HomeMy WebLinkAbout2010-09-29 Business Meeting MinutesDeschutes County Board of Commissioners
1300 NW Wall St., Bend, OR 97701-1960
(541) 388-6570 - Fax (541) 385-3202 - www.deschutes.org
MINUTES OF BUSINESS MEETING
DESCHUTES COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
WEDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 29, 2010
_____________________________
Commissioners' Hearing Room - Administration Building - 1300 NW Wall St., Bend
__________________________
Present were Commissioners Dennis R. Luke, Alan Unger and Tammy Baney.
Also present were Dave Kanner, County Administrator; Erik Kropp Deputy County
Administrator; Nancy Blankenship, Clerk; Laurie Craghead, County Counsel;
Sheryl Hogan, Health Services; and Tom Anderson, Community Development; and
four other citizens. No representatives of the media were in attendance.
Chair Luke opened the meeting at 10:00 a.m.
1. Before the Board was Citizen Input.
None was offered.
2. Before the Board was Consideration of Signature of Document No. 2010-
594, the Family Drug Court Grant Agreement through the Criminal
Justice Commission.
Sheryl Hogan explained the item, which involves a grant of over $252,000 to
continue the Family Drug Court program.
Commissioner Unger asked what local resources are used for matching. Ms.
Hogan said that some staff time is provided.
BANEY: Move approval.
UNGER: Second.
VOTE: BANEY: Yes.
UNGER: Yes.
LUKE: Chair votes yes.
Minutes of the Board of Commissioners’ Business Meeting Wednesday, September 29, 2010
Page 1 of 6 Pages
Minutes of the Board of Commissioners’ Business Meeting Wednesday, September 29, 2010
Page 2 of 6 Pages
3. Before the Board was a Public Hearing and Consideration of Signature of
Order No. 2010-050, Approving the Griffin Annexation into La Pine Rural
Fire Protection District.
Chair Luke opened the public hearing at this time, and Laurie Craghead gave a
brief overview of the item.
Dennis Griffin, a property owner in the proposed annexation area, said that they
have the support of 100% of the voters who are registered in that area. There
seems to be no opposition. Ms. Craghead stated that no letters or other
concerns have been received in opposition.
Chair Luke closed the hearing.
BANEY: Move approval.
UNGER: Second.
VOTE: BANEY: Yes.
UNGER: Yes.
LUKE: Chair votes yes.
Before the Board was Consideration of Approval of the Consent Agenda.
The minutes of the Business Meeting of September 22 were removed to allow
Commissioner Baney to review them.
Consent Agenda Items
4. Signature of Order No 2010-053, Appointing County Residents to Two Pools
from which the County Clerk will Select Members of the Board of Property Tax
Appeals, and Authorizing Signature of Letters to the Appointees, Notifying of
His/Her Appointment.
Nancy Blankenship said that they have a larger pool this year as they are
expecting a higher number of petitions this coming year that will need to be
addressed.
5. Signature of Document No. 2010-631, the Annual Boating Safety and Marine
Law Enforcement Services Agreement between the Sheriff’s Office and the
Oregon State Marine Board
6. Approval of Minutes:
Business Meeting of September 22
Work Session of September 20 and 22
Minutes of the Board of Commissioners’ Business Meeting Wednesday, September 29, 2010
Page 3 of 6 Pages
CONVENED AS THE GOVERNING BODY OF THE 911 COUNTY
SERVICE DISTRICT
7. Before the Board was Consideration of Approval of Weekly Accounts
Payable Vouchers for the 911 County Service District, in the Amount of
$60,585.82.
BANEY: Move approval, subject to review.
UNGER: Second.
VOTE: BANEY: Yes.
UNGER: Yes.
LUKE: Chair votes yes.
CONVENED AS THE GOVERNING BODY OF THE EXTENSION AND 4-H
COUNTY SERVICE DISTRICT
8. Before the Board was Consideration of Approval of Weekly Accounts
Payable Vouchers for the Extension/4-H County Service District, in the
Amount of $544.95.
BANEY: Move approval, subject to review.
UNGER: Second.
VOTE: BANEY: Yes.
UNGER: Yes.
LUKE: Chair votes yes.
RECONVENED AS THE DESCHUTES COUNTY BOARD OF
COMMISSIONERS
9. Before the Board was Consideration of Approval of Weekly Accounts
Payable Vouchers for Deschutes County, in the Amount of $1,878,129.56.
BANEY: Move approval, subject to review.
UNGER: Second.
VOTE: BANEY: Yes.
UNGER: Yes.
LUKE: Chair votes yes.
Minutes of the Board of Commissioners’ Business Meeting Wednesday, September 29, 2010
Page 4 of 6 Pages
10. Before the Board were Additions to the Agenda.
Dave Kanner said that Community Development staff has asked for guidance
regarding fee waivers. He suggested there be a process in place to address
these because it is potentially controversial.
Tom Anderson stated that last week he received a fee waiver request from Kelly
Brown, regarding non-farm commercial events on agricultural land. There is a
process for temporary approval of non-farm events. The fee, because of the
extensive time needed for this text amendment, would be $10,000. If a
Hearings Officer is involved, it could cost another $5,000.
Commissioner Baney would like to see an open process with all sides being
able to provide testimony as to what they would like to see happen.
Commissioner Unger agreed, but feels that there needs to be a clear path. The
State has not helped at all in this regard. Commissioner Baney said there are
two things: the fee waiver, and the next steps. She would like to take them
separately. Commissioner Unger is not sure he can keep them separate; they
are the same issue. Commissioner Luke feels they should be kept separate. He
asked how the fees would be covered, and the process regarding the fee waiver
needs to be determined. Commissioner Unger feels they overlap but is
frustrated that no direction is coming from the State.
Mr. Anderson stated that staff can prepare a staff report, with the important
questions that can be addressed in this regard. There is already an item on the
work plan for this fiscal year to take on this issue, but not until the first of the
year. The timing comes into play, and it needs to be decided on when to start
the process. Starting early may provide answers regarding an ongoing Code
enforcement issue and might provide a model ordinance for what is going on at
the State level right now. However, it might make more sense to wait until the
State discussions play out. Either way is okay, but the discussion needs to be
properly framed and a process established. Notice is a consideration, and
whether the Planning Commission should be involved is another.
Commissioner Baney said that the County is not one that sits back and waits for
the State if something needs to be addressed. Commissioner Luke asked if the
fee waiver can be ignored at this point, and the County just work through the
process. Mr. Anderson said there is no formal text amendment application and
it would likely have to be initiated by the County. Commissioner Unger feels
that this would give the County a way to look at the big picture without
involving just one party.
Minutes of the Board of Commissioners’ Business Meeting Wednesday, September 29, 2010
Page 5 of 6 Pages
Mr. Kanner reminded the Board that this discussion is to be on whether there
would need to be a process established to address the fee waiver situation.
Commissioner Luke feels that the discussions are appropriate. Ms. Craghead
noted that public meetings law allows additions to the agenda that were not
previously noted, but the discussion should be more focused on the question,
which is how to handle fee waivers.
Commissioner Baney feels that the issues need to be handled separately, just the
fee waiver situation at this point, in a business meeting. Commissioner Unger
feels that criteria regarding how to handle fee waivers in general should be
developed. Commissioner Luke said he would deny the request.
Mr. Anderson stated that if the fee waiver was approved, he would tell the
applicants to initiate a text amendment to address the larger issue. If the waiver
is denied, the County would likely have to initiate the text amendment.
Commissioner Luke feels there are other things on the work plan that should
take precedence over moving up something else that was to be addressed after
the first of the year.
Ms. Craghead said there needs to be a general policy discussion on this fee
waiver under the current rules, the fee waiver policy in general, and, once a
decision has been made on this fee waiver, what direction the Board wants to
go. Staff needs guidance on the process the Board wants to follow. It is
possible that the Board may not want to develop a fee waiver policy at all.
Mr. Anderson proposed that an e-mail notification be sent to individuals who
have a stake in the fee waiver issue. It is not a land use proceeding and this is
more than is required.
This issue will be addressed at an upcoming business meeting agenda.
The meeting adjourned at 10:45 a.m.