2018-218-Minutes for Meeting May 16,2018 Recorded 6/18/2018Recorded in Deschutes County
Nancy Blankenship, County Clerk CJ2018-218
Commissioners, .Journal 06/18/2018 9:44:01 AM
� :H 11111111111111111111 IN
1111111
2018-218
For Recording Stamp Only
Deschutes County Board of Commissioners
1300 NW Wall St., Bend, OR 97703-1960
(541) 388-6570 - Fax (541) 385-3202 - www.deschutes.org
MINUTES OF BUSINESS MEETING
DESCHUTES COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
Wednesday, May 16, 2018
Commissioners' Hearing Room - Administration Building - 1300 NW Wall St., Bend
Present were Commissioners Tammy Baney, Phil Henderson and Anthony DeBone. Also present
were Tom Anderson, County Administrator; Erik Kropp, Deputy County Administrator; David
Doyle, County Counsel; and Mattie Corya-Swanson, Board Administrative Assistant. No
representatives of the media were in attendance.
CALL TO ORDER: Chair DeBone called the meeting to order at 9:05 a.m.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
CITIZEN INPUT: None was offered.
CONSENT AGENDA: Before the Board was Consideration of Approval of the Consent
Agenda.
Commissioner Baney requested a hold on Item 12, for further review. Commissioner Henderson
asked for report on Items 2 and 3. Items 2 and 3 were held for discussion.
BOCC May 16, 2018 Page 1 of 4
BANEY: Move approval with Items 2 and 3 held for discussion and Item 12 as
pulled for further view.
HENDERSON: Second.
VOTE: BANEY: Yes.
HENDERSON: Yes.
DEBONE: Chair votes yes. Motion Carried
1. Consideration of Board Signature of Order No. 2018-031, Declaring Surplus Property and
Authorizing Sale
2. Consideration of Board Signature of Document No. 2018-239, Family Resource Center
Second Addendum to the Lease
3. Consideration of Board Signature on Document No. 2018-238, United Way Second
Addendum to the Lease
4. Consideration of Board Signature on Letters Appointing Lorelei Kryzanek and Rebecca
Timms to the Behavioral Health Advisory Board
5. Approval of Minutes of the April 2, 2018 Work Session
6. Approval of Minutes of the April ll, 2018 Business Meeting
7. Approval of Minutes of the April 11, 2018 Work Session
8. Approval of Minutes of the April 12, 2018 Public Hearing
9. Approval of Minutes of the April 16, 2018 Business Meeting
10. Approval of Minutes of the April 16, 2018 Work Session
11. Approval of Minutes of the April 18, 2018 Work Session
12. Approval of Minutes of the April 23, 2018 Work Session
ACTION ITEMS
Consent Agenda Item 2 as pulled for discussion: Consideration of Board Signature of Document
No. 2018-239, Family Resource Center Second Addendum to the Lease
Consent Agenda Item 3 as pulled for discussion: Consideration of Board Signature on Document
No. 2018-238, United Way Second Addendum to the Lease
Commissioner Henderson requested background on market rate, process, and use of facility.
Mr. Lewis responded that both groups have been in the Mike Maier Building since mid -2000.
Rental rate was established at that time; historically Deschutes County has done reduced rates
for non -profits, however there is usually a 2% increase each year to cover costs. Market rate
would be $1.70/sq. ft. and rent for these tenants is about half that or $.80/sq. ft. Tom Anderson
clarified lease rates are below market and County views these groups as partners; rates can be
revised if desired. Mr. Lewis clarified that leases are limited to two years with 60 -day notice
BOCC May 16, 2018 Page 2 of 4
to terminate lease. Commissioner Henderson asked if all space was being used and Mr. Lewis
clarified that all space is being used by non -profits as well as County offices. Commissioner
Henderson asked if other non -profits have requested space; Mr. Lewis responded there have
been no requests.
BANEY: Move approval Items 2 and 3.
HENDERSON: Second.
VOTE: BANEY: Yes.
HENDERSON: Yes.
DEBONE: Chair votes yes. Motion Carried
13. DELIBERATION: Marijuana Production Appeal
Isabelle Liu, Associate Planner presented brief staff review. Decision was approved and
appeal was filed; 21 day open record period was agreed to which ended on May 2"d;
during this period concerns were received.
Item 1 — Odor — Commissioner DeBone noted this is a new style or odor control and he is
supportive. Commissioner Baney asked for clarification of documents in packet and actual
name of applicant. Ms. Liu provided clarification on who had sent which reports and their
roles. Copy of earlier decision was provided to direct commissioners on relevance of
documents included. Commissioner Henderson clarified a "report" is required regarding
odor control and parties filing seem to think they only need provide a letter. Simple
statements that odor control works isn't enough. Asked where in packet this information is
provided. Ms. Liu indicated testimony from other parties in packet was considered as
documentation. Commissioner Baney stated she felt there was enough information
provided in materials to approve. Two in favor, Baney and DeBone, one, Henderson,
opposed.
Item 2 — Noise - applicant has satisfied requirement.
Item 3 — Water — applicant has satisfied requirement.
Item 4 — Utility — Commissioner Henderson expressed concern and frustration on ability
of applicants to find ways to get utility/electrical power approvals from utility companies
in what he feels is a less than transparent manner. Commissioner Henderson felt applicant
may have mislead neighbors and neighbors don't want grower in their area. Commissioner
DeBone supports access to power.
Conesus is that application can be approved on these four items that were required by
application. Commissioner Henderson stated Deschutes County seems to be functioning as
BOCC May 16, 2018 Page 3 of 4
a `laboratory' on what works and what doesn't work and is concerned about how to `police'
compliance. Commissioner Baney led discussion clarifying that the Board has recourse if
systems do not function correctly. Licensed growers can be shut down due to code
violation if needed. Commissioners approve application with written approval pending.
OTHER ITEMS: None were offered.
ADJOURN
Being no further items to come before the Board, the meeting was adjourned at 10:40 a.m.
DATED this - 61 Day of 2018 for the Deschutes
County Board of Commissioners.
Anthony DeBone, Chair
TTLU�, ch 11k—'v----,
Philip G. H 3erson, Vice Chair
Tammy Baney, Com . i sioner
BOCC May 16, 2018 Page 4 of 4
Deschutes County Board of Commissioners
1300 NW Wall St, Bend, OR 97703
(541) 388-6570 — Fax (541) 385-3202 — https://www.deschutes.org/
AGENDA REQUEST & STAFF REPORT
For Board of Commissioners Business Meeting of May 16, 2018
DATE: May 10, 2018
FROM: Isabella Liu, Community Development,
TITLE OF AGENDA ITEM:
DELIBERATION: Marijuana Production Appeal
RECOMMENDATION & ACTION REQUESTED:
Staff respectfully requests that the Board specify if they intend to approve or deny the
application and to provide any additional findings for Staff to include in their decision.
BACKGROUND AND POLICY IMPLICATIONS:
The Deschutes County Board of County Commissioners ("Board") is tasked with determining if the subject
proposal meets the requirements listed in the applicable sections of the Deschutes County Code. The Board held
a public hearing to consider the appeal, filed by appellants Virgina Sanders, Bart Brown & Mary Ferguson, in
response to an Administrative Determination that approved a marijuana production facility proposed by Swamp
Fox Farm, LLC.
ATTENDANCE: Izze Liu, Associate Planner
STAFF MEMORANDUM
Date: May 9, 2018
To: Deschutes County Board of Commissioners
From: Izze Liu, Associate Planner
Re: Deliberations following a public hearing on the appeal of an Administrative
Determination for Marijuana Production. File No. 247-18-000206-A, 207-A (247 -17-
000936 -AD).
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Applicant: Swamp Fox Farm LLC
Appellant's
Attorney: Clifton Cannabis Law, c/o Jeremy Dickman
Owner: Lee Property Management LLC
Appellants: Bart Brown & Mary Ferguson
Virginia Sanders et al
Appellant's
Attorney: Fitch Law Group, PC c/o Edward P. Fitch
Proposal: The applicant requested approval of an Administrative Determination to establish a
marijuana production facility in the Exclusive Farm Use (EFU) Zone.
Location: The subject property is located at 4725 NE ONeil Way, Redmond; and is further
identified on County Assessor Tax Map 14-13-25 as tax lot 200.
Review Period: The application was deemed complete on December 28, 2017. The Administrative
Determination was issued on February 16, 2018, and an appeal was filed on February
27, 2018.
To accommodate the open record period, the applicant agreed to place a 21 -day hold
on the 150 -day decision timeline. The 150th day on which the County must take final
action on this application is June 18, 2018.
Hearing Date: April 11, 2018
Record Period: In compliance with Deschutes County Code (DCC) 22.24.140, the following open record
period was provided immediately following the public hearing: a 7 -day period ending
on April 18, 2018, for new written evidence and testimony, and a 7 -day period ending
on April 25, 2018, for response to materials submitted in the previous period.
PURPOSE
The Deschutes Board of County Commissioners ("Board") is tasked with determining if the subject proposal
meets the requirements listed in the applicable sections of the Deschutes County Code. The Board held a
public hearing to consider the appeal, filed by appellant Mary Ferguson, Bart Brown and Virginia Sanders et
al, in response to an Administrative Determination that approved a marijuana production facility proposed by
Swamp Fox Farm LLC. The Board was provided with a memorandum from staff prior to the hearing that
discussed the appellant's arguments and included several attachments consisting of significant materials from
the record.
The two matrices below are designed to assist the Board in their deliberations. Table 1 focuses on the
contested aspects of the application which directly address approval criteria and which require Board
interpretations and decisions. Table 2 summarizes comments and testimony received during the hearing and
the open record period, and identifies if those comments are directed toward applicable criteria. Attached to
this memo are additional materials including testimony submitted at or after the hearing, rebuttals, and all
other materials from the record that were not included as attachments to the previous staff memo.
ISSUES RAISED IN TESTIMONY & SUBMITTED MATERIALS
Table 1 provides a decision matrix for the Board to determine if the application will be approved or denied.
These are the four key issues identified in testimony and materials that are applicable to the subject
application.
Table 2 captures the majority of the impacts, comments, and topics of concern identified in the written
materials and testimony from the public hearing and open record period. The issues identified in Table 2 are
not applicable to an approval criterion. Staff grouped public comments by topic in no particular order other
than alphabetical.
247-18-000206-A, 207-A Page 2 of 7
TABLE 1: KEY ISSUES FOR BOARD DECISION
STAFF DISCUSSION FOR TABLE 1
1. Odor control
The applicant has submitted a mechanical engineer's report verifying that the proposed odor control system
will be effective to control odor. The mechanical engineer's report states the applicant will use AgriAir purifiers
that utilize a photo -catalytic oxidation (PCO) process to remove bio -contaminants and cannabis odor. The
applicant proposes to use three types of AgriAir Industrial Control Units described as AGRIAIR 1000-1, PG -1
and PG -3. The AGRIAIR 1000-1 and PG -1 purifiers are rated to control odors in a space up to 8,000 cubic feet.
The PG -3 purifier is rated to control odors in a space up to 12,000 cubic feet. Each type of purifier is provided
with photocatalytic generators, pleated carbon filters and MERV-11 filters.
Additionally, the applicant submitted new evidence and testimony to the record during the open record period
to explain the effectiveness of the AgriAir purifers (Attachment C). The appellant raised concerns that the
engineer's report includes a conclusionary opinion that an odor control system would control odor. The
appellant has not offered evidence to demonstrate the odor control technologies will be ineffective. Staff
defers to the Board to determine if the mechanical engineer's report and additional evidence sufficiently
demonstrates compliance with the above criteria.
For the Board's convenience, staff has outlined previous Board interpretations regarding odor control below.
In the Administrative Determination, staff found the mechanical engineer's report met the requirements of
this section and included an ongoing condition of approval:
247-18-000206-A, 207-A Page 3 of 7
mhMNc
'
Has the applicant
The applicant submitted a mechanical
Yes: The application may
be approved.
1. Odor
satisfied the odor
engineer's report, consistent with
No: The application is
Control
control requirements of
previous approvals.
DCC 18.116.330(8)(10)?
denied.
Has the applicant
The applicant submitted a mechanical
Yes: The application may
2. Noise
satisfied the noise
engineer's report, consistent with
be approved.
No: The application is
requirements of DCC
re q
previous approvals.
18.116.330(B)(11)?
denied.
Has the applicant
The applicant submitted a letter from
Yes: The application may
satisfied the water
Central Oregon Irrigation District and
be approved.
3. Water
source requirements of
ABC Lightning, LLC, consistent with
No: The application is
DCC 18.116.330(B)(13)?
previous approvals.
denied.
Has the applicant
The applicant submitted a "will serve"
Yes: The application may
4. Utility
satisfied the utility
letter from Central Electric
be approved.
Verification
verification
requirements of DCC
Cooperative, consistent with previous
No: The application is
18.116.330(B)(15)?
approvals.
denied
STAFF DISCUSSION FOR TABLE 1
1. Odor control
The applicant has submitted a mechanical engineer's report verifying that the proposed odor control system
will be effective to control odor. The mechanical engineer's report states the applicant will use AgriAir purifiers
that utilize a photo -catalytic oxidation (PCO) process to remove bio -contaminants and cannabis odor. The
applicant proposes to use three types of AgriAir Industrial Control Units described as AGRIAIR 1000-1, PG -1
and PG -3. The AGRIAIR 1000-1 and PG -1 purifiers are rated to control odors in a space up to 8,000 cubic feet.
The PG -3 purifier is rated to control odors in a space up to 12,000 cubic feet. Each type of purifier is provided
with photocatalytic generators, pleated carbon filters and MERV-11 filters.
Additionally, the applicant submitted new evidence and testimony to the record during the open record period
to explain the effectiveness of the AgriAir purifers (Attachment C). The appellant raised concerns that the
engineer's report includes a conclusionary opinion that an odor control system would control odor. The
appellant has not offered evidence to demonstrate the odor control technologies will be ineffective. Staff
defers to the Board to determine if the mechanical engineer's report and additional evidence sufficiently
demonstrates compliance with the above criteria.
For the Board's convenience, staff has outlined previous Board interpretations regarding odor control below.
In the Administrative Determination, staff found the mechanical engineer's report met the requirements of
this section and included an ongoing condition of approval:
247-18-000206-A, 207-A Page 3 of 7
Odor: An effective odor control system must at all times prevent unreasonable interference with neighbors'
use and enjoyment of their property. The odor control system shall be maintained in working order and
shall be in use.
This is consistent with the Board's Rubio decision', where the Board found:
The Board acknowledges that the criteria of this section are discretionary in terms of what constitutes
"unreasonable interference of neighbors' use and enjoyment of their property". The record includes two
letters from Oregon -licensed Mechanical Engineer Robert lames, PE, dated November 23 and November
29, 2016. The Board finds the applicant met these criteria. The Board also clarifies that odor control is an
ongoing requirement and that the burden of compliance is on the applicant. The Board further clarifies that
in subsequent applications, an engineer's letter should explicitly identify that the engineer signing the letter
is a mechanical engineer.
This is also consistent with the Board's Tewaltz decision, where the Board found:
The record contains two letters from Mechanical Engineer lay Castino addressing the mitigation of odor
for the property. The initial letter submitted with the application (dated March 20, 2017) and a revised
letter (dated September 6, 2017). Although one Board member disagreed, the remaining two Board
members found that the applicant could meet the criteria with the ongoing condition of approval:
• At all times, the proposed odor control system shall prevent unreasonable interference with
neighbors' use and enjoyment of their property, shall be maintained in working order, and shall
be in use.
The Board may wish to determine consistency with the Board's decision for Evolution Concepts LLC3, where
the Board found:
Although one Board member found the applicant could meet the criteria with an ongoing condition of
approval, two Board members disagreed and found that the applicant did not provide enough specificity
regarding odor control measures. The two commissioners found that the information submitted by the
applicant does not demonstrate an ongoing capability to insure [sic] odor emissions will not unreasonably
interfere with neighbors' use and enjoyment of their property.
Staff asks the Board to determine if the applicant has met their burden of proof with respect to odor control.
2. Noise levels
In the administrative decision, staff found the engineer's statements satisfied the requirements of this section,
with a corresponding condition of approval to ensure ongoing compliance.
In the recent Evolution Concepts LLC decision, the Board found:
... two Board members expressed a desire for additional details specific to the proposal and the property,
especially concerning controlling sustained mechanical noise from the heating and ventilation equipment
1 Rubio: BOCC Document N2 2017-294, Planning Division File Ns 247-17-000036-A
2 Tewalt: BOCC Document No 2017-718, Planning Division File Ns 247-17-000723-A
3 Evolution Concepts LLC: BOCC Document Ns 2017-773, Planning Division File No 247-17-000803-A
247-18-000206-A, 207-A Page 4 of 7
[... ] The Board finds that the applicant has not met its burden of demonstrating in a site-specific manner
that sustained noise will not become a problem for this operation, relative to adjoining properties.
The applicant provided a mechanical engineer's report stating that sound attenuation walls will be constructed
around the AgriAir units. The units will be enclosed with CMU block or wood framing. Each wall partition will
be three sided, 10 feet wide, 8 feet tall and the inside of each wall will be attached with an ANC-AB220 quilted
fiberglass absorber. The applicant proposes to apply two lapped sections to the interior of each wall to achieve
a height of 8 feet and permanently attach each section with grommets and secure to the wall with galvanized
hardware. The report states the sound attenuation walls will ensure that the noise from the odor control
equipment will not exceed 30 db(A) from all property lines.
Additionally, the applicant provided a report (Attachment F) during the open record that describes the current
sound measurements of the subject property which exceed 30 dB(A).
Staff asks the Board to determine if the applicant has met their burden of proof with respect to noise control.
3. Water source
There were several concerns raised regarding water in testimony and in written materials. Many of the
concerns were in regards to the use of the domestic well.
The applicant has provided a "will serve" letter from Central Oregon Irrigation District referencing water right
certificate #83571 and supplemental certificate #76714. The subject property is served with 33.46 acres of
irrigation water rights. Delivery of irrigation water is during the irrigation season of April 1St through October
31St. For periods outside of the irrigation season, the applicant proposes to have water delivered to the
property by ABC Lightning, LLC.
Additionally, the applicant provided a letter from Avion Water Company, Inc. stating that potable water can
be served to the subject property for the proposed marijuana production use through ABC Lightning, LLC.
Staff found the use of irrigation water rights and potable water met the requirements of this section.
4. Utility Verification
The appellant raised concerns of the property owner's ability to obtain power for the proposed marijuana
production building.
The Central Electric Cooperative (CEC) provided a "will serve" letter dated January 22, 2018. The letter states
that CEC has reviewed the provided load information (two 800 amp Single phase services) associated with the
cannabis grow facility and is willing and able to serve this location in accordance with the rates and policies of
the company.
Staff found the "will serve" letter to be sufficient to meet the requirements of this section.
247-18-000206-A, 207-A Page 5 of 7
TABLE 2: TOPICS AND APPLICABLE CRITERIA
Environmental impacts I ( ✓
Hemp production on the same property I I ✓
Lal -F% UI 0,1.1111111CII CIO IU a I rUIL "IG A%
Land use action sign not posted properly ✓
Livestock and wildlife impacts ✓
Majority of rural residents voted "no" to legalizing recreational marijuana ✓
Marijuana is a drug `/
Negative impacts on nearby businesses ✓
Overproduction
Power usage `/
Property values
Safety of the community
Stigma of marijuana grow next door ✓
Water consumption
CONCLUSION & NEXT STEP
Staff respectfully requests that the Board specify if they intend to approve or deny the application and to
provide any additional findings for Staff to include in their decision. The final local land use decision must be
issued by June 18, 2018. At the conclusion of the business meeting, staff will draft a decision for Board
signature. That decision will be placed on the agenda for one of the Board's future Business Meetings.
ATTACHMENTS FROM RECORD:
NOTE: All of these attachments are in the written record. In the event the Board's decision is appealed, and
by attaching these items to this memo, the following materials from the record have been properly presented
before the Board. The complete digital written record is available on the Deschutes County Property
Information website: http://dial.deschutes.org/Real/DevelopmentDocs/131792 and as well as the Oregon
ePermitting website: https://aca.oregon.accela.com/oregon/, and the physical record is available for
inspection in the County's Community Development offices.
From public hearing:
A. Area Map
B. Site Plan
From open record period for new materials
C. Applicant's Comments
4 As identified in Findings & Decision for file 247 -17 -000755 -AD.
247-18-000206-A, 207-A Page 6 of 7
D. Appellant's Comments
E. Public Comments
From open record period for rebuttal:
F. Applicant's Rebuttal
247-18-000206-A, 207-A Page 7 of 7
This page intentionally left blank.
Attachment A —Area Map
This page intentionally left blank.
This page intentionally left blank.
Attachment B — Site Plan
This page intentionally left blank.
SITE PLAN - 4725 NE O'NEIL HIGHWAY, REDMOND, OREGON
LOCATED IN THE SE1/4 OF THE NEI f4 OF SECTION 25, T14S, R13E, W.M.,
DESCHUTES COUNTY, OREGON
TAX LOT: 1413250000200
�z
o�
SCALE' 1" = 40'
& l�
n a 40 td0 t l oil,
/J t
1
I J
OQ�'� IFFFFR±2947,3 /
J
TO WEST--------�-�-1
PROPERTY LINE
/
E EXISTING UTILITY POLE ANCHOR.
f
/1
— U — EXISTING OVERHEAD UTILITY LINE.
$ WELL
NOTES
I,
1, VERTICAL DATUM FOR THIS SURVEY WAS ASSUMED,
RESIDENCE
a
SHOP
FF ±2947.2
2. EXISTING OVERHEAD UTILITIES TO BE RELOCATED AT THE DIRECTION OF
CENTRAL ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE.
3. EASEMENTS, RIGHTS-OF-WAY OR OTHER ENCUMBRANCES MAY EXIST ON
. J7
THESE LANDS, A CURRENT TITLE REPORT SHOULD BE OBTAINED AND
I
I
REVIEWED PRIOR TO ANY DEVELOPMENT.
N�TIUIYTNOTIFIED
OTHER UTILITIES OR IMPLANDS,
SEPTIC
AREA
S71
POND
PROPOSED STRUCTURE
SEE NOTE 2
515 TO EAST y'' -
PROPERTY LINE
(S89'59'11'W - 1332.86)R
TAX LOT: 1413250000200
SCALE 1" = 400'
nl
z
!n
1
L, SEE DETAIL
.pN., LEFT Ii
t�5
U'JI
r_7 ,
i
(N69 -50';W17 - I;1325.60)R
LEGEND
( )R RECORD DATA PER COUNTY SURVEY CS18146.
EXISTING CONTOUR LINE - SEE NOTE 1.
I
----- EXISTING EDGE OF GRAVEL ROAD OR PARKING.
'L ¢ EXISTING UTILITY POLE.
oz
CAR
PORI
E EXISTING UTILITY POLE ANCHOR.
— U — EXISTING OVERHEAD UTILITY LINE.
$ WELL
NOTES
1, VERTICAL DATUM FOR THIS SURVEY WAS ASSUMED,
RESIDENCE
2. EXISTING OVERHEAD UTILITIES TO BE RELOCATED AT THE DIRECTION OF
CENTRAL ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE.
3. EASEMENTS, RIGHTS-OF-WAY OR OTHER ENCUMBRANCES MAY EXIST ON
THESE LANDS, A CURRENT TITLE REPORT SHOULD BE OBTAINED AND
REVIEWED PRIOR TO ANY DEVELOPMENT.
N�TIUIYTNOTIFIED
OTHER UTILITIES OR IMPLANDS,
CATION
4. MAYEXISTDONGTHEUSD CONTACT TTHE£OREGON
CENTER PRIOR TO ANY EXCAVATION.
S71
O71
REGISTERED PREPARED FOR:
o
PROFESSIONAL CURT ROGERS
w o
LAND SURVEYOR 2235 SHORELINE DRIVE
a
x
I JOHNS ISLAND, SC 2945
10/16/17
p
PREPARED BY:
OREGON PRECISION LAND SURVEYING,
P.O. 2002
O
AILY m i0ol
JERRY D STICHIER REDMOONN D, OREGON 87768
(641) 640-0002 (641) 923-1
2927 OCTOBER 16, 2017 SHER
RENEWS 6/30/f8 DRAWN 0Y: J.S. JOB NO.
EP: RDDERS SREPWJ ACJD: ti
This page intentionally left blank.
Attachment C — Applicant's Comments
This page intentionally left blank.
F CENTRAL ELECTRIC
COOPERATIVE, INC.
%�
www.cec.coop • P.O. Box 846, Redmond, OR 97756 • Office: 541.548.2144 • Fax: 541.548.0366
AGREEMENT
February 7, 2018
Curt Rogers
2235 Shoreline Dr.
Johns Island, SC 29455
RE: New 800 Amp, Single Phase, 120/240 Nominal Transformer Voltage Service for
4725 NE Oneal Way CIN 127068 Acct # 8300945601
WO# 418174 Perm SO# 7206261
Under the terms of Central Electric Cooperative's (CEC) Commercial Line Extension Policy, we
request payment of $30,536.00 to install the facilities required to provide electric service to you.
The following is a breakdown of the above figure:
Line Extension Fee $ 30,371.00
Permanent Connection Fee + 165.00
Total Cost $ 30,536.00
The facilities charge for your new service will be $92.53 per month. The minimum charge is
based on our general service rate schedule.
CEC shall provide electric service in accordance with CEC's policies, rules, regulations and rate
schedules as they now exist or as modified from time to time in CEC's sole discretion. You
agree to pay for the electric service, including any facility charges in accordance with CEC's
applicable rate schedule as it now exists or may be changed from time to time.
All facilities installed by CEC shall be the property of CEC. CEC, its authorized employees,
contractors, and/or agents, shall have access to the facilities at all reasonable times for any
reasonable purpose, including but not limited to, inspecting, maintaining, operating, or replacing
any equipment.
By accepting this agreement, you represent and warrant that you are authorized to
contract with CEC to install the facilities required to provide electric service to this
location. You further represent and warrant that this agreement constitutes a valid and
binding agreement of you in accordance with its terms.
Please sign this letter in the space provided, and return both pages with your check so we may
proceed with engineering and construction.
This cost is valid for ninety (90) days from the date of this letter.
Curt Rogers
February 7, 2018
Page 2of2
If you have any questions, please call me.
Sincerely,
�nce ooderson
Distribution Engineer
LRW:lr
I agree to the terms set forth in this letter
Signed Dated
CENTRAL ELECTRIC
COOPERATIVE, INC.
www.cec.coop • P.O. Box 846, Redmond, OR 97756 • Office: 541.548.2144 • Fax: 541.548,0366
AGREEMENT
February 12, 2018
Curt Rogers
2235 Shoreline Dr.
Johns Island, SC 29455
RE: New 800 Amp, Single Phase, 120/240 Nominal Transformer Voltage Service for
4725 NE Oneal Way CIN 127068 Acct # 8302517001
WO# 418924 Perm SO# 7215373
Under the terms of Central Electric Cooperative's (CEC) Commercial Line Extension Policy, we
request payment of $_ 6,925.00 to install the facilities required to provide electric service to you.
The following is a breakdown of the above figure:
Line Extension Fee $ 6,760.00
Permanent Connection Fee + 165.00
Total Cost $ 6,925.00
The facilities charge for your new service will be $92.53 per month. The minimum charge is
based on our general service rate schedule.
This price is dependent on WO #418174, SO #7206261 being completed first. This job cannot
proceed on its own.
CEC shall provide electric service in accordance with CEC's policies, rules, regulations and rate
schedules as they now exist or as modified from time to time in CEC's sole discretion. You
agree to pay for the electric service, including any facility charges in accordance with CEC's
applicable rate schedule as it now exists or may be changed from time to time.
All facilities installed by CEC shall be the property of CEC. CEC, its authorized employees,
contractors, and/or agents, shall have access to the facilities at all reasonable times for any
reasonable purpose, including but not limited to, inspecting, maintaining, operating, or replacing
any equipment.
By accepting this agreement, you represent and warrant that you are authorized to
contract with CEC to install the facilities required to provide electric service to this
location. You further represent and warrant that this agreement constitutes a valid and
binding agreement of you in accordance with its terms.
Curt Rogers
February 12, 2018
Page 2 of 2
Please sign this letter in the space provided, and return both pages with your check so we may
proceed with engineering and construction.
This cost is valid for ninety (90) days from the date of this letter.
If you have any questions, please call me.
Sincerely, r ., , /�
Wooderson
ution Engineer
LRW:lr
I agree to the terms set forth in this letter
Signed Dated
AMMM
� CENTRAL ELECTRIC
COOPERATIVE, INC.
www.cec.coop • P.O. Box 846, Redmond, OR 97756 • Office: 541.548.2144 • Fax: 541.548.0366
Recorded at the Request of and
After Recording Return to:
Central Electric Cooperative, Inc.
PO Box 846
Redmond, OR 97756
Deschutes County Official Records 201$.04499
Nancy Blankenship, County Clerk
1111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111
$58.00
01186723201800044990020022 02/02/2018 12:58:59 PM
D-EASR Crit -1 Stn=26 JS
$10.00 $11.00 $21.00 $10.00 $6.00
TERMINATION OF POWER LINE EASEMENT
CENTRAL ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE, INC. ("Grantee"), is the Grantee of and the benefitted
party under that certain Power Line Easement executed by Virginia B. Sanders, as Trustee of the
Virginia B. Sanders Revocable Living Trust Dated June 5, 2001 ("Grantor"), which was recorded
in the Official Records of Deschutes County, Oregon on October 12, 2017, as Instrument No.
2017-40929 ("Power Line Easement").
Grantee hereby terminates the Power Line Easement effective immediately upon the recordation
of this Termination of Power Line Easement but Grantee hereby reserves unto Grantee all of
Grantee's prior and existing express, implied, consensual, prescriptive, written (but not including
the above defined Power Line Easement) and oral easements and rights of access and use,
including but not limited to the right to install, construct, reconstruct, maintain, repair and operate,
on, over and through that property used by Grantee, for its prior and existing power lines, poles,
and appurtenances thereto, which property constitutes a portion of Grantor's property as described
in that certain Bargain and Sale Deed recorded in the Official Records of Deschutes County,
Oregon on June 12, 2001, in Volume 2001 at Page 27777.
This Termination of Power Line Easement is executed as of this Z day of February, 2018.
CENTRAL ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE, INC., an
Oregon Electrical Cooperative Corporation
Name: (c 14-)
Its: l>���c z r�r� e"it
[Acknowledgment follows]
708879.000917202800.1
STATE OF OREGON }
) ss.
COUNTY OF _ 1
This instrument was acknowledged before me on I"`ell f Lr -4, 2 , 2018, by
iecQ tot Is(" as 1) t ✓r� c- v r �' {�C `j1�✓u'1' L`✓` 5., �E of Central l leetri Cooperative, Inc.,
on behalf of the corporation.
OFFICIAL STAMP C_
LESLIE J RYERSON-SMITH
NOiAfY F'ii9LiG flREQt3iYi? _r._.
COMMISSION NO. 9150238 No ary Public i'6Oreg
UYOO M MIWMREs MAY 08,2020 My commission expires: 2-() 2Z
2
708879,0009/7202800.1
April 10, 2018
Swamp Fox Farm LLC
Ref: (Marijuana Production) 4725 NE Oneil Hwy Redmond, Oregon 97756
To Whom It May Concern:
Avion Water Company, Inc. is willing and able to provide potable water to the
above described production, provided all requirements by Avion Water
Company are met and all monies due are paid in accordance with Avion's
approved tariff. Avion is aware that the applicant intends to construct a
cannabis production/processing facility and that the water will be used for
agriculture purposes. Avion is also aware that the applicant plans on having
Avion water delivered by ABC Lightning Water during the non -irrigation season
months. The water usage for the above described production is estimated at
8,000 gallons per month. Avion has the capacity to meet the potential demand.
Sincerely,
Mike Heffernan
Engineering Department
Avion Water Company, Inc.
This page intentionally left blank.
From: Curt Rogers
To: Isabella Liu
Cc: Jennifer Clifton; Jeremy Dickman
Subject: 247 -17 -000936 -AD - Swamp Fox Farm
Date: Wednesday, April 18, 2018 1:46:57 PM
Attachments: Testimonial Odor Adam Kirkwood 060CT16.odf
Testimonial RootsSupplv.pdf
ODOR DeschutesCoRockJuniperColeBreitEngineerODORagnrovalLetter12Sep16.pd
PavelClackCoLetter29SEP16.docx
AariAir FAO 1217.odf
Izze,
Good afternoon. I hope you are having a good week.
Please find attached the information requested by the Commissioners regarding the
appeal hearing for Swamp Fox Farms held on April 11, 2018.
Commissioner Henderson requested more information on our odor control system,
AgriAir Odor Control. There was some discussion that this product had not been used
in past Odor Control Plans.
Attachments are as follows -
Testimonial _Odor—Adam Kirkwood- this is a testimonial from a grower in
Portland regarding the effectiveness of the AgriAir system on odors from animal
waste initially present in his rental space. He subsequently purchased AgriAir as his
odor control plan for his marijuana business to meet the requirements of his
operation.
Testimonial _RootsSupply- testimonial on the ability to control and mitigate odor
as well as mold.
ODOR_ DeschutesCoRockJuniperColeBreitEng.- we made further inquiry
with the AgriAir company and they provided this is letter. It is taken from the odor
control plan submitted by an approved Deschutes County applicant's file in
September 2016.
PavelClackCoLetter29SEP16- this letter is from the Pavel Mazac, President of
Omnitec. Mr. Mazac speaks to the fact the AgriAir system, created by Omnitec, meets
the requirements of odor control as required by state and local governments. He also
gives specific details that Commissioner Henderson was inquiring of our Mechanical
Engineer, Larry Scharf.
AgriAir FAQ 1217- this FAQ sheet was provided by the manufacturer and further
discusses the ability to kill odor.
In my recent discussions with the manufacturer I was encouraged to have you and/or
the the Commissioners contact management of AgriAir for more detail. I will provide
their contact info and any more information if desired.
After completion of the construction of our facility, we will have the proposed odor
and noise systems tested by a third party. We also have purchased an approved sound
meter that we will use for weekly testing of the sound levels at our property lines when
our equipment is in full operation.
Thank you for your time.
Curt Rogers
Swamp Fox Farm, LLC
Lee Property Management, LLC
Adam Kirkwood <adam@certifiedpdx.com>
Thu 10/6/2016 6:17 AIV(
To:reagan@agriairequipment.com <reagan@agriairequipment.com>;
Reagan,
Thank you for coming by and introducing yourself. We're really looking forward to doing more business with
AgriAir. Our own experience with your product began we first toured the space we are now in. The previous grower had
apparently lost his license and had financial issues and he simply abandoned the space as is. He had been there for
around 10 years, I believe, and was not exactly the tidiest of people. To be more accurate, he was a 3 day horse ride
from the outskirts of tidy. He kept dogs as his main security so they were there 24 hours a day and it didn't look like
anybody cared where or when they did their business. I could be wrong but it also smelled like there were cats
occupying the space as well. After seeing, and smelling, all of this, we were finding it hard to get excited about the space
even though it was already built and ready to go. The landlord used the AgriAir system 24 hours a day for probably a
month moving units throughout the space. When he finished gutting the space and throwing out everything he couldn't
sell, we toured it again. The difference was absolutely amazing! Maybe it was on purpose, but there was one room in
the back that he never got to and you can go back in there and immediately witness what the entire space smelled like
before.
We were completely sold on AgriAir that day. So far we have purchased 2 units and have plans to buy at least 2 more as
we get more rooms prepared.
Thanks again, Reagan!
Adam Kirkwood
Co-Founder/CFO
Certified Portland
www.certifiedpdx.com
www.instaaram.com/certifledpdx
503-628-9595
adam@certifiedpdx.com
At Certified Portland we believe that the strain is only as good as the breeder. Paying
homage to those who craft the fine genetics found in many farms & nurseries around the
globe is something that is not done enough, and something that we are passionate about.
We strive to grow these incredible genetics as they were meant to be grown, with time and
care.
"We installed an AgriAir 1000 PG air purifier into a 225 square foot, 10,000
watt sealed room just over 5 months ago. Our initial purpose for this trial was
to determine whether or not a room saturated with Hydro -Peroxides would
have any mitigating effect on Cannabis terpenoid production.
Through a third party laboratory we had plant material analyzed for terpene
content. Two samples were submitted. The first sample came from the most
recent harvest before the AgriAir was employed. The second sample
submitted represented product from the first harvest after the AgriAir had
run 24/7 for nine weeks in the flower chamber. The results from Sunrise
Analytical confirmed that there was zero terpene loss in the second
submission.
We were also impressed with the AgriAir's ability to mitigate odors inside and
around the exterior of the grow space. As an added bonus: we experienced
zero mold build up in our air handler!
In this new era of exponentially expanding plant pathogens effecting medical
and recreational cannabis, the AgriAir peroxide generators are the answer to
insuring that the airborne environment is as sterile as possible."
Aichard Crommelffil
Manager
Roots Garden Supp
September 12, 2016
Tyler Hauth
Rockchuck & Juniper LLC
Dear Tyler:
ColeBreit Engineering has reviewed the Hydrogen Peroxide Generator proposed for your facility within
Deschutes County.
[From the AgriAir website]
AgriAir purifiers produce Ionized Hydro -Peroxides through a process called photo -catalytic oxidation,
oxidizing gas molecules, by UV energy reacting with a quad metallic shield. The IHP is generated from
humidity and 02 in the air without adding any chemicals. The IHP oxidizer plasma is exhausted in the air,
where it proactively seeks any types of bio -contaminants to react with. The unused oxidizer plasma
reverts back to humidity and oxygen in about 15 minutes, leaving no chemical residues behind.
AgriAir purifiers with single 14" generators covers about 8,000 cubic ft. of space. Our units with dual
generators can run on Low output and cover 6,000 cubic ft., at Medium 8,000 cubic ft. and at high, 14,000
cubic ft. These are only guidelines and in our experience these units can sanitize areas twice as large.
Coverage depends greatly on the type of plants, canopy size, growing medium, and bio -contaminant load.
Units can cover multiple cultivation spaces using standard 12" flexible or rigid ducting and Y or Tjunctions.
It is important to have good air circulation in the grow space to distribute ionized hydro peroxides across
the entire area.
We recommend sizing and installing per manufacturer's instructions. Per the manufacturer's
representative, each AgriAir model 1000-3(HO) Air Purifier is good for a room volume of up to 20,000
cubic feet. Therefore, for an 8,000 square foot room with 9' ceiling (56,000 cubic feet), (3) Air Purifiers
will be required for each room. For a 5,000 square foot room with 18' ceiling (90,000 cubic feet), (5) Air
Purifiers will be required for each room.
Per the manufacturer, if the odor is neutralized within 2 hours of installing the units, it's a good
indication that the units are properly sized for the operation in question. After installation, we
recommend having a third party verify that the odor within and exterior to the space has been mitigated
in order to ensure the installation has met the intent of the Deschutes County code regarding odor,
pursuant to 18.116.330, Section B.10.d.ii (Alternate Method).
ColeBreit makes no assurances as to the safety of this device to the cannabis crops.
Regards,
Laura Breit, P.E.
Principal
COLEBREIT
E N 0 1 N E E R I N 0
Omnitec Design produces AgriAir photo -catalytic air purification equipment which we would
like to be considered as a highly effective alternative to the carbon filtration system required
for use under current ordinances in indoor cannabis growing facilities in Oregon. The
Oregon regulations call for use of a carbon filtration system for removal of odor from the air
exhausted to the outside from the grow facility, and creating negative air pressure inside the
building to prevent leakage of the odor to the outside.
The AgriAir system provides:
Elimination of odor inside the facility before it's released to the outside
A clean healthy environment for workers in indoor cannabis grow facilities
Since there are stringent requirements for marijuana crops to be pure and free of
contaminants, our approach is to eliminate odor and purify the air and surfaces inside the
grow facilities. AgriAir equipment is able to reduce the odor and VOC levels in an indoor
cannabis grow area by 85% and in addition eliminates over 95% of airborne mold, mildew,
and pathogens, which are known health risks to workers and the final quality of the product.
Since the system already purifies the air inside the entire indoor grow facility, the air
exhausted or leaking to the outdoors will meet or exceed your odor regulations for exhausted
air. With odor controlled inside the building, the need for negative air pressure is
eliminated. A negative air pressurized building will naturally draw in contamination from the
outside, such as pollen and pesticides. By eliminating the need for negative air pressure, the
amounts of bio -contamination that enter the grow area from the outside are greatly reduced.
The AgriAir purifiers utilize photocatalytic oxidation technology which produces a friendly
oxidizer plasma consisting of ionized hydro peroxide, super oxides, and hydroxyl ions. This
technology has been used for air purification and sanitization of surfaces for over 20 years in
hospitals, the food industry, commercial buildings and many other applications. This
technology is approved by the United States FDA, FSIS and USDA and is safe for human
exposure.
For more information on our products, please consult our website
at www.agriairequipment.com and specifically the technology page at
htip://agriairequipment.com/theagriairsystem/.
Best regards,
Pavel Mazac
President
Omnitec Design, Inc.
Company: 425 290 3922
Office: 206 799 4432
4640 Campus Place. Suite 100. Mukilteo, WA 98275
Frequently Asked Questions
How does Agriair purification work?
Agriair purifiers produce Ionized Hydro -Peroxides (IHP), oxidizing gas molecules, by UV energy reacting with a
quad metallic shield. The IHP is generated from humidity and 02 in the air without adding any chemicals. The
IHP oxidizer plasma is exhausted in the air, where it proactively seeks any type of bio -contaminant to destroy.
The unused oxidizer plasma reverts back to humidity and oxygen in about 15 minutes, leaving no chemical
residues behind. The cycle of IHP oxidizer plasma generation, reaction with contaminants, and breakdown to
02 and humidity is going on 24/7, sanitizing and protecting your plants.
Is Ionized Hydro -peroxide safe for plant,
animal and human exposure?
IONIZED Ionized Hydro -Peroxides occur in nature in levels similar to those
HYDRO -PEROXIDE produced by our purifiers, or about 0.03 ppm which is 30 times
lower than the OSHA limit.
Does an Agriair Purifier alter the quality
SUPER of the harvested crop, THC or CBD?
OXIDE IONS Based on independent lab reports the harvest retained its normal
quality while mold and fungus were eliminated. Independent labs
show no loss of cannabinoids, trichomes, taste, or terpenes from
the final product.
IONIZED
HYDROXIDES Does IHP reduce the level of CO2 in the air?
The CO2 levels are not affected at all by the IHP oxidizer plasma.
How much space does each purifier sanitize?
As an example the purifier with a single 14" generator can sanitize and control odor in about 8,000 cubic ft.
of space, with 100 plants. The unit with 9" and 14" generators can run on low output and cover 6,000 cubic
ft., at medium 8,000 cubic ft. and at high, 14,000 cubic ft. of space with over 175 plants. The purifiers with
two 14" generators can effectively sanitize over 16,000 cubic ft. of space with over 200 plants. These are only
guidelines and in our experience, these units can sanitize and control odor in considerably larger areas. It is
important to have air constantly moving in the grow area to distribute IHP to the entire area.
How does installing an Agriair purifier benefit my grow operation
and save me money?
The Agriair purifier sanitizes the air and surfaces in the grow area, thus greatly reducing the need for fungicides
and pesticides to keep plants healthy. It kills pollen, viruses and molds, such as Aspergillum and Botrytis,
which can destroy entire crops. IHP also prevents mold from growing on the HVAC system and kills the mold
spores in the air. Another benefit of the Agriair purifier is the removal of the odor and VOCs inside the grow
area, eliminating the need for a carbon filtration system for the exhausted air.
How much service does the Agriair purifier require?
Agriair purifiers contain particulate filters, which capture pollen, dust and mold spores and should be replaced
when loaded with contaminants. Some Agriair purifiers contain carbon filters, which block any visible light
radiating from the unit and don't need to be replaced frequently. The UV light inside the IHP generator cells
slowly loses its capacity and after 25,000 hours of operation (over 2.5 years) and should be replaced. All
service can be done by an operator in the field.
What is the best way to install an Agriair purifier unit?
Most Agriair purifiers are portable and easy to set up without ducting and require only a 115 Volt outlet. The
units are designed to generate IHP gas which mixes with air circulating inside the grow area. These units
should be installed elevated above the floor or hanging from the ceiling. This will assure complete mixing of
exhausted peroxides with the air in the grow or processing area. As an optional accessory, the units could be
ordered with flexible ducting to direct the Hydro -peroxide rich exhaust to any area desired.
Does the Agriair purification process generate Ozone?
The Agriair purifier is not an Ozone generating machine. Its purification action utilizes the oxidation process
where ionized hydro -peroxides add or remove an oxygen molecule from the organic contaminants, to destroy
them. An independent test showed that the Ozone [03] level in the tested area remained unchanged and at very
low levels.
Where should I use the PHI purifier with HEPA filter?
The drying period is a critical time in the grow process, when the cannabis can easily get moldy and
contaminated. During this time, we recommend our purifiers with PHI generators to sanitize the entire
processing environment and HEPA filters to enhance the process by capturing even sub -micron contaminants.
Is the Agriair effective on destroying formaldehyde?
Our purifiers effectively eliminate off -gassing of formaldehyde and many other chemical fumes and VOCs.
Could I use an Agriair purifier for rapid sanitation of a contaminated area?
We recommend sanitizing your grow area thoroughly before each new cycle, followed by setting up the Agriair
purifiers, to maintain sanitation of the space 24/7. If use of the purifiers begins in an environment with sick
plants containing powdery mildew, for example, the existing mildew will be brought under control and will not
spread to healthy plants. Depending on the level of the bio -contamination and the size of the space, multiple
units can be used to control highly contaminated areas; increasing the concentration of IHP without harming
the plants. While the IHP is considered safe for human exposure, each operator must determine howto maintain
a safe and comfortable IHP level while the area is occupied.
What are the important factors to consider when choosing Agriair Purifiers
for a contained grow environment?
• Goals - What are the goals I'm trying to achieve - control of odors, mold, mildew, fungus, microbes?
• Size - The total cubic feet of the grow space determines how many Agriair purifiers are required to
generate the amount of peroxides needed to purify the whole space.
• Distribution of Peroxides - The IHP plasma generated by the purifiers has to be exhausted into air
circulating in the grow space. Turbulent airflow through the grow space is necessary to assure an even
distribution of peroxides and to achieve complete sanitation of plants and surfaces.
How do I know if I have enough concentration of IHP in the air
of a contained grow environment?
If odors are greatly reduced within one hour, it is a good indication that the IHP level is sufficient for sanitizing
the air & surfaces. It is important to watch your plants closely assuring they remain healthy, mold and mildew
free, and calibrating the level of hydro -peroxides in your grow space appropriately. The ultimate purpose of the
PHI purification process is to have healthy plants without using chemical pesticides and fungicides. Another
indication that the purifiers are working is that the HVAC system stays clean of mold or is gradually purified of
existing mold after use of Agriair purifiers.
How does the Agriair purifier compare with the use of carbon filters?
Carbon filters remove odor and VOCs from the air exhausted to the outdoors and create negative pressure
inside the building, allowing pollen and other contaminants to leak into the grow area. Also, carbon filters
will not sanitize the air and surfaces inside your grow space. Agriair purifiers remove odors inside the grow
area, sanitize the air and hard surfaces, prevent growth of mold inside HVAC systems, and create a healthy
environment for plants and workers. Our purifiers also enable growers to reduce the use of fungicide and
pesticide. While the carbon filter initially costs less to install, the replacement of filter media along with the
maintenance of the units makes this system more expensive to operate than Agriair purifiers.
Can Agriair purifiers sanitize existing contaminated HVAC systems?
Yes, the IHP molecules destroy mold growth in the HVAC system and ducting. This can be done gradually,
during the normal air sanitizing process, or rapidly, by sending the Agriair purifier output directly into the intake
of the HVAC unit.
Are Agriair purifiers effective in greenhouses?
Agriair purifiers provide multiple functions in greenhouse applications to keep the plants and the environment
healthy including the following:
• They purify incoming outside air by deactivating pollen, mold spores, virus and bacteria.
• Kill mold, mildew, fungus and bacteria generated inside the green house.
• Reduce or eliminate odor from the air before it is exhausted to the outside.
How much hydro -peroxide is required to provide complete sanitation
and control odors in the green house?
There are many variations of greenhouse construction and methods of growing crops. Also variations in
the climate from hot, wet, dry, cold and seasonal changes in the environment need to be considered. Agriair
purifiers generate strong peroxide molecules which are exhausted and mixed into the surrounding turbulent air
where they pro -actively seek and destroy bio -contaminants. These peroxides are active for about 15 minutes,
during which time they either react with bio -contaminants or convert back to 02 and humidity. Each Agriair
purifier, depending on the number and size of its IHP generators, can release enough peroxides to purify from
3,000 to 16,000 cubic feet of air. Depending on the size, its operation and required level of purification, multiple
units can be installed throughout the greenhouse to maintain an elevated level of ionized -hydro -peroxide in the
air to continuously destroy bio -contaminants. Our modular approach using Agriair purification units provides
maximum flexibility to respond to changing conditions inside and outside the greenhouse.
What are the important factors to consider when choosing Agriair Purifiers
in my greenhouse?
• Goals - What are the goals I'm trying to achieve - control of odors, mold, mildew, fungus?
• Size - The total cubic feet of the greenhouse determines how many Agriair purifiers are required to
generate the amount of peroxides needed to purify the whole space.
• Air Flow - The number of air changes per hour inside the greenhouse has to be considered when
calculating the number of purifiers required.
• Distribution of Peroxides - A turbulent airflow through the greenhouse is necessary to assure an even
distribution of peroxides through the whole space to achieve a complete sanitation.
for further information please visit us at
t
Attachment D — Appellant's Comments
This page intentionally left blank.
Fitch Law GrOup, PC Edward P. Fitch
:_ ., ,� ed'i��fitchiaN�.roup.com
Ciamn'littecl to Excellence"
Patricia Jane Roberts
Paralegal
n-tyicia2iPfitchI aw group.a>m
April 18, 2018
VIA EMAIL ONLY
Isabella Liu
Deschutes County Community Development
117 N W Lafayette Avenue
Bend, OR 97703
Email: Isabella Liu Lir)deschutes.or
Isabella:
I was not able to make the hearing on April I 1 tl'. I did review the CEA Consulting Engineer's letter
from October 26, 2017. As I understand it, that is the letter that the applicants are relying on. This
letter woefully inadequate.
1. Odor.
The letter describes a potential system which, in theory, addresses odor issues, but there has been
no demonstration of that odor control in a report. At the prompting of the planning department, it
only includes a conclusionary opinion that an odor control system would control odor. That
conclusionary opinion does not even give a definitive statement that that system as described in the
letter would be used. It is prefaced by the statement "if the system is selected and constructed within
the guidelines described above and if the system is maintained per the filter and manufacturers
recommendation." This is not a demonstration of a site specific system that is going to be effective
in terms of odor control. It is only a description of a theoretical system coupled with a conclusionary
opinion. If the code called for an opinion, that might pass muster. The code, however, requires a
report that demonstrates the site specific system for the operation to work to control odor.
2. Noise.
This same malady is evident in the noise control analysis. The noise control analysis indicates that
the largest units of the HVAC system would operate within a db 41 at the property line. This, of
course, exceeds the limitations imposed by the code. There are more than one of these largest units
and there is no analysis as to whether or not the combination of these units, even with any type of
sound attenuation law, would sufficiently control the sound to a decibel level of 30 at the property
line.
210 S W 5``1 Street, Suite 2 j Redmond OR 97756
Phone: 541.3 16. 1588 Fax: 541.3 16.1943
Fthen) Law Group, PC Page 2
"(:oninu�tccl rnIxtellc:nic"
3. Water.
This application as does others suffers again this same problem of having water delivered to the
property which lies northeast of Redmond from the quasi -municipal water provider located in Bend.
Avon Water has a site specific system. The allowable use for quasi -municipal water is defined under
the Oregon Administrative Rules if you combine those ordinary and normal uses within their water
delivery system including irrigation (see enclosed). That irrigation, however, is limited to the same
extent exempt uses for domestic water wells is limited. That is, quasi -municipal, municipal water
or exempt water from a domestic well can only be used to irrigate lawns and gardens. It cannot be
used for agricultural purposes. Even the circular from the Water Resources Department, a copy of
which is enclosed, evidences allowable use and prohibits the use of exempt water for agricultural
production. The definition of the allowable uses for municipal water and quasi -municipal water and
exempt water are all the same. That is, it cannot be used for agricultural production.
For the reasons stated above, this application must be denied.
Very truly yours,
EDWARD P. FITCH
EPF:pjr
Enclosure
cc: Client
G:AClients\EPI'\Sanders, Virigina\Sanders, Virginia WDeschutes County hr 041818.wpd
2/6/2018
Oregon Secretary of State Administrative Rules
Water Resources Department
Chapter 690
Division 300
DEFINITIONS
690-300.0010
Definitions
The following definitions apply in OAR chapter 690, divisions 15, 310, 320, 330, 340, and 350 and to any permits,
certificates or transfers issued under these rules:
(1) "Affected Local Government" means any local government as defined in OAR 690-005-0015 within whose
jurisdiction water is or would be diverted, conveyed, or used under a proposed or approved permit, water right transfer.
or certificate.
(2) "Agricultural Water Use" means the use of water related to the production of agricultural products. These uses
include, but are not limited to, construction, operation and maintenance of agricultural facilities and livestock sanitation
at farms, ranches, dairies and nurseries. Examples of these uses include, but are not limited to, dust control, temperature
control, animal waste management, barn or farm sanitation, dairy operation, and fire control. Such use shall not include
irrigation.
(3) "Aquatic Life Water Use' means the use of water to support natural or artificial propagation and sustenance of fish
and other aquatic life.
(4) "Artificial Groundwater Recharge" means the intentional addition of water to a groundwater reservoir by diversion
from another source.
(5) "Beneficial Use" means the reasonably efficient use of water without waste for a purpose consistent with the laws.
rules and the best interests of the people of the state.
(6) "Commercial Water Use" means use of water related to the production, sale or delivery of goods, services or
commodities by a public or private entity. These uses include, but are not limited to, construction, operation and
maintenance of commercial facilities. Examples of commercial facilities include, but are not limited to, an office, resort,
recreational facility, motel, hotel, gas station, kennel, store, medical facility, and veterinary hospital. Examples of water
uses in such facilities include, but are not limited to, human consumption, sanitation, food processing, and fire
protection. Such uses shall not include irrigation or landscape maintenance of more than 1/2 acre. Notwithstanding this
definition, exempt commercial water use under Division 340 does not include irrigation or landscape maintenance.
(7) "Comment" means a written statement concerning a particular proposed water use. The comment may identify
elements of the application which, in the opinion of the commenter, would conflict with an existing water right orwould
impair or be detrimental to the public interest.
(8) "Commission" means the Water Resources Commission.
(9) "Contested Case" means a hearing before the Department or Commission as defined in ORS 183.310(2) and
conducted according to the procedures described in ORS Chapter 53, ORS 183.413 - 183.497 and OAR chapter 690.
division 2.
(10) "Cranberry Use" means all necessary beneficial uses of water for growing, protecting and harvesting cranberries.
Examples of these uses include, but are not limited to, irrigation of cranberries or other crops in rotation, chemical
application, flooding for harvesting or pest control, and temperature control.
(11) "Deficiency of Rate Right" means an additional right allowed from the same source for the same use at the same
place of use when an earlier right does not allow a full duty or rate of flow of water. APPENDIX M
Page 1 of 4
(12) "Department" means the Water Resources Department.
httus://secure.sos.state.or.us/oard/viewSingleRule.action;JSESSIONID_OARD=FkIsDG3zWCZHiRRLw_HQ68DKc1DPaEBfl1SV89oR41q—EOPOPfh!-.,. U5
2/6/2018 Oregon Secretary of State Administrative Rules
(13) "Director" means the Director of the Department.
(14) "Domestic Water Use" means the use of water for human consumption, household purposes, domestic animal
consumption that is ancillary to residential use of the property or related accessory uses.
{ 15) "Domestic Use Expanded' means the use of water, in addition to that allowed for domestic use, for v✓ 4c"'g ul;
1/2 -acre of Lawn or noncommercial garden.
(16) "Drainage Basin", as used in OAR 690-340.0020, 690-340-0030 and 690-340-0050, means hydrologic unit
delineated as a cataloging unit by the US geological Survey Office of Water Data Coordination on the State Hydrologic
Unit map.
(17)' Fire Protection Water Use" means the use and storage of water for the purpose of extinguishing fires or reducing
the potential outbreak of fires.
(18)'Fish Bypass Structure', as used in OAR 690-340-0010. means any pipe. nume, open channel or other means of
conveyance that transports fish that have entered a water diversion structure back to the body of water from which the
fish were diverted.
(19) "Fish Screen", as used in OAR 690.340.0010, means a screen, bar, rack trap or, other barrier at a water diversion to
entrap or provide adequate protection for fish populations, including related improvements necessary to insure its
effective operation.
(20) "Pishway." as used in OAR 690-340-0010, means any structure, facility or device used to facilitate upstream or
downstream passage of fish through, over or around any man-made or natural barrier to free movement.
(21) "Forestland and Rangeland Management;' as used in Chapter 595, Oregon laws 1993, means water used for
operations conducted on or pertaining toforestlands and rangelands. Such uses may include, but are not limited to.
reforestation, road construction and maintenance, harvesting, vegetation management, and disposal of slash. Suchuse
shall not include irrigation.
(22) "Groundwater Reservoir" means a designated body of standing or moving groundwater as defined in ORS
537.515(5).
(23) "Group Domestic Water Use" means the use of water for domestic water use by more than one residence or
dwelling unit.
(24) "Human Consumption" means the use of water for the purposes of drinking, cooking, and sanitation.
(25)'Industrial Water Use" means the use of water associated with the processing or manufacture of a product. These
uses include, but are not limited to, construction, operation and maintenance of an industrial site, facilities and buildings
and related uses. Examples of these uses include, but are not limited to, general construction; road construction: non -
hydroelectric power production, including down -hole heat exchange and geothermal: agricultural or forest product
processing; and fire protection. Such use shall not include irrigation or landscape maintenance of more than 1/2 acre.
Notwithstanding this definition, exempt industrial water use under Division 340 does not include irrigation or landscape
maintenance.
(26) "Irrigation" means the artificial application of water to crops or plants by controlled means to promote growth or
nourish crops or plants. Examples of these uses include, but are not limited to, watering of an agricultural crop,
commercial garden, tree farm, orchard, park, golf course, play field or vineyard and alkali abatement.
(27) 'Mining Water Use" means the use of water for extraction, preliminary grading, or processing of minerals or
aggregate at a mining site or construction, operation and maintenance of a mining site. These uses include, but are not
limited to, general construction, road construction, and dust control. Examples of mining include, but are not limited to.
aggregate, hard rock, heap teach and placer mining.
(28) "Municipal Corporation" means any county, city, town or district as defined in ORS 198.010 or 198.180(5) that is
authorized by law to supply water for usual and ordinary municipal water uses.
(29)"Municipal Water Use" means the delivery and use of water through the water service sys tem of a municipal
corporation for all water uses usual and ordinary to such systems. Examples of these water uses shall include but are not
limited to domestic water use, irrigation of lawns and gardens, commercial water use, industrial water use, fire
protection, irrigation and other water uses in park and recreation facilities, and street washing. Such uses shall not
include generation of hydroelectric power.
(30) "Nursery Operations Use" means the use of water for operation of a commercial nursery which may include
temperature control, watering of containerized stock, soil preparation, application of chemicals or fertilizers, watering
within greenhouses and uses to construct, operate and maintain nursery facilities. The use of water within plant nursery
operations constitutes a different use from field irrigation, although that may be a part of nurAWVlg 0j X r1Yl d
irrigation for nursery stock, such use is not restricted to the defined agricultural irrigation season. Page 2 of 4
httnc•ticPcura cos state.ocustoardlviewSinpieRu!e,action;JSESSiONID_OARD=Fk1sDG3zWCZHiRRLw_NQ88DKc1DPaE8f11SV89oR41q—EOPOPih!-... 215
2/6/2018 Oregon Secretary of State Adminis(rative Rules
(31) "Oft -Channel" means outside a natural waterway of perceptible extent which, during average water years.
seasonally or continuously contains moving water that flows off the property owned by the applicant and has a definite
bed and banks which serve to confine the water. "Off-channeI" may includes the collection of storm water run-off snov"
melt or seepage which, during average water years, does riot flow through a defined channel and does not flow off the
property owned by the applicant.
(32) "Planned" means a determination has been made for a specific course of action either by',! legislative,
administrative or budgetary action of a public body. or by engineering, design work, or other investment toward
approved construction by both the.public and private sector.
(33) "Planned Uses" means the use or uses of water or land which has/have been planned as defined in this section Suer.
uses include, but are not limited to, the uses approved in the policies, provisions, and maps contained in ecknow, edged
city and county comprehensive plans and land use regulations.
(34) "Pollution Abatement or Pollution Prevention Water Use" means the use of water to dilute, transport or prevent
pollution.
(35) "Power Development Water Use' means the use of the flow of water to develop electrical or mechanical power.
Examples of these uses include, but are not limited to, the use of water for the operation of a hydraulic rain or water
wheel and hydroelectric power production.
(36) "Primary Right" means the right to store water in a reservoir or the water right designated by the commission as the
principle water supply for the authorized use, or if no designation has been made, the first in time or initial
appropriation.
(37) "Proposed Certificate" means a draft version of a water right certificate describing the elements and extent of the
water right developed under the terms of a permit or transfer approval order, as determined by field investigation.
(38) "Protest" means a written statement expressing disagreement with a proposed final order that is filed in the
manner and has the content described in ORS 537.145 to 537.240.
(39) "Public Corporation" means a corporation which operates subject to control by a local government entity or officers
of a local government and which, at least in part, is organized to serve a public purpose of, and receives public funds or
other support having monetary value, from such government.
(40) "Quasi -Municipal Water Use" means the delivery and use of water through the water services stem of a
corporation other than a public corporation created for the purpose of operating a water supply system, f r tQ hose uses
usual and ordinary to municipal water use, or a federally recognized Indian tribe that operates a water supply system fcr
uses usua an ordinary to a municipal water use. A quasi -municipal water right shall not be granted the statutory
municipal preferences given to a municipality under ORS 537.190(2), 537.230(1), 537.352, 537.410(2), 540.510(3).
540.610(2), (3), or those preferences over minimum streamflows designated in a basin program.
(4 1) "Rate and Duty of Water for Irrigation" means the maximum flow of water in cubic feet per second or gallons per
minute (instantaneous rate) and the total volume of water in acre-feet per acre per year that may be diverted for
irrigation.
(42) "Recharge Permit" means a permit for the appropriation of water for the purpose of artificial groundwater
recharge.
(43) "Recreation Water Use" means the use of water for play, relaxation or amusement. Examples of these uses include,
but are not limited to boating, fishing, wading, swimming, and scenic values. (44) "Riparian Area" means a zone of
transition from an aquatic ecosystem to a terrestrial ecosystem, dependent upon surface or subsurface water, that
reveals through the zone's existing or potential soil -vegetation complex, the influence of such surface or subsurface
water. A riparian area may be located adjacent to a lake, reservoir, estuary, pothole, spring, bog, wet meadow, or
ephemeral, intermittent or perennial stream.
(45) "Secondary Groundwater Permit" means a permit for the appropriation of groundwater which was stored through
the exercise of a recharge permit or certificate.
(46) "Stockwater Use" means the use of water for consumption by domesticated animals and wild animals held in
captivity as pets or for profit.
(47) "Storage" means the retention or impoundment of surface or groundwater by artificial means for public or private
uses and benefits.
(48) "Stored Recharge Water" means groundwater which results from artificial groundwater recharge.
(49) "Storage Account" means a net volume of artificially recharged groundwater which is calculated for a single
recharge activity from a formula specified in a single recharge permit which records addition A ENtV M
reservoir by artificial recharge and depletionsfromagroundwater reservoir bypumpingandnaturallosses.age 3 of
r w�< 1r�on ra snc gtnta nr ustoardlviewSinateRule.action;JSESSIONID_OARD=Fk1sDG3zWCZHiRRLw_HQ68DKc1DPaE8fl1 SV89oR41q--EQPOPfh!-... 315
2/6/2018
Oregon Secretary of State Administrative Rules
(50) "Storm Water ManagementWater Use" means the use or storage of water in any structure or drainage way that is
designed, constructed and maintained to collect and filter, retain or detain surface water runoff during and after a Ston:
event fort Ile purpose of water quality improvement, flood control or property protection. It may also include, but is not
limited to, existing features such as wetlands, water quality swales, and ponds which are maintained as storm wata
quality facilities.
t5 1) "Stream or Riparian Area Enhancement Water Use" means the use of water to restore or enhance a stream or
riparian area.
(52) "Supplemental Water Right or Supplemental Water Use Permit' means an additional appropriation of water to
make up a deficiency in supply from an existing water right. A supplemental water right is used in conjunction with a
primary water right.
(53) "Surplus Waters" means all waters in excess of those needed to satisfy current existing rights and minimum
streamflows established by the Commission.
(54) "Temperature Control" means the use of water to protect a growing crop from damage from extreme temperatures
(55) "Transfer" means a change of use or place of use or point of diversion of a water right.
(56) "Wastewater" means water that has been diverted under an authorized water right after it is beyond the contro of
the owner or that right but has not yet returned to the channel of a natural stream. In an irrigation district, the
wastewater of an individual user is not subject to appropriation until it leaves the boundaries of the district. Wastewater
abandoned to the channel of a natural stream becomes a part of that stream and is subject to appropriation.
(57) "Water is Available," when used in OAR 690-310-0080, 690-310-0110 and 690-310-0130, means:
(a) The requested source is not over -appropriated under OAR 690-400-0010 and 690-410-0070 during any period of
the proposed use; or
(b) If the requested source is already over -appropriated for any portion of the period of use proposed in a new
application:
(A) The applicant can show the proposed use requires water only during the period of time in which the requested
source is not already over -appropriated;
(8) The applicant has obtained or has shown the applicant can obtain authorization to use water from an alternate
source to provide water needed during any period of use in which the source is over -appropriated: or
(C) If the applicant has shown they can obtain authorization to use water from an alternate source during the time water
is unavailable, the department conditions the approval of the application to require that prior to diversion of water the
applicant obtains authorization for use of water from the alternate source.
(c) For surface water applications received before July 17, 1992, the provisions of subsection (a) of this section shall
apply except that the determination of whether a requested source is over -appropriated under OAR 690.400-0010 and
690-410-0070 shall be based upon whether the quantity of water available during a specified period is not sufficient to
meet the expected demands for all water rights at least 50 percent of the time during that period.
(58) "Water Availability Analysis" means the investigation of stream flow or groundwater measurement records,
watermaster distribution records, flow requirements of existing water rights, stream flow modeling in ungauged basins,
minimum perennial streamflows, or scenic waterway Flow requirements to determine if water is available to support the
proposed water use.
(59) "Water Right Subject to a Transfer" means a right established by a court decree or evidenced by a valid water right
certificate, or a right for which proof of beneficial use of water under a water right permit or transfer has been
submitted to and approved by the Director but for which a certificate has not yet been issued.
(60) "Wetland" means an area that is inundated or saturated by surface or groundwater at a frequency and duration
sufficient to support, and that under normal circumstances do support, a prevalence of vegetation typically adapted for
life in saturated soil conditions.
(6 1) `Wetland Enhancement Water Use" means the use of water to restore, create, or enhance or maintain wetland
resources.
(62) "Wildlife Water Use" means the use of water by or for sustaining wildlife species and their habitat.
Statutory/other Authority: ORS 536.027
Statutes/Other implemented: ORS 536, 537, 539, 540 & 541
History:
WRD 1-2012, f 1.31.12, cert. ef. 2-1-12
WRD 2-1998, f. & cert. ef.10-13-98
WRD 3.1996, f. & cert. et 3.15-96
APPENDIX M
Page 4 of 4
�« .,, �f.,ro11.-lna Wvipwf2mnloRulp ar_tion*JSESSiONID OARD=FklsDG3zWCZHiRRLw_HQ68DKe1DPaE8f11SV89oR4lq—EQPOPfh!-... 415
.537.535
WATER. )CAWS
ect under a permit, upon approval by the
Water Resources Department, to recover up
to 100 percent of the water stored in the
aquifer storage facility if valid scientific data
gathered during Operations under the limited
license or permit demonstrate that the in-
jected source water is not lost through mi-
gration or other means and that ground
water otherwise present in the aquifer has
not been irretrievably lost as a result Of
aquifer storage or retrieval.The Water other
Re-
sources Department may p) such
conditions on withdrawal of stored water
necessary to protect the public health and
environment, including conditions allowing
with
of the permit to comply
ORS 537.532. the De-
c) The procedure for allowing
partment. of Environmental Quality and the
Oregon Health Authority to comment on and
recommend permit conditions.
(6) The use of water under a permit as
injection source water for an aquifer storage
and recovery project up to the limits allowed
in subsection (5)(b) of this section shall not
affect the priority date of the water right
permit or otherwise affect the right evi-
denced by the permit.
(7) The holder of a permit
for for aatrans-
, ins
stshall orage and recovery
fer or change of use if the use of recovered
water is different from that which is allowed
in 1e source c.487 §4; 1997 water
p
§2; 199 9
it or certificate.
( 995 .6 §3; 2003 594 K
2009 c.595 §98.53
(Appropriation of Ground Water)
537.535 Unlawful use or appropriation
of ground water, including wen construc-
tion and operation. (1) No person or public
agency shall use or attempt to use any
ground water, construct or attempt to con-
struct any well oro he water o of operate or
and securing gr well owned or
permit the operation of any
controlled by such person or public agency
except upon compliance with OS537,506 to
537.795 and 537.992 andany applicableResources
er
or rule adopted by h
Commission under ORS 537.505 to 537.795
and 537.992.
(2) Except for those uses exempted under
ORS 537.545, the use of ground water for any
purpose, without a permit issued under ORS
537.625 or registration under ORS 53d7.60a er,
a -1155
n unlawful appropriation ec gr
jg$15c�668 §21'1985 c.& 344§47)' subsection (2) enacted as
6vmo [Repealed by 1955 c.708 §383 filing of
537.545 )Exempt uses; map;
use; fee; rules. (1) No registration, certif-
icate of registration, application for a permit,
permit, certificate of completion or ground
Title 45
water right certificate under ORS 537,505 to
537.795 and 537.992 is required for the use of
ground water for:
(a) Stockatering purposes;
(b) Watering any lawn or noncommercial
garden not exceeding one-half acre in area;
(c) Watering the lawns, grounds and
fields not exceeding 10 acres in area of
schools located within a critical ground wa-
ter area established pursuant to ORS 537.730
to 537.740;
(d) Single or group domestic purposes
an amount not exceeding 15,000 gallons a
day' Purposes;
(e) Down -hole heat exchange pwrP
(f) Any single industrial or comm 6rcial
000
purpose in an amount. not exceeding
gallons a day; or as the
(g) Land application, so long
ground water:
(A) Has first been appropriated and used
under a permit or certificate issued under
ORS 537.625 or 537.630 for a water right is-
sued for industrial purposes or a water right
authorizing use of water for confined animal
feeding purposes;
(B) Is reused for irrigation purposes and
the eriod of irrigation is a period duringwhicph
w
charged to thewaters of the tate; n state;
(C) Is applied pursuant to a permit issued
by the Department of Environmental
Quality
un -
or the State Department of Agriculture
der either ORS 46813.050 to construct and
to operate as w stem or ORS -
confineposal danimal feeding opera-
tion. ose that
(2) A ground water use for a purp
is exempt under subsection (1) o
tion, to the extent that the use is
this sec -
beneficial,
constitutes a right to appro9 b a ground
water equal to that establishedd by ip
water right certificate issued under ORS
537.700.
(3) Except for the use of water under
subsection (1)(g) of this section, the re are
Resources Commission by rule may q
any person or public agency usin so ground
water for any such purpose to ferns
mation with regard to such ground water and
the use thereof. For a use of water described he e -
in subsection (1)(9) of this section, or the
partment of Environmental Q reh shall the
state Department of Agri a
Pro-
vide to the Water Resources Department
copy of the permit issued under ORS
46813050 or 46813.215 authorizing the land
application of ground water for reuse. The
permit shall provide the information reg he
ing the place of use of such water an
nature of the beneficial reuse. APPENDIX N
Page 68
(2015 EditiokAge 1 of 2
V _
j
APPROPRIA'T'ION OF WATER. CE)TERALLY 537.605
,a
(4) If it is necessary for the Water Re- tion for a permit under ORS 537.51.0, 537.520,
'
sources Department to regulate the use or 537.530, 537.540, 537.550, 537.560, 537.570,
[
distribution of ground water, including uses 537.580, 537.590 and 537.600 prior to, pending
i
for purposes that are exempt under subset- and nott yet approved on August 3, 1955, shall
tion (1) of this section, the department shall be governed as an application for a permit
.; .:
use as a priority date for the exempt uses the under QRS 537.615, 537.620, 537.621, 537.622
r A
date indicated ria the tog for the well filed and 537.825. (1955 c.708 §6(1); 9999 c.59 §1711
with the department under ORS 537.765 or 637.580 [Repealed by 1955 008 §38)
i=
other documentation provided by the well
owner showing when water use began. 537.585 Beneficial use of ground water
riot to August 3, 1955, recognized as
n
(5) The owner of Iand owhich a well is Wight to appy priate water when regis-
dri3led to allow ground water use for a put- tered. Except as otherwise provided in ORS
pose that is exempt under subsection (1) of 537.545 or 537.575 or 537.595 and subject to
i.! 4
this section shall provide the Water Re- determination under ORS 537.670 to 537.695,
sources Department with a map showing the
({
actual and lawful application of ground wa-
�;
exact location of the well on the tax lot. The ter to beneficial use prior to August 3, 1955,
`
landowner shall provide a map required by by or under the authority of any person or
this subsection to the department no later
p public agency or by or under the authority
a
than 30 days after the well is completed. The of a predecessor in interest of such person
reap must be in accordance with ORS
prepared or public agency, when registered under
standards established by the department. 537.605 and 537.610, is recognized as a right
{
(6) The owner of land on which a well to appropriate ground water to the extent of
thereof
f 1
described in subsection (5) of this section is the maximum beneficial use at any
_
located shall file the exempt ground water time within two years prior to August 3,
use with the Water Resources Department 1955. [1955 008 §6(2)1
ry
for recording. The filing must be accompa- 537$30 Wepealed by 1955 c.708 §381
cried by the fee described in (7)
r
t.,
subsection of
this section. The filing must be received by 537.595 Construction or alteration of
well commenced pnor to August 3, 1955,
the de artment no later than 30 days after
recognized as right to appropriate water
the we l is completed. when registered. Except as otherwise pro -
'4
(7) The Water Resources Department vided in ORS 537.545 or 537.575 or 537.585
.1
shall collect a fee of $300 for recording an and subject to determination under ORS
exempt ground water use under subsection 537.670 to 537.695, when any person or public
(6) of this section. Moneys from fees col- agency on August 3, 1955, is lawfully en-
lected under this subsection shall be depos- gaged good faith in such construction, a)-
xn
ited to the credit of the Water Resources teration or extension of a well for the
Department Water Right Operating Fund. application of ground water to beneficial use,
t.,
Notwithstanding ORS 536.009, moneys deppos- the right to appropriate such ground water,
ited to the fund under this subsection shMI upon completion of such construction, alter -
be used for the purposes of evaluating ation or extension and application of the
ground water supplies, conducting ground ground water to beneficial use within a rea-
.4
water studies, carrying outground water sonable time fixed by the Water Resources
ORS
monitoring, processing ground water data Commission, when registered under
and the administration and enforcement of 537.605 and 537.810, is recognized to the ex
this subsection and subsections (3), (5), (6) tent of the beneficial use of the ground wa-
and (8) of this section. ter. [1955 008 §6(3); 1985 c.673 §491
J
(8) The Water Resources Commission 537 (1989 c.939 §4; repealed by 1991 c.200 §3)
shall adopt rules to implement, administer 637.699 [1989 c.939 §5; repealed by 1991 c.200 §31
and enforce subsections (5) to (7) of this sec- 537.600 [Repealed by 1955 c.708 §381
tion. [1955 008 §5; 1983 x372 §1; 1983 x698 §1; 1985 537.605 Registration of right to a ppro-
c.673 §48; 1989 c.99 §l; 1989 c.833 §57; 1997 c.244 §3; 2001 gist?
-x
c.248 §12; 2003 c.594 §2; 2009 c.819 §11 priate ground water claimed under ORS
537.550 [Repealed by 1955 c.708 §381 537.585 or 587.585; registration statement.
537.W (Repealed by 1955 c.708 §38) (1) Any person or public agency claiming any
right to appropriate ground water under ORS
537.670 [Repealed by 1956 008 §381
537.585 or 537.595, except for any purpose
537.575 Permits granted, approved or exempt under ORS 537.545, is entitled to re-
pending under former law. Any permit ceive from the Water Resources Commission
granted or application for a permit approved within three years after August 3, 1955, a
under ORS 537.510, 537.520, 637.530, 537.540, certificate of registration as evidence of a
0
537.550, 537.560, 537.570, 537.580, 537.590 and right to appropriate ground water as pro -
537.600 prior to and still valid and in effect vided in ORS 537.585 or 537.595. Failure of
on August 3, 1955, is considered to be aper- such person or public agency to file a regis-
mit issued under ORS 537.625. Any applica- tration statement within such period creates
Title 45 Page 69 (MS LgYJA N
i
Page 2 of 2
Alarijrlana-related water rise is subject to the same acuter -use regulations as any olIle] irrigaued crap. Under the Oregon
NVater ('ode of' 1909, all water belongs to the public. "oil it few exceptions. cities irrigators, businesses, and othcr aaatcr
users must obtain a water algin honl the AV'nter resources 1)eparumem to use cycler fr<)m any source -- "Tether it is
underground, or from lakes or streams. (icnerally speaking, landowners with waicr tkl)ying past, through, or under their
property do not automatically hays the right to use that wMer "hhout aukorkmiou 60M the flepartnlc•rlt.
New avatcr permits are not available it manly ,as of Oregon, so individuals are mnirioy encounTed to irivestigme their
water-re;ourees Option; hefore investing in a proiect that requires a aaater supply. Volutions of Oregon h'"Imer lam s call
result in civil 1)enaltics or prosecutiolt fol a Class 13 Inisdenleanor.
Joe best "uy U) idcntiQ ) our legal "„ater roourees options is to speak vx ith your local lvaternmmer (see next page 1. 101
n)orc infornurlion, you Can contact the Department at 501986-0900, or visit our Nvebsite at
NVhat are the matevuse authorization options'
I. A cycler right may Ama ly he associated with your property: however. you will need to confirm that the richt is,
l'aU and that A can be used 1br your pruEposes. Similarly. water nlav be obtained from it water purveyor such as a
Q or a acuter district that delivers wmer under an existing water right.
2. Ifayalilable, nater may be acquired by obtaining al new as aler-right permit for surf?ace hater or &floU ldmater.
3. Ceriain walcr uses are authorized through Qe�uon law as "exeml)t" from the need for a water ri��.ht. N100 ini�urrnaatiun
about exempt uses is plM idcd holo"! . Check NMh your aaaterulaster to make sure your use qualifies.
-i_ Thcre can be oder oNwris to oNain water aside h nl oht"Ang a no" right to swilace water or groundwater. In stmt:
case,,. a Ali Icparnucnt a])prrrval. a w ucr rig& iron) another property can be transferred to a neer parcel, or mored
as iter that is ,jumd during the "ywr and spring can help provide a supply. Talk, to your wall rnrlster about options,.
Ntl'hat else should you knots about the use of Your nater right'?
(:)nce you have a water risht, nuke sure that you comply with the condition: an the right. It is guoef idea to
cheek with your aaatermaster to understand the conditions. AVater rights arc issued fora particular place of use. I} PC of
use. and point al divcrsiun. 1' aWi rights ,also have limits on the anlonnt of water that can he used. and may include
lrallitatlolls oil the season of uNC. Y01JI a �'alcYIlalstet' Carl ])oil) you to understand the (Calls of use oil A'ollr- aa'ater right.
If you avant to change how the water is being used (for example, front field irrigakirl to a greenhouse 1. check iOth vtaur
walerrnaster to make sure that the change fits %vhhin your existi+lg eater right. in sr,nlc instances vgiu inay need to a,btain
approval from the Depaalnlent through a process called a transfer. In addition. there play be limits on the mind" than the
nater can he used. AVater
right, nam) be subject to forfeitUm if�not used fur five c(msectitile years.
In additiom there may be times v\,here three is not enough water for ever) nater user who holds a water right. 111 times o1
sh<)rtaL,e_ the sctlior user is eniillcd to recci c all of his or her water, hciore a junior user. For example. a scninr user with a
priorit) date of 1010 can make a call for waW% anti users with a junior date Who IQ I0 for this exaunNe) nmy be wgulattcd
NY in order to satisfy that senior right. l'ou should talk with your local ivalern)asier to andersland hoaafrequently
regulation is likely to occur. No that qni can plain your operations accurdin&. hic:.ihhnyh Om',:
<In gni rri�rairaa perarr;l, tht' it t -Il Haut- hi ° strhjr<; to r( rrd<Niou li?w an ntrv< r arut(r rti,,ht in lilacc r>(;volt s170170!,'t.
1jujV do I obtain a %%ater right permit in the State of Oregon?
\1.1 cyclo ri.dhts are Obtained in a three-ste) process. The applicant firm must apply fo the• Deparunent for a permit to use
water. (hlce a permit is ;granted. the apphclym must construct a wvater system and begin using wwcr. Ann. water k applied,
the permit holder mutt hire a certified watera ight examiner to complete a survey of water use (a map and a report
detailing ]how and avhere aaater has been applied). 1f tauter has been used accordir)g to the provisions ()I� the permit. the
Depatlnlent mill issue a water -right certificate.
APPENDIX P
10642&5 Page 1 of 2
what sources of water are exempt from the perrnittNg press and how can file grater he used`'
V, N loraI springs: INC of a spriltg Ilial, armee natural conditions, dots not forma nauual channel and flmv offll`c
property Micle it ori ,inrltes ai any tint; of the year is considered excnipt frons the need to obtain a ""ter right C hal,
"As yita "Wermaster to determine ifyour spring quajifics liar the exemption.
c Rainm ater: Collodion and use tW Wriwater thmn an artificial impervious surface. such as :a rottf. i, ctntsidered
cxcmpt front a vvltel-right. For more ill formal ion- rcfcr to ORS 537.1.11. Clwck »vitit your imcrmaslcr Io
We sure that your raim alcr s}stem is pwperly set up to meet this exemption. You ntav alsta need to check ole local
ret_)11121ions With your county all(Por City.
* Exempt use of groun(INN ater for non -irrigation -related commerdaWndustrial purposes: Linder die exemption. V
to WO gallon; per day could be asci or commcreial or itldusWal use whhout a "Vcr right. This ""Wd inclutic
11l'occstag lllarltl.lalla; ho1', e1Yl', this CXCmptAM An, Wn include water to p)olnotc plant growth/cultivation
0 Exempt use of ; mundmater for one-half acre of noel -commercial lati n
:and garden: w.itcr fear cultic <atior` rawd of marijuana. Whcr in a
:�recsnhouse or not, floes not 1wiLlire a Waley Ii& permit peelv kkd tl M the
irrit=ation is no more than one-Nallacre in area ANO the cultivation is now
c0111P7erc ir7l. Us( a here,' shear i,
p,h,l 1, jawyo jko um ywagAw a ivia r uacr exel77jnitJro. Now
conimercial includes home,=rotix�n recreational marijuana and medical
marijuana for personal usc, or 4> here there is no intent to profit. Medical
prowrrs that seek to make a profit from medical or recreational nlarijuana
are not eligible ter this exernpdon. For example. an individual that gm s
nlarijuam and donates it to patients and dispensaries could quahQ Rw Ow
exeruption. Con\ersciv. an individual Am grows marijuana and is
reimbursed for the Co Sts ofIllc production and labor— intelldin<, to make
nxmc;'- rrrnr(tfnut yutllif)'-
(in syater he obtained from a federal i%ater project?
A'Qr1.': This is not a ct)1771Ric
list elf (svcvlJ)fions, hul 1-whel,
IiSts those most l)L'1'fi1h"d fn
thegroirtl7 tindIlrodla-lion o/
mfirijmnw. Like an,r eroj). the
gvor th of nuwr hnlna 1nr
ccrn7nlrr(�irll i)ut/xlsee, whether
mtt' howl yr re'cre'cniowd. i.; 1701
elf/Ela° lin',r,>rnnntln'afer
t'.lY'll7f J71
ons,
i -he lederalgovernmenl is resporlsibic for dctcrnaininu, whcahcr water front their projects can be used tot*ruin natlntuan; 1,
Previous suucmcttts by the federal t mTmment indicate that use of I3urcau of�Redwriation wM r Wr the purpose of
=rowog marijuana is prohihilwi. Contact file I3urcau of" Reclamation or your irrigation district for illole iliformatit'll
Who is Illy waterrnaster?
`\top of 1\ ata nwstvr I )i,u lCls
DOW I
I WrA 2
14nrct 3 541-506-2052
It ,71t li l
7)Ii1riG1 S S-tl-27S-ti-}jG � tJ
541063-HOI
i)iarict '
541-420-4464 1
-l4! ' N ( ,
I)isn ice
541-473-5130
Iii trt'i llr 541 `,>-2591
1)i nlel I': 541 .06-610 tt
541047003S f, �
L)t,n'icr I 541 S74VS80
1)isrrrct 14
541-4"9-2_101WAS; 15 ���•
., f K5
ar.i-t)86-t 1K" l
1)iari�t It;
I)i,u ici l � 541083-41 2 { 1
;tt3-s46--R`tt
i istrrctlt utt:itt� r
rI
i.)t�.uici Ito -t1 '96-tt
I)isu�icl _n � - 503-/22-14Io0 �
F) i, r net 21 ---
3OMW2ol5 Page 2 of 2
Attachment E — Public Comments
This page intentionally left blank.
From: Liz Russell
To: Isabella Liu; Tammy Banev; Tony DeBone; Phil Henderson
Subject: 4725 NE Oneil Way, proposed marijuana production site
Date: Tuesday, April 17, 2018 2:39:05 PM
My family and I moved to the Terrebonne area three years ago because we wanted some land,
we liked the area and we really loved that our neighbors were good ranching and farming
families. In the three years that we have lived here we have found this area and community
to be so welcoming and feel so fortunate to feel safe because we know we are surrounded by
good honest people. It is a great area to raise a family and I love knowing that my children are
safe here.
We also love that we are close to Smith Rock, Terrebonne and fun family tourist places like
the two pumpkin patches and the alpaca ranch. Hearing that someone wants to put a marijuana
grow into this small rural community is very upsetting to me. This is not an area or a
community that is welcoming or conducive to drugs. I know I speak for my family and a
majority of our neighbors, that we feel that despite the fact that marijuana is legal, it is a drug
and it is something we want kept out of our area.
There is no room for marijuana in our community. We don't welcome people using it around
here and we definitely don't welcome people growing it because they are encouraging the
users. It's been shown time and time again that marijuana is a gateway drug and the type of
people who grow and use marijuana are not the type of people I want anywhere near my home
or my family.
This is a very safe community. Farmers, ranchers, families and people who love the beauty of
smith rock and this area live and work here. This a community where people don't have to
lock their doors and for the most part we don't worry about crime. Sure there are the
occasional occurrences but they're rare. Addicts will do just about anything to get drugs,
whether that means stealing, breaking in or just hanging around the property. I don't want that
type of place in our safe community because it will eventually attract people who will do
anything to get their drugs.
This is also a tourist community. Smith Rock brings in so many people each year which boost
our local economy. The two pumpkin patches are overflowing with families during the fall
season each year and there are many other small local businesses as well. I feel that this
marijuana grow would have a negative impact on those businesses. I know I try my very best
to stay away from the local dispensaries in Central Oregon which means I've taken business
elsewhere from places that are next to a dispensary. If this grow is approved there will be
people like myself who will take their business elsewhere.
I know many people who have avoided buying property in the alfalfa area because of the
marijuana grows there. It's an area that unfortunately isn't appealing to families, farmers or
average people anymore. The Terrebonne area has great property values and they continue to
rise. It would be very unfortunate if Terrebonne's real estate market was impacted in the way
that Alfalfa's has been.
It is very disappointing to me to even learn that someone would want to bring a marijuana
grow to our little community. It's also disappointing that this person purchased the property
and then applied as if expecting to be approved. What will they do if they are denied? Will it
be their residence? Will they sell it? If they are approved, how many more of these production
sites will also be approved? Will it become what Terrebonne is known for much like what has
happened in Alfalfa?
Would you like to live down the road from a marijuana grow? Would you like to worry about
what type of people will start frequenting the area that you live? Drugs are big money and
from what I've observed they bring a lot of problems and a lot of crime. We don't need either
of those in our community. We ask that you consider the families who live here, the farmers
and ranchers who have been here for decades, the local businesses and little community when
you make your decision.
Sincerely,
Liz Russell
From: Zach Russell
To: Isabella Liu
Cc: Tammy Banev; Tony DeBone; Phil Henderson
Subject: proposed marijuana production site on 4725 NE ONeil Way
Date: Tuesday, April 17, 2018 6:44:37 AM
Commissioners,
Please take the time and think for the moment of LAW versus ETHICS.
I understand our laws have allowed these marijuana grows in our community. And I
understand you are faced with making decisions on what is allowed to exist within our
community based on law. But my question to you all is... "As a county commissioner, at what
point can your morale compass justify a decision based on concerns for the safety of our
community?"
Personally, I am against the drug. I don't like the drug. I believe it is the "introduction drug"
into the nasty drug world. There are studies to prove it. And we all have friends or family that
we try to help because they have fallen into the drug swamp. It is such a gray area in society
because its legal in our state, but is illegal at the federal level. Explain that to a kid... and we
wonder why society sucks.
I have been in Central Oregon my whole life. I work hard, I play hard, and I am a family
man. We love this place we call HOME. I am raising children out here in this community, the
setting in which I have always dreamed for my kids to grow up. And now my wife and I are
faced with the fact of living next to a marijuana grow! It sucks. It sucks that we even have the
fight. I will do my best to educate my children on the demons of drugs. And do my best to
explain to them that the neighbors that grow marijuana might be good people (if this gets
approved), but stay away from them because it's against our ethical beliefs.
My family does not want a marijuana grow down the street from our home. I do not know
what your personal belief is on this issue. If you are against marijuana grows, please fmd your
morale compass to guide you in your decisions you make for our community.
Respectfully,
Zach Russell
This page intentionally left blank.
Attachment F —Applicant's Rebuttal
This page intentionally left blank.
From: Curt Roaers
To: Isabella Liu
Cc: Jeremy Dickman; Jennifer Clifton
Subject: Response Letter To Appeal Hearing
Date: Thursday, April 19, 2018 8:43:35 AM
Attachments: Swamp Fox Farm Appeal Hearing Response.pdf
Izze,
Good morning.
Please find attached a letter which I felt compelled to send to wrap up our final
thoughts on the hearing last week.
I hope that the Commissioners will be able to view it. There are many emotions going
around the marijuana issues in both Deschutes County and the rest of the US.
Mr. Henderson asked if I had ever been in the marijuana business, which I answered
truthfully- I have not. I am coming into the industry as a registered Republican -
business person, not someone who has been hiding in the shadows working illegally.
Isn't this a better background for a potential licensee in Deschutes County giving the
distrust towards the industry?
Anyway if it can be forwarded great, if not I still want it out there.
Thanks so much and have a great weekend!
Curt Rogers
Phone 843.296.7438
Fax 866.599.2585
April 19, 2018
Izze Liu
Deschutes County Community Development
117 NW Lafayette Avenue
Bend, OR 97701
Izze,
Thank you for the time you have spent in dealing with our application. I have worked with local
governments in different capacities throughout my professional career. It is my opinion you
represented yourself, your department and Deschutes County with an uncommonly high level of
professionalism and unbiased focus on facts and details.
I wanted to also take the time during the final phase of our application to make a few points that
I hope will go on the record in response to our hearing last week.
Our actions and words are respectful of others- The representation we had for our side
of the argument made their points in an orderly and professional manner. This is what I
requested and expected. We did not interrupt the Commissioners or those who fell on the other
side of the discussion. From the beginning we have respected the requirements and procedures
we were asked to follow, in the same way we will respect the laws and conditions as a licensee if
we are granted approval to move forward.
Lawsuit Pending- Mrs. Sanders and her daughter have since the day they received the NOA,
refused to talk with me regarding what occurred in the only meeting we had in October. As I said
in a letter to you on December 18, 2017 and again was quoted in the Bend Bulletin on January
30, 2o18, I am sorry Mrs. Sanders felt she was misled. It was not my intention. Why would I
mislead her when obviously it was going to be public knowledge what I was doing? Also on both
of these documented pieces I made it clear that I would drop the easement since she felt she was
wronged. I did not and have not, as I have been accused of since November 9, 2017, act in a way
that was fraudulent or abusive.
Mrs. Sanders and her daughter, represented by Mr. Fitch, felt it necessary to file a lawsuit
seeking damages of $1o,000 and the removal of electrical services to my property, even after we
made it clear that the easement would be withdrawn. I believe the lawsuit is frivolous and is an
attempt to damage my reputation and blackmail me into dropping my legal and compliant
business. We have attempted to settle the case, but the attempt was denied because I would not
voice or pen an admission of fraud or guilt. The refusal to work through this admission of guilt is
a continuing attempt to pirate my family's future in Oregon.
Mrs. Sanders and her daughter have also named CEC and the past owner of the property in this
lawsuit. The previous owner has nothing to do with what we are doing on his property. We paid
him his asking price and he is moving on with his life as he should be able to. He has no
involvement in our business as the Sanders have claimed in one of the many arguments against
Swamp Fox Farm.
Electrical Power is available- CEC has issued a will serve letter for (2) 800 AMP services
that I am told will have no impact on Mrs. Sanders and her daughter's property. We adjusted
our plans and significantly increased the cost of our start-up by using LED lighting to reduce our
power needs so we would not upset these neighbors. The service will run from our shared
property line to my buildings on power poles that have exisited since 1941 as evidenced by this
photo taken last week after our hearing.
CEC has informed me that they will not have to access Mrs. Sanders' property to increase our
power from 200 AMP service to (2) 800 AMP services.
Appellant No Show- After our hearing, I reached out to one of the other appellants who filed
a letter with the county. We had met with them a few weeks after they filed the appeal. They met
my family and we all discussed our plans for the property and how we will operate as good
neighbors. I asked why they had not shown for the hearing and was told that, because they felt
we were going to be good neighbors who respected others' property rights, they did not believe it
was necessary to speak at the hearing.
In closing Izze, please move forward with our application. We are not bad people and we want
relocate to Oregon to be good law abiding citizens. If we need to meter our residential well, we
will do it. If we need to have monthly inspections, we will do it. We are coming to Oregon to be
the same good citizens we are here. We love the area and the people. We respect others and their
property. We are just like most anyone else in Oregon. When operating as a legal entity and
following the rules, we don't like to be told what we can and can't do because someone wants to
force their differing opinions. This could have been handled differently, but others malicious
attempts to intimidate me and my family, and the seller who is an uninvolved party, have forced
our hand to defend ourselves.
We respect our neighbors and the laws that make a community safe and one that we want to
raise our family in.
Curt Rogers
Lee Property Management, LLC
Swamp Fox Farm, LLC
CEA
CONSUMNG
E N GNI` E` IRS
April 9, 2018
Lee Property Management
Attn: Curt Rogers
Re: 4725 Oneil Way Sound Measurements
Dear Curt:
5(),6 iii .. ST RI, E , SUITr
BENI.), OREGON 97701
We visited your property on Friday April 6th at 3:30pm to conduct sound measurements at your property
lines. The following information summarizes our findings.
Ambient Conditions
• Periodic traffic on State Route 370 (Oneil Highway) which borders your south property line.
• Per Redmond Airport readings the winds were 8mph with 20 mph max and 25 mph gusts.
• There was no machinery or other sound producing events that were noticed during our visit.
Sound Measurements
Measurements averaged over approximately one minute or the minimum reading during an event.
1. West Property Line
a. 42 dbA, no traffic and light winds
b. 50 dbA, car traffic and light winds
c. 55 dba, truck traffic and light winds
2. North Property Line
a. 42 dbA, no traffic and light winds
b. 52 dbA, no traffic and moderate winds
c. 62 dbA, truck traffic and moderate winds
3. East Property Line — Bounded by canal berm
a. 40dba, no traffic and light winds
b. 50dbA, car traffic and light winds
4. South Property Line adjacent to Highway
a. 70dbA, car traffic, moderate winds
b. 80dbA, truck traffic, moderate winds
Summary
The readings above show that in the absence of other events, the 2 main influences are highway traffic
and the wind with its effects on trees and other obstructions. The property line you share with your
neighbor to the north is approximately 1350 feet from the highway. The residence of your neighbor to
C Ix: A
CONSULPING
I ST
BEND, OREGON 97701
the west is approximately 1050 feet from the highway at the closest point. Both locations will be
affected by traffic on the highway. We can see that this can be as much as 60dbA with truck traffic and
moderate winds. To have a chance to reach 30db, it appears it would take a totally calm day with no
highway traffic.
1. Total individuals admitted to jail (each person counted once and please identify time period —12
months is preferred)
2. Total number of admission during same period — (one individual can be counted more than once)
please use same time period
3. Out of the total number of individuals booked at the jail during the identified time period, list the
number of the following. If the number is unknown, put estimated %
a. # or % of individuals having both mental health and substance use problems?
b. # or % of individuals identified as having a substance use problem?
c. # or % of individuals having both mental health and substance use problems?
d. How many have pre-release planning — Plans to connect them to support services in the
community # or %
e. How many people are held for forensic review?
For those who are identified as persons with mental health, substance abuse or both
4. What percent of ail Person crimes committed by the target population?
S. What percent of all Property Crimes?
6. What percent of all "other" crimes?
7. Please list the most common type of Other crimes committed by this population.
Length of stay for each episode in jail for target population:
8. % less than 1 week
9. % more than a week and up to a month
10. % Between 1 and 6 months
11. % 6 to 12 months
12. % more than a year
13. # or % of people left the jail with financial benefits or entitlements in place?
14. # or %of a left the jail with a shelter as the identified residence?
15. # or % people had no known residence?
16. # or % of people left the jail with an appointment at a mental health or other treatment service?
17. # or % How many people with mental illness had contact with a helping professional from the
community to facilitate reentry?
For the entire population of persons booked into jail during the identified time period (open or closed
cases):
18. Of those with a mental health issues:
a. What percent are frequent users of the ER?
b. What percent are engaged in the mental health system of care?
c. What percent receive acute crisis services?
19. Of those with substance use disorders:
a. What percent are frequent uses of the ER?
b. What percent use community-based additions treatment services?
c. What percent need detox?
d. What percent need residential treatment?
20. What discipline do you representative? Criminal Justice, Behavioral Health, Judicial, Other