Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2014-11-05 Work Session Minutes Minutes of Board of Commissioners’ Work Session Wednesday, November 5, 2014 Page 1 of 5 Pages For Recording Stamp Only Deschutes County Board of Commissioners 1300 NW Wall St., Bend, OR 97701-1960 (541) 388-6570 - Fax (541) 385-3202 - www.deschutes.org MINUTES OF WORK SESSION DESCHUTES COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS WEDNESDAY, NOVEMBER 5, 2014 ___________________________ Present were Commissioners Tammy Baney, Anthony DeBone and Alan Unger. Also present were Tom Anderson, County Administrator; Erik Kropp, Deputy County Administrator; David Doyle, County Counsel; and, for a portion of the meeting, Nick Lelack, Todd Cleveland and Paul Blikstad, Community Development; DeAnn Carr, Health Services; Ed Keith, Forester; and two other citizens. Chair Baney opened the meeting at 1:35 p.m. ___________________________ 1. Discussion and Consideration of Approval of Updated Behavioral Health Advisory Board Bylaws. DeAnn Carr gave an overview of the proposed changes to the bylaws. Commissioner Unger asked if it includes addictions and other issues. Ms. Carr replied that it has to do with mental health as well as developmental disabled and addictions. Chair Baney said it is written as ‘mental health’ in statute, which was drafted years ago. Chair Baney said there is a lot of value in the group making recommendations to the Board, but it is not in the purpose statement. Ms. Carr stated that a lot is implied in Section A. They can make suggestions around legislation or various avenues of care. Chair Baney said they are the Board of Health, b ut it seems that there would be a more direct connection to the Board with recommendations and ideas. Minutes of Board of Commissioners’ Work Session Wednesday, November 5, 2014 Page 2 of 5 Pages Tom Anderson said that mostly it is in the public health side regarding addictions, etc. but it is clear that issues have to be in coordination with the Board. He suggested some draft language might be developed to clarify this to take back to the Advisory Board. They want to be on the same page. Commissioner DeBone stated there are opportunities to communicate and feels it is adequate. There are good relationships already. Ms. Carr stated that the Advisory Board could map out the protocols for making recommendations to the Board. Chair Baney asked the group to decide how best to incorporate this language. 2. Discussion of a Remand and Hearing on the Millican Mining Site Decision. Paul Blikstad said the applicant notified him that there have been three appeals to LUBA. The last one has to do with the Spencer Well site. (He referred to an oversized map.) The product is an aggregate resource with 17 million cubic yards of high quality basalt. LUBA has remanded this on specific issues. The applicant had to pay for the remand appeal to the County. It has been 3.5 years since the original decision but that is due to the applicant. LUBA felt remand was necessary for a couple of reasons. (He referred to his staff memo.) Some of this has to do with Sage Grouse habitat. It is important to note that the Nash’s are no longer the allotment holder for part of the adjacent lands, although they were an appellant at one time. The land is now being held by Steve Roth who supports the application. This makes it hard for staff to know how to proceed. Laurie Craghead stated that the Board would have to decide on the remand in any case, unless the Nash’s participate. It is likely they won’t, since they no longer have an interest in the property. Mr. Blikstad said the Walkers appealed twice but not this last time. Mr. Blikstad said the Ross letter indicates that they can graze their cattle on land that is close to the mining site. Ms. Craghead stated that the Nash’s said the mining activity would impact their cattle if the Sage Grouse invaded that land. LUBA found this to be very speculative but said it has to be addressed. The Roger Borine letter agreed that the Sage Grouse would not affect agriculture in that way. Minutes of Board of Commissioners’ Work Session Wednesday, November 5, 2014 Page 3 of 5 Pages Mr. Blikstad indicated that the Board has established a half-mile as an impact area. This was based on exiting uses, and there would be an automatic impact area for mining also. The hearing will take place next Wednesday, November 12. Ms. Craghead added there is a letter from the BLM that says they will not review this information. This was noticed to all parties and it is unknown if there will be interest in the hearing. It goes back to 2004 and all parties to this process have been noticed. Chair Baney wants to be sure the hearing is focused on the specific issues. Ms. Craghead stated that LUBA detailed these. Mr. Blikstad said they need to reaffirm that the ½ mile is still adequate, and whether the mining would affect agriculture through relocation of the Sage Grouse into grazing areas. The Walker residence is not a part of this appeal. Commissioner Unger asked what timeframe the mining would be done. Mr. Blikstad stated that they need to clarify when blasting might take place. Ms. Craghead stated that this was not part of the remand. Ms. Craghead said that there was reference to blasting during severe winter conditions. Chair Baney asked what constitutes ‘severe’ weather. Ms. Craghead stated that this was directed towards antelope, but is not a question for the Board now. This is up to the ODF&W biologist. Chair Unger asked about how to make it clear to the federal government that the County knows how to address the Sage Grouse issue. He asked if this makes it more difficult. Ms. Craghead replied that there were findings that this would not affect Sage Grouse and that there are no leks within the ½-mile impact area. It is not a matter of whether it affects the Sage Grouse, but whether the Sage Grouse would negatively impact agriculture. It has already been shown that it won’t negatively affect the Sage Grouse. The issue is narrower. 3. Other Items. Les Schwab Giving Program Mini-Grant. Ms. Carr discussed this grant opportunity, which is for $10,000. It is part of a program called Positive Community Norming, using positive messages to encourage proper use of alcohol in specific age groups. This helps with the long-term attempts to reach these individuals, and is part of a greater effort. Commissioner Unger likes the idea of the message coming from peers. It has been done in the past. This grant is for media development. UNGER: Move approval of the grant application. DEBONE: Second. VOTE: UNGER: Yes. DEBONE: Yes. BANEY: Chair votes yes. Forest Service Project. Ed Keith explained the need for a letter relating to fuels reduction, fire adaptive communities and cohesive strategies. The Forest Service wants to partner with other entities in this regard, and is asking for a letter of support from Deschutes County. It would not necessarily be on federally-owned lands, and the funding would come from various sources. UNGER: Move approval of the letter of support for the Greater La Pine Basin Restoration Project. DEBONE: Second. VOTE: UNGER: Yes. DEBONE: Yes. BANEY: Chair votes yes. Onsite Wastewater Management Program Issue. Nick Lelack presented a memo regarding an issue regarding the DEQ and a septic maintenance company. The maintenance is to be contracted for an ATT system. There has been good compliance, but one company began to fall behind on reporting and submission of the fees. Todd Cleveland indicated the company is Enviro-Serve, LLC, which apparently is preparing to dissolve their company. They work in the tri-county area and are certified by the DEQ. They do not have to be bonded or licensed, although some are licensed as installers. The company's owner, Tom Noice, has not responded to repeated requests to cooperate. The reports and fees have not been submitted. Mr. Cleveland said it is not the County's list, but on the DEQ website. The County works with those that are local and known. Mr. Lelack stated that the County follows up as a courtesy. The number one goal is that the systems are properly maintained. Mr. Cleveland noted that this is an unusual situation, but one bad player can affect a broad industry. Mr. Lelack stated that they do not intend to go back to try to collect another fee from the property owners, but to make sure that the system has been properly maintained. Minutes of Board of Commissioners' Work Session Wednesday, November 5, 2014 Page 4 of 5 Pages Being no further items discussed, the meeting adjourned at 2:55 p .m. [if.. A\ _ DATED this I ..--Dayof VJR~ 2014 for the Deschutes County Board of Commissioners. Ta~ Anthony DeBone, Vice Chair ATTEST: Alan Unger, Commissioner ~~ Recording Secretary Minutes of Board of Commissioners' Work Session Wednesday, November 5, 2014 Page 5 of 5 Pages 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, NOVEMBER 5, 2014 1. Discussion and Consideration of Approval of Updated Behavioral Health Advisory Board Bylaws -DeAnn Carr 2. Discussion of a Remand and Hearing on the Millican Mining Site Decision Paul Blikstad 3. Other Items 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(2Xd), labor negotiations; or ORS 192.660(2) (b), personnel issues; or other issues underORS 192.660(2), executive session. Meeting dates, times and discussion items are subject to change. All meetings are conducted in the Board o/Commissioners' meeting rooms at 1300 NW Wall St., Bend. unless othenvise indicated. lfyou have questions regarding a meeting, please call 388-6572. 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, please call (541) 388-6571, or send an e-mail to bonnie.baker@deschutes.org. 1." ::r­." ;Q) ....... "'0 ~ ...... . "'0 CQrc 'iO 1 E ' I I Q) I I ~I Q) I r-...) c : t>,y:>I . 0 : \'<) .s:::.' 0.. i :::--., , ~I ' ... \J\ I ~l ~l-n I~I I I VI Q) rc 0.. 4­ 0 I.~0 ~,~ ~I <::jIJ,-~)I Q)I en t-+.. - I I I t- I , ~l ~ I I I I I I I I , I ~1 1 1 I I I I ~i '1 I "'0 ' I c : ~I "'0 1 <I ~ ·-1 'iO I "--i I '-~i ;;:: I~ ~ I c ! IQ) ' <: \ ~ ~ ~ I i I I c: ~ I 0 ~ -oJ .-.;: ~ IVI ~ VI I ~ Q) OJ E ~ V'\ I ~ ~ (5 ~ rc I .... z I 0..I. I I I United States Department of the Interior BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT Prineville District Office 3050 N.E. 3rd Street IN REPLY REfER TO; Prineville, Oregon 97754 6000 (ORP060) Deschutes County Planning Commission 117 NW Lafayette Avenue Bend, Or 977501 Dear Mr. Blikstad: I am writing in response to your request for a Bureau of Land Management (BLM) review of information contained in Exhibit 3 of LUBA Case No. 2010-082, File Nos. PA-04-8! ZC-04-8. Exhibit 3 is a letter prepared by Roger Borine on September 5, 2014 in which Mr. Borine makes an assessment and conclusion for the effect of deVelopment and full operation of the Spencer Wells Mine on livestock and ranching operations. It is my intent in this letter to simply point out factual information that exists within the BLM records. The BLM has not completed an effects analysis of the proposed Spencer Well Mine. The information provided is based on existing BLM land management direction and the most recent sage-grouse population and habitat data available: Upper Deschutes Resource Management Plan, 2005 (UDRMP): Horse Ridge Allotment -deferred rotational grazing system, allowable allocation of up to 1,624 Animal Unit Months, and identified the allotment as being in an Improve category; page 247. The Leslie Ranch Coordinated Resource Management Plan (CRMP) -Horse Ridge Allotment: Allowable grazing use dates: 311 to 2128 for the allotments; 7!l to 10/31 for Rat pasture. Objective for the allotment: Maintain or improve deer and antelope winter range and sage-grouse habitat. Improve the ecological condition. The Leslie Ranch CRMP identified that winter livestock feeding as an allowable action if it were analyzed in an environmental assessment (EA) and designed to benefit wildlife habitat. Such analysis and EA was never done. Sage-grouse habitat: There are two sage-grouse leks within two miles of the subject property line with the closest being 1.19 miles from the property boundary. Male lek attendance on the closest lek has been declining between 20 to 26% every seven years since the lek was first surveyed in 1986. Telemetry data collected in the 1990s indicated that sage-grouse used the Flat Pasture year round. Telemetry records indicate nesting taking place within .17 miles of the subject property. During the telemetry survey there was concentrated winter use within the Flat Pasture area. The Flat Pasture is identified as Low Density sage-grouse habitat in the Oregon Greater Sage-Grouse Conservation Assessment and Strategy (Hagen, 2011). Subsequently the BLM identified this area as Preliminary General Habitat (PGH) in our 2011 National Technical Team Report (USDI 2011). Mr. Borine's letter appears to make a conclusion that the effects of the mining operation would be minimal thus there would be no need to adjust grazing in the Flat pasture. Future grazing decisions within the Horse Ridge Allotment and specifically the Flat pasture would need to be consistent with existing overarching land management direction in the UDRMP and any subsequent amendments for sage-grouse, as well as, consider all direct, indirect, and cumulative effects to sage-grouse and other management issues identified through the NEPA process. Because the BLM has not done an analysis of the effects of the proposed mining operation on sage-grouse we are not in a poSition to evaluate Mr. Borine's conclusions relative to the effects to sage-grouse from the proposed mining operation. However, the BLM is currently developing the Oregon Sub-Regional Greater Sage-Grouse Resource Management Plan AmendmentlEIS (Draft EIS). When completed the plan amendment will revise management direction for sage-grouse and their habitats within the UDRMP. The plan amendment is using the most recent science to develop proposed management actions. The Draft EIS also analyzes expected effects to sage-grouse and other resources if these actions were applied. The proposed actions and effects in the Draft EIS are specific to BLM managed lands; however, they may provide you with insight into the validity of effects and conclusions that Mr. Borine makes in his letter. The Draft EIS was released in November of 2013 and can be accessed at: http://www.blm.gov/or/energy/opportunity/sagebrush.php If the BLM were to do an analysis of grazing management for the Horse Ridge Allotment, mining on adjacent lands would not be considered a connected action to livestock grazing. However; if the mine is allowed to proceed the effects of mining on sage-grouse may be considered as part of a cumulative effects analYSis. Should a cumulative effect of mining and grazing be identified through the NEP A process, future management decisions would still need to consider factors such as the significance of the effect, the types of management actions that could address the effect. the type of correlation between the two actions, and many additional factors before making a decision to change the current grazing management direction. Without such an analysis it is not practical to say what, if any, recommendations would be made for the Horse Ridge Allotment. I hope the information provided helps with your assessment. If you have further questions regarding this public land management adjacent to the proposed Spencer Well Mine please contact our Wildlife Biologist,Monte Kuk or me at (541) 416-6700. Sincerely ·~~.~i~Vv~ Molly M. ~rown Field Manager, Deschutes Resource Area TALKING POINTS Summary Deschutes County Environmental Soils Division is the contract agent of Oregon Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) for administering the Onsite Wastewater Management Program. The Operation and Maintenance requirement is an Oregon DEQ rule requirement for all Alternative Treatment Technology (ATT) systems, and new Sand Filter systems and Pressure Distribution systems(OAR 340-071-130(17). Owners of these systems must maintain an ongoing contract with a DEQ certified maintenance service provider for the life of the system. DEQ's rules require either the service provider under contract or the property owner to submit annual reports and an annual report evaluation fee. Typically, the maintenance provider submits the required report and fee on behalf of the owner. Specifically, the issues with Enviro-Serv, LLC have evolved over the past couple of years, and are highly variable between specific properties. Initially, the County experienced inconSistency in the submittal of reports and payment of fees. Staff followed up with this company's representative by sending letters, invoices, etc. On some occasions the problems were corrected. However, when the problems were not corrected and started to expand to additional properties, staff contacted DEQ. DEQ investigated the situation and learned that these performance problems were also occurring in Crook County. DEQ met with the representative to discuss and address the problems. After that meeting, Enviro-Serv submitted some reports with the fee and a few reports intermittently; however, the level of non-compliance was becoming more of a concern over time. DEQ notified the company of its failure to meet the agency's requirements. After receiving DEQ's notice, Enviro-Serv decided to dissolve their business. Enviro­ Serv's dissolution leaves the existing ATT systems out of compliance with rules and in an unknown state of operation. County staff notified property owners in Deschutes County of this situation and is working to get these systems into compliance with owners and other maintenance providers. 1. I paid my contracted service provider and he didn't submit the report and pay the fee. Why do we have to get a new contractor and submit the annual report and fee now? Deschutes County has not received the necessary reports and fees as required in DEQ rule; therefore, the system needs to be maintained, reports submitted and the report evaluation fee paid. Contracts with a certified provider are required for the life of the system. If you have old reports that the County is missing, please provide them with the annual report evaluation fee in the in the amount of $51.00 and this will bring your property into compliance. More importantly, it will also ensure your on-site system is properly maintained and functioning. 2. Can the County help me get my money back from the contractor? The County and DEQ have repeatedly reached out to the contractor to strongly encourage him to submit the reports and pay the required fees in a timely manner for your property. County and DEQ staff have not yet met with the contractor, but are continuing to pursue such a meeting and successful resolution to this issue. However, please know that this is a private contract issue between the property owner and the contractor. Deschutes County and DEQ are not involved in this private contractual relationship. It is ultimately the property owners responsibility to submit the report and fee. 3. Why is the annual fee so expensive for paperwork? Professional staff review and evaluate the report to make sure the system is operating according to permit specifications. The systems requiring annual maintenance have more moving parts and are typically at more limited sites. Problems with system performance can cause a public health hazard and/or environmental contamination. Deschutes County maintains these report records and places them in the permanent property record. The fee is used to cover the costs of O&M program that includes record keeping, review, compliance and sometimes site visits. Deschutes County's fee is similar to DEQ's annual report evaluation fee. 4. Why is Enviro-Serv, LLC still on the approved Jist? Enviro-Serv, llC has notified Deschutes County through DEQ that they intend to disolve their business; therefore, they have been removed from the certified provider's list. Tom Noice is still a certified provider on the DEQ list. The local list of certified providers is below: SERVICE PROVIDERS FROM TRI COUNTY AREA (Oct. 2014) • CENTRAL OREGON SANITATION SERVICES INCORPORATED MARK COELHO 541-536-2517 PO BOX 2879 LAPINE OREGON 97739 • MYCO EXCAVATION MICHAEL BENTZ 541-410-8553 1441 NE 6TH ST BEND OREGON 97701 • TERRY FIDLER EXCAVATION LLC TERRY FIDLER 541-382-5370 PO BOX 888 REDMOND OREGON 97756 • THE TANK DOCTOR ROBERT FISH 541-318-6252 19850 2ND STREET BEND OREGON 97702 Please contact the Community Development Department at (541) 6575 or DEQ's Bend Office at (541) 388­ 6146 for more information.