HomeMy WebLinkAbout2013-08-07 Work Session Minutes
Minutes of Board of Commissioners’ Work Session Wednesday, August 7, 2013
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, AUGUST 7, 2013
___________________________
Present were Commissioners Alan Unger, Tammy Baney and Anthony DeBone.
Also present were Tom Anderson, County Administrator; Erik Kropp, Deputy
County Administrator; and for a portion of the meeting, David Inbody,
Administration; Will Groves, Community Development; Dan Despotopulos, Fair &
Expo; Laurie Craghead, County Counsel; Wayne Lowry, Finance; and three other
citizens.
Chair Unger opened the meeting at 1:35 p.m.
___________________________
1. Discussion of an Appeal of the Hearings Officer’s Decision to allow a
Fueling Station at the Bend Airport.
Will Groves gave an overview of the item. The City of Bend is the landowner
and one of the applicants, and the Hearings Officer approved the application. It
was appealed on one issue, but the Hearings Officer felt this did not need to be
considered because it was not part of the criteria and is an outright use. There
was a lot of discussion on airport layout and the master plan. Generally, these
are used for long-term planning for FAA and funding mechanisms. However,
the appellant feels that the facility should be in one specific location.
Staff concurs with the Hearings Officer’s decision.
Chair Unger feels that a master plan is a guiding document and does help to site
some things where they should logically be. Mr. Groves said they are in the
process of updating the master plan, but are operating off an old plan.
Commissioner Baney stated that a master plan might not be that site specific.
Mr. Groves said that is the opinion of the City and County staff. Plan language
precluded this; this type of use is so germane to the airport that being this
specific is not required. There could be two or even three fueling stations.
Minutes of Board of Commissioners’ Work Session Wednesday, August 7, 2013
Page 2 of 5
Commissioner DeBone asked why there was an appeal. Mr. Groves said that
there is one fueling station at the airport, and it appears the public feels their
charges are exorbitant. There is a desire to have a more competitive pricing and
not a monopoly. The City is one of the applicants and they responded to the
appeal that the plan is not that specific.
Commissioner Baney wondered if the Flight Shop has a contract with the City
and whether the City receives part of the profit from the sale of fuel. The FAA
and Oregon Department of Aviation are involved once the master plan becomes
a zoning plan for airport purposes. There was a condition of approval in the
decision that requires the FAA to sign off on it.
Commissioner Baney asked if this is compatible with the master plan, which is
not yet done. Laurie Craghead said they have to use the existing plan and rules
in this consideration, not something else that might be coming at some point.
Mr. Groves feels that the Hearings Officer was correct in her decision, and this
is not a conditional use that requires it to be that specific.
Commissioner Baney said she does not see value in hearing this. Chair Unger
asked what the next steps would be. Ms. Craghead stated that it is pretty clear
through language in Code that it is an outright use. Commissioner Baney added
that it is a guiding document and not site specific.
Commissioner DeBone said he would like to decline this review. Chair Unger
agreed, but would like to have the master plan be more detailed and specific in
the future. Ms. Craghead said that since it is allowed as an outright airport use,
it is already compatible with the plan.
BANEY: Move signature of Order No. 2013-038.
DEBONE: Second.
VOTE: BANEY: Yes.
DEBONE: Yes.
UNGER: Chair votes yes.
2. Discussion of Proposed Transient Lodging Tax Increase.
Tom Anderson stated that there was a discussion regarding a tax increase last
week, with direction given on next steps. Wayne Lowry has done some
calculations on what a 1% increase might generate.
Minutes of Board of Commissioners’ Work Session Wednesday, August 7, 2013
Page 3 of 5
Mr. Lowry said that he based this on what was collected during this time period
last year. It would have meant an increase of about $527,000 net to the County.
(He referred to a handout, attached.)
Alana Hughson said that the 5% primarily covers administration and credit card
fees.
Mr. Anderson stated it would go into effect on J uly 1 next year. It has to be on
the agenda by next Monday, August 19, for Board consideration and approval.
The other concern was use of the 70% and the 30%. The 30% is not subject to
tourism restrictions. Optimally some flexibility would be best, having it
become part of discretionary funds, rather than putting something in the ballot
measure that is more specific but might help the measure pass. This may
hamstring the County in what it could do with the funds in the future.
They suggested that possible items or projects be noted, but with no
prescription that specific services be funded. The hope is that this is not so
loose that a voter will not support it.
Chair Unger asked why they would not want to focus it on the Fair & Expo,
since they are already so involved. Commission Baney does not want to lock
things in too much. Commissioner DeBone wants to address long-term
operating needs of the Fair & Expo Center.
Mr. Anderson noted that it would be about four years until the bonds expire on
the Fair & Expo, so there is a long time before retiring that. Dan Despotopulos
said that the goal of the 70% is to generate new marketing programs and
revenue, and not have to draw from the general fund.
Commissioner Baney said the commitment to the Sheriff was up to $2.6 million
to be transferred to the Sheriff’s Office. Until now, that number has not been
reached, but it might be this year. It should perhaps be capped at the $2.6
million for the future. Chair Unger stated that the 70/30 split is not locked in,
either.
Ms. Hughson said that she does not think the voters wi ll look at the smaller
portion of this measure. She thinks the Board should allow as much latitude as
possible to address County needs.
Minutes of Board of Commissioners’ Work Session Wednesday, August 7, 2013
Page 4 of 5
Mr. Anderson stated that it should perhaps say ‘critical County services’ and be
less specific. He said that the Secretary of State has the final say on what is
appropriate. Commissioner Baney feels that it should be specific enough to
indicate critical services rather than pet projects.
It could also say, ‘such as public safety, health and human services and
infrastructure needs.’
Mr. Anderson said this would come back to the Board on August 19 so he
needs to have further input as soon as possible.
Ms. Hughson stated the partners came together because they are committed to
supporting the Fair & Expo Center. In 2008, the industry pushed back because
the funding was more directed to roads, and the economy has improved greatly
since then. Most places with a higher room tax are within cities and a different
environment that may not be primarily tourism related.
Chair Unger will be out of town on August 19, but will call in to address this
item.
3. Executive Session under ORS 192.660(2)(h) – Litigation Status Report.
The Board went into executive session at 2:45 p.m.
4. Executive Session under ORS 192.660(2)(i) – Annual Personnel Evaluation.
5. Other Items.
DEBONE: Move approval of the minutes from the Consent Agenda this
morning.
Business Meeting: July 24, 2013
Work Sessions: April 15 and July 22, 2013
BANEY: Second.
VOTE: DEBONE: Yes.
BANEY: Yes.
UNGER: Chair votes yes.
_______________________________
DEBONE: Move perfonnance of Mark Pilliod be rated satisfactory to
exemplary, and the Board will support the tenns of his
employment contract.
BANEY: Second.
VOTE: DEBONE: Yes.
BANEY: Yes.
UNGER: Chair votes yes.
Being no further items addressed, the work session ended at 4:50 p.m.
DATED this {J'!; Day of ~~ 2013 for the
Deschutes County Board of Commissioners.
Alan Unger, Chair
Chair
ATTEST:
Tammy Baney, Vi
Anthony DeBone, Commissioner ~.~
Recording Secretary
Minutes of Board of Commissioners' Work Session Wednesday, August 7, 2013
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, AUGUST 7, 2013
1. Discussion of an Appeal of the Hearings Officer's Decision to allow a Fueling
Station at the Bend Airport Will Groves
2. Discussion of Proposed Transient Lodging Tax Increase Tom Anderson
3. Executive Session under ORS 192.660(2)(h) -Litigation Status Report
County Counsel
4. Executive Session under ORS 192.660(2)(i) - Annual Evaluation -Mark
Pilliod
5. 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(2)(d), labor negotiations; or ORS 192.660(2) (b), personnel issues.
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 meeting locations are wheelchair accessible.
Deschutes County provides reasonable accommodations for persons with disabilities.
For deaf, hearing impaired or speech disabled, dial 7-1-1 to access the state transfer relay service for TrY.
Please call (541) 388-6571 regarding alternative formats or for further information.
:~ I ~ 'I I
I I ~; l
I I
1
I ~I 'I ~-'2; I 1
I
1 ·~ I t: ~ Q
I
I I I1 I I~ \SI; >~I I ~II wi ~! t I
: i • ~ I -1J-i I
'--l-----+-+--+--+--l--~-----'...-~-"----
I
I ~I I 1;15 I
I
I ::tI:: '() ~ \1\1 I I
w \ rt-. ~...l J
c:: "" I ~ 1 I 101\ II ~ ~ ~ ~l ~
Q.. ~ cv-..; ...
_'----+, -4 *1 I '" \l\f I_ _ -j--------.._!_~ ---i-----'-_+____ ------l--I
~I ~ ~ I
I I Ni l I ~ ~I I I
I-------L I i ~f -l I r-
I 1 I I I
~I
I51 5:--PI 11 '
\ ~~ ~ I -~-I -I ---'---t---~----i-
I ~I ~ I i III "0 i -l..
"0 ~
-< a I I
I c:: I ~
I I ;n I I
I
I I
-I -t----~----j _--I -I '"
I I Q)
co
0.
I
I 4
I 0
I I ~
! Q)
,I I 1 i I ~
Community Development Department
Planning Division Building Safety Division Environmental Soils Division
P.O. Box 6005 117 NW Lafayette Avenue Bend, Oregon 97708-6005
(541)388-6575 FAX (541)385-1764
http://www.co.deschutes.or.us/cdd/
MEMORANDUM
DATE: July 30, 2013
TO: Board of County Commissioners
FROM: Will Groves, Senior Planner
RE: The Flight Shop and Aero Facilities Appeal I Hearings Officer's Decision (File
Nos. SP-13-7 and A-13-4).
Before the Board of County Commissioners (Board) is an appeal filed by The Flight Shop and
Aero Facilities. The appeal is submitted in response to a Deschutes County Hearings Officer's
decision that a proposed fueling station at the Bend Airport complies with all applicable
regulations. The appellant requests the Board formally reconsider the decision.
BACKGROUND
The applicant, Leading Edge Aviation, requested site plan approval to establish an aviation
fueling station at the Bend Airport. The property is owned by the City of Bend. The Hearings
Officer issued a decision on July 19, 2013 finding that the proposal complies with all applicable
regulations. A timely appeal was filed on July 26,2012. The 150-day time limit in this case will
expire on October 28, 2013.
APPEAL
The notice of appeal describes one assignment of error. This is summarized below, with
references to those pages within the decision where the Hearings Officer addressed the issue.
1. The Hearings Officer erred in determining that the Airport Master Plan and Airport
Layout Plan are not applicable to the proposal. (See Hearings Officer's decision pages
8-9)
As noted above, the 150-day time limit provides sufficient time for Board review of this matter.
The appellant requests de novo review. The Board should review the notice of appeal to
determine that it is sufficiently specific so that the Board is able to respond to and resolve each
issue in dispute (See: DCC 22.32.020(A».
If the Board decides to hear the appeal, the review shall be on the record unless the Board
decides to hear the appeal de novo because it finds the substantial rights of the parties would
Q'Lality Services Perlormeti with Pride
be significantly prejudiced without de novo review and it does not appear that the request is
necessitated by failure of the appellant to present evidence that was available at the time of the
previous review; or whether in its sole judgment a de novo hearing is necessary to fully and
properly evaluate a significant policy issue relevant to the proposed land use action (See: OCC
22.32.027(B)(2)(c) and (d)). The Board may. at its discretion. determine that it will limit the
issues on appeal to those listed in the notice of appeal or to one or more speCific issues from
among those listed on the notice of appeal (See: OCC 22.32.027(B)(4)).
DECLINING REVIEW
If the Board decides that the Hearings Officer's decision shall be the final decision of the county.
then the Board shall not hear the appeal and the party appealing may continue the appeal as
provided by law. The decision on the land use application becomes final upon the mailing of the
Board's decision to decline review. In determining whether to hear an appeal, the Board may
consider only:
1. The record developed before the Hearings Officer;
2. The notice of appeal; and
3. Recommendations of Staff (See: OCC 22.32.035(B) and (0)).
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the Board decline to hear this matter. It is Staff's opinion that the
substantial rights of the parties would not be prejudiced by declining review as a full and fair
hearing was granted before the Hearings Officer. Staff concurs with the Hearings Officer that
the plain language of the Code is determinative in this matter.
Attachments
1. Hearing Officer's decision (File no. SP-13-7)
2. Notice of Intent to Appeal (File no. A-13-4)
File No.: A-13-4 (SP-13-7) Page 2 of2
Community Development Departmeilt
PlanningOIvistOn a~:$f_OMIlon EnvtronMlIIltal&oasDlvlSlpn
P.O. Box 1$005 111 t-m ~~OA~ttQeBend, Oregon 9770&.6005
'(; " ,75 FAX (541)3851-t764
l/www;co.deschut'eS.or.U'§jCdd/
APPEAL APPLICATION
FEE: $2,801
EVERY NOnCE OF APPEAL SHALL INCLUDE:
1. A statement describing the specific reasons for the appeal.
2. If the Board of County Commissioners is the Hearings Body, a request for review by the Board stating
the reasons the Board should review the lower decision.
3. If the Board of County Commissioners is the Hearings Body and de novo review is desired. a request
for de novo review by the Board, stating the reasons the Board should provide the de novo review as
provided in Section 22.32.027 ofTitie 22.
4. If color exhibits are submitted, black and white copies with captions or shading delineating the color
areas shall also be provided.
It is the responsibility of the appellant to complete a Notice of Appeal as set forth In Chapter 22.32 of the County
Code. The Notice of Appeal on the reverse side of this form must include the items IIsttK:1 above. Failure to complete
all of the above may render an appeal invalid. Any additional comments should be included on the Notice of Appeal.
Staff cannot advise a potential appellant as to whether the appellant is eligible to file an appeal (Dec Section
22.32.010) or whether an appeal is valid. Appellants should seek their own legal advice concerning those issues.
Michael H. McGean, Francis Hansen & Martin obo
Appellanfs Name (print): The'.Fligh t Shop & Aero Facil i ties Phone: (541) 389-5010
Mailing Address: 1148 NW Hill Street City/StateJZip: Bend, OR 97701
Land Use Appllcation Being Appealed: File No. SP-13-7, Leading Edge Aviation
Property Description: Townsh~-Y=r-~_1_3__SectiOn 20 Tax Lot 200
Appellanfs Signature: ~
EXCEPT AS PROVIDED IN SECTION 22.32.024, APPELLANT SHALL PROVIDE A COMPLETE
TRANSCRIPT OF ANY HEARING APPEALED, FROM RECORDED MAGNETIC TAPES PROVIDED BY THE
PLANNING DIVISION UPON REQUEST (THERE IS A $5.00 FEE FOR EACH MAGNETlC TAPE RECORD).
APPELLANT SHALL SUBMIT THE TRANSCRIPT TO THE PLANNING DIVISION NO LATER THAN THE
CLOSE OF THE DAY FIVE (5) DAYS PRIOR TO THE DATE SET FOR THE DE NOVO HEARING OR, FOR
ON-THE-RECORD APPEALS, THE DATE SET FOR RECEIPT OF WRITTEN RECORDS.
(over)
3113
Statement on Appeal by Opponents The Flight Shop Inc. and Aero Facilities LLC
( collectively, "Appellants")
1. Standing.
Appellants have standing to appeal because they are an interested party, and filed
comments on the Application with the Planning Division.
2. Statement of Issue.
Appellants contend that the Hearing Officer erred by rejecting the arguments in their
written submissions and at the hearing in this matter, and in concluding that:
"The Hearings Officer finds I need not reach the merits of The Flight
Shop's arguments concerning the Application of the Airport Master Plan
and ALP to the Applicant's proposal because the plain language of
Section 18.76.100 makes it applicable only to conditional uses and not to
uses permitted outright in the AOD zone under Section 18.76.070(A) such
as fuel storage and sales. As discussed in the findings above, I have found
the Applicant's proposal falls within this outright permitted use"
The Hearings Officer's Decision is in conflict with the County's stated policy for the AD
zone, 18.76.010, and the Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan. Those ordinances
require adherence to the plan set forth in the 2002 Airport Master Plan and ALP, which
expressly calls for the proposed improvements to be located on a different portion of the
site, on the eastern side of the Airport.
3. Request for Review.
For the foregoing reasons, The Flight Shop, Inc. and Aero Facilities, LLC therefore
request review by the Board of County Commissioners.
Appellants request de novo review by the Board because it requires the interpretation of a
significant policy issue and the Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan zoning ordinance.
Dated this ~ihday of July 2013.
FRANCIS HANSEN & MARTIN LLP
~ Martin E. Hansen, OS'B #800526
Michael H. McGean OSB #004734
Attorneys for The Flight Shop. Inc. &
Pro Air, LLC
l
Transient Occupancy Tax Discussion
August 7, 2013
Background
Transient Occupancy Tax -ORS 320.350 -This statute allows the County to increase an existing tax as
long as at least 70% of the net tax revenue is used to fund tourism promotion or tourism related
facilities. No more than 30% of the net increased tax revenue can be used to fund county services. The
County's code section 4.08 that establishes the room tax allows operators who collect the tax to retain
5% of the tax as a collection reimbursement charge.
Based on collection in 2012/13, a 1% increase would raise the following:
2012/13 gross collection at 7% 3,885,770
Projection at 8% 4,440,S?O
Net 1% Increase 555,UO
Less 5% Operator collection charge 27,755
Net Revenue to County 527,355
70% Fair and Expo Center 369,148
30% County Services 158,207
Based on previous discussions, the implementation date of the proposed tax would be July 1, 2014.
The public hearing to consider af'esolution directing th~t the proposed increase be placed on the
November 2013 ballot is scheduled for August 19,2013, Note -the resolution must be approved no
later than this date to comply with election guidelines.
Use of 30% for County Services
Following staff discussions, the following list comprises possible uses of the 30% component for County
services:
• Public Safety/Jail Expansion debt service
• Public Safety/ Juvenile crime prevention programs
• Public Safety/Victlms assistance
• Public Health programs
• Road maintenance
• Fair and Expo Center operations
Language for Ballot Measure
Caption (10 words max.): Increase in Deschutes County Transient Room Tax by 1%.
Question (20 words max.): Shall County Code be amended to increase the transient room tax outside
cities to 8% beginning July 1, 20141
Summary Statement (175 words max.): On August 19, 2013, the County Board of County Commissioners
adopted Resolution No. 2013-XXX referring to the voters of Deschutes County an ordinance to amend
the Deschutes County Code Section 4.08.030 to increase the County Transient Room Tax from 7% to 8%
beginning July 1, 2014. The revenue from the increase in the tax on individuals renting of hotels, motels
and similar room accommodations will primarily be used to fund tourism promotion for the Fair and
Expo Center. Up to 30% of the revenue will be used to fund County services, such as public safety, health
and human services and other public services. This measure was developed with consensus between
Deschutes County, the Deschutes Fair & Expo Center and the Central Oregon Visitors Association. The
increase in the tax is expected to raise an additional $555,000 in revenue annually.
Explanatory Statement (500 words max.): Renters of hotel, motel or other overnight accommodations
pay transient room taxes. The County's current transient room tax of 1% was established in 1988.
Revenues from transient room taxes, paid by these renters, have been used to promote tourism and to
partially pay for County services and facilities also used by County visitors. The cities of Bend and
Redmond currently impose a 9% transient room tax. Increasing the County room tax to 8%would
generate estimated increased revenue of $500,000
The increased revenues will primarily be used to fund tourism promotion and enhance business activity
at the Fair and Expo Center. A key component will include marketing programs designed to increase the
number of large, region-wide events. Up to 30% of the revenue will be used to fund county services,
such as public safety, health and human service and other public services.
Approval of this measure will adopt a Deschutes County Ordinance Amending the first sentence of
Deschutes County Code ("DeC") section 4.08.090 to read "For the privilege of Occupancy in any Hotel,
on and after the effective date of the ordinance codified in DCC 4.08, each Transient shall pay a Tax in
the amount of eight percent (8%) beginning on July 1, 2014 of the Rent for Occupancy of space in a
Hotel.