Loading...
2023-58-Minutes for Meeting January 30,2023 Recorded 2/27/2023BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS 1300 NW Wall Street, Bend, Oregon (541) 388-6570 Recorded in Deschutes County Steve Dennison, County Clerk CJ2023-58 Commissioners' Journal 02/27/2023 9:36:10 AM ' `SS co IIIIIIIIIIIIImimmnii FOR RECORDING STAMP ONLY BOCC MEETING MINUTES 1:00 PM MONDAY January 30, 2023 Barnes Sawyer Rooms Live Streamed Video Present were Commissioners Anthony DeBone, Patti Adair, and Phil Chang. Also present were Nick Lelack, County Administrator; Kim Riley, Assistant County Counsel; and Brenda Fritsvold, BOCC Executive Assistant. This meeting was audio and video recorded and can be accessed at the Deschutes County Meeting Portal website www.deschutes.org/meetings. CALL TO ORDER: Chair DeBone called the meeting to order at 1:00 p.m. CITIZEN INPUT: Commissioner DeBone reported the receipt of three emails supporting the preservation of dark skies; one email opposing the Thornburgh Resort development; three emails providing input on the landfill siting process; and one email sharing concerns about animal traps on public lands near forest roads. CONSENT AGENDA: None ACTION ITEMS: 1. Mid -Year Report from Visit Central Oregon Julie Theisen, CEO of Visit Central Oregon, and Mackenzie Ballard, Vice President of Marketing, provided a mid -year report on the organization's success in BOCC MEETING JANUARY 30, 2023 PAGE 1 OF 5 attracting visitors to support Central Oregon's growing tourism economy. Theisen and Ballard reported on hotel occupancy rates and efforts to promote workforce development, and described promotional campaigns including videos and a print travel guide. Commissioner DeBone commented on the value of Central Oregon's dark skies and noted ongoing efforts to preserve these. Theisen agreed that Visit Central Oregon could include information on this subject in its regional industry newsletter. 2. Camping Feasibility Study Request for Proposals (RFP) Jen Patterson, Strategic Initiatives Manager, presented the submittals received in response to the County's solicitation for a qualified consultant to perform a Camping Feasibility Study for development of private or public RV parks and campgrounds, along with support amenities and infrastructure. Five proposals were submitted and scored by an evaluation committee. Patterson described the criteria used to score the proposals and shared the score and key feedback from the committee on each of the proposals, along with each study's estimated cost. Following discussion, the Board concurred to interview three of the responding companies: ECOINurUIwest, Cr"INI Government Services, and Crane Associates. 3. Work Session to Prepare for the Board's Review of a Modification Request to the Thornburgh Destination Resort's Fish & Wildlife Management Plan Caroline House, Senior Planner, explained the two appeals filed from the Hearings Officer's decision denying a request from the Thornburgh Destination Resort to modify its Fish & Wildlife Management Plan (FWMP) for its proposed resort project. The Hearings Officer denied the Resort's modification request based on the lack of sufficient time for the Oregon Department of Fish & Wildlife to review the changes and submit a meaningful response, and additionally due to a failure to propose clear, objective and enforceable compliance language. House noted that if the Board denies Thornburgh's appeal, the project could yet move forward based on the previously -approved FWMP from 2008. Commissioner Chang questioned how the Board will evaluate whether the "no net loss" requirement would be met under the proposed 2022 FWMP modification. Stephanie Marshall, Assistant Legal Counsel, said the Board must determine the appropriate weight to give all of the presented evidence. BOCC MEETING JANUARY 30, 2023 PAGE 2 OF 5 Commissioner Chang asked to know if other destination resorts in the County were developed according to the "no net loss" of habitat standard. Anthony Raguine, Principal Planner, said staff will research this and provide an answer. Commissioner Chang emphasized the distinction between "wet water" and "paper water," the latter of which merely conveys a water right. He sought clarity on whether any water offered up as mitigation for habitat protection is paper water, i.e., a legal claim to a specific allocation of water. House shared that the Confederated Tribe of Warm Springs will send a representative to testify at the hearing. Commissioner DeBone agreed this person or persons will be treated as an agency in terms of their time allowed for testimony. 4. Update from City of Bend on its Multiple Unit Property Tax Exemption Program Allison Platt, Core Area Project Manager for the City of Bend, reviewed that last year, Bend adopted a local Multiple Unit Property Tax Exemption (MUPTE) program to support development and redevelopment goals in the city's core and transit -oriented areas. The program is available for multi -story residential projects that offer at least three identified public benefits; these properties can apply to receive a ten-year property tax exemption. Platt explained details of the program and how projects are determined to qualify, and described options for the County's future evaluation of these applications. In response to comments from the Commissioners, Platt summarized that the Board, as the authority of the Deschutes County taxing district, requests staff updates on projects in the core area Tax Increment Financing (TIF) district. The Board further directs that the first few projects outside of the core area TIF district come before it as part of the review process. 5. Draft FY 2024 Goals and Objectives Whitney Hale, Deputy County Administrator, presented the Board's draft FY 2024 Goals and Objectives as determined at its recent annual retreat. The goals and objectives center on safe communities, healthy people, a resilient county, housing stability and supply, and service delivery. Hale said this document will be placed on the Board's next consent agenda for formal adoption. BOCC MEETING JANUARY 30, 2023 PAGE 3 OF 5 OTHER ITEMS: • Commissioner DeBone explained the reasons why citizen input at Board meetings is restricted to items not on a current meeting agenda, except in the case of public hearings. He noted the function of the Board's meetings is to conduct business, and said citizens are always welcome to call, email or meet with the Commissioners on any topic. Commissioner Chang objected to this rule, characterized it as anti- democratic, and said the Board should go beyond the bare minimum requirement of allowing people to speak at public hearings. He added it is more efficient to allow people to address the Commissioners all at once rather than one at a time. • Commissioner DeBone noted the receipt of communications from Doralee King regarding her proposal for a cottage housing project where homes would be built at an overall density of one structure per acre, but the houses would be built in close proximity to each other to promote security, friendship and community. • Regarding the current state legislative session, Public Works Director Chris Doty reported he will testify in support of HB 2095 which would authorize all cities to utilize photo radar speed enforcement. • Deputy County Administrator Whitney Hale shared an upcoming opportunity to testify in support of HB 2101, which would allow local agencies to continue exchanging federal transportation funding for state funding. The Board directed that both Commissioner Chang and Commissioner Adair be signed up to testify in support of this bill, depending on what time either is available. • Hale distributed a draft letter regarding the regulation of Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs). Commissioners reviewed the draft and provided feedback. At 3:46 pm, a brief break was announced. The meeting reconvened at 3:50 to recess into Executive Session. EXECUTIVE SESSIONS: At 3:50 p.m., the Board went into Executive Session under ORS 192.660 (2) (e) Real Property Negotiations. The Board moved out of executive session at 4:19 p.m. to direct staff to proceed as discussed. At 4:19 p.m., the Board went into Executive Session under ORS 192.660 (2) (e) Real Property Negotiations. The Board moved out of executive session at 4:32 p.m. to direct staff to proceed as discussed. BOCC MEETING JANUARY 30, 2023 PAGE 4 OF 5 At 4:32 p.m., the Board went into Executive Session under ORS 192.660 (2) (e) Real Property Negotiations. The Board moved out of executive session at 4:35 p.m. to direct staff to proceed as discussed. ADJOURN: Being no further items to come before the Board, the meeting was adjourned at 4:35 p.m. DATED this JS Day of ATTEST: /6-ft,/,,triraitaf RECORDING SECRETARY BOCC MEETING 2023 for the Deschutes County Board of Commissioners. ANTHONY DEBONE, CHAIR PATTI ADAIR, VICE CHAIR PHIL CHANG, COMMYZIONER JANUARY 30, 2023 PAGE 5 OF 5 Angie. Powers From: Sent: To: Subject: McConnell <mcconn@bendbroadband.com> Friday, January 27, 2023 10:01 AM citizeninput Deschutes County's Outdoor Lighting Ordinance. Some people who received this message don't often get email from mcconn@bendbroadband.com. Learn why this is important [EXTERNAL EMAIL] Honorable Commissioners, I think that we should be supporting educational campaigns and maybe later working more on code enforcement once there is higher community understanding of what the right thing to do for our night skies is. As a resident of Sunriver, I enjoy the benefits of living in a Dark Sky Community. The fact that we have established and maintained our dark skies is actually a marketable and sustainable tourism attraction, which brings in more room tax dollars to the County. Sincerely, Mark McConnell Mark and Cindy McConnell 18160 Cottonwood Road #132 Sunriver, OR 97707 mcconn(a)bendbroadband.com Mark : 541-270-1313 Cindy: 541-270-9784 #3 Tamarack Lane ************************************* Angie Powers From: Sent: To: Subject: Arnolds <patorken@gmail.com> Wednesday, January 25, 2023 11:04 AM citizeninput Capped lighting Some people who received this message don't often get email from patorken@gmail.com. Learn why this is important [EXTERNAL EMAIL] January 25, 2023 To: Deschutes County Commissioners I am writing this email to support the strongest efforts possible in support of dark skies, and thus in support of the county's efforts at education and enforcement of shielded lighting. My wife and I have lived in Sunriver for 16 years ago, and we vacationed here for 15 years before that. Like many others, we were attracted to central Oregon and to Sunriver in particular because of its lifestyle. Sunriver's vision from day one has been to live in harmony with the natural world ... a rare vision for any development. Sunriver has always had quite a few rules that help preserve its vision, including one requiring that all lights to be capped. Now, we know that you cannot always please all the people all the timer In my time here, I have heard plenty of grumbling about tree cutting limits, house color restrictions, prohibitions on garden fences, the "thought police" mentality and more ... but very rarely have I heard anyone grumble about capped lighting. It's not an onerous regulation, and people love the dark sky at night. It is part of the mystique of the Sunriver lifestyle. Personally, for me, I love to look up at the dark sky at night. The first thing I do when I go out at night is look up. l try to spot the Big and Little Dippers, the. North star, Orion in the winter, an orbiting satellite, a shooting star, or the Milky Way. I may only spend a moment or two, but it is a transcendental moment, a moment of wonder and awe, a moment that soothes the soul. I cannot help but think about our place in the universe, about the size and composition of the world, about science and god. I cannot help but think that others must be similarly inspired when they peer into the dark sky at night. Mankind has been doing this for millions of years. This must be imprinted in our genes by now. I look up and feel a certain connection to the past, and also to the future. Yet when I am in a modern city and look up into the light pollution and see few objects in the sky, I think that most people are losing at least some of this aspect of their humanity. Dark skies matters. Sunriver has preserved the dark sky from the beginning. The. Observatory at Sunriver sprung to life because people realized an observatory would work well here in the high desert with our dark sky. Partly because of the tens of thousands of visitors in Sunriver every year, the Oregon Observatory has grown to be one of the best places in the world to enable large numbers of people to view the night sky close up. When we first came to Sunriver, the night sky did not reveal Bend; now Bend is a glowing ball of light at night. It would be a shame if we lose one of the things that makes central Oregon so attractive to residents and tourists. Make dark skies part of the vision for Deschutes County. Help us to feel connected to the universe and to reach for the stars in wonder. Capped lighting is a small thing; but it makes a big difference. Dark skies are a wonder of nature. Let's save this part of our heritage. Sincerely, 1 Angie Powers From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Some people who received this [EXTERNAL EMAIL] Bella Henson <arhenson.henson@gmail.com> Saturday, January 28, 2023 11:04 AM citizeninput Paul Bennett; Mary Ann Kruse; james henson; Carol Arnold; Becky Dobrowski; Sue Clarke; Anastacia Compton Night Skies essage don't often get email from arhenson.henson@gmail. coin. Learn why this is important Dear Commissioners Adair, Chang, and DeBone: Although I don't know which two of you voted for beginning a "robust" education campaign and ordinance revision plan for the county Outdoor Lighting Ordinance, I want to thank you, very much! Educating myself is the way I "came around" to understand the importance of this issue for our livability and for birds in particular. Thankfully both of our past 2 houses in Bend are in no street light n'borhoods. I first learned of the Night Sky movement as a member of East Cascades Audubon. I suggest, if I may, Paul Bennett's wonderful song about Night Skies; his email is in the cc field above. If you have already heard his song, or better yet, heard him sing it accompanied by his ukelele, you may well have found a few moments of peace, and perhaps enlightenment in a normally hectic County Commissioner's life. As a retired adult education staff person for the regional part of Habitat for Humanity, Int., educators know that people learn best through some form of the arts. When I planned worship for our faith based organization's conference settings, we chose songs/hymns with this knowledge in mind. I could go on, but you probably get my point. We camped last winter in several campgrounds in/near recognized Dark Sky areas. Kartchner Caverns, AZ and Anza Borego, CA. The 3rd outside Tucson, a very large city, was also a spectacular example of a dark sky. Although I'm unsure about Tucson being a certified Night Sky city. Thank you again for this step toward darker skies over Deschutes County. Annis Henson Annis Henson 2399 NW Hosmer Lake Dr. Bend OR 97701 cell 541-350-6315 home 541-389-3314 1 Angie Powers From: Sent: To: Subject: Janet Navarra <SJRC@msn.com> Wednesday, January 25, 2023 12:29 PM citizeninput Thornburg Some people who -received -this message don't often get email [EXTERNAL EMAIL] 'rom sjrc@msn.com. Learn why this is important To all involved in this important matter: At a time when farmers, ranchers and common households are having to ration water, why would the commission even entertain the approval of Thornburg Resort? Yes, our county is growing. Yes some development will be approved. Thornburg does not benefit our community and in fact harms it. The decision is simple. No. Thankyou. Sincerely, ely, Janet Navarra 61680 Elmwood PI Bend Oregon 97702 1 Angie Powers From: Sent: To: Subject: Attachments: Kathy Weick <riderightinc©yahoo.com> Monday, January 30, 2023 12:17 AM citizeninput Millican Valley landfill proposed landfill sites possible Millican Valley land fill.pdf Some people who received this message don't often get email from riderightinc@yahoo.com. Learn why this is important [EXTERNAL EMAIL] Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android Please see attached file for comments on the land fill sites. Thank you. Kathy. Weick i am writing to object to the placement of a landfill at any proposed site in the Millican Valley area. Though you may be aware of some of the problems I enumerate, I will list them because they are of concern to me, 1 Pine Mountain Observatory: This location was selected for an observatory because it has one of the darkest and clearest night skies of anywhere in the United States. It has 4 telescopes and is used regularly in the Spring and Summer months. It is owned by the University of Oregon Physics Department and is used for educating students and is open to public viewing regularly. No doubt much effort and expense was involved to develop and operate this facility. It is a i iniquolI valuable asset to (antral operate 1111J 1 ..l11.r. 1 4 .A 11...E ..,r VN1� 1....4��... central Oregon. The placement and operation of a landfill in the Millican Valley will doubtless have a severe adverse effect on the quality of the night sky and, therefore, the usefulness of the telescopes. The site preparation and operation of the proposed landfill, with heavy equipment and very heavy trucks will create large volumes of dust to float into the atmosphere into the area of the observatory. Currently Deschutes County receives about 300,000 tons of garbage at Knott landfill. With increasing population over time, the volume should be expected to increase. (The proposal is for the new site to operate for 100 years). I read that garbage trucks are allowed to haul 18 tons per load. Assuming trucks run 5 days per week that would be about 240 days per year (allowing for a few days off for holidays, etc.). If my math is correct, that would be in excess of 60 loads per day. Even now, an occasional small vehicle traveling on Pine Mountain Road creates a dust plume that rises far skyward and can be seen for miles. There can be no doubt that the proposed Pine Mountain Road site, or any site, in the Millican Valley area will be devastating to the observatory. And, that isn't the only deleterious effect the proposed sites will have on the clarity of the sky. I understand that landfills produce large volumes of methane gas, most of which drift skyward and is moved to surrounding areas by wind. Much of this noxious gas can be expected to blow toward Pine Mountain and the observatory. 2. Wildlife: I have done a bit of research on the Sage Grouse habitat in and near Millican Valley. I read a U.S Forest Service report stating that, in the 1980s, there were nesting sites on Pine Mountain and even on Horse Ridge. Though I am not an expert on this subject, a cursory review of the literature is sufficient to alarm even a layperson concerning the dwindling population of this unique bird and the devastating impact the proposed Millican Valley landfill sites will have on this protected species. My reading informs me that there are "courting" and nesting protected areas within the proposed landfill sights. Those proposed sites should, therefore, be eliminated. I am hopeful that the committee will receive more detailed information on this subject. Sage Grouse are not the only wildlife in the Millican area that would be significantly harmed by placement of the landfill in Millican Valley. Antelope roam and feed throughout this area. I have personally observed and photographed antelope throughout Millican Valley, including the very area proposed just to the east of Pine Mountain Road. I have also observed herds of Mule Deer along the lower part of Pine Mountain Road near the proposed site. I am informed that the Mule Deer population in Deschutes County has decreased significantly over the last several years. Common sense would tell us that landfill activities on a scale proposed will interfere with the activities and, therefore, the population of Mule Deer in the area. l also observe (what I believe to be) Golden Eagles flying and nesting in the area. Then, of course, there are numerous other species of wild animals, large (i.e. Elk) and small (i.e. cottontail rabbit, chip monks, etc) that make this valley their home. They all need the food, the shelter, and the quiet peace the valley provides for their continued existence. I have read that, even with the most modern technology, seepage of toxic gases cannot be eliminated from these landfills. Over time, these gases create what is called "dead zones" where no life, plant or animal, can exist. These lifeless areas will cause great harm to all the affected areas. I think it is not an overstatement to say that that harm, together with the human activity at the proposed landfill sites in Millican Valley will be irreparable and permanent. 3. Fire: In doing my research, I discovered that at around October 20, 2022 there was a fire at the Knott landfill which was spread by the wind. Fortunately, the Bend Fire Department responded and put it out. The point is landfills are subject to fires, winds can spread those fires, and a well equipped nearby fire department is needed to extinguish the blazes. Millican Valley has afternoon winds daily, sometimes very strong and long lasting. Millican Valley has no well equipped nearby fire department to assist in the event of such an emergency. The likelihood of a rapid spread with inestimable damage should counsel strongly against a Millican Valley landfill. 4. Aquifer: I have read that there are significant aquifers in the Millican Valley region. I also understand that, for various reasons, they are being depleted. The toxic gas seepage noted above could, very likely find its' way into the remaining aquifers and contaminate what remains, rendering them unfit for use. Again, prudent counsel would direct against locating a landfill in the region. 5. Paragliders: have spoken with paragliders who use Pine Mountain to engage in their sport. I have observed them using this area almost daily for many years from spring to fall. They inform me that Pine Mountain was selected because of its' unique wind patterns which make it ideal for that activity. They also inform me that the introduction of methane gas into the atmosphere in the Millican area will cause an alteration in the wind patterns, not to mention poisoning them with the toxic gas, which would render the area useless, even perilous, for their sport. A major draw for Central Oregon residents and visitors is outdoor sporting activities. Paragliding is the major sporting activity in Millican Valley. It deserves to be protected. Airport. 6 Airport An airport has long existed on the east side of Pine Mountain Road just south of Highway 20. This landing strip is within proposed site 201500-300 and within five miles of proposed site 191400-3300. While it is not used as extensively as other airports near proposed sites, it should be off limits for the same safety reasons. There should be no minimum acceptable risk to life in selecting a landfill site. There is the important issue of Native American pictographs in the Millican Valley area. The site is listed on the National Register of Historic Places, These pictographs date from approximately 1500 B.C. to 1900 A.D. From my reading, I understand that they are fragile and are of historic and spiritual significance to certain tribal groups. Certainly, they are of cultural significance to all caring humans. While don't know what the impact of a landfill in the Millican area might be, I would hope that every care be taken to eliminate any possibility of damage: 8. Quiet Beauty: will end on a personal note. When I first discovered Millican Valley I knew it was a special place of beauty. Its' beauty was quiet, and that is what so attracted me. It was a place where the "still quiet voice" became audible to me. Though we don't think about it much, beauty is necessary for the well being of humans. That is why Central Oregon attracts so many. Its' beauty is virtually unparalleled. Millican Valley is one of its' gems. We have duty to protect it for future generations. Please, no landfills in Millican Valley. Respectfully. Kathleen Weick Angie Powers From: Sent: To: Subject: [EXTERNAL EMAIL] Robin Vora <robinvoral@gmail.com> Tuesday, January 24, 2023 5:16 PM citizeninput Fwd: Difficult potential county landfill choices In case I should also submit this comment to this email. Please see below. Robin Vora Forwarded message From: Robin Vora <robinvoral Agmail.com> Date: Tue, Jan 24, 2023 at 1:32 PM Subject: Difficult potential county landfill choices To: <board a@deschutes.org> I understand County Commissioners will be deciding tomorrow as to whether to make the FAA guideline of 5 miles from an airport an absolute requirement to an entire new landfill site. I would like the Board to be aware that so far there do not appear to be any good potential landfill sites, at least from my perspective. If the Redmond transfer station, Dodds Road (COID) and Rickard Road sites are eliminated from consideration, the. remaining 8-9 sites all have major environmental issues, longer haul distances, and most have local opposition. The county may not want to rule out options too quickly and may want to direct county staff, consultants and the committee to look more exhaustively at other possibilities that might work but didn't meet the initial GIS-based screening criteria (e.g., 500 acres minimum size, combining several parcels if that wasn't done). A couple of possibilities with likely less environmental conflict and closer haul distances might be BLM lands near to Highway 97 in the vicinity of the solar farms (access would require a railroad crossing) or BLM land near and just east of the Powell Butte Highway at the Crook -Deschutes county border. These two areas would require a land exchange or purchase from BLM, but that agency may go along with it if they see the environmental tradeoffs with the eastern Deschutes County sites. A number of the public have recommended the 453 or so acres site just south of Knott Landfill. While it does have a major power line running through it, and is under 500 acres, perhaps the powerline could be moved to the edge over the next 6 years leaving 250 acres for a landfill, or a different landfill model combining use of Knott Landfill and this site. The Commissioners may want to keep the train to Arlington as back-up and compare its potentially higher costs to environmental costs and local opposition to an in -county landfill: I am just offering thoughts and ideas, and wanted to recommend not throwing out options too quickly. The entire Dodds Road site appears to be just within 4-5 miles of Bend Airport and only about a half of the Rickard site may be within that 5-mile radius. I suspect there are airports elsewhere that have landfills within 5 miles and it might be worth checking with other airports for practical experiences rather than employing an arbitrary 5-mile criteria. The busy Salt Lake City airport, for example, appears to have a landfill about 5 miles away according to Google Maps. I am sending this as a personal comment and not representing the Soil Waste Advisory Committee in any way. Robin Vora 1679 NE Daphne Ct, Bend, OR 97701 Angie Powers From: Sent: To: Subject: Attachments: Craig Miller <gismiller@gmail.com> Tuesday, January 24, 2023 9:18 PM managethefuture; citizeninput Deschutes Landfill Options Discussion Deschutes Landfill Options.docx Some people who received this message don't often get email from gismiller@gmail.com. Learn why this is important [EXTERNAL EMAIL] To Whom it May Concern: Please accept my comments (attached) regarding the Deschutes County search for a new landfill site. Sincerely, Craig Miller PO Box 6376 Bend, Oregon gismiller@gmail.eom i 1-24-2023 To Solid Waste Advisory Committee: To Deschutes. County Commissioners: Thank you for providing this opportunity to comment on the planned location options for a new Deschutes County landfill. As a former SWAC member, I understand the necessity for planning a new facility. I also understand both the difficulty and the importance of choosing the best possible location. I have lived in Bend since 1981. I served as an Emergency Physician at St. Charles Medical Center from 1981-1999. I subsequently contracted as a Geographic Information Systems (GIS) specialist for the Oregon Natural Desert Association where I work now. I have a deep appreciation for the need to protect human lives as well as protecting the environment on which both humans and wildlife depend. I provide these comments on my own, and are not on behalf of ONDA, which will offer its own set of comments. I have grave concerns regarding the methods and assumptions that have been used to determine approximately 12 potential sites. I believe certain criteria were too heavy-handed and other criteria should have been included that were omitted. I will touch on some of these criteria in the following paragraphs. Insufficient information: I believe the County was correct to eliminate the non -viable areas first. However, as illustrated by the FAA 5-mile avoidance recommendation, it is clear that the non -viability criteria were not adequately identified. There appears to have been a significant lack of knowledge regarding federal land management as well state wildlife management. Although most of the potential sites are privately owned, many are surrounded by Bureau of Land Management (BLM) land. As such, road construction, visual changes, traffic and wildlife impacts may preclude the types of activities that might be planned on the private parcel. One striking example is the Cougar Wells site (#12) which is a private inholding inside a Wilderness Study Area (WSA). There is no access to this site except for a primitive motorized trail. There is not a constructed road that accesses the site, and since the parcel is surrounded by WSA, no possibility exists for a road to be constructed to the site. Trash cannot be hauled to the site without a constructed road. In short, the Cougar Wells option is fatally flawed. WSAs should have been included in the exclusion criteria. Other exclusion criteria that should have been included from the start includes 4-mile buffers around occupied/pending sage -grouse leks and Visual Resource Management (VRM) categories 1 and 2. Federal Management is guided by an overarching management plan that has undergone a rigorous environmental impact statement (EIS). A federal agency is subject to litigation if it fails to follow its own regulations set out in the management plan. The Greater Sage -Grouse Approved Resource Management Plan Amendment (ARMPA) was devised to help prevent the extinction of this keystone species. Its intent is to avoid triggering more stringent protections under the Endangered Species Act (ESA). Unfortunately ARMPA has not stopped the continuing decline of Greater Sage -Grouse throughout the west. It is therefore imperative that our federal agencies carefully follow the regulations it has set out. While the County correctly designated Priority Habitat Management Area for exclusion, it failed to do so for 4-mile sage -grouse lek buffers as required under ARMPA. Road construction and other disturbance activity is not allowed within 4 miles of a pending/occupied sage -grouse lek. Three of the parcel options lie with the buffer, precluding road construction, site development, and other disturbance activities. Another federal requirement is that various viewscapes receive a range of protections, referred to as Visual Resource Management (VRM): A VRM 1 or 2 classification prohibits new disturbances (such as developments, roads, night lights, increased noise or traffic). The Golden Valley site is within a VRM 2 zone and therefore ineligible for landfill placement. Other exclusion criteria should have included situations where multiple wildlife winter range and habitat overlap. ODFW-designated essential pronghorn habitat was omitted entirely. Every option from Horse Ridge east possesses multiple overlapping wildlife ranges. Another important factor not considered is the importance of dark sky to the Pine Mountain Observatory. It has been a Central. Oregon icon since it was established in 1967. It has made many important cosmic discoveries. Dark skies are becoming increasingly rare throughout North America. The increased presence of night lights in the Millican Valley will seriously impact the ability of the observatory to function. Millican Valley and Golden Valley site options should be excluded to preserve the dark skies and the lowest possible air particulates. Regarding exclusion criteria, it is unclear to me what extent federal/county land exchange has been considered. There are easily accessible areas (along Hwy 97 and along Powell Butte Hwy) that are managed by BLM, and could potentially be amenable to exchange while at the same time avoiding "nimby" and wildlife conflicts. Furthermore, to what extent has a tri-county approach been considered? There may be certain areas just outside the Deschutes County boundary that could serve the entire Central Oregon region. Considering that this will be at least a hundred year commitment, it is imperative that the whole range of possible solutions be carefully considered, using the most comprehensive range of viable options possible. I believe the current process falls short of that. Sincerely, Craig Miller PO Box 6376 Bend, Oregon gismiller@gmail.com Angie Powers From: Andrea Wampler <dreana83@gmail,com> Sent: Wednesday, January 25, 2023 9:22 AM To: OSPFWD@osp:oregon.gov; odfw.info@odfw.oregon.gov, odfw.commission@odfw.oregon:gov; citizeninput; Sen.TimKnopp@oregonlegislature.gov, Rep.JackZika@oregonlegislature.gov. Subject Lethal Animal. Traps Some people who received this message don't often get email from dreana83@gmail.com, Learn why this is important [EXTERNAL EMAIL] Dear representatives, I am writing to express my concerns on lethal animal traps. I've learned that it is not widely known that these dangerous jaw traps exist throughout our public lands. I recently learned that there are traps in the forest just behind my residence in Deschutes county. The traps are near forest roads where I and my neighbors go for walks with our families and pets. Many people ride horses around here from the nearby equestrian center. Most are unaware that we are walking by dangerous and potentially deadly traps. I only learned about the traps existing because my friend went through a traumatic ordeal of having her dog get caught in a trap while on a run. Luckily the dog is large and strong and did survive. Had it been one of her other dogs, there would have been a different ending. Although the dog did survive, she was unable to remove the trap herself and had to call her husband to help her rush the dog to the vet. Can you even imagine the agony of helplessly watching your d i for allthat timeit took to get to t1, t the trap and treat the injury? A t the hands f dog in pain a,� of �.�e vex to remove �u., ���., injury : �� �� e ��an s o� someone that does this...for what? I often hear one to two gunshots around sunrise in the forest behind my house. I now realize that is the sound of our local wildlife being killed. Other than the risk of injury to our families and beloved pets, I can't help but be deeply disturbed at the thought of the torture each of these animals endures in their final minutes or hours of life. They are not all instantly killed, many suffering in horrible pain. I know that hunters strive for shots that will instantly kill and have the animal experience the least amount of pain. This is anything but that. There is no way to guarantee that only certain animals that are perceived as pests are trapped. All of our wildlife is susceptible to being trapped - coyotes, fox, cougars, deer, elk, bear, raccoons, porcupines, and wolves. Also, lost domesticated dogs and cats looking for a meal can encounter the traps. I believe that trapping is archaic and immoral and should be outlawed. When I think of Oregon, I think of a place that is progressive and sympathetic. Yet we are still one of the last states in the West to still allow these traps. California, Washington, Colorado and New Mexico have banned the use of these traps. We should do the same. Thank you for all you do for the community. I appreciate you taking the time to read this. Best, Andrea Wampler 55036 Marten Lane Bend OR 97707 541-604-5113 t BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS AGENDA REQUEST & STAFF REPORT MEETING DATE: January 30, 2023 SUBJECT: Mid -Year Report from Visit Central Oregon RECOMMENDED MOTION: No action needed. BACKGROUND AND POLICY IMPLICATIONS: Appointed by the Oregon Tourism Commission to serve as the regional destination marketing organization for the Central Oregon area, Visit Central Oregon works to grow tourism by inviting visitors to experience the landscapes and culture that Central Oregon has to offer. BUDGET IMPACTS: None ATTENDANCE: Nick Lelack, County Administrator Julie Theisen, CEO, Visit Central Oregon BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS AGENDA REQUEST & STAFF REPORT MEETING DATE: January 30, 2023 SUBJECT: Camping Feasibility Study RFP BACKGROUND AND POLICY IMPLICATIONS: The County issued a Request for Proposal (RFP) for a qualified consultant to perform a Camping Feasibility Study for development of private or public RV parks and campgrounds, along with support amenities and infrastructure. The RFP application period ran from November 16 - December 16. The RFP was advertised in the Bend Bulletin, The Daily Journal of Commerce, and on the County's social media websites and local news ran stories, live and online. Additionally the RFP was sent directly to consultants who the County had previously worked with and firms who expressed interest in this topic. The County received five (5) proposals. A proposal evaluation committee was established that included tourism and recreation representatives as well as local government employees. The evaluation committee met on January 23, 2023 to discuss proposals and submitted final scoring sheets by January 26, 2023. The scoring criteria is as follows: • Demonstrated competence and experience of the individual or team relevant to this project (25%) • Quality and extent of services available (25%) • Proposal costs (25%) • Timeline to complete the study (25%) The submitted proposals are listed below in top scoring order. The proposal costs along with topline feedback from the evaluation committee have been included for consideration. ECONorthwest Score: 476/500 $128,170 • Demonstrated a depth of knowledge in feasibility studies and relevant experience • Scope of work was laid out in two phases: o Phase 1 analysis of feasibility on sites listed o Phase 2 assessments, operational and finance plans, organizational structure, and executive summary • Price was within the median range of all proposals submitted • Proposal outlined a 1-year timeline to complete the study CHM Government Services (Concessions Hospitality Management Government Services) Score: 361/500 $311,300 • Demonstrated extensive experience and the team would consist of a staff of 10 who has specific campground feasibility study knowledge and experience • Schedule of product deliverables and process was clear and well thought out • Price was 2 to 3 times that of other proposals, it is noted that the price encompasses every aspect of the RFP where some of the other proposals encompassed a scalable and/or narrowing of sites for full analyses • No timeline was presented Crane Associates Score: 342/500 $65,000 • Demonstrated unique and thorough experience in the tourism industry however it was not highly relevant to the scope of work listed in the RFP • outlined A tasks in an effective and detailed manner, the tasks are heavy on market feasibility versus land use, policy, and zoning feasibility • Consultant would setup an office in Bend at no cost to the County for the duration of the feasibility study • The costs was the lowest of the 5 proposals • Proposed a timeline of starting in June lasting 6-8 weeks Staves Consulting Score: 314/500 Phase 1 $54,600 Phase 2 $20,000 per detailed site study • Depth of industry knowledge designing campgrounds and RV parks • Proposal suggests a two-phase approach with separate budgets o Phase 1 would gather data, meet with agencies, and provide a written report highlighting the pros and cons of each site o Phase 2 would include detailed plans for sites, roads, footprints, electrical, water, and sewer • $20,000 per each site the County would like to include • Price is within the median range dependent on how many sites the County opts to include in Phase 2 • No timeline or schedule was included which negatively impacted their overall score (timeline was 25% of scoring criteria) Healthy Sustainable Commurfties Score: 295i500 $109,402 • Proposal demonstrated years of experience, however direct feasibility study experience was not clear o Small team, 2-4 people, includes a consultant from Redmond who would bring local knowledge to the project • Provided a short description for each of the 5 phases with correlating budget but did not provide a high level of detail on what work would be conducted for each phase • Proposal cost is similar to other proposals • Proposed a 6 month timeline beginning in February The County has received numerous letters from HOA's and home owners in neighborhoods located adjacent to or near Forrest Service Road 4604 (Phil's Trailhead) in opposition to a feasibility study taking place at this location. Staff seeks next steps from the Board that could include: 1. The Board can request to conduct interviews with some or all of the consultants who submitted a proposal. 2. Staff can return at a later date if the Board is not prepared to make a decision today. 3. The Board can make an award based on the evaluation committee's scores. BUDGET IMPACTS: The cost to implement the RFP has not been included in the current budget. Proposals range from $65,000 up to $311,300. ATTENDANCE: Jen Patterson, Deschutes County, Strategic Initiatives Manager BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS AGENDA REQUEST & STAFF REPORT MEETING DATE: January 30, 2023 SUBJECT: Work Session to Prepare for the Board's Review of a Modification Request to the Thornburgh Destination Resort's Fish & Wildlife Management Plan RECOMMENDED MOTIONS: N/A BACKGROUND AND POLICY IMPLICATIONS: On January 30, 2023, staff will be available to answer questions related to the Hearings Officer's review of a modification request to the Thornburgh Destination Resort's FWMP and associated appeals. This work session will provide an opportunity for the Board, prior to the public hearing scheduled for February 1, 2023, to ask staff questions about the application, the Hearings Officer's decision, and appeals. BUDGET IMPACTS: None ATTENDANCE: Caroline House, Senior Planner Anthony Raguine, Principal Planner William Groves, Planning Manager BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS AGENDA REQUEST & STAFF REPORT MEETING DATE: January 30, 2023 SUBJECT: Update from City of Bend on its Multiple Unit Property Tax Exemption Program RECOMMENDED MOTION: NA/no action needed at this time BACKGROUND AND POLICY IMPLICATIONS: In August 2022, the Bend City Council adopted a local Multiple Unit Property Tax Exemption (MUPTE) program to support development and redevelopment goals in Bend's core and transit -oriented areas. The program is available for multi -story residential projects in certain areas of Bend that provide three or more units and provide at least three public benefits such as a certain percentage of units dedicated at middle income or affordable rental levels, providing energy efficient buildings, public open space, and more. In order for projects to rri ialify fnr the tav evemntinn to annhi to the fi In tau rinllar, each inrlivirii ial project will need to be approved by board resolution of 51 % of the combined levy of taxing districts. Allison Platt, Core Area Project Manager for the City of Bend, will give an overview of the program and provide options for the Board's future evaluation of MUPTE applications. More information is available online at: Multiple Unit Property Tax Exemption Program I City of Bend (bendoregon.gov) BUDGET IMPACTS: Budget impacts will vary according to the specific project. Multi -unit residential projects of three or more units can apply to receive a ten-year property tax exemption on structural residential improvements. Commercial improvements and parking may also be exempt if required by applicable design standards. ATTENDANCE: Nick Lelack, County Administrator Allison Platt, Core Area Project Manager for City of Bend Codified in August 2022 z_ w 0 -J w> V 0 z 0 w z z_ 0 S_. z w >m_ LL Overview of program & program questions Recommendations for County's review process Improvements exempt (not land) for up to 10 years Program adopted by Ordinance c U 0 0 c 0 0 V) A O a a a) 0 17) E U •L •O N Q0 U c) W c O O C a) 0 O O Q • E O +' 7 (0 • .x •U) c y L a) oz5Eco ct.Ca fn -L ES co — �- d. co• NLa) U ca.5To 0 )EC • L N `-E� •2a)Ec ctsc ° E O a) OEL a0) o_a) EE°E O C.)) W • °-0 U O cc i a) a) a) -a CO c .� U •L CO 4 in •L O)� C • CO • a, a, Q 7 • •U C L (6 E c- o O O LC, N 4- N 0,4 d c o o CO -J CITY OF BEND I ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 1 N d C O c o a) N _§ o o a) v a vQ o_`Oo X 1 U o CO •> E U 0 I ) M E-1 U ♦L., .4- CZ -I-7 CO o c u) U To -0a) = Uo u_ a) a)cn cn 2 a) I— 0 7 oo-c CD co E N co �? m dam- 2 a) CC 1 D) 0) Q C >, 0 = o �- U COoo a o L p �•� • a) CD 2 o •E in'c o2 J coQ co W N 0 I D' U CO 0 w Z J g 2 g ce stki cn ca ca a) TD T3 CITY OF BEND 1 ' EOM 8283130 IL Alk Sites code. f tf{1.1 3 or more residential units a) • N O H O (/) - O O - o n u O O Li j .N O O o O L O EQ u) O O L L U O � c c a) a) N N L L ® 5 ▪ .5 CT CT E E E • '5 E E (/) 0- ▪ c c a) N E E o 0 a) +1 A CV _ 2 . Meet public benefit requirements (see next slide) cn a) a) L (6 E O L 0 U c 0 0 0 c (0 cn 0 O (0 (6 4- a) a) Q a) a. M O E .E W O O• _ 07 c -0 O O 9O a) co N O O • = a) a E CO o c o m E;c o E a� w c��"'- •>, .m N ate-+ :.. U L O Q L �, O v) C O i U 0= U O 0 O to O 3 L N= "' O O p .c U Q) 0,_ roc . O c Q) N c 2 x , O C_ U y- - 0 L.- a) •O Q N N 0 OL 0...0 a) •� \ C 0 C 0 to N 1- ' O) O1 O., 1 '� HD N a) 'jEO`u O O 2 • U f a a a) E z • • • • • Earth Advantage Silver, or Usable amenities LEED Silver L ii N aco c c a co • � E • O (f) O Consultation with BPRD storm event Units required to be deed -restricted for the length of the exemption (10 years) CITY OF BEND I HOUSING c \ c » o \0_ ƒko .13.1%.2E0 Lu(9• 3a g e/ 0 co c 0 c ° 7 « 0t7 f iEk 3 2- 0(0 c b §co #0 2•#7 o �— .o£ mad% 7• % o o 0. /.ƒ f73 A( : 0 kk (0 < c) o. . 2 \ «2 §9m2 &4 « cm NJ f %//\k a<Q T... Recommendation: CITY OF BEND '1 9- O A .N L +- i C 2 = a--" .L O O Lo L L (n C r- 1 O O CO C N CD. - CLU O 0 co a) c >, o 0 o O0Lo C = CO . L -O N f +� — +� ; "� N -U .N C U-0 "0 C"6 O 2 N O (6 s- C N L- o O cn N O L N Q.}, N L �a) c czc0 Q_c(a�Q o_ O Q O LL O cn E L Q Oc � VJ 1' c O O O t _OE2 .V c > oo� aa�-t O ODU)- �(E_ a -co >, m(z .� m�NO(a o Lf ) T d- L0 • Notifications to al C IA O. 0 In 0 0. 2 Li) ft d = CD > a) a ) 70 2 •= o _a O -a o a� co co v� .�, E "E r Wr- 0)0) 00 N t� N N- x- Annual tax revenue before project (2025) bg Annual tax revenue after exemption (2037) 10-year tax collection without MUPTE O CA T- O CC) 09- 10-year tax collection with MUPTE 10-year impact (a to o .F+ 1- L� CO OD CO 'mod' N N N- O) O O r LC) CO Lf) C\ , CD LC) 0) t0 to N Coo ) N op N te d9. oe, o 0 o c o O 00 N o0 C r- N cal4 O to d' n N c- c- - Bend La Pine School District Actual Impact for Bend LaPine (3%) c N m •+- 0 0 Deschutes County Bend Park and Recreation District .� U a) 0) 1• 0 0 Deschutes County & 911 CITY OF BEND iI 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 0 0 0 0 cz N Nzl" O `N id▪ '� o 0 0 0 0 Cfl CO CV CO CO t- LO M CO 41' d' Lei C J ▪ CO • M N O Actual Impact for Bend LaPine (3% of above) Deschutes County Bend Park and Recreation District Total Deschutes County (911& County) CITY OF BEND I 01' ES 0 BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS AGENDA REQUEST & STAFF REPORT MEETING DATE: January 30, 2023 SUBJECT: Draft FY 2024 Goals and Objectives for Approval RECOMMENDED MOTION: Move approval of 2024 Goals and Objectives BACKGROUND AND POLICY IMPLICATIONS: The draft FY 2024 Goals and Objectives (attached) reflect the initial conversation of the Board during the Retreat held on January 20, 2023. BUDGET IMPACTS: None ATTENDANCE: Whitney Hale, Deputy County Administrator FY 2024 Goals and Objectives Mission Statement: Enhancing the lives of citizens by delivering quality services in a cost-effective manner. Safe Communities: Protect the community through planning, preparedness, and delivery of coordinated services. • Provide safe and secure communities through coordinated public safety and crisis management services. • Reduce crime and recidivism and support victim restoration and well-being through equitable engagement, prevention, reparation of harm, intervention, supervision andenforcement. • Collaborate with partners to prepare for and respond to emergencies, natural hazards and disasters. Healthy People: Enhance and protect the health and well-being of communities and their residents. • Support and advance the health and safety of all Deschutes County's residents. • Promote well-being through behavioral health and community support programs. • Help to sustain natural resources and air and water quality in balance with other community needs. • Continue to support pandemic response and community recovery, examining lessons learned to ensure we are prepared for future events. A Resilient County: Promote policies and actions that sustain and stimulate economic resilience and a strong regional workforce. 41 I InrlatA rni inty Ind i is.- plans anrd nnliriac to nrmmnta livahility, arnnnmir nnnnrti inity rdicactar preparedness, and a healthy environment. • Maintain a safe, efficient and economically sustainable transportation system. • Manage County assets and enhance partnerships that grow and sustain businesses, tourism, and recreation. Housing Stability and Supply: Support actions to increase housing production and achieve stability • Expand opportunities for residential development on appropriate County -owned properties. • Support actions to increase housing supply. • Collaborate with partner organizations to provide an adequate supply of short-term and permanent housing and services to address housing insecurity. Service Delivery: Provide solution -oriented service that is cost-effective and efficient. • Ensure quality service delivery through the use of innovative technology and systems. • Support and promote Deschutes County Customer Service "Every Time" standards. • Continue to enhance community participation and proactively welcome residents to engage with County programs, services and policy deliberations. • Preserve, expand and enhance capital assets, to ensure sufficient space for operational needs. • Maintain strong fiscal practices to support short and long-term county needs. • Provide collaborative internal support for County operations with a focus on recruitment and retention initiatives. BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS MEETING 1:00 PM, MONDAY, JANUARY 30, 2023 Allen Room - Deschutes Services Building - 1300 NW Wall St - Bend (541) 388-6570 I www.deschutes.org AGENDA MEETING FORMAT: In accordance with Oregon state law, this meeting is open to the public and can be accessed and attended in person or remotely, with the exception of any executive session. Members of the public may view the meeting in real time via the public meeting portal at www.deschutes.org/meetings. To view the meeting via Zoom, see below. Citizen Input: The public may comment on any meeting topic that is not on the current agenda. To provide citizen input, submit an email to citizeninput@deschutes.org or leave a voice message at 541-385-1734. Citizen input received by noon on Tuesday will be included in the meeting record for topics that are not on the Wednesday agenda. If in -person comment from the public is allowed at the meeting, public comment will also be allowed via computer, phone or other virtual means. Zoom Meeting Information: This meeting may be accessed via Zoom using a phone or computer. • To join the meeting from a computer, copy and paste this link: bit.ly/3h3ogdD. • To join by phone, call 253-215-8782 and enter webinar ID # 899 4635 9970 followed by the passcode 013510. • If joining by a browser, use the raise hand icon to indicate you would like to provide public comment, if and when allowed. If using a phone, press *6 to indicate you would like to speak and *9 to unmute yourself when you are called on. Deschutes County encourages persons with disabilities to participate in all programs and activities. This event/location is accessible to people with disabilities. If you need accommodations to make participation possible, call (541) 388-6572 or email brenda.fritsvold@deschutes.org. CALL TO ORDER PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE CITIZEN INPUT: Citizen Input may be provided as comment on any topic that is not on the agenda. Note: In addition to the option of providing in -person comments at the meeting, citizen input comments may be emailed to citizeninput@deschutes.org or you may leave a brief voicemail at 541.385.1734. To be timely, citizen input must be received by noon on Tuesday in order to be included in the meeting record. ACTION ITEMS 1. 1:05 PM Mid -Year Report from Visit Central Oregon 2. 1:35 PM Camping Feasibility Study RFP 3. 2:00 PM Work Session to Prepare for the Board's Review of a Modification Request to the Thornburgh Destination Resort's Fish & Wildlife Management Plan 4. 2:20 PM Update from City of Bend on its Multiple Unit Property Tax Exemption Program 5. 2:35 PM Draft FY 2024 Goals and Objectives OTHER ITEMS These can be any items not included on the agenda that the Commissioners wish to discuss as part of the meeting, pursuant to ORS 192.640. EXECUTIVE SESSION At any time during the meeting, an executive session could be called to address issues relating to ORS 192.660(2)(e), real property negotiations; ORS 192.660(2)(h), litigation; ORS 192.660(2)(d), labor negotiations; ORS 192.660(2)(b), personnel issues; or other executive session categories. Executive sessions are closed to the public; however, with few exceptions and under specific guidelines, are open to the media. 6. Executive Session under ORS 192.660 (2) (e) Real Property Negotiations ADJOURN January 30, 2023 BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS MEETING Page 2 of 2