The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2014-03-05 Work Session Minutes Minutes of Board of Commissioners’ Work Session Wednesday, March 5, 2014 Page 1 of 5 Deschutes County Board of Commissioners 1300 NW Wall St., Suite 200, Bend, OR 97701-1960 (541) 388-6570 - Fax (541) 385-3202 - www.deschutes.org MINUTES OF WORK SESSION DESCHUTES COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS WEDNESDAY, MARCH 5, 2014 ___________________________ Present were Commissioners Tammy Baney, Anthony DeBone and Alan Unger. Also present were Tom Anderson, County Administrator; Erik Kropp, Deputy County Administrator; and, for a portion of the meeting, Laurie Craghead, County Counsel; Ed Keith, Forester; Chris Doty, Road Department; Judith Ure, Administration; and eight other citizens, including Angela Lee-Mandlin, Bruce White, Carly Moore and Marcus Tiktin of the Mock Trial Group; and a representative of KTVZ TV. Chair Baney opened the meeting at 1:30 p.m. ___________________________ 1. Mock Trial Group Presentation – Classroom Law Project. Student Marcus Tiktin, a junior at Summit High School, said he has been involved in this group since he was a freshman. He explained what a mock trial group does. They select a criminal or civil case to use as a test case, with the assistance of an attorney or judge. At Summit High, this is extracurricular class. Student Carly Moore is a freshman at Bend High School, where this is also an extracurricular activity. She finds it amazing to see how a trial works and appreciates her instructor, Lillian Quinn. Mr. Tiktin said they started practicing on this three months ago. The competition was last weekend. They are assigned three cases and it is randomized as to who gets which side at trial. His group moves to the State competition in a couple of weeks along with the home school group. Seven teams competed. He said that the biggest part for him was the public speaking piece. He gives the closing statement. Minutes of Board of Commissioners’ Work Session Wednesday, March 5, 2014 Page 2 of 5 Ms. Moore stated that the courtroom setting was a great experience. She thanked the Board for helping with the costs involved. Her school does not charge the students. Mr. Tiktin said students at Summit have to pay towards supplies and materials, and transportation if they go to the State event. He found this experience teaches three things: leadership skills, speaking skills and learning about the law and perhaps a future career path. Commissioner Unger stated that Redmond has a student court, and perhaps they could investigate this since they do not do this in Bend. They decide on cases that involve other students that got into trouble. Bruce White invited the Commissioners to be involved with mock trial next year as possible judges. 2. Discussion regarding Adjustments to the County’s Weed Ordinance. Chair Baney wanted to start with the emergency clause. Commissioner Unger noted that this has been an issue for years. Commissioner DeBone added that he can see a need to have this in place for spring when weeds sprout. It is probably too late for that this year. Commissioner Unger said that this is for those few people who cause problems. The Board wants to move forward without the emergency clause. In regard to the separation of power, they could have the Sheriff handle part of this. Community Development does enforcement to a point. There is some benefit having someone with a badge show up. However, the Sheriff may not want staff spending time doing this type of thing. Mr. Anderson stated that the Sheriff’s Office has substantial experience doing this for CDD. In most cases, if the Sheriff’s Office does this, they start with a warning or even just a conversation. Tom Wells, a law enforcement technician, does most of this and works with people at a personal level. Usually this results in compliance. Minutes of Board of Commissioners’ Work Session Wednesday, March 5, 2014 Page 3 of 5 In regard to cleaning equipment, the State does not provide a definition. It should be defined so it can be approached in a uniform way. Pressure washing is not always practical. They can remove the ‘how to do it’ part and just show an expectation of the equipment being cleaned. Ms. Craghead reiterated that this is in the ordinance now and has always been th ere, and it is in State law if the equipment moves onto public roadways. Commissioner Unger said that this is an educational process and most will want to comply. Chair Baney added that certified weed free crops are very important to some. Ms. Craghead noted that a farm could actually be quarantined through the Department of Agriculture, if there are too many harmful weeds there. This is in State statute and already available to the County. Commissioner Unger would like the Ordinance and Orders easy for the public to access. Mr. Keith stated that State statute is posted right next to the Ordinance. The Orders refer to Statute. Chair Baney said that she looked this up on the website and found it was user-friendly. Ms. Craghead stated that the Orders establish the District, refer to State statute and appoint the Road Department Director as weed control inspector. This has been spelled out in the new Ordinance. By Statute, County legal counsel cannot represent the County unless the other party has counsel. The Weed Control Inspector has to contact the District Attorney to go further. The compliance window was a recommendation from the Weed Advisory board. They need to act in a short timeframe before the weeds go to seed. They moved up the time to two to ten days rather than the two to twenty days in the State law. This can mirror statute, but it may not make a difference. As to whether this should apply to agricultural lands only, the entire County is a Weed Control District, and each parcel impacts the whole. State law does not allow selective enforcement. This is not an effective way to control weeds and it impacts property values even in residential areas. There should be the same standard for all lands. The County has no jurisdiction within the city limits or on State or federal lands. Minutes of Board of Commissioners’ Work Session Wednesday, March 5, 2014 Page 4 of 5 Ms. Craghead said that they cannot be less restrictive than State law, so they cannot exclude any lands. This goes well beyond the agricultural impacts. The Board felt that staff recommendations on this are appropriate. In regard to education, financial assistance and voluntary compliance, this is already incorporated and is the desired outcome. This is clear in the code enforcement policy. Questions regarding using chemicals came up. There is no change in this. There is no mandate on the use of approved chemicals or other methods. There are a multitude of approaches that are feasible. The property owner and weed inspector can discuss the best methods on a case-by-case basis. Integrated vegetation management principles can be encouraged. This can be added. In regard to County properties, this applies to all lands including County-owned and lands over which the County has jurisdiction. Chair Baney asked if there is a work plan for the County to address its own needs. Mr. Keith said there was a plan drafted previously through Dan Sherwin, but it needs refinement and updating annually. Some lands have been foreclosed and came to the County in poor condition. Ms. Craghead noted that Property & Facilities did work on cleaning up these properties, but it changes continually. Chair Baney said there needs to be a coordinated effort. Mr. Keith stated that Property & Facilities normally would contract with people to get this done. It all needs to be capt ured in a plan. The Commissioners agreed this covers their concerns, and asked for a revised draft for deliberation. The oral and written record is closed. Ms. Craghead observed that a public hearing was not even required, but the Board wanted to reach out to the public. The Board allowed Judy Forsythe to speak. She asked if the monies received go to the State. Mr. Anderson said that money generated from any kind of citation, whether a speeding ticket or something under Code, goes to the State. Some comes back based on volume, but what people are paying is the Courts. Ms. Forsythe said that the Weed Board misunderstood this. She asked if the property owners are on farm deferral, do they lose this if they do not comply. Mr. Anderson stated that the Assessor reviews deferrals of all kinds, and is the best resource for this explanation. 3. Other Items. The Board went into executive session at 2:20 p.m., under: . Executive Session, under ORS 192.660(2)(b), a Personnel Issue . Executive Session, under ORS 192.660(2)(e), Real Property Negotiations Being no further items discussed, the meeting adjourned at 2:20 p.m. DATED this 2014 for the Deschutes County Board of Commissioners. Ta ~hair 6 ~tI!J~ Anthony DeBone, Vice Chair ATTEST: Alan Unger, Commissioner ~~ Recording Secretary Minutes of Board of Commissioners' Work Session Wednesday, March 5,2014 Page 5 of5 Deschutes County Board of Commissioners 1300 NW Wall St., Suite 200, Bend, OR 97701-1960 (541) 388-6570 -Fax (541) 385-3202 -www.deschutes.org WORK SESSION AGENDA DESCHUTES COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS 1:30 P.M., WEDNESDAY, MARCH 5, 2014 1. Mock Trial Group Presentation -Classroom Law Project -Angela Lee Mandlin, Mock Trial Competition Regional Coordinator 2. Discussion regarding Adjustments to the County's Weed Ordinance -Ed Keith, Laurie Craghead 3. Other Items. Executive Session, under ORS 192.660(2)(b), a Personnel Issue PLEASE NOTE: At any time during this 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; or ORS 192.660(2) (b), personnel issues; or other issues under ORS 192.660(2), executive session. Meeting dates, times and discussion items are subject to change. All meetings are conducted in the Board ofCommissioners ' meeting rooms at 1300 NW Wall St., Bend, unless otherwise indicated. Ifyou have questions regarding a meeting, please call 388-6572. Deschutes County encourages persons with disabilities to participate in all programs and activities. This eventllocation is accessible to people with disabilities. If you need accommodations to make participation possible, please call (541) 388-6571, or send an e-mail to bonnie.baker@deschutes.org. d d ~ 0( .~ ~ ~ I VI (J ~ Q) VI , J-OJ g -(i;) ~ \1 .. ~ --"'0 ......, ~ "'0 ~ I ~ S -\ CO py .:&: -cr ~ I) \('\ .q. ~ 1) CO .,j 3 ~ .~ "0 E ~ -+ \ • "" ~ ('() I ~~ --'~ ~ ~ OJ 1 "'? 'I::' ~ ~ .J <:. d utt-.. ~ ~ L-. ~ r~ ~ r-J ro ~ ~ ~ g: t"- ~ ~ ~ • J ...,... OJ V<:l ~ r- c '* I ~ r(') ,..... en 0 ~ t'""\ \J) ~ 0 .c \ L, ,..., , '-0 Q.. ;::: ..., ~ -, :;:: d: - ~ ~ I() "f" \i) It'' Ln ~ -.: 't::> r31 0 N-- . ~ I'. ~ t'~ " ~ ~ C(S---. CJ 1 j -6 ~ a i s: ~ ~ ~ <::J'""'-..) cD ~"-..::. \~ ~ ~ , VI ~ ! ~ NVI ~ .~OJ ~ rj ~ rn ~ ~i '1 « ~ ~r' ~ ... ~ J] ~." co ~ -~ ~ ~& ~ I ~ -ir.~ r.3 c ~ ~ « ~ ip ~ ~ - ~~ 1 VI \~ ~ ~ c ,; ~ co y ~~ 0... 0 ~ 'c:S:: ~ -r--~~ 't) ..£ \ ' -~ ,--:. I Q IVI ...J SVI ~ OJ '" --J ~ ~Q) E ~ ..1 ~ -iV\ ~ ~ 4 co ~ 0 ,::,,{. z ~ r=s.. ~ .) 0 ~ "-..::,. '5 .r r IJ' f~ -..;::.. ~ !J .-~ ;j ~ -::2 ~ ...J ::tt:: ~ '-" fS U ~ f-. ~ co 0... To: Deschutes County Board of Commissioners From: Ed Keith, Deschutes County Forester Date: February 27,2014 Re: Weed Ordinance issues for consideration Attached you will find a table of issues distilled from public comment related to the draft weed control ordinance (Chapter 8.35) which was discussed at the Board business meeting of February 5, 2014. The table lists the issue, presents a pro and con where applicable and the recommendation from staff as well as the rationale for that recommendation. WEED CONTROL ORDINANCE ISSUES - Issue Requesting that the Sheriff issue citations. 1. -~ 2. How to define 'thoroughly cleaned" equipment, draft ordinance specified equipment would be pressure washed. 3. Number of days to allow for compliance (ordinance was drafted with a 2-10 day window, state statute is 2-20) - 4. Enforce on agricultural lands only Don't apply the ordinance to smaller, residential lots -_ ......_._ ......_.-_ -........ _ .......-~- Pro It is likely that offenders will take violations more seriously if issued by the Sheriff. Having the Sheriff issue citations may increase staff safety in the case of unhappy offenders. Would mean a more thorough cleaning of equipment before moving between properties and on public right of ways. A shorter timeframe would keep some weeds and weed seeds from spreading. ~-.-.-~ -~ -~-~....-.-.......-........ .......-..... .... ~ Con Staff Recommendation The Sheriff may not want Request that the Sheriff issue to spend staff time citations. issuing weed citations. If the Sheriff is willing to issue citations, it will likely be done through an MOA with an associated cost. Equipment operators Remove "pressure washing" from can't carry pressure definition of "thoroughly clean." washer equipment with Definition would read "Thoroughly them. cleaned means removing all seeds, Pressure washing may plants, plant fragments, dirt and other damage some sensitive debris from the sides, tops, wheels equiJ>ment. and undercarriages of machil'!et)''' A shorter timeframe does Revise the compliance window to not mirror state statute. mirror state statute of 2 to 20 days. A shorter timeframe does not allow for as much flexibility depending on the details of the case. The entire county was No change. declared a Weed Control District, so must All lands under County jurisdiction administer evenly as should be held to the same standard. much as possible. State law does not allow selective enforcement. Not an effective way to control weeds or a fair way to carry out County ordinance. --... ....-........ -.......--L.... ......._~...... _~.......__ ......__ ...... __ ......_._ .... _._ .... _._ ---~-~- -- --- Pro ConIssue Staff Recommendation Incorporate education and 5. No change. assistance and voluntary compliance into ordinance The ordinance already incorporates the code enforcement policy which states that voluntary compliance is the desired outcome of all code enforcement contacts. County staff practice is to provide education and seek voluntary compliance first. Property owners have the ability to let the Board know if the Weed Control Inspector gets heavy handed. 6. State alternatives to the No change. use of chemicals. The ordinance does not mandate the Specify how abatement use of chemicals or any other specific must be conducted. method. The weed inspector and the landowner can agree as to the best methods to be employed on a case by case basis. The ordinance should No change. The ordinance applies to apply to County property 7. all land which the County has jurisdiction, which includes County owned land. --..........--......... -~-~-~.---~-~---~... -.. .......-..--......-..--.......-.--~