2018-488-Minutes for Meeting October 24,2018 Recorded 11/8/201801 ES C,
BOARD OF
COMMISSIONERS
1300 NW Wall Street, Bend, Oregon
(541) 388-6570
Recorded in Deschutes County CJ2018-477
Nancy Blankenship, County Clerk
Commissioners' Journal 11/08/2018 2:00:02 PM
12[1010 1111E11 11 11111111111 111
FOR RECORDING STAMP ONLY
WORK SESSION MINUTES
1:30 PM WEDNESDAY, October 24, 2018 ALLEN CONFERENCE ROOM
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 Sharon Keith, Board Executive Assistant. Several citizens and representatives of the media
were in attendance.
CALL TO ORDER: Chair DeBone called the meeting to order at 1:32 p.m.
ACTION ITEMS
1. Public Safety Campus Master Plan
Facilities Director Lee Randall, Community Justice Director Ken Hales, Sheriff
Shane Nelson, and Dr. George Conway presented the near term options for
the Public Safety Campus Master Plan. Discussions began last fall working
with the Deschutes County 911, Community Justice, Sheriff's Office, Health
Services and the Oregon State Police. Mr. Randall reviewed each
department's near-term space needs and parking areas. The plan for the
campus includes a remodel of the Programs Building near the Jail currently
occupied by Adult Parole & Probation to be utilized for the Stabilization
Center (Crisis and Sobering). Cost estimates were included in the
BOCC \NORK SESSION
OCTOBER 24, 2018 PAGE 1 OF 4
presentation and Finance Director Wayne Lowry reported on budget
considerations. Commissioner Baney asked to remember the partnership
with Crook and Jefferson Counties with the WEBCO funds ($1,000,000) that
have been dedicated to this project and the need to honor the partnership.
A tri -county discussion will be schedule to review the project and the funding
coverage into the future. Mr. Randall reviewed the project timelines for
development and construction. A project team meets regularly to discuss
the next steps. A financing plan and funding options will be presented to
the Board. The Board expressed support in proceeding with the project.
2. Request to Extend Written Record for Appeal, Marijuana Production at
63775 Diamond Forge Road, Bend - Consideration of Order No. 2018-068
Peter Gutowsky, Community Development Department and Adam Smith,
Assistant Legal Counsel presented this item for discussion. Mr. Gutowsky
presented an email received from the applicant. The issue concerns whether
the record can be reopened so that the applicant can provide additional
technical data responsive to concerns raised by the Board during the public
hearing. Staff have asked Mr. Anderson to clarify whether he is agreeing to
toll the clock. To date, Mr. Anderson has submitted an unclear response.
The period for written testimony closed 48 hours ago. Deliberations will be
scheduled for November 5, 2018.
OTHER ITEMS:
• Peter Gutowksy, Community Development Department reported on the
Caldera Springs decision that could be presented on for consideration on the
October 31 agenda but wouldn't be available for the agenda packets until
Friday which is past the deadline. The delay is occasioned due to untimely
submission of the draft findings by Caldera's attorney.
BOCC WORK SESSION
OCTOBER 24, 2018 PAGE 2 OF 4
COMMISSIONER UPDATES
• Commissioner Baney met with members of Walden's office today and they
are researching affordable housing needs.
• Commissioner Henderson met with Walden this past week regarding historic
hotel project in Redmond and opioids and Mosaic Medical.
• Commissioner DeBone attended the Biomass Summit last Friday in
Prineville.
• Commissioner Henderson attended the Solid Waste Advisory Committee
meeting yesterday.
• Commissioner DeBone recently spoke to the cadets at the Oregon Youth
Challenge.
• Commissioner DeBone will attend an AOC budget meeting on November 2
and will report back. Commissioner Henderson will be at the budget
discussions at the AOC Conference in Eugene. Discussion held on the
Eastern Oregon Counties membership and will need further conversation.
OTHER ITEMS Continued:
• County Administrator Anderson reported on the recruitment for Fair and
Expo Director. The job description will be revised. A convention center
manager will also be considered. Mr. Anderson spoke to the Fair Board for
their input.
• County Administrator Anderson reported the finalists for the 911 after action
review proposals.
• Deputy County Administrator Kropp reported that Brightside Animal Shelter
in Redmond is requesting a $225,000 grant from the County. A letter will be
BOCC WORK SESSION
OCTOBER 24, 2018 PAGE 3 OF 4
sent thanking them for the request and sharing information on our
discretionary grant application process.
EXECUTIVE SESSION:
At the time of 3:41 p.m. the Board went into Executive Session under ORS 192.660
(2) (d) Labor Negotiations and ORS 192.660 (2) (h) Litigation. The Board came out of
Executive Session at 4:10 p.m.
ADJOURN
Being no further items to come before the Board, the meeting was adjourned at 4:10 p.m.
DATED this
Commissioners.
ATTEST:
Day of VO ✓e04'11 2018 for the Deschutes County Board of
RE ORDING SECRETARY
BOCC WORK SESSION
ANTHONY DEBONE, CHAIR
PHILIP CIa ENDERSON, VICE CHAIR
TAMMY BAN EY,
OCTOBER 24, 2018
MISSIONER
PAGE 4 OF 4
Deschutes County Board of Commissioners
1300 NW Wall St, Bend, OR 97703
(541) 388-6570 - www.deschutes.org
WORK SESSION AGENDA
DESCHUTES COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
1:30 PM, WEDNESDAY, OCTOBER 24, 2018
Allen Conference Room - Deschutes Services Building, 2ND Floor - 1300 NW Wall Street - Bend
Work Session, which are open to the public, allow the Board to gather information and give direction to staff.
Public comment is not normally accepted. Written minutes are taken for the record
Pursuant to ORS 192.640, this agenda includes a list of the main topics that are anticipated to be considered or
discussed. This notice does not limit the Board's ability to address other topics.
Meetings are subject to cancellation without notice.
CALL TO ORDER
ACTION ITEMS
1. Public Safety Campus Master Plan - Lee Randall, Facilities Director
2. Request to Extend Written Record for Appeal, Marijuana Production at 63775
Diamond Forge Road, Bend - Consideration of Order No. 2018-068 - Peter Gutowsky,
Planning Manager
COMMISSIONER'S UPDATES
EXECUTIVE SESSION
At any time during the meeting an executive session could be called to address issues relating to ORS
192.5660(2)(e); real property negotiations; ORS 192.660(2)(h) litigation; ORS 192.660(2)(d), labor
negotiations; ORS 192.660(2)(b); personnel issues; or other executive session categories. Executive sessions
are closed to the public; however ,with few exceptions and under specific guidelines, are open to the public.
Board of Commissioners Work Session Agenda
of 2
Wednesday, October 24, 2018 Page 1
OTHER ITEMS
These can be any items not included on the agenda that the Commissioners with to discuss as part of the
meeting pursuant to ORS 192.640.
ADJOURN
Deschutes County encourages persons with disabilities to participate in all programs and
activities. To request this information in an alternate format please call (541) 617-4747.
FUTURE MEETINGS:
Additional meeting dates available at www.deschutes.org/meetingcalendar
Meeting dates and times are subject to change. If you have question, please call (541) 388-6572.
Board of Commissioners Work Session Agenda
of 2
Wednesday, October 24, 2018 Page 2
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 Work Session of October 24, 2018
DATE: October 18, 2018
FROM: Lee Randall, Facilities, 541-617-4711
TITLE OF AGENDA ITEM:
Public Safety Campus Master Plan
IES
F OUTIE D IAR NT
Date: October 24, 2018
To: Board of County Commissioners
From: Lee Randall, Facilities Director
Re: Public Safety Campus Master Plan—Near Term Options
In November of 2017 a project team was assembled to create a master plan for the public
safety campus which serves 9-1-1, Community Justice, Sheriff's Office, Health Services, and
Oregon State Police. The central aims of the project are to create a long term plan that would
utilize the remaining acreage in an efficient manner, and to address near-term space and
operational needs.
Through the winter and spring of 2018, the team met with stakeholders to identify shared
needs, prepared near, mid, and long-term options, and created draft site plans. In May of 2018
we presented an update to the Board on the progress made to that point in time.
On August 22nd we presented a concept to consolidate Adult Parole & Probation operations in
the building currently shared with the Sheriff's Office Work Center by expanding the 2nd floor
over a single -story area currently occupied by the Work Center. The plan would also remodel
an under-utilized area of the 1" floor to meet current and near-term Work Center operational
requirements.
This consolidation would allow the Programs Building near the Jail (currently occupied by Adult
P&P) to be remodeled for utilization as the Stabilization Center (Crisis and Sobering). A shop
building could be added near the existing Juvenile Detention facility to accommodate
Community Justice service programs which currently utilize a garage space attached to the
Programs Building.
Since the update in August, the team has further refined the site plan, met with stakeholders to
verify program requirements and potential remodel concepts, and created project budget
estimates.
Our goal is to seek the Board's direction in regard to a near-term scope of work which could
include the following:
14 NW Kearney Avenue, Bend, Oregon 97703 1 P.O. Box 6005, Bend, 00 97708-6005
t2" (541) 330-4686
www.desc.hutes.org
FAMMES E DEPARTMENT
• Construction of, an expanded 2nd floor of the shared Adult P & P/Work Center facility to
consolidate Adult P & P operations
• Minor remodel of the Work Center to meet current and near-term operational needs
• Remodel of the Programs Building for use as a Stabilization Center (Crisis and Sobering)
• Construction of shop building for use by Community Justice service programs
These near term options represent changes that could accommodate near-term future growth
while providing for current operational requirements. This proposal aligns with a long-term
public safety campus master plan which the team continues to refine and will be presented to
Board at a future work session.
14 NW Kearney Avenue, Bend, Oregon 97703 ( P.O. Box 6005, Bend, 00 97708-6005
(541) 330-4686
www.deschuLes.org
{E} VEHICLE
MAINTENANCE
E
(E) EMERGENCY
SERVICES
a OF I
j gr rm
ADULT P & P
SHERIFF'S
WORK CENTER
(E) SPELL SERVICES ..
TOA E.
XIS'I1NGS.O.
SECURE PAFtXI
AD ITIONAL.
SECURE PARKIN
(
(SHOWN
HATCHED)
(El MAINTENANCE
BUILDINGS
COMMUNITY POTENTIAL STREET
SERVICE SHOP ACCESS
TABILIZATION
ENTER STAFF
PARKING
fRFC1 S TF
1.e1 AC
0
n
tne
tra
r+
WSW g
e
s s
CD
1
CIO
4444
ag CT
wash
wash
•
1
•
CD
• •
1
1
1
dTh AIINIDIA aLIS
•,•
. o .
1 , ,
• . ! ,
M
. o .
z .
0
0
m * e
0
liwk 9?
0 *
— •
n n'
Ikewie
1/40
s
SNOIIICNOD ONIISIX3
CZ IT
EV) VI . rl
= ni �° rD
0 _
Lilv = 0 0 �D° c Co
rt M
rt- n < o n (D
M3 E o
o as l c rt C1J
1.11 flm3 �b3
.® < CO°� . �> 13
4--C rt eD 13) VIO. . c
in
_ o
fi > tD
dD o mon. DI SU
o Aem
o° : t tol �° =ro ° FD i
INITIAL STABILIZATION CENTER CONCEPT
1A -- • -
•
520
•
•
t
f8g E-62;
\ 17'
t ;
133,1SY111.5
VI -0
4-t-
cr 3
CL
0 n
rD
rD -
rD
3
5* 5 ---h
GrQ(D
rD
(-)
rD
•
6 g
#
z
-4
01
_ z _
CD
3
ft+
•
m
e—t•
0
a.)
0
(D
(D rD
a_
0
0
CD
OQ
5
CI)
0.)
•
m o rD
X
n
rD
rD
cr (1)
o Lflm--h
a) ;77
0- a)
("D
rD -00
c).3
CD n
rD rD
—
(--.1
rD 7
r)
74rt
' rD
3
a.)
111 al
(D
tn
rD
"Z3
L1)
--h
0 -0
—s
V) 0
Ore)
--f)
- -h
0
rDD
CL
rDrD
ro
3
rD
rD
0
0
74:
0
0
0
-D
er-t-
O.
CD
fD
0
:SCI33N IN3IALLIM3C1
11,
Lk)
r't C
r+
o- c
=-‚
0 3
CT
rD
r+
rD
NJ
rD
c
rD
Q.)
0.)
(--1
rD
rD
z
,-+
r -p- 0
rD
rD
0 —
a. 0-
rD 5-
(7) cm,
0
- -
1331115 Ygilie
mID
0
rib
CD
11)
LU.1 aJ -.I a N
O
3
0
0
9199
9
rb z
Q° rt) rb rtC4
(b. ton'.
cn
a001 ONO3
O 0
q
C)
NJ 1 in r) ro
rt) -0
rt rt
< 0v
'-
co
c
Ro
sio
CT
z
®ii
0
210013 ONO03S
NOI103S ONIO1If E
0
O
w0
00
r
■
O
0 O
0
O
r Co
rt
rq
crq rt)
cal
etcl
C.:)
rt
/y0
oQ
3
3
0
0
0
rt
O
r+
(D
. . . .
0 ri•
3
rm LT, =
..... ..._,
(.1 L, :?3 C)) r+
Lc)
,
-
rD
--_-' 3
---„ c ,
:„,_,, II
(. (---) a)
n 0 7.5 0
Un
0
=NM 0 0000i ED
VI
`‘‹
0 0
(16
....1
(`-` -%
0•••• 0 r+
71 , 001
-r.
, — rD
V) CT
1) (
Ill , , o 00? w
0
.- ,-----
0 01_
rD r, 3°
tsi
n
6
0
m
C0)
e%.".
0
0 CD
0
0
Total Estimated Cost for Near -Term Combined Option
pT
o
C.)
4(0
90
0
ANN"
• •
0
rt
1
rD
0)
rD
Fi*
rD
rsj0
<
0
(
0
3
0
Zrl
o
t
rmx
0
CD
m
BEN
it;
rit
DJ
�D
1
�D
'n
O
d1
O
a a
0
00 00
175
•••"..:)-‘ • —
uonDmasuoD parwd
.
rD
6-11.
- ,
00
" .,
CD St
rD
®m
0
r+
MIMS CO0
0
3
0
CL
"S
C!1
rD
CD
0
cu
MEMIN
( •
CL
as
rD
0
0
0
Lo,
rD0
0
V)
0
V)
rD
t®'F
A
c
CD
in
r•ii
0—.
N
.v
DESCHUTES COUNTY SAFETY COMPLEX
COST R.O.M.
architects
Area
Drw.
Ref.
SF
Total
Cost
Total Additional Information / Running Total
A Construction Costs
Major Remodel - 2nd Floor
Minor Remodel - 2nd Floor
Building Addition - 2nd Floor
A2.2 3,596 SF $ 160.00 $575,360 finishes, MEP, stair reconfiguration_
A2.2 3:882 SF $ 100.00 $388,200 50% demo, space reconfig., finish work, utilities to
remain, minor MEP
Second Floor Expansion over Exist. Roof. Provide
structural components such as columns and footings
A2.2 5,986 SF $ 280.00 $1,676,080 on the first floor of the Adult P&P building as required
in order to support new construction on the second
floor (see structural SD package).
80% demo, space reconfig., relocate/add restrooms,
Al Total Building Costs 13,464 SF $2,639,640
A2 Contingency 15% Of Line Al $395,946
A3 Escalation 6% Of Line Al+A2 $182,135
A4 General Conditions, insurance, bond 10% Of Line Al+A2+A3 $321,772
A5 GC oh&p 5% Of Line A1+A2+A3+A4 $176,975
A6
Total Construction Costs
$3,716,468
B Soft Cost
B1 A&E, permits, fees, inspections
25%
Of Line Al +A2+A3
$804,430
C Interior Costs
C1 Fumiture, Fixtures and movable equipment
0% Of Line A6
$0 F,F & E cost not included in scope.
13 Total Project Costs
Total Construction Costs A6 $3,716,468
Total Soft Costs B1 $804,430
Total Interior Costs C1
$0
Total Project Costs
$4,520,898 $4,520,898
Al
Minor Remodel - 1st Floor
A2.1
2
1.227 SF $ 100.00 $122,700 Minur doi .,, wet.. ICI.UI Iflg., til liSh w.lk, utilities to
remain, minor MEP
Total Building Costs 1,227 SF $122,700
A2 Contingency 15% Of Line Al $18,405
A3 Escalation 6% Of Line Al+A2 $8,466
A4 General Conditions, insurance, bond 10% Of Line A1+A2+A3 $14,957
A5 GC oh&p 5% Of Line Al+A2+A3+A4 $8,226
A6
Total Construction Costs
$172,755
B Soft Cost
B1 A&E, permits, fees, inspections
25% Of Line Al+A2+A3
$37,393
C interior Saasts
Cl Furniture, Fixtures and movable equipment
0%
Of Line A6
$0 F,F & E cost not included in scope.
• Total Project Costs
Total Construction Costs
A6 $172,755
Total Soft Costs
Total Interior Costs
B1 $37,393
Cl 80
Total Project Costs
$210,148 $4,731,046
Cost Model 10.20.18 (2) BLRB Architects
Deschutes County Master Planning 10/20/2018
DESCHUTES COUNTY SAFETY COMPLEX
COST R.O.M.
architects
Area
Drw.
Ref.
SF
Total
88
Cost
Total Additional Information / Running Total
A Construction Costs
Major Remodel
P5 - Paving & Drainage
90% demo, space reconfig., relocate/add restrooms.
A2.3 4,956 SF $ 180.00 $892,080 add floor @ garage, finishes @ entirety of building
interior. The building will be re -purposed for use as
the new Deschutes County Stabilization Center
A1.0 7,952 SF $
5.50 $43,736 New asphalt -paved parking / drive aisles with
required drainage.
Al Total Building Costs 12,908 SF $935,816
A2 Contingency 15% Of Line Al $140,372
A3 Escalation 6% Of Line Al+A2 M ` $64,571
A4 General Conditions, insurance, bond 10% Of Line Al+A2+A3 $114,076
A5 GC oh&p 5% Of Line Al+A2+A3+A4 $62,742
A6 Total Construction Costs $1,317,577
B Soft Cost
51 A&E, permits, fees, inspections
25% Of Line Al+A2+A3 $285,190
C .Interior Costs.
01 Furniture, Fixtures and movable equipment
0% Of Line A6 $0 F,F & E cost not included in scope.
D Total Project Costs
Total Construction Costs
Total Soft Costs
Total Interior Costs
A6 $1,317.577
01 $285,190
Cl $0
Total Project Costs
$1,602,767 $6.333,813
A Construction Costs
Al
New Shop Building
P3 - Paving & Diainaye
Provide pre -fabricated steel or pole structure,
A1.0 1,000 SF $ 90.00 $90,000 insulated & heated steel building with two 14'-0" high
roll -up garage doors.
A1.0 4,890 SF $ 3.50 526,888 New asphalt -paved parking / drive aisles with
required drainage.
A2 Contingency
A3 Escalation
Total Building Costs
5.890
$116,895
5% Of Line Al $5,845
6% Of Line Al+A2 $7,364
A4 General Conditions, insurance, bond 10%
Of Line Al+A2+A3 $13,010
A5 GC oh&p 5% Of Line Al +A2+A3+A4 $7.156
A6
Total Construction Costs
$150,270
B Soft cost
01 A&E, permits, fees, inspections
25%
Of Line Al+A2+A3
$32,526
C Interior Costs
Cl Fumiture, Fixtures and movable equipment
0%
Of Line A6
$0 F,F & E cost not included in scope.
D Total.ProjecctCosts:
Total Construction Costs
A6
$150,270
Total Soft Costs
Total Interior Costs
01
$32,526
Cl
$0
Total Project Costs
$182,796 $6,516,610
Cost Model 10.20.18 (2) BLRB Architects
Deschutes County Master Planning 10/20/2018
DESCHUTES COUNTY SAFETY COMPLEX
COST R.O.M.
A Construction Costs
3 architects
Total Additional Information / Running Total
Al
A2
A3
A4
A5
A6
Security Fencing Type 1
Security Fencing Type 2
Security Fencing Type 3
Electronic Fencing Gate
P1 - Paving & Drainage
P2 - Paving & Drainage
P4 - Paving & Drainage
A1.0/ 50 LF $ 80.00 $4,000 Security fencing (16'-0" high, no -limb with razor wire
A2.1 at top)
Security fencing (8'-0" high with privacy slats, (3)
1,091 LF $ 53.00 $57,823 strands of barbed wire @ top) around additional
secured parking.
Security wall/fencing (8'-0" high, 8" thick CMU wall
A1.0/ 64 LF $ 240.00 $15,360 with 8'-0" high, no -climb above with razor wire at the
A2.1 top). 12LF under buildng does not include razor
wire.
A1.0/
A2.1
A1.0/
A2.1
A1.0/
A2.1
2 Unit $ 25,000.00 $50,000 Electronic rolling gate.
1,620 SF $ 5.50 $8,910 New asphalt -paved parking / drive aisles with
required drainage.
Al.0 6.794 SF $ 5.50 $37.367 New asphalt -paved parking / drive aisles with
required drainage.
A1.0 13,888 SF $ 5.50 $76.384 New asphalt -paved parking / drive aisles with
required drainage.
Total Site Costs
Contingency
Escalation
General Conditions. insurance, bond
GC oh&p
22,302
15% Of Line Al
6% Of Line Al+A2
10% Of Line Al+A2+A3
5% Of Line Al+A2+A3+A4
$249,844
$37,477
$17,239
$30,456
$16,751
Total Construction Costs
$351,767
B Soft Cost
B1 A&E, permits, fees, inspections
25% Of Line Al +A2+A3
$76,140
D Total Project Costs
Total Construction Costs
Total Soft Costs
A6
B
$351,767
$76,140
Total Project Costs
$427,907 $6,944,516
TOTAL DESCHUTES COUNTY SAFETY COMPLEX
86,944,516
Drawing References:
A1.0 - Near -Term Phasing Site Plan
A2.1 - First floor plan of the existing Adult P&P building
A2.2 - Second floor plan of the existing Adult P&P building
A2.3 - Floor Plan of existing Programs Buildling
Cost Model 10.20.18 (2) BLRB Architects
Deschutes County Master Planning 10/20/2018
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 Work Session of October 24, 2018
DATE: October 18, 2018
FROM: Peter Gutowsky, Community Development, 541-385-1709
TITLE OF AGENDA ITEM:
Request to Extend Written Record for Appeal, Marijuana Production at 63775 Diamond
Forge Road, Bend - Consideration of Order No. 2018-068
SUMMARY: On October 24, 2018, the Board of County Commissioners (Board) will consider
Order No. 2018-068 to extend the written record period following the public hearing on an
appeal of an Administrative Determination (AD) to establish marijuana production at 63775
Diamond Forge Road, Bend.
ATTENDANCE: Peter Gutowsky, Planning Manager
ES c
COM U 1TY DEN NEL MENT
STAFF MEMORANDUM
Date: October 24, 2018
To: Board of County Commissioners
From: Matthew Martin, AICP, Associate Planner
Re: Request to Extend Public Hearing Written Record (File Nos. 247 -18 -000766 -A/316 -AD)
On October 24, 2018, the Board of County Commissioners (Board) will consider Order No. 2018-068
(Attachment 1) to extend the written record period following the public hearing on an appeal of an
Administrative Determination (AD) to establish marijuana production at 63775 Diamond Forge
Road, Bend. On October 17, 2018, the applicant, Andrew Anderson, submitted the request to
extend the written record for 21 -days (Attachment 2). Deschutes County Code Chapter 22.24, Land
Use Action Hearings (Attachment 3) outlines the procedures for such a request. Specifically, Section
22.24.160(A) states, "The Hearings Body [Board] shall not reopen the record at the request of an
applicant unless the applicant has agreed in writing to an extension or waiver of the 150 -day time
limit." At the time of submission of this agenda item, the applicant has not submitted said written
agreement to extend the 150 -day time limit.
Attachments:
1. Order No. 2018-068
2. October 17, 2018, E -Mail from Andrew Anderson
3. Chapter 22.24. Land Use Action
REVIEWED
LEGAL COUNSEL
For Recording Stamp Only
BEFORE THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF DESCHUTES COUNTY, OREGON
An Order Re -opening the Public Hearing for the
Submittal of Written Materials in the De Novo
Hearing on File Numbers of 247 -18 -000361 -AD
and 247-18-000766-A
*
*
*
ORDER NO. 2018-068
WHEREAS, Appellants, Todd and Denese Fitzmaurice, appealed the administrative decision in
application number 247 -18 -000361 -AD; and
Whereas, the Board of County Commissioners ("Board") agreed to hear this appeal de novo under Order
No. 2018-062; and
WHEREAS, the Board conducted public hearings and established post -hearing periods, for the submittals
of written materials; and
WHEREAS, Applicant, Andrew Anderson, requests a re -opening of the public hearing record for the
submittal of written materials, and
WHEREAS, the Board has determined that additional testimony and information regarding this matter is
of paramount importance in this proceeding; and
WHEREAS, the Board may at its discretion reopen the record in accordance with DCC 22.24.160; and,
WHEREAS, Applicant, Andrew Anderson, agreed in writing to a 21 -day extension of the 150 -day time
limit in accordance with DCC 22.24.160(A) therefore,
THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF DESCHUTES COUNTY, OREGON, HEREBY
ORDERS as follows:
Section 1. The written record on file numbers 247 -18 -000361 -AD and 247-18-000766-A shall be
reopened for written evidence and argumentation.
Section 2. The written record for all parties for new evidence and argumentation is extended to 5:00
p.m. November 7, 2018, but only for written evidence and argumentation.
Section 3. The written record of all parties is extended to 5:00 p.m. November 14, 2018, but only
for response to the evidence and argumentation per Section 2.
Section 4. The written record for final argument by the applicant is extended to 5:00 p.m. November
21, 2018.
///
Page 1 of 2- ORDER NO. 2018-068
Section 5. The Planning Division shall give written notice to all parties that the record is being
reopened, in accordance with DCC 22.24.160(B)(2).
Dated this of , 2018 BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF DESCHUTES COUNTY, OREGON
ATTEST:
ANTHONY DEBONE, Chair
PHIIP G. HENDERSON, Vice Chair
Recording Secretary TAMMY BANEY, Commissioner
Page 2 of 2- ORDER NO. 2018-068
Matt Martin
From: Plantae Group <Plantaegroup@outlook.com>
Sent: Wednesday, October 17, 2018 4:57 PM
To: Matt Martin; Board
Cc: maryannecooper@oregonfb.org; matt@aspenlakes.com;
mrhughes@mrhugheslaw.com; Dave Hunnicutt
Subject: Re: Appeal - Marijuana Production at 63775 Diamond Forge Rd (file 247 -18 -000361 -
AD)
Peter/Matt,
Im formally requesting for the BOCC to clarify when the record shows that the "interpretation" of the odor
mitigation standards changed. Please provide a date and time as I'm sure if this changed there should be public
comment and a date and time of when staff was directed to change how they looked at this. I believe this was
done after my application at hand was submitted.
On Oct 17 2018 at 3:37pm Peter Gutowsky stated in our call that the 150 day time clock set by the legislature
wouldn't be met by the county if they granted me the 21 days that is required by the Colebreit engineering to
get the additional information
I have an email prior to my hearing Requesting I extend the time clock because the county wouldn't meet the
150 day deadline. I was also clearly being coerced towards extending this time clock as can be shown in my
public hearing as well. Then In a desperate attempt to force me to extend my time clock now I was asked in my
public hearing to provide additional information that takes an engineering company another 3 weeks and $2000
to provide.
This extra $2000 and the engineering report going from 3 pages to 70 pages was specific to Colebreit
Engineering at the request of the Deschutes County BOCC. Even though it's unreasonable and extremely unfair
I agreed to get the document and asked the BOCC and staff not to force me to push back my 150 day time clock
21 days as that's what the engineering company needs. The BOCC and staff denied this and said I need to stop
the time clock.
I submit under protest that due to being forced to either choose to to submit the information the BOCC
requested and extend the 150 day time clock OR not submit it and they will deny it for not complying with there
requests.
As a result I under protest request 21 additional days to get the documents in the record that the BOCC
REQUESTED, not because I need the time but because the BOCC is forcing me to do this or I won't be
following what they requested in my public hearing. I was setup for failure. Alls we want to do is run our
business and provide jobs, add economic value, and pay taxes. Why wouldn't the BOCC be supportive of this.
Your stopping us from doing this.
Either way I'm being forced to do something I shouldn't have to do.
1
I suspect I will provide this additional document which is already unreasonable and the BOCC will still deny it
for something else as that has and continues to be a trend.
Due to all the hostility the BOCC process has added my staff fears my neighbors. This should never happen and
it's truly sad this hostility was created by county rules and this type of environment.
Thanks in advance, Andrew Anderson
Sent from my iPhone
On Oct 17, 2018, at 10:44 AM, Matt Martin <Matt.Martin(c�deschutes.org> wrote:
Good Morning Andrew -
During the agreed upon 7 -day time period, you and other parties are afforded the opportunity to submit
any additional written testimony. A written request is required if you, the applicant, are interested in
additional time to submit testimony. Please refer to DCC 22.24, Land Use Action Hearings
(attached). DCC 22.24.140 identifies procedures to address a request by the applicant for a record
extension and DCC 22.24.160 identifies procedures to address a request by the applicant to reopen the
record. The applicable procedure depends on the timing and nature of the request. Please note that
both require the 150 -day clock to either be suspended or extended if the request is made by the
applicant.
Please confirm in the message below is your written request to extend the initial open written record
period. If so, 1 will present the request to the Board of Commissioners for consideration at the next
available meeting.
Matthew Martin, AICP I Associate Planner
t,_ �E� Tlv,ic n
<ImageOO1 ,png> 117 NW Lafayette Avenue 1 Bend, Oregon 97703
PO Box 6005 1 Bend, Oregon 97708
Tel: (541) 330-46201 www.deschutes.org/cd
<image002.png> <image003.png> <image004.png>
Disclaimer: Please note that the information in this email is an informal statement made in accordance with DCC 22.20.005 and shall
not be deemed to constitute final County action effecting a change in the status of a person's property or conferring any rights,
including any reliance rights, on any person.
From: Plantae Group <plantaegroup@outlook.com>
Sent: Wednesday, October 17, 2018 8:10 AM
To: Matt Martin <Matt.Martin@deschutes.org>
Cc: Mary Anne Cooper <maryannecooper@oregonfb.org>; Matt Cyrus <matt@aspenlakes.com>; Dave
Hunnicutt <dave@oia.org>
Subject: Re: Appeal - Marijuana Production at 63775 Diamond Forge Rd (file 247 -18 -000361 -AD)
Hey Matt,
I was curious what the cut off is for me to file this extension that I don't want to file but am
being forced to in order to meet the BOCC's additional information request?
2
As I've stated over and over I do NOT want to stop my time clock or file my extension, but as
I've been told by the BOCC they want additional information that wasn't being required at the
time i submitted my application in April.
I stated on the phone with you today that I was being forced to file this extension in order to
comply with what the BOCC has requested of me in my public hearing. You said I wasn't being
forced. I would like clarity on this. The facts are simple:
1. The BOCC requested I provide a second engineering report for odor From Colebreit
Engineering in addition to my first application after it was deemed complete.
2. They gave me 7 days to submit additional information. Colebreit engineering has stated that
they went from the 2-3 page document to a 60-70 page document after my application had been
submitted at a specific request of the Deschutes BOCC.
3. Unless I give the BOCC an additional engineering document they will deny my application.
4. This forces me to file an extension based on what the BOCC has demanded.
With these facts in mind how can I get my application approved by the BOCC without getting
this engineering report that will take 2-3 weeks and fling an extension to stop my 150 day
timeclock at the request of the BOCC?
The information requested by the BOCC (even though it was deemed complete already) for
another Odor control engineering report will take 2-3 weeks. The engineered report i provided
I don't want to file the extension but if i don't provide this my application will be denied.
I haven't asked for any variances or exceptions and obviously met all the criteria to get an
approval.
Why wouldn't the BOCC allow the time clock to keep running if they are requesting more
information after I was already approved?
The legislator didn't set the 150 day limit to approve applications so that the BOCC could hold
my application up they set it up to prevent exactly this and its being abused. For this reason I'm
requesting that the BOCC change my time frame to submit documents to 21 days from today
(without stopping the 150 day time clock) in order for me to comply with there request. This
timeframe takes this long because of the requests of the BOCC.
This is the only way I wouldn't be forced into stopping my time clock based off the BOCC
request.
Please let me know.
Thanks in advance,
Andrew Anderson
Plantaecroupa,outlook.com
Deschutes County Farm Bureau Board Member
Upper Deschutes Local Water Advisory Committee Member
OFB Production Committee Board Member
Alfalfa Valley Farms-CEO/Owner
3
Plantae Cannabis-CEO/Owner
DH Wholesale -Owner
Plantae Extracts -Owner
Happy and Baked -Owner
@alfalfavalleyfarms
@Plantaehealth
**NOTICE** This E-mail and the material attached with it constitute privileged and proprietary information. It is
intended for the exclusive use of the person indicated above. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby
notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution or the taking of any action in reliance on the contents of this
electronic information is strictly prohibited. If you have received this email by mistake, please reply to alert me and
then kindly delete the email. I do not waive any privilege by misdelivered email.
On Sep 19, 2018, at 8:05 AM, Matt Martin <matt.rnartindeschutes.org> wrote:
Good Morning Andrew -
I have confirmed with the Bulletin that we have until 11:30am today to cancel the
published notice. As noted below, your written request to provide additional time in
the 150 -day review period is needed to reschedule to a later date. Please let me know if
you have any questions or action on the schedule.
-Matt
From: Matt Martin
Sent: Tuesday, September 18, 2018 3:14 PM
To: 'Plantae Group' <Plantaegroup@outlook.com>
Subject: RE: Appeal - Marijuana Production at 63775 Diamond Forge Rd (file 247 -18-
000361 -AD)
Hi Andrew -
I called you a few minutes ago but could not leave a message. I had to initiated the
notice of public hearing for October 10, 2018, today to meet publishing and notice
deadlines. I have a call in to the Bend Bulletin to see if I can cancel the
notice. However, I am unable to schedule the hearing to a later date without you
agreeing in writing to extend the 150 -day review time period. In my review of the 150 -
day review time period and the Board's calendar, an extension of a minimum of 30 days
will provide time to schedule the hearing for the following week (10/17) and for the
board to render decision in early December. Please let me know if you have any
questions or if you desire to extend to review time period.
Matthew Martin, AICP I Associate Planner
<Image003.png> 117 NW Lafayette Avenue 1 Bend, Oregon 97703
PO Box 6005 1 Bend, Oregon 97708
Tel: (541) 330-46201 www.deschutes.org/cd
<image005.png> <image006.png> <image007.png>
4
Disclaimer.' Please note that the inforrnation in this email is an informal statement made in accordance with DCC
22.20.005 and shall not be deemed to constitute final County action effecting a change in the status of a
person's property or conferring any rights, including any reliance rights, on any person.
From: Plantae Group <Plantaegroup@loutlook.com>
Sent: Tuesday, September 18, 2018 2:07 PM
To: Matt Martin <Matt.Martin@deschutes.org>
Subject: Re: Appeal - Marijuana Production at 63775 Diamond Forge Rd (file 247 -18-
000361 -AD)
Hey Matt,
I wasn't able to get ahold of my attorney on such short notice to respond about the
extension by 1 pm today about the 150 day deadline.
As I explained before I already have commitments on Oct 10th.
Did you move ahead with the Oct 10 hearing date?
1 look forward to hearing from you.
Thanks Andrew
Sent from my iPhone
On Sep 18, 2018, at 8:58 AM, Matt Martin <Matt.Martin@deschutes.org> wrote:
Andrew -
Yesterday an appeal of land use file 247 -18 -000361 -AD was filed
(attached). I am contacting you to both inform you of the receipt of this
appeal and the hearing before the Board of County Commissioners is
scheduled for October 10, 2018. Due to procedural requirements and
limited time remaining the 150 -day review time period the is no
flexibility in scheduling the hearing. When you have an opportunity,
please give me a call. I would like to discuss the process moving
forward.
Matthew Martin, AICP I Associate Planner
<Inlage001 .png> 117 NW Lafayette Avenue 1 Bend, Oregon 97703
PO Box 6005 1 Bend, Oregon 97708
Tel: (541) 330-46201 www.deschutes.org/cd
<imageo05.png> <image006.png> <image004.png>
Disclaimer: Please note that the information in this email is an informal statement made in
accordance with DCC 22.20.005 and shall not be deemed to constitute final County action
effecting a change in the status of a person's property or conferring any rights, including
any reliance rights, on any person.
<Appeal 247-18-000361-AD.pdf>
<Chapter 22.24 - LAND USE ACTION HEARINGS.pdf>
5
Chapter 22.24. LAND USE ACTION HEARINGS
22.24.010. Filing of Staff Report for Hearing.
22.24.020. Hearings Body.
22.24.030. Notice of Hearing or Administrative Action.
22.24.040. Contents of Notice.
22.24.050. Burden of Proof.
22.24.060. Nature of Evidence.
22.24.070. Limitation on Oral Presentations.
22.24.080. Standing.
22.24.090. Record.
22.24.100. Disclosure of Ex Parte Contacts.
22.24.105. Disclosure of Personal Knowledge.
22.24.110. Challenge for Bias, Prejudgment of Personal Interest.
22.24.120. Hearings Procedure.
22.24.125. Setting the Hearing.
22.24.130. Close of the Record.
22.24.140. Continuances or Record Extensions.
22.24.150. Objections to Jurisdiction, Procedure, Notice or Qualifications.
22.24.160. Reopening the Record.
22.24.010. Filing of Staff Report for Hearing.
A. At the time an application that in the judgment of the Planning director requires a hearing is deemed
complete, a hearing date shall be set.
B. A staff report shall be completed seven days prior to hearing. If the report is not completed by such
time, the hearing shall be held as scheduled, but any party may at the hearing or in writing prior to the
hearing request a continuance of the hearing to a date that is at least seven days after the date the initial
staff report is complete. Pursuant to DCC 22.24.140(A)(3), grant of a continuance under these
circumstances shall be discretionary.
C. A copy of the staff report shall be mailed to the applicant, shall be made available to such other persons
who request a copy and shall be filed with the Hearings Body.
D. Oral or written modifications and additions to the staff report shall be allowed prior to or at the hearing.
(Ord. 96-071 §1D, 1996; Ord. 95-045 §11, 1995; Ord. 90-007 §1, 1990)
22.24.020. Hearings Body.
A. The following shall serve as the hearings body:
1. Hearings Officer.
2. Planning Commission, as specified by DCC 22.24.020(C).
3. Board of County Commissioners, except where an applicable joint management agreement within
an acknowledged urban growth boundary specifies a city governing body as the final appeals body.
B. The Hearings Body order shall be as set forth in DCC 22.24.020(A), except that the Board may call up
an administrative decision for review without the necessity of an application going before the Hearings
Officer.
C. Where the Hearings Officer declines to hear a matter on the grounds of a conflict of interest, the
Planning Commission shall substitute for the hearings officer. In the Redmond Urban Area, the initial
Hearings Body for a quasi-judicial plan amendment or zone change may at the discretion of the
Planning Director be either the Planning Commission or the Hearings Officer. Additionally, in the
Chapter 22.24 1 (08/2006)
Redmond Urban Area, the initial Hearings Body for Declaratory Rulings and revocations of land use
approvals may, at the discretion of the Planning Director, be the Hearings Officer, the Redmond Urban
Area Planning Commission or the Redmond City Council.
(Ord. 2001-045 §1, 2001; Ord. 2000-003 §1, 2000; Ord. 99-031 §5, 1999; Ord. 98-019 §3, 1998; Ord. 96-
071 §1D, 1996; Ord. 95-045 §11A, 1995; Ord. 90-007 §1, 1990)
22.24.030. Notice of Hearing or Administrative Action.
A. Individual Mailed Notice.
1. Except as otherwise provided for herein, notice of a land use application shall be mailed at least 20
days prior to the hearing for those matters set for hearing, or within 10 days after receipt of an
application for those matters to be processed administratively with notice. Written notice shall be
sent by mail to the following persons:
a. The applicant.
b. Owners of record of property as shown on the most recent property tax assessment roll of
property located:
1. Within 100 feet of the property that is the subject of the notice where any part of the
subject property is within an urban growth boundary;
2. Within 250 feet of the property that is the subject of the notice where the subject property is
outside an urban growth boundary and not within a farm or forest zone, except where
greater notice is required under DCC 22.24.030(A)(4) for structures proposed to exceed 30
feet in height; or
3. Within 750 feet of the property that is the subject of the notice where the subject property is
within a farm or forest zone, except where greater notice is required under DCC
22.24.030(A)(4) for structures proposed to exceed 30 feet in height.
c. For a solar access or solar shade exception application, only those owners of record identified
in the application as being burdened by the approval of such an application.
d. The owner of a public use airport if the airport is located within 10,000 feet of the subject
property.
e. The tenants of a mobile home park when the application is for the rezoning of any part or all of
a mobile home park.
f. The Planning Commission.
g. Any neighborhood or community organization formally recognized by the board under criteria
established by the Board whose boundaries include the site.
h. At the discretion of the applicant, the County also shall provide notice to the Department of
Land Conservation and Development.
2. Notwithstanding DCC 22.24.030(A)(1) (b)(1), all owners of property within 250 feet of property
that is the subject of a plan amendment application or zone change application shall receive notice.
3. The failure of a property owner to receive mailed notice shall not invalidate any land use approval if
the Planning Division can show by affidavit that such notice was given.
4. For structures proposed to exceed 30 feet in height that are located outside of an urban growth
boundary, the area for describing persons entitled to notice under DCC 22.24.030(A)(1)(b) shall
expand outward by a distance equal to the distance of the initial notice area boundary for every 30
foot height increment or portion thereof.
B. Posted Notice.
1. Notice of a land use action application for which prior notice procedures are chosen shall be posted
on the subject property for at least 10 continuous days prior to any date set for receipt of comments.
Such notice shall, where practicable, be visible from any adjacent public way.
Chapter 22.24 2 (08/2006)
2. Posted notice of an application for a utility facility line approval shall be by posting the proposed
route at intervals of not less than one-half mile. The notice shall be posted as close as practicable
to, and be visible from, any public way in the vicinity of the proposed route.
3. Notice of a solar access application shall be posted as near as practicable to each lot identified in
the application.
C. Published Notice. In addition to notice by mail and posting, notice of an initial hearing shall be
published in a newspaper of general circulation in the County at least 20 days prior to the hearing.
D. Media Notice. Copies of the notice of hearing shall be transmitted to other newspapers published in
Deschutes County.
(Ord. 99-031 §6, 1999; Ord. 96-071 §1D, 1996; Ord. 95-071 §1, 1995; Ord. 95-045 §12, 1995; Ord. 91-013
§7-8, 1991; Ord. 90-007 §1, 1990)
22.24.040. Contents of Notice.
A. All mailed notices of a land use action hearing shall:
1. Describe the nature of the applicant's request and the nature of the proposed uses that could be
authorized.
2. List the criteria from the zoning ordinance and the plan applicable to the application at issue.
3. Set forth the street address or easily understood geographical reference to the subject property.
4. State the date, time and location of any hearing or date by which written comments must be
received.
5. State that any person may comment in writing and include a general explanation of the
requirements for submission of testimony and the procedures for conduct of testimony, including,
but not limited to, a party's right to request a continuance or to have the record held open.
6. If a hearing is to be held, state that any interested person may appear.
7. State that failure to raise an issue in person at a hearing or in writing precludes appeal by that
person to the Land Use Board of Appeals (LUBA), and that failure to provide statements or
evidence sufficient to afford the decision -maker an opportunity to respond to the issue precludes
appeal to LUBA based on that issue.
8. State the name of a county representative to contact and the telephone number where additional
information may be obtained.
9. State that a copy of the application, all documents and evidence submitted by or on behalf of the
applicant and applicable criteria are available for inspection at no cost and will be provided at
reasonable cost.
10. State that a copy of the staff report will be available for inspection at no cost at least seven days
prior to the hearing and will be provided at reasonable cost.
11. All mailed notices shall contain the following statement: NOTICE TO MORTGAGEE,
LIENHOLDER, VENDOR OR SELLER: ORS CHAPTER 215 REQUIRES THAT IF YOU
RECEIVE THIS NOTICE, IT MUST PROMPTLY BE FORWARDED TO THE PURCHASER.
B. All mailed and published notices for hearings shall contain a statement that recipients may request a
copy of the staff report.
C. All mailed and published notices concerning applications necessitating an exception to one of the
statewide land use planning goals shall state that a goal exception is proposed and shall summarize the
issues in an understandable manner.
(Ord. 96-071 §1D, 1996; Ord. 95-045 §13, 1995; Ord. 90-007 §1, 1990)
22.24.050. Burden of Proof.
Throughout all local land use proceedings, the burden of proof rests on the applicant.
(Ord. 95-045 §14, 1995; Ord. 90-007 §1, 1990)
Chapter 22.24 3 (08/2006)
22.24.060. Nature of Evidence.
All relevant evidence shall be received.
(Ord. 90-007 §1, 1990)
22.24.070. Limitation on Oral Presentations.
The Hearings Body may set reasonable time limits on oral testimony.
(Ord. 90-007 §1, 1990)
22.24.080. Standing.
A. Any interested person may appear and be heard in a land use action hearing, except that in appeals
heard on the record, a person must have participated in a previous hearing on the subject application.
B. Any person appearing on the record at a hearing (including appeals) or presenting written evidence in
conjunction with an administrative action or hearing shall have standing and shall be a party. A person
whose participation consists only of signing a petition becomes a party only if his or her signature is
legible and his or her address is clearly written on the petition.
C. Additionally, any owner of property to be burdened by a solar access permit shall be considered a party
at every stage of the solar access permit decision process.
(Ord. 96-071 §1D, 1996; Ord. 95-045 §15, 1995; Ord. 90-007 §1, 1990)
22.24.090. Record.
A. A tape record of the hearing shall be made.
B. All exhibits presented shall be marked to show the identity of the person offering the exhibit.
C. Exhibits shall be numbered in the order presented in two categories, proponents and opponents, and
shall be dated.
D. When exhibits are introduced, the proponent or opponent exhibit number or letter shall be read into the
record.
(Ord. 05-051 §1, 2005; Ord. 90-007 §1, 1990)
22.24.100. Disclosure of Ex Parte Contacts.
Prior to making a decision, the Hearings Body or any member thereof shall not communicate directly or
indirectly with any party or his representative in connection with any issue involved in a pending hearing
except upon notice and opportunity for all parties to participate. Should such communication - whether
written or oral - occur, the Hearings Body member shall:
A. Publicly announce for the record the substance of such communication; and
B. Announce the parties' right to rebut the substance of the ex parte communication during the hearing.
Communication between County staff and the Hearings Body shall not be considered to be an ex parte
contact.
(Ord. 90-007 §1, 1990)
22.24.105. Disclosure of Personal Knowledge.
A. If the Hearings Body or any member thereof uses personal knowledge acquired outside of the hearing
process in rendering a decision, the Hearings Body or member thereof shall state the substance of that
knowledge on the record and allow all parties the opportunity to rebut such statement on the record.
B. For the purposes of DCC 22.24.105, a site visit by the Hearings Body shall be deemed to fall within this
rule. After the site visit has concluded, the Hearings Body must disclose its observations and
conclusions gained from the site visit in order to allow for rebuttal by the parties.
(Ord. 95-045 §16, 1995)
Chapter 22.24 4 (08/2006)
22.24.110. Challenge for Bias, Prejudgment or Personal Interest.
Prior to or at the commencement of a hearing, any party may challenge the qualification of the Hearings
Body, or a member thereof, for bias, prejudgment or personal interest. The challenge shall be made on the
record and be documented with specific reasons supported by facts. Should qualifications be challenged,
the Hearings Body or the member shall disqualify itself, withdraw or make a statement on the record of its
capacity to hear. A planning commission member with a conflict identified under ORS 215.035 or 215.244
must disqualify him or herself after disclosure.
(Ord. 90-007 §1, 1990)
22.24.120. Hearings Procedure.
A hearing shall be conducted as follows:
A. The Hearings Body shall explain the purpose of the hearing and announce the order of proceedings,
including reasonable time limits on presentations by parties.
B. A statement by the Hearings Body regarding pre -hearing contacts, bias, prejudice or personal interest
shall be made.
C. Any facts received, noticed or recognized outside of the hearing shall be stated for the record.
D. Challenges to the Hearings Body's qualifications to hear the matter shall be stated and challenges
entertained.
E. The Hearings Body shall list applicable substantive criteria, explain that testimony and evidence must
be directed toward that criteria or other criteria in the comprehensive plan or land use regulations that
the person believes to apply to the decision, and that failure to address an issue with sufficient
specificity to afford the decision -maker and the parties an opportunity to respond precludes appeal to
LUBA based on that issue.
F. Order of presentation:
1. Open the hearing.
2. Staff report.
3. Proponents' presentation.
4. Opponents' presentation.
5. Proponents' rebuttal.
6. Opponents' rebuttal may be allowed at the Hearings Body's discretion.
7. Staff comment.
8. Questions from or to the chair may be entertained at any time at the Hearings Body's discretion.
9. Close the hearing.
G. The record shall be available for public review at the hearing.
H. A form of preliminary statement incorporating the provisions of DCC 22.24.120 is set forth as
Appendix A to DCC Title 22 for use by the Board of County Commissioners.
(Ord. 90-007 §1, 1990)
22.24.125. Setting the Hearing.
A. After an application is deemed accepted a hearing date shall be set. A hearing date may be changed by
the County staff, or the Hearings Body up until the time notice of the hearing is mailed. Once the notice
of hearing is mailed any changes in the hearing date shall be processed as a continuance in accordance
with DCC 22.24.140.
B. If an applicant requests that a hearing date be changed, such request shall be granted only if the
applicant agrees that the extended time period for the hearing shall not count against the 150 -day time
limit set forth in DCC 22.20.040.
(Ord. 99-031 §7, 1999; Ord. 96-071 §1D, 1996; Ord. 95-045 §17, 1995)
Chapter 22.24 5 (08/2006)
22.24.130. Close of the Record.
A. Except as set forth herein, the record shall be closed to further testimony or submission of further
argument or evidence at the end of the presentations before the Hearings Body.
B. If the hearing is continued or the record is held open under DCC 22.24.140, further evidence or
testimony shall be taken only in accordance with the provisions of DCC 22.24.140.
C. Otherwise, further testimony or evidence will be allowed only if the record is reopened under DCC
22.24.160.
D. An applicant shall be allowed, unless waived, to submit final written arguments in support of its
application after the record in the initial hearing has closed within such time limits as the Hearings Body
shall set. The Hearings Body shall allow applicant at least seven days to submit its argument, which
time shall be counted against the 150 -day clock.
(Ord. 2006-010 §9, 2006; Ord. 99-031 §8, 1999; Ord. 96-071 §1D, 1996; Ord. 95-045 §19, 1995; Ord. 90-
007 §1, 1990)
22.24.140. Continuances or Record Extensions.
A. Grounds.
1. Prior to the date set for an initial hearing, an applicant shall receive a continuance upon any request.
If a continuance request is made after the published or mailed notice has been provided by the
County, the Hearings Body shall take evidence at the scheduled hearing date from any party
wishing to testify at that time after notifying those present of the continuance.
2. Any party is entitled to a continuance of the initial evidentiary hearing or to have the record left
open in such a proceeding in the following instances:
a. Where additional documents or evidence are submitted by any party; or
b. Upon a party's request made prior to the close of the hearing for time to present additional
evidence or testimony.
For the purposes of DCC 22.24.140(A)(2), "additional documents or evidence" shall mean
documents or evidence containing new facts or analysis that are submitted after notice of the
hearing.
3. The grant of a continuance or record extension in any other circumstance shall be at the discretion
of the Hearings Body.
B. Except for continuance requests made under DCC 22.24.140(A)(1), the choice between granting a
continuance or leaving the record open shall be at the discretion of the Hearings Body. After a choice
has been made between leaving the record open and granting a continuance, the hearing shall be
governed thereafter by the provisions that relate to the path chosen.
C. Continuances.
1. If the Hearings Body grants a continuance of the initial hearing, the hearing shall be continued to a
date, time and place certain at least seven days from the date of the initial hearing.
2. An opportunity shall be provided at the continued hearing for persons to rebut new evidence and
testimony received at the continued hearing.
3. If new written evidence is submitted at the continued initial hearing, any person may request prior
to the conclusion of the continued hearing that the record be left open for at least seven days to
allow submittal of additional written evidence or testimony. Such additional written evidence or
testimony shall be limited to evidence or testimony that rebuts the new written evidence or
testimony.
4. If the hearing is other than an initial hearing, any continuances are at the discretion of the hearings
body.
Chapter 22.24 6 (08/2006)
D. Leaving record open.
If at the conclusion of the initial hearing the Hearings Body leaves the record open for additional written
evidence or testimony, the record shall be left open for at least 14 additional days, allowing at least the
first seven days for submittal of new written evidence or testimony and at least seven additional days for
response to the evidence received while the record was held open. Written evidence or testimony
submitted during the period the record is held open shall be limited to evidence or testimony that rebuts
previously submitted evidence or testimony.
E. A continuance or record extension granted under DCC 22.24.140 shall be subject to the 150 -day time
limit unless the continuance or extension is requested or otherwise agreed to by the applicant. When the
record is left open or a continuance is granted after a request by an applicant, the time period during
which the 150 -day clock is suspended shall include the time period made available to the applicant and
any time period given to parties to respond to the applicant's submittal.
(Ord. 99-031 §9, 1999; Ord. 96-071 §1D, 1996; Ord. 95-045 §18, 1995; Ord. 91-013 §9, 1991; Ord. 90-007
§1, 1990)
22.24.150. Objections to Jurisdiction, Procedure, Notice or Qualifications.
Any objections not raised prior to the close of oral testimony are waived. Parties alleging procedural error
shall have the burden of proof at LUBA as to whether the error occurred and whether the error has
prejudiced the party's substantial rights.
(Ord. 95-045 §20, 1995; Ord. 90-007 §1, 1990)
22.24.160. Reopening the Record.
A. The Hearings Body may at its discretion reopen the record, either upon request or on its own initiative.
The Hearings Body shall not reopen the record at the request of an applicant unless the applicant has
agreed in writing to an extension or a waiver of the 150 -day time limit.
B. Procedures.
1. Except as otherwise provided for in DCC 22.24.160, the manner of testimony (whether oral or
written) and time limits for testimony to be offered upon reopening of the record shall be at the
discretion at the Hearings Body.
2. The Hearings Body shall give written notice to the parties that the record is being reopened, stating
the reason for reopening the record and how parties can respond. The parties shall be allowed to
raise new issues that relate to the new evidence, testimony or criteria for decision-making that apply
to the matter at issue.
(Ord. 99-031 §10, 1999; Ord. 96-071 §1D, 1996; Ord. 95-045 §21, 1995)
Chapter 22.24 7 (08/2006)
BRIGHTSIDE
A N I M A L CENTER
Oct. 9, 2018
GRANT PROPOSAL FOR THE DESCHUTES COUNTY COMMISSION
FROM BRIGHTSIDE ANIMAL CENTER
Dear Commissioners,
We, the directors of BrightSide Animal Center, were very gratified to be able this summer to pay off the loan of more
than $1 million Deschutes County generously extended our organization 10 years ago. It is because of that loan that we
are still in business today. Because of it, we were able to avoid having to close our doors, to continue to serve our
community and its companion animals.
We weathered that crisis and have since replaced our board and management, and installed new policies and
procedures that deliver better oversight to ensure responsible financial management. While nonprofits always are
challenged to make ends meet, we are managing our operations successfully.
It costs more than $1 million annually to operate the shelter. By increasing our revenue streams over the past 10 years,
we have been able to meet our operational needs. But we lack any additional funds to make capital improvements.
Our "new" shelter building now is 15 years old. Over those 15 years our operations have grown significantly and we
need to make some major capital investments. We seek the county's support through a grant of $225,000 for these one-
time costs. These include:
1. Replacement of our outdoor kennels, $100,000. Our kennels are in disrepair and this has become a safety issue,
as some dogs have escaped and caused injury not only to other animals but to dog handlers as well. We want to
install new kennels on concrete pads that would prevent dogs from digging out.
2. Commercial laundry, $100,000. The shelter does 25 loads of laundry per day. The household washers and dryers
we have were not designed for this heavy use and break down frequently. They often are replaced with
machines donated to our thrift store that typically are near the end of their useful lives, so this becomes a
PO Box 1404, Redmond, OR 97756 a 501c3 not for profit
constant headache. We need to install commercial machines. That requires not only the machines themselves
but a new stronger concrete pad to support the additional weight and new ventilation.
3. Cross -fencing in play yard, $25,000. We are lucky to have a large play yard for exercise and dog training. But it is
underutilized because only one dog, or group of similar dogs, can use it at a time. We can rehabilitate dogs in
need of training more quickly if we can use this space efficiently. We would cross -fence it to provide several
different pens, add shade trees and irrigation for the trees.
We have been seeking grants from animal -welfare foundations for more than a year to cover these expenses, but
competition from other shelters throughout the nation is intense and we have not won any of the grants we've sought.
Meanwhile, our needs have only grown more urgent.
We believe we have demonstrated our commitment not only to our high -save mission (we successfully place more than
97% of all the animals we receive), but to responsible fiscal management. The county can be confident that BrightSide
will continue to provide animal -welfare services to the county to the best of our ability. We seek this grant to enable us
to invest in the facilities we need to continue to do that.
Respectfully submitted,
Mark Crose, president
Jan Even, vice president
Megan Fries, treasurer
Jerry Boysen, director
Sue Hutchens, director
Beth Palmer, director
Chris Pearson, director
PO Box 1404, Redmond, OR 97756 a 501c3 not for profit