiscal impact analysis, and to analyze and present information to key stakeholders. 2. What priorities in the Health Services Strategic Plan would this grant activity support? Provide data to describe a documented health need that would be addressed and that is consistent with the Strategic Plan. Convening this workgroup to analyze a tobacco retail program would meet Health Services strategic goal to promote health and prevent disease by supporting healthy living in the community through evidence-based practice. Addressing nicotine addiction at an early age reduces the prevalence and incidence of tobacco-associated diseases. According to the 2013 Oregon Healthy Teens Survey, Both 8th and 11th graders in Deschutes County use tobacco products including cigarettes, menthol cigarettes, chew, snus, snuff, hookah, cigars, cigarillos, little cigars, dissolvable tobacco and electronic nicotine delivery devices such e-cigarettes, e-hookah and e-cigar more than their peers across the state. According to the Surgeon General's Report, 90% of all daily addicted smokers started before the age of 18. Adolescents are more susceptible to addiction because their brains are developing. Rev. 9/18/2015 Smoking causes one of every three deaths from Cardiovascular disease, according to the 2014 Surgeon General's Report on smoking and health. It is a leading cause of preventable death in the US and doubles a person's risk for stroke. One in six adults in Deschutes county report smoking tobacco. The current prevalence of tobacco use among adults is 16.3% (Oregon BRFSS, 2010-13) and of tobacco use during pregnancy is 10% (Oregon BRFSS, 2008-2012).Deschutes County spent$50.3 million in 2013 on smoking related health care costs. These target areas are also currently in the draft Regional Health Improvement Plan under the Cardiovascular Disease Priority area. 3. Would this support core program activities and, if so, which one(s)? Are additional funds needed to support these activities? Yes. This funding would support preventing youth tobacco use initiation, which is a core program activity of the tobacco prevention and education program. 4. Does this funding add new program activities? If so, what are the activities? Is it appropriate to add these new activities at this time? Yes, this funding will add new program activities. The new program activity is a workgroup to assess the impact of implementing a tobacco retail licensing program throughout the cities and county. 5. Is there a science base to support delivering the activities and services listed? Please describe that science base. There is strong evidence to support conducting these activities. All are highly recommended by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Community Guide to Preventive Services. 6. How long would the funding be available? If the funding is for less than three years, what is the plan to transition the work, staffing and expenses after the funding ends? The funding is available from January 4, 2016 to June 30, 2017. The activities proposed will provide sustainable system improvements and will not require sustained funding. 7. What is the application deadline? Do you anticipate any problems meeting this deadline? January 27, 2016. It is a tight timeline but we seek to achieve it. 8. Do you have the staffing to write a competitive proposal? If not, how will you contract for these services? Yes. 9. Are there any matching requirements? Matching funds are not required by the grantor. Rev. 9/18/2015 10.What other partner organizations could potentially be applying?What is the plan to work with them? Crook and Jefferson County Health Departments are likely to apply. While the work of this proposal will be focused in Deschutes County, the process and lessons learned will be beneficial for the region. The Tobacco Prevention and Education Coordinators collaborate regularly and utilize the same evidence based strategies. 11.What are the potential political issues that could arise as a result of this application, funding, and/or activity? Substance abuse prevention is historically political. Every effort is made to proceed with community-based informed and prioritized strategies so that political issues are minor. It is unknown what might surface from this funding opportunity. 12.What is the fiscal impact to the department if we are awarded this grant? Please attach fiscal impact analysis form completed with Business Manager approval. This is an 18 month grant that covers all associated costs and requires no new FTE. See attached budget form. 13.Will a contract be required if we are awarded this grant? If yes, is there sufficient time to complete the contract process (estimated timeline: 4-6 weeks) prior to starting the work? Yes, a contract will be required with the Oregon Health Authority. Staff will work to accommodate the time it takes for the contract process prior to work starting. Department Director Signature Date Director to Attend Board Meeting? (check one) ❑ Yes ® No (designee in attendance) Contract Specialist Review: Board Meeting Date: January 25, 2016 Time: 1:30PM Grant Application Number: Rev. 9/18/2015 i L u +' O a) , 3 Call 8 cu 4 E W *= O cu c C O a E _ GJ �p CIS W. „� t9 a 7 a u 1 = c © a _ u) W c w c1. U a CLO \1 E. Ci 4.a5 a 5 ... 1 a a CU � ;y a ttl aI co o a �= ;a , co t 7, co ,. E , .•,�y1j,x to �� a ill L a N CO 72 .0 4l Cti r;;r Q N p„ rG "'+{Pr J rj Y� 4, 'i.TD fP , [�O $eP l ° n } p b dot 4Y y."^r ■ dui *' \ Ta r CCU ;no °C '� % I o E ci3 ,Y3 eel �. ac hoo • ,40a? •u a, L O AI l o 'L, n ` I 0 �■� ` / 1I ! H r n 7' , * Public Health ' l '_Modernization Foundational Capabilities . AIM 2 Policy and Communications Planning Illo Emergency Assessment and Community Epidemiology Partnership Preparedness E and Response + p Development 0 Health Equity Leadership and and Cultural Organizational Responsiveness Competencies.........„::„,.„,,„,,„„,mittkatimitin„mo,„,...... ,......„,„„,...,:,:,,„.,:,:,,„„„:„„:,,44..... C) 411) d Environmental Foundational Programs Communicable Health Disease Control of 0 Prevention and Access to Clinical . Health Promotion Preventative Services• rkti • q y Healthy oreg n a°.•r s.x":idyt"t T d`8 � , ' , ,W �` ., o0 6 /„ uf "fir r�t$p d w .��a l i PUBLIC HEALTH DIVISION J:._ «..., . healthoregon.org/modenzation r •. • 971-673-1222 r. M � , Certified Community CCBHC Are you reader. Behavioral Health Clinics What is a CCBHC? Defined for the first time in the Excellence in Mental Health Act,Certified Community Behavioral Health Clinics(CCBHCs)are designed to provide a comprehensive range of mental health and substance use disorder services,particularly to vulnerable individuals with the most complex needs during a federal demonstration program with participating states. States must certify that each CCBHC offers the following services either directly or through a formal contract with a designated collaborating organization(DCO).Through the demonstration,the following services must be offered and will be paid for even if they are not included in a state's Medicaid plans: • Crisis mental health services including 24-hour mobile crisis teams,emergency crisis intervention and crisis stabilization* • Screening,assessment and diagnosis including risk management* • Patient-centered treatment planning* • Outpatient mental health and substance use services* • Primary care screening and monitoring** • Targeted case-management** • Psychiatric rehabilitation services** • Peer support,counseling services,and family support services** • Services for members of the armed services and veterans** • Connections with other providers and systems(criminal justice,foster care,child welfare,education,primary care, hospitals,etc")** "CCBHC must directly provide **May be provided by CCBHC and/or OCO Why these services.and why together? The service array is deliberate.CCBHCs provide the comprehensive array of services that are necessary to create access,stabilize people in crisis,and provide the necessary treatment for those with the most serious,complex mental illnesses and addictions" CCBHCs also integrate additional services to ensure an approach to health care that emphasizes recovery,wellness,trauma- informed care,and physical-behavioral health integration.Highlights regarding this comprehensive array include: • Easy and welcoming access to services regardless of ability to pay or location of residence to ensure those who need services are able to receive them. • Immediate screening,assessment,and risk assessment for mental health,addictions,and basic primary care needs to ameliorate the chronic co-morbidities that drive poor health outcomes and high costs for those with behavioral health disorders. • 24/7/365 crisis services to help people stabilize in the most clinically appropriate,least restrictive, least traumatizing,and most cost-effective settings. • Full clinical,operational,and financial commitment to peer and family support,recognizing these elements as essential for recovery. • Tailored emphasis on active and veteran military,who have served our country with honor,to ensure they receive the unique health care support they need. • Expanded coordination with other health care and social service providers,with a focus on whole health and comprehensive access to a full range of medical,behavioral and supportive services. NATIONAL COUNCIL FOR BEHAVIORAL. I1EAL.Tk.1 �.Sr.A1k\SS(XiACIl1NNOF AI1I1K ION I.fYVIC:t14 Stronger together. Certified Community CCBHC Are you ready? Behavioral Health Clinics Who Do CCBHCs Serve? In short,CCBHCs serve any individual in need of care, regardless of his or her ability to pay.This includes(but is not limited to): • Adults with serious mental illness • Children with serious emotional disturbance • Those with long-term chronic addiction • Others with mild or moderate mental illness and substance use disorders • Underserved individuals and families • Low income individuals and families • Those who are insured,uninsured or on Medicaid • Those with complex health profiles • Members of our armed services and veterans What-is the CCBHC Demonstration Program? The Excellence Act provides for a funded demonstration of selected CCBHC projects.The demonstration rolls out in two phases. Phase 1 offers states one-year planning grants to develop their CCBHC program.In October 2015,the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration(SAMHSA)awarded 24 states grants to plan their CCBHC projects over the next year.States will submit to SAMHSA a program proposal by October 23,2016.In Phase 2,SAMHSA will select at least eight states to carry out their CCBHC projects.The demonstration project grants will fund the selected CCBHCs for at least two years. What Happens Afterward? The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services(CMS)has committed to helping states explore options for maintaining CCBHC services through such mechanisms as Section 1115 waivers. Meanwhile,the congressional champions of the Excellence Act and the behavioral health advocacy community are working to expand the demonstration to include more states and to extend for more years. For more information, please visit the National Council's CCBHC Resource Hub or contact Rebecca Farley at the National Council (RebeccaF @thenationalcouncil.org). NATIONAL COUNCIL FOR BEHAVIORA.I. 0,rm v,,c)'lAIRINN44rnnnic I4' iit:i(F' Stronger Together. 4 4 0 tipto A Community Development Department MiM .4 3 5:,1tr glf1.-e01 b r �r Planning, Building Enforcement Safety, Environmental Soils, Code Enforcement 111 . 3 ER, PO Box 6005, Bend, Oregon 97708 6005 117 NW Lafayette Avenue O "' www.deschutes.org/cd MEMORANDUM TO: Deschutes County Board of Commissioners FROM: Matthew Martin,Associate Planner Nick Lelack, Director DATE: January 20, 2016 SUBJECT: Marijuana Advisory Committee Selection, Facilitation &Schedule I. SUMMARY On January 13, 2016, the Board of County Commissioners (Board) directed staff to initiate recruitment for the Deschutes County Marijuana Advisory Committee (MAC). The purpose of this memorandum is to outline administration of the committee. II. MAC MEMBER SELECTION PROCESS County staff issued a media release, posted information on the County's website, utilized On January 15, 2016, Co y , p y social media, and sent direct emails to potentially interested persons to recruit members for the MAC. Staff seeks Board direction on the process and timeline to select members with the first meeting tentatively scheduled for Wednesday, February 10. Committee member appointments will be made by the Board at a regular meeting. III. FACILITATION The Board expressed support for hiring a professional facilitator for the MAC meetings. Staff is requesting proposals and quotes for professional facilitation services for five (5) meetings, including extensive meeting preparation and follow-up with staff. Facilitation services are estimated to cost up to$15,000. A professional facilitator provides many benefits, including providing additional capacity for this significant effort during budget season, sustained high permit volumes, increasing coordination with Bend on the UGB remand and Bend Airport Master Plan Update,training new staff,and more. IV. MEETING SCHEDULE/LOCATION The MAC is expected to meet on Wednesdays in February and March from 4 p.m.to 7 p.m.Staff proposes MAC meetings be held in the Deschutes Services Building. The reason is to provide a regular meeting place in a centralized location where recording and other equipment is readily available and easily accessible. In addition, the facilitator's proposal did not budget for travel to meetings outside of Bend with the exception of one tour. Staff seeks Board direction on whether(1)to hire a facilitator,and (2)to hold meetings at the Deschutes Services Building. vT sc0 Deschutes County Board of County Commissioners AL"" P.O.Box 6005,Bend,OR 97708-6005 1300 NW Wall St., Suite 206,Bend,OR 97703-1960 (541)388-6570-Fax(541)385-3202 www.deschutes.org board@deschutes.org Tammy Baney Anthony DeBone Alan Unger January 26,2016 Representative Gene Whisnant State Capitol,900 Court St NE Salem,Oregon 97301 RE: Regulation of Marijuana Production&Land Uses in the Exclusive Farm Use Zone Dear Representative Whisnant Deschutes County is ready to pass land use regulation but we are stuck and need your help. Hobby farms are zoned EFU.Marijuana is a crop,permitted on EFU& `Right to Farm' prohibits odor,noise etc.regulation. If we permit we have no control and neighbor problems.HELP Deschutes County has engaged the public in a process to develop local land use regulation of marijuana related uses including production,processing,wholesaling,and retailing. Most prominent in the discussion was marijuana production(grows) in the rural areas of Deschutes County. Outstanding concerns emerged with regard to infringement on right-to-farm protections,uncertainty and ambiguity of JIB 3400 reasonable regulation opportunities,and potential for protracted legal challenges with uncertain outcomes. The purpose of this letter is to highlight and outline these specific issues and concerns. DESCHUTES COUNTY'S"ASK" Deschutes County respectfully requests the 2016 Legislature: 1. Clarify and define"reasonable time,place,and manner regulations"in HB 3400(2015)including how it relates to Oregon's right-to-farm law. Without defining"reasonable regulations,"LUBA or higher courts will provide clarity of its meaning through appeals or other legal remedies when regulations are adopted,applied or implemented. The appeals process will require significant time and money by all parties involved and result in tremendous uncertainty until final resolutions/decisions are reached. In addition,there remains significant uncertainty of whether LUBA or the courts will nullify county reasonable time, place and manner regulations due to conflicts with the right-to-farm law in the EFU leaving local jurisdictions and surrounding property owners with only minimal mitigation measures as provided by the OLCC rules. OR 2. Exempt recreational marijuana from Oregon's right-to-farm law. Alternatively,exempt all indoor and greenhouse(as well as hoop house,etc.)recreational marijuana production from the right-to- farm law. AND 3. Amend state law to treat medical and recreational marijuana production the same in terms of land use permitting,under the same state agency authority,and with the same or consistent decision making processes(i.e.,Land Use Compatible Statements). OR 4. Classify recreational and medical marijuana land uses as sub-2 uses in the EFU Zone(conditional uses subject to local standards)to provide local control.Alternatively,classify recreational and medical marijuana uses as sub-1 uses with standards(and clarify and define the reasonable time, place and manner standards that must be met). BACKGROUND PRODUCTION OF MARIJUANA IS A FARM USE Section 34(1)(a)of HB 3400 specifies that marijuana is a crop for the purposes of"farm use"as defined in ORS 215.203. Section 34(1)(b)states that marijuana qualifies for the protections,and limits on regulation afforded to all other farm crops(i.e.tomatoes,hay,etc.). Proponents of marijuana businesses and the Farm Bureau have asserted that the provisions of Section 34 preclude regulation of the concerns and impacts identified by staff,the public and others (i.e.,odor,noise,visual). OREGON RIGHT TO FARM PROTECTIONS Oregon has established a right-to-farm law to protect"...farming... practices from legal actions that may be intended to limit,or have the effect of limiting, farming... practices"(ORS 30.933(1)(c)). ORS 30.930(2)finds that"Farming practice"means a mode of operation on a farm that: (a)Is or may be used on a farm of a similar nature; (b)Is a generally accepted,reasonable and prudent method for the operation of the farm to obtain a profit in money; (c)Is or may become a generally accepted,reasonable and prudent method in conjunction with farm use; (d)Complies with applicable laws;and (e)Is done in a reasonable and prudent manner. ORS 30.935 prohibits local laws that make farm practices a nuisance or trespass. For this purpose,ORS 30.932 defines"nuisance"or"trespass"to includes but is not limited to actions or claims based on noise,vibration,odors, smoke,dust,mist from irrigation,use of pesticides and use of crop production substances. Traditionally,this has been interpreted to mean that a local government may not adopt time,place,and manner regulations that limit farming practices such as additional setbacks,noise and odor control,visual screening,and other design or operational standards. Therefore,as noted above,the concerns and impacts expressed could not be addressed. "REASONABLE REGULATION"OF RECREATIONAL MARIJUANA PRODUCERS ALLOWED Sections 33 of HB 3400 allows local jurisdictions to adopt ordinances that impose"reasonable regulations"on the operation of recreational marijuana producers,processors,wholesalers,and retailers. More specifically,Section 33(1)(a)provides opportunity for"Reasonable conditions on the manner in which a marijuana producer[licensed by OLCC] may produce marijuana."The legislation does not define"reasonable regulation"or provide examples of what reasonable regulations or conditions may be. The concern is that establishing"reasonable regulations"on marijuana production located in the Exclusive Farm Use zone would constitute limitation of farming practices and,thereby violate the provisions of the right-to-farm protections previously cited. Perhaps, the intent was to allow"reasonable regulations" for marijuana producers not located in the EFU zone. Consequently,the courts,rather than the Legislature,may be the authority that interprets and,by default,defines what constitutes a"reasonable regulation." OREGON FARM BUREAU COMMENTS In a letter dated December 7,2015,Jenny Dresler,Oregon Farm Bureau Federation Director of State Public Policy, cited concerns"...about Deschutes County's proposal to impose setbacks,noise and odor restrictions,and other regulations on cannabis. Such regulation of an agricultural commodity invites right to farm litigation on a highly politicized commodity and creates a risk of regulation of cannabis being used as precedent to regulate other agricultural commodities." Ms. Dresler further stated that the Oregon Farm Bureau"...has long fought to protect and support producers' right to farm free from burdensome regulation and to protect producers from a"not in my backyard"mentality regarding the dust,odors,and noise that are inherently part of production agriculture.We encourage you to reconsider your decision to regulate nuisance associated with cannabis and adopt regulations which ensure that it is treated like any other agricultural commodity." LOCAL CONDITIONS Statewide Planning Goal 3 requires counties to preserve and maintain agricultural lands. However,in discussions on the future of agriculture in Deschutes County,there are still differences of opinion over which lands should be designated farm lands and which should not,as well as what land uses should be allowed. Farm lands contribute to the County in a number of ways. Agriculture is part of the ongoing local economy. Wide-open farm lands offer a secondary benefit by providing scenic open spaces that help attract tourist dollars. Farm lands also contribute to the rural character that is often mentioned as important to residents. Finally, it should be noted that agricultural lands are preserved through State policy and land use law because it is difficult to predict what agricultural opportunities might arise,and once fragmented the opportunity to farm may be lost. On the other hand,there seems to be widespread agreement that much of the local farm land is marginal at best, particularly without irrigation. The climate,especially the short growing season,makes commercial fanning challenging and usually a losing proposition financially. Statewide Planning Goal 3 does not really account for the conditions in Deschutes County,resulting in agricultural zoning being applied to land with no history of farming and limited potential for profitable farming. The small size of agricultural parcels adds significantly to the challenges. It has been argued that preserving farm lands benefits the wider public at the expense of agricultural landowners. There is considerable pressure to convert agricultural land to residential or other uses. The debate is complicated because there are impacts to the fanning community from converting agricultural lands to other uses. It can be challenging for a farmer who has residential neighbors because farming activities can have noise,odor and/or dust impacts. The right-to-farm law discussed earlier offers some protection to farmers,but as residential uses grow there is pressure to convert,leading to a greater loss of agricultural lands. The introduction of marijuana production into these farming areas,particularly those areas of smaller lotting patterns and nonfarm residential development,highlights the compatibility concerns expressed by both farm and nonfarm, rural residential property owners. The unique conditions and development patterns present in Deschutes County only amplify the concerns of these diverse populations and the challenge in mitigating potential impacts to maintain compatibility nearby land uses. Please find attached maps of the Exclusive Farm Use(EFU)Zone in Deschutes County showing the number and size of lots. TREAT MEDICAL&RECREATIONAL MARIJUANA THE SAME Medical and recreational marijuana land uses should be regulated and reviewed subject to the same standards and under the same state and local agencies. Combining the programs ensures consistencies and efficiencies in the administrating the program(s),application review and decision making,enforcement,and customer service across the state. Most of the marijuana producers,neighbors,and impacts will be the same. Creating one integrated program will enable state and local governments to provide a high level of customer service to interested parties on all sides of this issue rather than navigating between different programs resulting in confusion,misinformation or misunderstandings,and unneeded complexity and cost. Please know this action is very important as Deschutes County decides how to move forward with local marijuana regulations in the coming months. Thank you for your consideration. c .� Community Development Department 0 1 { Planning Division Building Safety Division Environmental Soils Division . ;,.:. 9 a ; ,. � 160 .A.ice.. ;gi=`'4'' P.O. Box 6005 117 NW Lafayette Avenue Bend,Oregon 97708-6005 (541)388-6575 FAX (541)385-1764 http://www.co,deschutes.or.us/cdd/ MEMORANDUM DATE: December 30, 2015 TO: Board of County Commissioners FROM: Will Groves, Senior Planner RE: Whether to hear Elizabeth A. Dickson's appeal of a Hearings Officer's decision. File Nos. 247-15-000113-CU, 247-15-000114-CU, 247-15-000115-NUV, 247-15- 000116-LM (247-15-000670-A) Before the Board of County Commissioners (BOCC) is an appeal filed by Elizabeth A. Dickson, attorney for Peter Dreifuss. The appeal is submitted in response to a Deschutes County Hearings Officer's decision that a new community dock and decks, verification of non- conforming structures (bunkhouse and garage), alteration of the bunkhouse, verification of nonconforming uses consisting of fill within the flood plain and wetlands, and a septic system do not comply with all applicable regulations. The appellant requests the BOCC formally consider the decision. BACKGROUND In approximately 1976, Applicant's predecessor constructed a small structure on the property, referred to as the "bathhouse,"that had a sink, toilet, shower, and laundry facilities inside and a faucet and sink outside. In 2009 and 2010, the applicant built several structures on the subject property, including the existing dock, free-standing decks, walkways, garage, and an addition to the "bathhouse" consisting of a bedroom and attached decking, creating the bunkhouse. The applicant also placed eight cubic yards of gravel on the driveway. In 2013, the county received code violation complaints concerning construction and use of improvements on the subject property without necessary permits and approvals: 247-13205-CE (septic system); 247-13206-CE (work without building permits); and 247-C13207-CE (work without land use approval). The applicant submitted the subject land use applications to permit the work performed after-the-fact. The Hearings Officer issued a decision on December 9, 2015 finding that the proposal does not comply with all applicable regulations. Specifically, the "bathhouse" was found to have been unlawfully established while PL-5 was the active zoning code, aboveground decks were found Quality Services Performed with Pride to be not allowed in the 100-foot river setback, and the dock was found not to comply with a number of regulations. On December 22, 2015, the applicant appealed the decision to the BOCC. The 150-day period for issuance of a final local decision under ORS 215 expires on January 21, 2016. The applicant has offered to toll the 150-day clock through April 29, 2016 to allow sufficient time for the BOCC to hear this matter and issue a decision. APPEAL The notice of appeal describes several assignment of error. These are summarized below, with references to those pages within the decision where the Hearings Officer addressed the issue. 1. County Flood Plain designation should reflect actual site conditions verified by survey. H.O. Decision, pp. 32-33: "The Hearings Officer has found the county is authorized to interpret the FP Zone to apply only to those portions of the subject property located at or below the BFE based on a site-specific flood plain survey. The staff report raises the question of whether and to what extent the RR-10 Zone applies to the subject property because the entire property is zoned FP, which is a base or "primary" zone. As discussed in the findings above, in prior decisions the county has found that where, as here, a site-specific survey shows the flood plain is less extensive than the area mapped by FEMA, the provisions of the FP Zone are not applied to uses outside the surveyed flood plain and the provisions of the adjacent zone do apply. However, I have concluded that for purposes of the analysis in this decision, I will consider the entire subject property to be zoned FP. Therefore, I find the provisions of the RR-10 Zone do not apply to the applicant's proposal." Staff Note: While the BOCC might conclude, were it to hear this appeal,that the bunkhouse and garage should be evaluated under RR-10 zone criteria (as they are above the Base Flood Elevation), the setback requirement preventing expansion of the bunkhouse and placement of the decks is identical in the RR-10 and FP zones. 2. Nonconforming Use Verification should be granted when historic photos, neighbor testimony, and County Records prove existence. H.O. Decision, pp.40-51. "The record indicates the original bathhouse was constructed on the subject property in 1976. The county's official records indicate that in 1976 the subject property was zoned RR-1, Rural Recreational Residential Zone, under PL-5, the county's first zoning ordinance which took effect in December of 1971. Sections 3.150 and 3.155 of the RR-1 Zone listed the uses permitted outright and conditionally in that zone. The Hearings Officer finds none of those uses includes the original bathhouse. Section 3.160 of PL-5 authorized two "accessory uses" in the RR-1 Zone -- "not File Nos.247-15-000113-CU, 114-CU, 115-NUV, 116-LM(670-A) Page 2 of 4 more than one private garage" and "home occupation." I find neither of these uses includes the original bathhouse." Staff Note: Staff understands the record to contain no debate on the establishment date of the"bathhouse". At issue is whether that use was lawful at the time of establishment. 3. Deschutes River dock requirements need clarification. H.O. Decision, pp. 16, 20-27. Staff Note: The Hearings Officer denied the dock under several criteria (including frontage and dock size). While staff believes the Hearings Officer made reasonable interpretations, BOCC affirmation or reinterpretation on these issues would likely be granted deference on any future appeal. 4. Marine Life and Wildlife Habitat identification and mitigation analysis should weight site-specific information over general regulations or observations. Staff Note: The Applicant states: "We ask the Board to consider the reason for dock restrictions and if the underlying concern to protect habitat is met, that the Board allow the dock replacement to be deemed permitted". Staff notes that the applicant appears to be requesting a variance to dock criterion, but has not applied for a variance. The applicant also included a request to reevaluate the Hearings Officer's denial of decking in the 100-foot river setback under this appeal topic. The appellant requests de novo review. In deciding whether to hear an appeal, the BOCC may consider only the notice of appeal, the record of the proceedings below, and any staff recommendations. DCC 22.32.035(D). No additional comments from the parties are allowed. If the BOCC decides to hear the appeal, the review shall be on the record unless the BOCC decides to hear the appeal de novo. The BOCC may hear this matter de novo if it finds the substantial rights of the parties would be significantly prejudiced without de novo review and it does not appear that the request is necessitated by failure of the appellant to present evidence that was available at the time of the previous review. The BOCC may also choose as de novo review when, in its sole judgment, a de novo hearing is necessary to fully and properly evaluate a significant policy issue relevant to the proposed land use action. DCC 22.32.027(B)(2)(c) and (d). The BOCC may, at its discretion, determine that it will limit the issues on appeal to those listed in the notice of appeal or to one or more specific issues from among those listed on the notice of appeal. DCC 22.32.027(B)(4). DECLINING REVIEW If the BOCC decides that the Hearings Officer's decision shall be the final decision of the county, then the BOCC shall not hear the appeal and the party appealing may continue the appeal as provided by law. The decision on the land use application becomes final upon the File Nos.247.15.000113-CU, 114-CU, 115-NUV, 116-LM(870-A) Page 3 of 4 mailing of the BOCC's decision to decline review. DCC 22.32.035(B). In determining whether to hear an appeal,the BOCC may consider only: 1. The record developed before the Hearings Officer; 2. The notice of appeal; and 3. Recommendations of Staff. DCC 22.32.035(D). STAFF RECOMMENDATION Reasons to hear: 1) There are a number of significant code interpretation issues. LUBA will be obligated to defer to BOCC's interpretations if they are at least plausible. The BOCC may want to reinforce or refute some or all of the Hearing Officers findings/interpretations prior to LUBA review. Reasons not to hear: 1) CDD Staff believes the hearings officer decision is well reasoned and well written and could be supported as-is on appeal. Attachments 1. Hearing Officer's decision 2. Notice of Intent to Appeal File Nos.247-15-000113-CU. 114-CU, 115-NUV, 116-LM(670-A) Page 4 of 4 REVIEWED LEGAL COUNSEL For Recording Stamp Only BEFORE THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF DESCHUTES COUNTY,OREGON An Order Accepting Review of Hearings Officer's * Decision in File Nos. 247-15-000113-CU,247- * ORDER NO. 2016-004 15-000114-CU,247-15-000115-NUV,247-15- 000116-LM(247-15-000670-A) Dickson, attorney for Peter Dreifuss, appealed the Hearings WHEREAS, Appellant, Elizabeth A. y pp g Officer's decision in application number 247-15-000113-CU, 247-15-000114-CU, 247-15-000115-NUV, 247- 15-000116-LM(247-15-000670-A);and WHEREAS, Deschutes County Code Chapter 22.32 allows the Board of County Commissioners (Board)discretion on whether to hear appeals of Hearings Officer's decisions;and WHEREAS, the Board has given due consideration as to whether to review this application on appeal; now,therefore, THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF DESCHUTES COUNTY, OREGON, HEREBY ORDERS as follows: Section 1. The Board will hear the appeal for application numbers 247-15-000113-CU, 247-15-000114- CU, 247-15-000115-NUV, 247-15-000116-LM (247-15-000670-A) pursuant to Title 22 of the Deschutes County Code and other applicable provisions of the County land use ordinances. Section 2. The appeal shall be heard de novo. Section 3. Staff shall set a hearing date and cause notice to be given to persons or parties entitled to notice pursuant to DCC 22.32.030. Dated this of ,2016 BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF DESCHUTES COUNTY,OREGON ALAN UNGER,Chair TAMMY BANEY,Vice Chair ATTEST: Recording Secretary ANTHONY DEBONE,Commissioner Page 1 of 1-ORDER NO. 2016-004 .:11)10. s Board of Count Commissioners P.O. f3rrw 6005 • 13e4%.4, 0regaw g7709 1300 NW WaIL Sfre.ed; 51,4-Viv206 • 13e..0.4, Ore-gcnn..07703 TEL. (541) 38 8-6570 • FAX (541) 385-3202 wwvw.de-s4.u4e,6.arg January 25,2016 J.Paul Loether National Register of Ilistoric Places USDOI National Park Service-Cultural Resources 1201 Eye Street NW,8th Floor Washington,DC 20005 RE: Pilot Butte Canal Historic District Nomination for National Register of Historic Places Mr. Loether: Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the nomination of a segment of the Pilot Butte Canal as a historic district on the National Register of Historic Places. Prior to the submission of the subject nomination of a segment of the Pilot Butte Canal as a Historic District on the National Register of Historic places,the Central Oregon Irrigation District(COED)had entered into an agreement with the State Historic Preservation Office(SHPO)and the Bureau of Reclamation to complete the Multiple Property Documentation(MPD)process. This process is a study of COID's entire system looking at all main canal segments in COID's 400+ mile canal system and identify the segments of both the Pilot Butte Canal and the Central Oregon Canal of the COED system that are best suited for preservation. This process has not yet been completed. The Deschutes County Board of County Commissioners (Board)respectfully requests this nomination be suspended until the MPD process is completed. In addition,there a number of other issues and factors to thoroughly analyze and understand pertaining to this segment of the Pilot Butte Canal while simultaneously determining its historic value, such as its role in regional water conservation. A comprehensive study of this segment of the Canal should be completed. Addressing any one issue(i.e., historic designation)in isolation of the others may limit or preclude possibilities for the future. Thank you for your consideration. DESCI-IUTES COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS ' /26,41, Alan Unger,Chair Tammy Baney, \ cc Chair Anthony DeBone,Commissioner Enhancing the Lives of Citizens by Delivering Quality Services in a Cost-EffecliveMaftttA ) ,4REVIE D r LEGAL CO SEL For Recording Stamp Only BEFORE THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF DESCHUTES COUNTY,OREGON A Resolution Creating a New$100 Skyliners Road Event Fee and Limiting the Events * RESOLUTION NO. 2010-009 Permitted for Skyliners Road WHEREAS, Skyliners Road is a popular road to hold recreational bicycles and footrace events;and WHEREAS, Skyliners Road's condition includes potholes, broken down shoulders, severe cracks, narrow travel lanes,the absence of bike lanes and curved roadway sections;and WHEREAS, residents living off of Skyliners Road have expressed concerns over the safety of holding events on Skyliners Road; and WHEREAS, establishing a new Skyliners Road Event Fee to pay for cyclist education and/3r enforcement of cycling laws on Skyliners Road and limiting the number of permitted events will address the problems previously summarized; and WHEREAS, a duly noticed public hearing was held on Monday, February 8 at 6:00 p.m. at 1300 NW Wall Street, Barnes/Sawyer Rooms, Bend, Oregon to provide an opportunity for interested persons to comment on the proposed Skyliners Road Event Fee;and WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners' intent is to have the Skyliners Road Event Fee. a limited number of permitted events for a limited number of days and use restrictions requiring single file until road improvements,including bike lanes are constructed to Skyliners Road; on Skyliners in place S cycling y p p Y now,therefore, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF DESCHUTES COUNTY, OREGON, as follows: Section 1. The Board of County Commissioners hereby adopts a new Skyliners Road Event Fee in the amo ii fT$100. _.. — Section 2. As part of the event permit application process outlined in DCC 8.16.030, event organizers applying for a Skyliners Road Event Fee shall submit in writing documentation proving that not less than thr other event locations were considered and why each alternative route is not practical. Section 3.The Skyliners Road Event Fee is in addition to the standard Event Permit Fee per Deschutes County Code 8.16. Section 4. The Skyliners Road event fee revenue shall be used by County Risk Management to info'n members of the public and/or traffic control for the use of Skyliners Road. PAGE 1 OF 2—RESOLUTION NO.2010-009(3/03//2010) Section 5. The following events will be grandfathered in and allowed to apply for the Skyliners Ro id Event Permit: FreshAirSports' Time Trial/Duathlon Series, Mount Bachelor Rotary Club's Duel in the Desert, USA Cycling's US Elite Nationals, Bend Bella Cyclists/Oregon Bicycle Racing Association's High Desert Omnium, and Mount Bachelor Sports Education Foundation's Cascade Cycling Classic. These events will )e limited to no more than two "event days" per event. An "event day" is defined as each day an event occu.s. These events will also be subject to the stipulations discussed in Section 2 above. Events other than those list:d in this section which propose to use. Skyliners Road must be expressly approved in advance by the Cour.ty Board of Commissioners. Section 6. Events that only cross over Skyliners Road, such as the Smith Rock Race Group's Casca Je Lakes Relay, FreshAirSports'Haulin Aspen, and Mudslinger Events' High Cascade 100 will be permitted aid not subject to the Skyliners Road event fee, but will still be required to obtain the standard Event Permit Fee per Deschutes County Code 8.16. -7 (6 DATED this 7> day of L C4 ,20 P. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF DESCHUTES COUNTY,OREGON c____, re, ='''Xe,,_‘_____,- DENNIS R. LUKE, Chair ...,e0, ii.....„.....__ ALAN UNGER, Vice Chair ATTEST: is-.) '. e/77feLlik,./) III y1 Recording Secretary TAMMY BANEY,Commissioner PAGE 2 of 2—RESOLUTION NO.2010-009(3/03//2010) WATERSTON COMMUNICATIONS VAE Deschutes County FY 2017 Goals and Objectives Mission Statement Enhancing the lives of citizens by delivering quality services in a cost-effective manner. Safe Communities: Protect the community through planning,preparedness, and delivery of coordinated services. 1. Collaborate with county and community partners in preparing for and responding to natural and man-made disasters. 2. Promote public safety programs to reduce crime and repair harm. 3. Respond to,investigate, and prosecute criminal activity to ensure the guilty are held accountable, the innocent are protected, and the rights of all citizens are respected. 4. Expand and enhance public safety communications systems in coordination with all stakeholders. 5. Enforce County regulations to preserve rural quality of life. Healthy People: Enhance and protect the health and well-being of the community through advocacy, prevention, education and delivery of coordinated services. 1. Consider population health, wellness, and multi-modal connectivity in the design and implementation of infrastructure and land use policies. 2. Adjust to changing health system reforms, assess and address gaps in service, and strategize regional approaches. 3. Provide timely and convenient access to quality health services. 4. Promote health and prevent disease using strategies that align with the Central Oregon Regional Health Improvement Plan. 5. Support the development of collaborative solutions related to transit options, homelessness, affordable housing, and veterans'needs. Resilient Economy: Promote policies and actions that sustain and simulate economic vitality. 1. Complete strategic capital and planning and projects that strengthen the region's economy. 2. Partner with organizations in-order to stimulate economic vitality. 3. Support land use programs and initiatives that promote economic growth and diversity, livability, and sustainability. 4. Support beneficial management and access policies of publicly owned facilities and natural resources to promote tourism and recreational activities. WATERSTON COMMUNICATIONS Po Box 640 Bend,Oregon 97709 541.480.3933 VAT clleo @cllcnwaicrston.com www.cllenwaterston.com dshi : Promote environmental stewardship through assessment Natural Resource Stewardship: shi throu p p g assessment, advocacy, and collaboration. 1. Enhance and protect air, land and water resources. 2. Educate the public and enforce policies regarding noxious weed control and eradication. 3. Support healthy and sustainable forest, habitat, and land management practices and oversight. 4. Restore and maintain landscapes across all jurisdictions that are resilient to fire-related disturbances in accordance with management objectives. Quality Customer Service: Provide internal support and external services that are innovative, and efficient. *,rive: 1. Encourage and expand opportunities for public engagement with Deschutes County government. 2. Provide internal support to County operations to ensure cost-effective and efficient delivery of services to the public. 3. Support employee wellness, development, productivity and job satisfaction. 4. Support and promote Deschutes County Customer Service "Every Time" standards. 5. Pursue cooperative opportunities to enhance service delivery and the cost-effectiveness of public services. Effective Asset Management: Preserve and enhance capital and fiscal assets. 1. Use best management practices to sustain the quality of County assets and infrastructure. 2. Upgrade information management systems to streamline business processes. 3. Maintain strategies for major funds to ensure long-term financial stability. 4. Address long-term building and facility capital needs including major maintenance and replacement strategies. WATERSTON COMMUNICATIONS ®7i PO Box 640 Bend,Oregon 97709 541.480.3933 NIe6 ellen@ ellenwaterston.com wNywsl1.s.nwatcrston.coln WATERSTON COMMUNICATIONS VAE Deschutes County FY 2017 Goals and Objectives Mission Statement Enhancing the lives of citizens by delivering quality services in a cost-effective manner. Safe Communities: Protect the community through planning,preparedness, and delivery of coordinated services. 1. Collaborate with county and community partners in preparing for and responding to natural and man-made disasters. 2. Promote targeted public safety programs to reduce crime and recidivism, and repair harm. 3. Respond to, investigate, and prosecute criminal activity to ensure the guilty are held accountable, the innocent are protected, and the rights of all citizens are respected. 4. Expand and enhance public safety communications in coordination with all stakeholders. 5. Enforce County regulations to preserve rural quality of life. Healthy People: Enhance and protect the health and well-being of the community through advocacy,prevention, education and delivery of coordinated services. 1. Consider population health,wellness, and multi-modal connectivity in the design and implementation of infrastructure and land-use policies. land use 2. Adjust to changing health system reforms, assess and address gaps in service, and strategize regional approaches. 3. Provide timely and convenient access to quality health services. 4. Promote health and prevent disease using strategies that align with the Central Oregon Regional Health Improvement Plan. 5. Support the development of collaborative solutions related to transit options, homelessness, affordable housing, and veterans' needs. Resilient Economy: Promote policies and actions that simulate economic vitality. 1. Complete strategic capital planning and projects that strengthen the region's economy. 2. Partner with organizations in order to stimulate economic vitality. 3. Support land use programs and initiatives that promote economic growth and diversity, livability,and sustainability. 4. Support beneficial management and access policies of publicly owned facilities and natural resources to promote tourism and recreational activities. WATERSTON COMMUNICATIONS PO Box 640 Bend,Oregon 97709 541.4803933 ®7�� ellen @ellenwaterston.com www.ellenwaterston.com Natural Resource Stewardship: Promote environmental stewardship through assessment, advocacy, and collaboration. 1. Enhance and protect air, land and water resources. 2. Educate the public and enforce policies regarding noxious weed control and eradication. 3. Support healthy and sustainable forest, habitat and land management practices and oversight. 4. Restore and maintain landscapes across all jurisdictions that are resilient to fire-related disturbances in accordance with management objectives. Quality Customer Service: Provide internal support and external services that are innovative, efficient and comprehensive. 1. Encourage and expand opportunities for public engagement with Deschutes County government. 2. Provide internal support to County operations to ensure cost-effective and efficient delivery of services to the public. 3. Support employee wellness, development, productivity and job satisfaction. 4. Support and promote Deschutes County Customer Service "Every Time" standards. 5. Pursue cooperative opportunities to enhance service delivery and the cost-effectiveness of public services. Effective Asset Management: Preserve and enhance capital and fiscal assets. 1. Use best management practices to sustain the quality of County assets and infrastructure. 2. Upgrade information management systems to streamline business processes. 3. Maintain strategies for major funds to ensure long-term financial stability. 4. Address long-term building and facility capital needs including major maintenance and replacement strategies. WAPER51'ON COMMUNICATIONS PO Box 640 Bend,Oregon 97709 541.4803933 UT cllc:n@dlcnwatcrston.corn www,.dhoyy{unk,,msum Deschutes County Security Plan January 27, 2016 **Draft** I. Establish an on-going Security Steering Committee • Sheriff's Office representative(supervisor) • Sheriff's Office security personnel • Erik Kropp • Susan Ross • Joe Sadony • Others? 2. Steering Committee Role and Tasks • Consult and work with departments on facilities related security issues and implement physical security guidelines and security standards: o There are four primary spatial designations: public zones, reception/public transaction zones, operations zones, and security zones. • Oversee implementation of facilities related security items for Deschutes Services Building • Work with departments to develop security protocols o Use of duress buttons o Security on-boarding(new staff receives a facilities security overview within first 2 weeks of starting). • Work with departments on staff training o Personal safety training(Sheriff's Office).-optional ... • Offered quarterly o Run, Hide, Fight training(Sheriff's Office)—mandatory for departments with appointed department heads; encouraged for departments with elected department heads • Annually o Active shooter drill for Deschutes Services Building(Sheriff's Office)— optional o Educate staff on.MCAT resource • Security reviews? Deschutes County Downtown Campus Security Options Options presented by Captain Utter and Captain McMaster— Option 1 - share 1.0 FTE with the Sheriff's Office-Court Security • Estimated cost: o Step 4 Corrections Deputy: $30.44/hour o $30.44 +40% (benefits)=$42.62/hour o $42.62/hour x 1,000 =$42,620 • While working with Court Security, position would help with inmate transport and court security • Pros: o Sheriff's Office can rotate Court Security deputies through assignment o No gaps in coverage for employee vacations or absences o Communication with Court Security unit o Rotation among Court Security staff keeps the assignment fresh • Cons: o Higher cost than Option 2 Option 2—Contract with retired Special Deputy • Estimated cost: o $32/hour o $32 x 1,000 hours=$32,000 • Hire a retired deputy • Pros: o Less expensive than Option 1 o Still have law enforcement presence o Continuity of having one staff person assigned • Cons: o Coverage when employeeis_ahsent_.- • Maybe we hire two employees? o Not as integrated with Court Security unit