Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2012-10-10 Work Session MinutesDeschutes 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, OCTOBER 10,2012 Present were Commissioners Anthony DeBone and Alan Unger; Commissioner Tammy Baney was out ofthe office. Also present were Erik Kropp, Interim County Administrator; and, for a portion ofthe meeting, Susan Ross, Property & Facilities; Pam Hardy of1,000 Friends ofOregon; and Scott Cooper of Neighborlmpact. No representatives ofthe media were present. Chair DeBone called the meeting to order at 1: 3 0 p. m. 1. Update on Redmond Industrial Lands. Ms. Ross stated that the County's lands are part of the Redmond Eastside Framework Plan. Some is in the City limits and is zoned open space at this time. The intent might have been to use it for the Fairgrounds (it was placed in its present location). Transportation has been a maj or issue in that area. SB 1544 was approved as a way to address transportation issues and economic development needs since the parties could not afford the cost of transportation improvements. New limited commercial zones were created to address the needs of those working in the industrial areas. The plan amendment and zone change will result in various uses: light industrial, heavy industrial and limited commercial. All the parties will submit the same land use application. The property is within the City limits so the City will hold the application. A fifty-acre contiguous block of land had to be set aside, not affected by roads, etc. The County had the most land for this, and it would be zoned M-2 (heavy industrial). Commissioner Unger voiced concern about this being located right next to the runway and airport. The City is aware of this but wants to move forward. Minutes of Board of Commissioners' Work Session Wednesday, October 10, 2012 Page 1 of7 Minutes of Board of Commissioners’ Work Session Wednesday, October 10, 2012 Page 2 of 7 The groups are working well together and are splitting the costs. No fees will be waived but fees previously paid are being taken into consideration. Mr. Kropp said that Legal Counsel is working on what can be done with the proceeds from the sale of industrial lands owned by the County. The legal opinion is based on ORS. If there are specific projects in mind, he can give an opinion on this but for now he is relying on State law. Ms. Ross stated that this is the only category of land that can be sold outright. Everything else has to go through a different process. It is to be used to promote and diversify the economy, in specific ways. She indicated that it is not to be used for economic development in general; it is basically a bricks and mortar approach, with tangible assets. Chair DeBone stated that they want to have those funds available. Ms. Ross stated the contract with LIGI was very specific; they acted more or less like a real estate firm. Their sole mission for the County was to sell that property, and not for economic development in a general sense. Mr. Kropp stated that now that things have changed, they might not need to continue with this function. Chair DeBone said he is getting a lot of citizen input on what LIGI should be doing. It was different when they were putting in the infrastructure, but most of that has been handled. Ms. Ross does not feel their services are required at this point. Mr. Kropp said that canceling the agreement is the first step. Commissioner Unger stated that he would like to see the funds be reinvested in La Pine, but the law does not allow this. Ms. Ross said that the funds from Redmond are the same – they belong to the County for County purposes. Commissioner Unger is concerned about what happens with the Redmond Rod & Gun Club and other organizations. Ms. Ross stated that it is challenging to relocate a facility like that. Commissioner Unger said that perhaps it could be located in Crook County, or perhaps some staff changes at BLM might help. In regard to the west side property in Bend and the demolition landfill, discussions are still taking place. The City thought a cooperative work plan might be possible, but there are a lot of factors involved. Nick Lelack and Colin Stevens of the City and she went to a brownfields conference. Properties all over the country are being redeveloped with the EPA and other agencies being involved. Minutes of Board of Commissioners’ Work Session Wednesday, October 10, 2012 Page 3 of 7 They met with consultants and one company, Stantec, came to the group. The challenge is that the County created the problem by accepting materials at this site. Stantec has worked with other communities on grants to assess these properties and use funding for remediation. (She presented a handout detailing the grant and the company.) A community-wide effort would involve other properties owned by companies or individuals who might own such lands. The grant cycle starts in November 19. The cost of developing the grant application is $20,000. The company is willing to do this up-front and be repaid if the grant is given. They would also be paid $16,000 out of the grant funds for their work. There is little risk to the County to attempt this. However, the County needs to take the lead on behalf of the community. The County would be the contracting agency and administer the grant and oversee the scope of work; and develop a plan on how the funds would be used and disbursed. There would be considerable community outreach. Mr. Kropp stated there should be a project team from the County and City. Chair DeBone stated that of the 860 sites, are they all in trouble. Ms. Ross said that this is what the DEQ has on file. Brownfield is property that may have a complication due to the presence of contaminants, such as gas station, dry cleaners, etc. The properties would have to be prioritized. Mr. Kropp said he would like to find out what other communities have done in this regard. Ms. Ross stated said one session at the conference included input on this problem. One community located in north central Oregon, Mosier, found this was very successful. Chair DeBone asked if the project would provide enough benefit to the County to make it worthwhile. Ms. Ross stated that it might open up more funding opportunities and be a good chance for community cooperation. The goal is to make these sites shovel-ready. She recommends they proceed and see how the application process develops. Commissioner Unger asked if they end up knowing too much, how that impacts the County. Chair DeBone stated that he does not want to end up having to increase staff and obligate the County on a permanent basis. Mr. Kropp feels this is a good opportunity and it might not be available after the end of the year. Ms. Ross was asked to find out more about what has been done in other locations. Minutes of Board of Commissioners’ Work Session Wednesday, October 10, 2012 Page 4 of 7 Ms. Ross left the meeting at this time. ___________________________ Scott Cooper joined the discussion. He has recently been appointed as director of NeighborImpact. Mr. Cooper indicated that given the level of poverty in La Pine, the services needed there are not being met. The group has a limited amount of funding and they would have to take funds from something else , though. The level of foreclosures, for instance, has been higher there than in other locations. It has been a problem returning phone calls in a timely manner. They are trying to prioritize services to all. Mr. Kropp stated that if the Board approves funds now, will there be an expectation for this to continue indefinitely. Mr. Cooper said that might happen in La Pine. There will be uproar about services being diminished next year anyway. Oregon may be okay this year concerning energy proceeds, but this may be short-term. Chair DeBone said that he is comfortable funding this since there is a need. St. Vincent de Paul is working with the Partnership to Prevent Poverty in that area. Mr. Kropp feels that the City should kick in an amount for the individuals within the City. Commissioner Unger said they have a $200,000 general fund, and most of the need for energy assistance is outside the City limits. Mr. Cooper stated they want to do all they can two days a week. That is the schedule in Prineville and Madras. He would like to see all areas have the same level of service. Commissioner Unger said he is willing to support this request. It is important to quality of life. It helps to have someone there, but there must be a way to do this from a distance, in multiple sites, perhaps by teleconferencing. Mr. Cooper said that because of the nature of the population, he does not see this happening soon. About 60% of the population is elderly or disabled and they have few resources. Much of the demand in that area is for firewood. Mr. Kropp indicated that there should be an application but the Board can choose to approve it subject to that process. Minutes of Board of Commissioners’ Work Session Wednesday, October 10, 2012 Page 5 of 7 DEBONE: Move that this one-time request of $5,000 for La Pine area energy needs be funded, between the two Commissioners, out of discretionary lottery funds. UNGER: Second. VOTE: UNGER: Yes. DEBONE: Chair votes yes. Mr. Cooper stated that they have to prioritize funds, paying the ones with a shut-off notice first, regardless of the amount. He feels there are times when they could instead help half-dozen others with a small amount. They are also required to hold money in the bank to cover future staffing costs when they could do more with this funding. Mr. Cooper left the meeting at this time. 2. Executive Session under ORS 192.660(2)(d), Labor Negotiations. 3. Executive Session, under ORS 192.660(2)(a), Consideration of Employment of a Public Official. Executive session adjourned at 3:20 p.m. 4. Other Items. Chair DeBone brought up a concern about a transfer of an evaluation of a septic system that has the nitrate reducing system; State law requires a time of transfer inspection even if the system is under contract. The property is in Terrebonne. The homeowner called because he thinks his neighbor did not have to do this. Chair DeBone wants this on the record. Commissioner Unger said it should be across the board, and if it is under contract there should not have to be another inspection. This is a State issue so they need to be aware. Chair DeBone said the homeowner wants the County to waive the fee. Commissioner Unger said the County should not have to pay it, either. If the State does not comply, something needs to be done. Perhaps some of the funds for the program could be used for this. Minutes of Board of Commissioners’ Work Session Wednesday, October 10, 2012 Page 6 of 7 Chair DeBone wonders if the real estate community is making property owners aware of this. ___________________________ Chair DeBone asked for a status report on the juvenile facility. Mr. Kropp said the process of evaluating is starting, and the consultant is here to view the properties today. The study is long-term but he would like to get her perspective on the options presented for the short -term. The question is whether they can downsize the facility but still have the proper components. I t is hard to plan for future needs, and a decision has to be made as to whether to try to accommodate other counties. It should be expandable without a lot of disruption to operations. Commissioner Unger thinks that perhaps the juveniles who have a longer-term sentence can go elsewhere. Chair DeBone stated that they don’t ever get a very long sentence. ___________________________ Mr. Kropp said that in regard to changing signage on Highway 97 through La Pine to Ashton Eaton Boulevard, there are a lot of potential complications. It is a City proposal and the City should ask how this change could impact business owners and others. ODOT will not change the designation for its purposes. Commissioner Unger said the role of the County is to let the City go through the process before the County makes any changes. The County departments need to be asked if this presents a problem as well. ___________________________ Mr. Kropp stated that the Board received two letters from residents that need a response. Carla Elms purchased a property with a restrictive deed, in the flood plain zone. She wants to see this restriction reversed. The transfer development credit was sold. Community Development is not supportive. It was clear at the time of purchase that this restriction was in place. She purchased the property at County auction in 2006 and nothing has changed. Chair DeBone feels that the Board should sign the letter. Commissioner Unger asked if they want to build a garage or other structure, or a home. Mr. Kropp said the letter does not say. ___________________________ The other letter is from Elizabeth Lewis, who has a neighbor running a bed and breakfast out of her house. She is concerned about too many people staying there, and is serving food but she has no food license. CDD talked with the person and informed her of the restrictions. Ms. Lewis said she found guests who commented on the web about their experience and the number of people who stayed there. This probably happened before she was contacted by CDD. He feels perhaps CDD should send the letter since they are already in touch. Mr. Kropp will direct CDD to handle this. Commissioner Unger said that advertising for rooms to rent, boarding houses or B&B is coming back around. People need the extra funds just to pay their bills. In some ways, this is too restrictive. The liability is on the individual. It seems that this is too much involvement with unintended consequences of the law The meeting adjourned at 3:45 p.m. DATED this /~ Dayof ()e:irJ~ 2012 for the Deschutes County Board of Commissioners. Anthony DeBone, Chair ATTEST: ~~ Recording Secretary Minutes of Board of Commissioners' Work Session Wednesday, October 10,2012 Page 7 of7 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, OCTOBER 10, 2012 1. Update on Redmond Industrial Lands -Susan Ross 2. Executive Session under ORS 192.660(2)( d), Labor Negotiations 3. Executive Session, under ORS 192.660(2)(a), Consideration of Employment of a Public Official 4. 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 192.66O(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 o/Commissioners' meeting rooms at 1300 NW Wall St .• Bend. unless otherwise indicated. lfyou 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 ITY. Please call (541) 388-6571 regarding alternative formats or for further information. 0 " N.... N d.... r... Q.l .0 0 ti 0 ~ c 0.­'" '" QJ '-"\ ~ r... 0 ~ ""!""ICU.... "C "C ta-.-ta E I cu =11:= cu c 0 .t: Q.. r8ti -:;:::. ·s cuct E ta~. z~. I~ ~i I I ,­ ~ ~ .'!"l ~ ~ 15 "" 'd ~ l""l ("Y t"l. -: ~ --:' 0 F­ 0­ t 8' <...J i; U <.I) ---------..........--­~- o - REDMOND PROPERTY UPDATE October 10,2012 The SB 1544 lands are part of the Redmond Eastside Framework Plan and 465 acres of it is within the City limits. Deschutes County owns approximately 215 acres of this 465, the Redmond School District owns 50, and the remaining 215 is owned by the Central Oregon Irrigation District. Over the last four years or so, the County and other land owners have been stopped from getting the plan change approved because of ODOT concerns about the Transportation Planning Rule (TPR), extension requirements including the re-route (with an estimated price tag ofneady a quarter billion dollars), and other Redmond intersection improvements. The cost of those improvements could not be borne by the property owners or the City. SB 1544 was approved as way to address the transportation issues balanced with economic development needs. The Senate Bill requires the parties and City of Redmond to complete a traffic analysis and prepare a map change consistent with the Redmond Eastside Framework Plan. The parties have been meeting for the past six months to accomplish the tasks necessary to prepare for a zone change application. The City has also created a new limited commercial zone for this area. The new zone is "C-4a" and is tailored to be a limited commercial service zone with a primary emphasis on serving the surrounding industrial area. The County and COl will have this commercial zone applied to their properties in addition to industrial zoning. The City of Redmond is paying for the traffic study, but the County and COl are splitting the cost of the Commercial Needs Analysis (the school district does not have commercial lands on their properties). The land use permit application fee will be shared on a pro rata basis and the City has taken into consideration the fees previously paid by the parties. The Plan Amendment/Zone Change for converting the property from OSPR (Open Space) results in: M-l Light Industrial (385 acres) County Portion is 153 acres M-2 Heavy Industrial (50 acres) all County Limited Commercial (30 acres approx) County portion is 12 acres Key issues for the Redmond Plan Amendment/Zone Change include: • ODOT acceptance of a unique mobility standard that allows development now even though some nearby intersections have problems. Thus, the primary focus of SB 1544 is to provide a way to make sure economic development is not stalled, especially for those that need large industrial acreages. • SDCs from the site will be applied to the transportation system. • Commercial lands are only 10 percent of the total site acreage less a right-of-way dedication factor. This is less than the Framework Plan envisioned but meets ODOT and local objectives for limiting commercial uses. The submittal for the Plan Change will go to Redmond for processing late this week or early next week. The Redmond Planning Commission and City Council will review the application. We expect about 60 days to get through the Redmond land use process. The City will then present an update to ODOT and the OTC about the SB1544 process and results. I I ~ I i Stantec Consulting Services Inc. 9400 South West Barnes Road Suite 200 Portland OR 97225 Tel: (503) 297-1631 Fax: (503) 297-5429 Stantec October 2, 2012 Ms. Susan Ross Director of Property & Facilities Department Deschutes County (P.O. Box 6005, Bend, Oregon 97708) 14 NW Kearney Avenue, Bend, Oregon 97701 Dear Ms. Ross: Reference: Proposal to Provide Assistance for Applications to the U.S. EPA for Brownfields Community-Wide Assessment Grants (Fiscal Year 2013 Competition) Per our meeting on September 27, 2012, Stantec Consulting Services Inc. (Stantec) has prepared the following proposal to provide assistance to Deschutes County (County) for preparation of applications to the United States Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA) for grants to provide funding for assessment of brownfield properties within the County. Specifically, we propose to provide assistance to the County for preparation of applications for two (2) $200,000 U.S. EPA "community-wide" assessment grants -one for assessment of brownfield sites impacted primarily by petroleum, and the other for assessment of brownfield sites impacted primarily by non-petroleum hazardous substances. BACKGROUND INFORMATION The U.S. EPA defines brownfield sites as "real property, the expansion, redevelopment, or reuse of which may be complicated by the presence or potential presence of a hazardous substance, pollutant, or contaminant." Since approximately 1995, U.S. EPA has held a series of annual competitions for a variety of grants targeted primarily towards local units of government and providing funding for the assessment and cleanup of brownfield sites. Assessment grants are one of four primary grant categories, and include both site-specific grants to be used on one site only, and "community-wide" assessment grants that can be used on multiple sites as well as to fund a variety of inventory and public outreach activities. The community-wide assessment grants are particularly attractive in that: • They provide up to $200,000 in funding per grant; • Individual local units of government can receive up to two (2) grants per competition ($400,000 total); • The grants are 100% funded and require no matching funds from the applicant; • The specific sites or areas to be assessed do not need to be known at the time the grant application is prepared; and • The grants can fund not only environmental assessment activities, but a wide-range of other planning activities that can be of value in making brownfield sites truly "shovel ready" for redevelopment and reuse. stantec Deschutes County,OR Page 4of7 Reference: Proposal to Provide Assistance for Applications to the U.S. EPA for Brownfields Community-Wide Assessment Grants (Fiscal Year 2013 Competition) relevant to redevelopment of the area as a whole. The re-use planning effort for the former Deschutes County Demolition Landfill in Bend and/or the Deschutes County Shootjng Range in Redmond could potentially be funded at least in part through a U.s. EPA community-wide assessment grant, including the assessment of: (a) the economic development potential of the affected properties, (b) range of alternative uses for which the properties may be suited, (c) assessment of opportunities to integrate public access, environmental enhancement or other public benefits, and (d) the assessment of how environmental cleanup may be phased or accomplished to accommodate redevelopment. The area-wide planning activities can be used to supplement previous sub-area or corridor plans that may have contained only a limited assessment of challenges that will be associated with brownfields or other contaminated properties located within the corridor or areas. SCHEDULE The application deadline for the Fiscal Year (FY) 2013 competition is November 19, 2012. Work on the applications will begin upon acceptance of the terms of this proposal and County's issuance of a notice to proceed. The application process will require some input and assistance from County staff. County staff will need to provide information on five (5) past federal or state grants managed by the County, as well as background information on the credentials and qualifications of County economic development, planning or other staff who may be involved in managing the grants, if awarded. Some additional assistance will be required from County staff in order to develop a proposal that best integrates the brownfields program with County's existing projects and planning documents. Our goal will be to prepare a complete draft of the grant applications for review by County staff at least one (1) week prior to the application deadline. COST AND TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF AGREEMENT Our proposed approach for providing assistance with the U.S. EPA brownfield grant applications is a shared risk/reward arrangement. Past successful "dual" assessment grant applications have typically required about 140 or more hours of work by Stantec staff, with a majority of the work performed by senior staff knowledgeable regarding the grant requirements and format and having experience in writing successful grant applications. This level of effort is equivalent to a cost of approximately $14,000 if the application assistance were to be billed to the County on a time and materials basis. Many times there is a reapplication process if one or more of the grants are not funded on the first submittal. The reapplication process typically requires a debrief with U. S. EPA staff and about one half the hourly effort required of the initial submittal or around 60 hours, roughly equivalent to around $6,000 in additional cost. Although this total cost of approximately $20,000 would represent only about 5% of the antiCipated grant amounts ($400,000), this approach places all of the risk on the County in pursing the funding and is generally not viewed favorably by many local units of government. Stantec can offer the County a no risk alternative to prepare the grant applications at our sole risk, with no up-front application fees, and with a 4.0% success fee associated with each successful grant upon notice of award. This arrangement also results in a strong incentive for Stantec to prepare high quality applications, with costs only being incurred for the County in the event of the grant funding being awarded. Additionally Stantec would agree to hold the invoices and to waive one-half of the success fee(s), if Stantec is selected as the consulting firm after a competitive RFQ process is completed to implement the successful grant application(s). If the County agrees to pursue funding under this option, the following conditions would apply to Stantec's assistance: f - COUNTY LANDS 275.330 275.318 Sale or lease of land located in industrial use zone;. Industrial Develop­ me~t Revolving Fund; use of proceeds of sale. (1) When the governing body of a county sells or 1eases real property acquired in any manner by the county. if that property is located in an area planned and zoned for industrial use under an acknowledged com­ prehensive plan of the county, the ~overning body may order all the moneys pald to the county under the terms of the sale be de~os. ited with the county treasurer and credlted to a special fund created by the governing body and designated the Industrial Deve1op~ ment Revolving Fund of the county. (2) The county treasurer shall disburse the moneys in the Industrial Development Revolving Fund of the county only upon the wl'itten order of the county governing body and only for the purposes set forth in sub­ section (3) of this aeetion. (3) Moneys in an Industrial Development Revolving Fund created under this section by a county governing body shall be ex­ pended only for the engineering, improve­ ment, rehabilitation, construction, operation or maintenance, in whole or in part, includ­ ing the pl'eproject planning costs, of any de­ velopment project authorized bJ' DRS 271.510 to 271,540 and 280,500 that is located in the county and that could directly result in one of the following activities: (a) Manufacturing 01' other industrial production; (b) Agricultural development or food pro­ cessing; (c) Aquacultural development 01' seafood processing; (d) Development or improved utilization of natural resources; (e) Convention facilities and trade cen­ ters; (t) Transportation or freight facilities; and . . (g) Other activities that represent new technology or types of economic enterprise the county governing body determines are needed to diversify the economic base of the county. (4) If moneys from the sale of county property located in an area planned and zoned for industrial use are not credited to the Industrial Development Revolving Fund of the county, those moneys shall be distrib­ uted as provided in ORS 275.275, (5) The governing body of a county may sell, lease 01' convey the real property de­ scribed in this section, including any part thereof 01' intel'est therein, at public or pri­ vate sale, with 01' without advertisement, and do all acts necessary tp the accomplishment of the sale, lease or conveyance. [1983 e.494 §1] Note: 275.818 was enacted into law by the Legisla­ tive Assembly but was not added to or made a part of ORS chapter 275 or ally series therein by leglsJative action. See Preface to Oregon Revised Statutes for fur­ ther explanation. COUNTY FORESTS AND PARKS . 275.320 Designation of county forests, parks and recreational areas. The govern· mg body of a county may ... 'by order, designate as county forests, PUblic parks or recre­ ational areas any real property heretofore or hereafter acquired by the county for delin­ quent taxes or otherwise. Where the ]Jark or recreational area is situated in whole 01' in part within the corporate limits of any city the county first shall obtain the consent 01' approval/ by resolution or ordinance· adopted by the CIty consenting or approving the cre­ ation of the public park 01' recreational area. (Anlended by 2005 c.248 §271 275.880 Conveyance of county forests, parb:s or recreational areasi agreements to manage th~ber. (1) Upon the entry of an order by the governing body of a county set­ ting aside the real property for county forest, public park or recreational area, the lands shall be set apart for such use, Thereafter such lands may not be alienated by the gov­ erning body of the county for any purpose unless authorized by a majority of the elec­ tors of the county in a regula~' or special election, except that: (a) In counties having 450,000 population or over according to the latest federal decennial census: (A) The lands may be sold and conveyed by the governing body of a county if it con­ 81del's the sale to be in the best lllterests of the county; or (B) The lands may be conveyed without payment or compensation for :park and rec­ reational purposes to any public educational institution, park and recreation distdct, ser­ vice district formed under ORS chaptel' 451 to provide and maintain park and recre­ ational facilities or nonprofit corporation or­ ganized under the laws of the State of Oregon for as long as the lands so conveyed are used for such purposes. Any lands con­ veyed under this subparagraph shall auto­ matically revert to the county if the lands are not used for such purposes 01' if the in­ stitution, disttict or corporation to which the lands are· conveyed is di8solved, However, lands conveyed under this subpal'agraph to a nonprofit corporation which is Ol'ganized for the purpose of promoting the preservation of park and recreational areas may be conveyed without restriction subject to prior approval of the governing body of the county. When Title 25 Page 197· (2011 Edition)