Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2012-11-19 Work Session Minutes Minutes of Board of Commissioners’ Work Session Monday, November 19, 2012 Page 1 of 11 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 MONDAY, NOVEMBER 19, 2012 ___________________________ Present were Commissioners Anthony DeBone, Alan Unger and Tammy Baney. Also present were Tom Anderson, Interim County Administrator; Erik Kropp, Deputy County Administrator; Nick Lelack, Community Development; Susan Ross, Property & Facilities; Mark Pilliod, County Counsel; media representative Hillary Borrud of The Bulletin; and four other citizens. Chair DeBone opened the meeting at 1:30 p.m. 1. Discussion of Request for a Fee Waiver, Cloverdale Fire Department. Thad Olson, Cloverdale Fire Chief, was introduced by Nick Lelack. Mr. Lelack said a blanket fee waiver request has been made. The total cost is around $8,000, which includes site plan and variance review, a landscape management review, building permit fees and SDC’s. The current policy allows the Board to grant a waiver, but they have to find it is in the public benefit. There are other ways to qualify under public health and safety, or for income reasons. Tom Anderson noted that the Community Development Director has the ability to waive fees if there is a known health or safety reason. Typically the requests coming to the Board do not fit in this specific authority, or are for a broader benefit. Commissioner Baney said this is a fee-supported department, so the costs have to be covered in another way. Mr. Lelack stated that CDD tries to keep fees in alignment with the services provided. Mr. Anderson added that in essence, this means other applicants are subsidizing any fees that are waived. Commissioner Unger said that the Board could also take it out of the general fund. Minutes of Board of Commissioners’ Work Session Monday, November 19, 2012 Page 2 of 11 Chief Olson gave an overview of the Cloverdale district, which is between Bend, Sisters and Redmond and includes about 3,500 residents. They have the lowest permanent tax rate for these services in the area, at $1.09. Ambulance and fire response is needed for those areas that do not have fire protection. Recently residents have indicated they would like to have a fire station. They are also facing a declining volunteer base, with a loss of 15-20% the past year due to the aging population and the requirement of training, which is about 280 hours. Their funding is driven by tax dollars, which is also down. Station #2 currently has no restroom or washing facilities or sleeping arrangements. Paid staff has to work out of Station #1. He feels this is an immediate need. They are surrounded by roads but there are setback requirements that require fees of $2,600 to see if the County will allow a waiver for the sleeping facilities, with no guarantee they can do what they need to do. They have tried to reduce costs as much as possible, including obtaining some free labor. He knows fees and permits are a part of this. He understands fees for inspections. It is a critical need and they wanted to have this done this winter, but it has been delayed. They would like to be in place by June 2013. Mr. Lelack said there was a pre-application meeting, and everyone believes the application is doable. Chief Olson noted that this is for the public good. They will be using local workers. The building is pre-fab so inspections should be minimal. The estimated cost is about $140,000, not including fees and permits. They have tried for grants but most go to larger communities. There is a limit as to how many grants they can apply for (two). Their fire trucks are 30 years old and they are trying to get something newer. They also have to keep up with communications needs. Chair DeBone said that he is not supportive of writing off everything. Commissioner Unger stated they need to have findings, one being for health or safety. There are other ways to help finance things, perhaps extending costs out over a period of five years. They may be able to get a loan to encompass part of these costs as well, over a longer time period. Chief Olson said they would have a loan of $140,000 over 15 years, with payments of $14,000 a year. A $160,000 loan brings this to $16,500 a year. They have analyzed their budget, and a $2,000 a year difference means they cannot do all they should. He asked that perhaps the fees could be waived for plan review, landscape management review and the variance fee. The planning part is mostly intangible, but the most expensive part. Minutes of Board of Commissioners’ Work Session Monday, November 19, 2012 Page 3 of 11 Chair DeBone noted that this still involves staff time for the department. Chief Olson explained they provide an important service to the County, especially in the unprotected area where there are 44 homes. They respond to up to five miles outside their district, while others will not respond beyond their borders. They are trying to do their share. Chair DeBone asked about the volunteer training program. Chief Olson said that some are going to COCC. They will be talking with the National Guard about returning soldiers who can do this kind of work while adjusting to civilian life and attending school to learn a new field, which would not necessarily have to be in fire work. Commissioner Baney asked if they have talked to the Holmes Road residents about annexing. Chief Olson said they have contracts with a few of them, and some in McKenzie Canyon, but there is no good year-round access. This means they cannot guarantee services at all times. They take action now if there is a threat to buildings or people, plus providing medical aid because it is the right thing to do. There is too much liability in taking on the whole area due to access issues and being subsidized by others. They have two paramedics and eight EMT basic. The ambulance comes out of Sisters or Redmond. Engines have EMS gear now. Station #2 is the busiest and has a fire engine, a brush truck and other equipment. Commissioner Unger would like to dedicate $2,600 of lottery funds to support development of the volunteer program, and offer a payment program for the rest of the fees. He appreciates they think about providing services outside their district. Commissioner Baney said she supports this except for the permitting and inspection fees. Chief Olson noted that the fees for site plan review, the variance, and landscape management review could be used for other things. Mr. Anderson said that CDD has never done a payment plan for permits in the past. It is available for SDC’s but that goes through Finance. Commissioner Unger stated they fill a critical need in the public benefit, and a mechanism needs to be found. Commissioner Baney supports a $2,600 grant for the volunteer program. This keeps them from having to waive fees. Over the next few years there will probably be other requests for help in areas with unprotected lands. This makes the process easier. Minutes of Board of Commissioners’ Work Session Monday, November 19, 2012 Page 4 of 11 Chair DeBone said that this amount is closer to $3,000 if you include the landscape management plan and variance costs. Mr. Kropp stated he would ask Judith Ure to provide a discretionary grant fund form to Chief Olson and guide him through the process, with a total grant request of $3,000. 2. Discussion of South County Economic Development. Rick Allen and Ken Mulenex, representing the City of La Pine, and Roger Lee of EDCO, came before the Board. Mr. Allen said there have been many discussions with the La Pine Industrial Group, Inc. regarding ending the LIGI agreement, and having the City take the lead. He meet with LIGI board members, representatives of the Chamber of Commerce and community leaders, and a lot of people are just not sure what is going on with this issue. The focus seems to be a desire to work with the County as a partner while this group transitions into a long-term strategy, like the REDI (Redmond Economic Development, Inc.) model. Madras and Prineville both partner with EDCO. They would like to support LIGI going away as it now exists. This is another step in being a City. They were necessary and did a good job at the time, but the City is slowly taking on more. The model needs to change. They would like to have an IGA with the County regarding the industrial lands. This new group would take on the role that LIGI had previously. The City would have a memorandum of agreement with EDCO, and an IGA with the County regarding funding, in the amount of $20,000 a year for five years, using funds from the sale of the industrial land. They are also trying to include Sunriver. This would help fund a part-time position at $45,000 a year. LIGI’s mission before was just handling the industrial land owned by the County. It is important to market and sell the County’s land, but not all development will be on this land. There is $250,000 left in the fund now. In the future, property will sell and the County will get this money back. The community feels this is La Pine money because the land was acquired there from the BLM. The money was raised through good stewardship of that land. Minutes of Board of Commissioners’ Work Session Monday, November 19, 2012 Page 5 of 11 Mr. Lee said they are trying to work out an arrangement with Redmond that is similar to this, but it is yet to be explored. Mr. Mulenex said they have gone a long way in recognizing the whole picture. The property is now inside the City limits. They want an umbrella group to manage it. The City will pay its share and work to the point where they can take it all over, but they need a partnership with the County for a while. Mr. Allen stated they will form an advisory board, which would include someone from the County, plus business owners, someone from Sunriver and others, up to twelve members. EDCO and the City would jointly approve members. Chair DeBone thanked them for the clarity on this issue. He was placed in an awkward position as a La Pine resident and business owner. Commissioner Baney asked about the $240,000 needed to put in a stop light, which the City says is a priority. The County already contributed $75,000 for the study. If this is the economic machine to assist, the funds are holistically for this type of project, if it is important enough. Mr. Allen said a signal is a priority in transportation. This is two-phased and not required unless a large employer comes in. They have worked on getting funding built up for years with the sale of property, and it should not have to be for an ODOT project. He does not think the plan was to put all of this into a signal. Susan Ross said the price of property was low to keep development costs low and attract businesses. Commissioner Baney added the LIGI model was put into place to address infrastructure needs. A real estate broker can market the remaining properties. Mr. Lee said that this is a fair statement, but there is a lot more to it. They still need a real estate person, but this plan would market much more than just those properties. Ms. Ross stated that the money is a separate issue. Statute covers how this can be used. Mr. Kropp had recommended that the LIGI agreement be canceled, get the money back and figure out how to handle the process. There are very specific laws regarding how that money can be used, and it cannot be used for general economic development. The model being discussed is a good one, but the money needs to be discussed separately. Minutes of Board of Commissioners’ Work Session Monday, November 19, 2012 Page 6 of 11 Commissioner Baney noted that there is $1.8 million worth of land in Redmond. She asked if the demo landfill property would be used just to support Bend. There is no County property in Sisters, so they would get nothing. These funds are to support all residents of the County. The County has been a good partner for years, but cannot make decisions for the cities. This is why there are both cities and counties. Those limited dollars are meant to help with the financial stability of the County as a whole long after this Board is gone. This is why the County has what it already does, based on past actions. Limiting funds from property to the city where it is located has never been an operating principle. Mr. Mulenex said some of this is true, it is County money. But, it should be used to help that part of the County, which helps the rest of the County, t oo. It would put into place in La Pine the same type of independence that supports the whole County. The broad picture is that by investing there, it will benefit other areas. Commissioner Baney stated she is glad the City is willing to match, but she is not sure about the five years. Mr. Allen indicated that La Pine does not have a long history. The County has tried to help there. This model goes from 100% to less than half in a time - specific way. The County just cannot dump everything onto a new city. This project still has the County with a vested interest. Things won’t happen overnight. Mr. Mulenex added that this new city sees itself moving forward with infrastructure, people wanting to spend time there, and family wage jobs. It is the County’s charge to help get them there. Everyone will reap the benefits. Commissioner Baney said that it is always good if people can live and work in the same community. The County already supports EDCO, and there have been a lot of changes in the focus of economic development. Sisters is not a new city but is just getting started on economic development programs. She wondered if this is a sign of the times. All cities did not have advisory boards and members to do this before. Minutes of Board of Commissioners’ Work Session Monday, November 19, 2012 Page 7 of 11 Mr. Lee responded that EDCO was formed 31 years ago as a small organization with no local offices. They are now able to dedicate local resources. It is better here than in Jefferson and Crook counties. EDCO survives off increasing membership and with the help of cities and counties. The current model is working, and it helps when someone in each community knows what to do. Commissioner Unger said that Redmond recognized this and started REDAP, which is supported locally. They needed a stronger relationship with EDCO so put a contract into place. The different areas need a local representative. Mr. Allen stated it won’t help La Pine if the support of EDCO isn’t there. La Pine is a member as well. Chair DeBone said he is comfortable with terminating the LIGI agreement and separating the funds per Legal. They are now talking about an agreement for financial support. The City has levied less than the full amount, and usually they will ask for this to happen first. Mr. Mulenex noted there have been discussions about an 8 cent raise. That would pay for about half of this. They have plans to increase participation with EDCO. Mr. Pilliod said that funds generated by the County through land sales are dedicated to distribution to taxing districts or to the industrial development fund. There are very strict limitations on how this can be spent, and it has to have a direct impact on a specific project. Outreach and marketing are not specific enough. They would have to find other funds for this purpose. This was set up as a specific project for LIGI, and it morphed into something more generalized which he is not sure was entirely legal. Chair DeBone said he thinks LIGI knew what the boundaries were. Commissioner Unger stated that the City should recognize the opportunity available to them to develop this land and its economic value. Commissioner Baney asked if the land is being managed in the most constructive way. Mr. Mulenex replied that there needs to be a one-stop shop. This alone won’t do it; several steps are needed. Minutes of Board of Commissioners’ Work Session Monday, November 19, 2012 Page 8 of 11 Mr. Lee asked about discussing this in the future. There has been some discussion regarding the idea of disbursing the residual, or create an economic development revolving fund Countywide. Commissioner Baney said they have that fund in place now for land sales and improvements, but not for business incentives or speculation. Mr. Kropp said that it is mostly for infrastructure, and the nuts and bolts. Commissioner Baney stated she wants to support the area. There is a hindrance for La Pine because the Oregon Housing and Community Services taskforce uses Bend members. This will change next year. But she does not think they can get around the fact that those dollars can’t be used for this purpose. If it is to fund the LIGI portion, this begs the question of why they would dismantle LIGI. She is hearing a request for general fund dollars since this money can’t be used for that purpose. They can’t start down this slippery slope. She asked if this changes the request. The County would have to figure out how to come up with $20,000 a year, and this could change in the future with a new Board. Mr. Mulenex said the City wants to commit to this for five years. It can’t be just for a year. The idea is to partner with the County no matter where the money comes from. Mr. Kropp stated that once the fund is divided among the taxing districts, not a lot will be left over. Over 50% of it goes to just the schools. Mr. Allen emphasized that La Pine stepped up and there are now sewer and water lines there so the property could be sold. La Pine has paid to keep those systems going. The LIGI people have a long history there. That’s why this land sold. They feel they have ownership of this money. Commissioner Baney said that the County helped with water and the rest and has been a good partner. She wants to retain this relationship. Mr. Anderson stated that this money could be used for the traffic light. There will still be marketing in place if LIGI goes away. Property & Facilities can help with this. It makes sense for an advisory committee to recast the proposal to look at physical needs versus a greater La Pine model hiring one person. A modified proposal could be done soon or handled as a budget issue. Minutes of Board of Commissioners’ Work Session Monday, November 19, 2012 Page 9 of 11 Mr. Mulenex said they put a lot of effort into this and want to bring it to resolution. La Pine is ready to take this on, and the sooner, the better. There is a lot of energy there now. Partnerships carry a lot of weight. They want to know how to make this partnership work. They see success at REDI and with EDCO’s work. This has a lot of value and they want to be ready for the up-tick in the economy. All they need is some money. Chair DeBone stated that a lot of people want to move in the same direction. The community feels positive and the land is ready to go. They want to be a partner in this. He would like to see the County talk about a different pot of money, switch gears and give this some support. Commissioner Baney said she wants to fully understand the lottery fund commitments as they now stand, and projections. Mr. Kropp said that the use of lottery funds was to be discussed further. Economic development is one of these issues. Mr. Allen would like to see someone on board soon and wants to help save City general fund dollars. LIGI is anticipating being closed out by the end of the year. BANEY: Move that staff prepare an agreement for Board approval, canceling the LIGI agreement per the terms of the current contract. UNGER: Second. VOTE: BANEY: Yes. UNGER: Yes. DEBONE: Chair votes yes. Mr. Lee feels that the leadership in La Pine expects this, but would appreciate help with strategic projects. Commissioner Baney noted that they have to be careful in how they proceed. If Redmond were to come to the County for the same kind of support, the demand and impact would be drastic. Mr. Kropp said that the Board needs to discuss the use of lottery funds soon, to clarify the issue. 3. Consideration of an AFSCME Step IV Grievance. This item was postponed. 4. Other Items. The Board discussed whether they would like to reappoint Clay Higuchi to the Budget Committee. The Commissioners were supportive if Mr. Higuchi wishes to remain on the Committee. Commissioner Baney said she will be attending a meeting of interested parties regarding a possible transient room tax increase. This is not a COV A meeting. They are looking for Fair & Expo input as well. Chair DeB one stated he plans to attend County College through AOC. Some are two-day events. The Board was supportive of this. Commissioner Baney asked when they will be checking in with the Public Affairs Counsel representatives regarding preparation for the next session. They should soon start hearing about proposed bills and other issues. Efforts will be made to coordinate these discussions. BANEY: Move approval of the minutes of meetings, except for those of the October 31 work session. UNGER: Second. VOTE: BANEY: Yes. UNGER: Yes. DEBONE: Chair votes yes. Being no further items discussed, the meeting adjourned at 3:25 p.m. Minutes of Board of Commissioners' Work Session Monday, November 19,2012 Page 10 of 11 DATEDthis \11:2 Dayof ~2012 for the Deschutes County Board of Commissioners. Anthony DeBone, Chair Alan Unger, Vice Chair ATTEST: Tamm~iSSioner ~~ Recording Secretary Minutes of Board of Commissioners' Work Session Monday, November 19,2012 Page 11 of 11 0\ ,..... c ~0 I '~'Vi VI ~Q) VI ~ ~ ~II­ 0 ~ ~ I ~I OJ E !O z I I II_I-.­ \ I I I I I Q) !O . 0.. 4­ 1° I I ~ 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., MONDAY, NOVEMBER 19,2012 1. Discussion of Request for a Fee Waiver, Cloverdale Fire Department -Nick Lelack 2. Discussion of South County Economic Development -Rick Allen 3. Consideration of an AFSCME Step IV Grievance ­ 4. Other Items PLEASE NOTE: At any time during this meeting, an executive session could be called to aidress issues relating to ORS 192.660(2) (e), real property negotiaticns; 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 o/Commissioners' meeting rooms at 1300 NW Wall St., Bend, unless otherwise indicated. Ifyou have questions regarding a meeting, please call 388-6572. Deschutes COWlty meeting locations are wheelchair accessible. Deschutes COWlty provides reasonlble accommodations for persons with disabilities. For deaf, hearing impaired or speech disabled, dial 7·1-1 to access the state transfer relay service for TTY. Please call (541) 388·6571 regarding alternative formats or for further information. , Community Development Department Planning Division Building Safety Division Environmental Soils Division 117 NW Lafayette Avenue Bend Oregon 97701-1925 (541)388-6575 FAX (541)385-1764 http://www.co.deschutes.or.us/cdd/ MEMORANDUM TO: Board of County Commissioners FROM: Nick Lelack, Interim Director DATE: November 19, 2012 RE: Blanket Fee Waiver -Cloverdale Rural Fire Protection District Background The purpose of this work session is to consider a Fee Waiver Request from the Cloverdale Rural Fire Protection District (RFD). The request, submitted by Fire Chief Thad Olsen, is to waive all fees in the amount of $13,439.80 to place a 1,600 square foot factory-built structure (office and dormitory) at its Fire Station No.2 site. Chief Olsen will attend this work session. The proposed structure requires land use and building permit approval. County Planning and Road Dept. staff conducted a pre-application meeting with the Cloverdale RFD and conducted a site visit. Senior Planner Will Groves also provided Chief Olsen a written land use fee estimate on September 26,2012 in the amount of $5.835 (Site Plan Review: $2,770, Landscape Management Review: $805; and Full Variance: $2,260). Cloverdale RFD requests a land use fee waiver in the amount of $7,595 for "Planning Fees ($4,995)" and "Full Variance/setback requirements ($2,600)." In addition, according to Senior Transportation Planner Peter Russell, he and County Engineer George Kolb determined that a traffic study is not required and no System Development Charges (SDCs) must be paid. The reasons are: (1) The land use (fire station) is already established and fire stations produce trips on an irregular basis. The Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Handbook does not account for fire stations or police stations for this reason. The County's traffic study threshold is 50 new weekday trips and the Cloverdale station does not generate that many trips, based on conversations staff had on-site with Cloverdale RFD representatives. (2) The fire station will contain a new element, office and dormitory, which may house a few volunteers. However, even if the few volunteers do stay at the station their shifts could begin and end outside of the p.m. peak hour, thus not consuming any road capacity. The County's SOC is based on p.m. peak hour consumption of road capacity. In other words, due to the combination of the site's unique use, the number of fire engines remaining the same, the few staff, and the low number of responses, staff felt neither a traffic study nor an SOC was warranted. In sum, the total estimated fees for the structure are $8.679 rather than the requested $13.439. Quality Services Perjonned with Pride Discussion The applicant states there is an immediate need to protect public safety; the fees contribute to a financial hardship due to the District's low tax rate and limited purchasing power; and the proposed development will not result in a significant change to the property or its traffic generation. In consideration of this request, it might be useful to consider how similar requests from other public agencies might be addressed in the future in meeting immediate public health, safety, education, or job creation needs who are also facing "significant financial limitations." Requested Board Action Staff seeks a Board decision to: (1) Approve the blanket fee waiver in the amount of approximately $8,679 and find that the action is in the public benefit, per the fee waiver policy; or (2) Approve a partial fee waiver (an amount less than approximately $8,679) and find that the action is in the public benefit, per the fee waiver policy; or (3) Deny the fee waiver request; or (4) Conduct another work session on this request (this action may include directing staff to provide additional information). -2­ fee Waiver Reguest Fo111ll Name of Organization: C!f1JetdJ4}e £,,t ta4=1 hve. PvoteLf-,f11 'j)'!:./l Address of Organization:--,fo~&,--,7--,-8""-7I--..:.G-~eo~v'i-re""--CY----"f-!-J4:...;;...t./S"""----"t:::...d-'---_____ City: SrS:.L-Ie.=.JIvS"--,,,'=-f(-----State: d1L Zip Code: 177$.7 Type of Permit IX! Building $_______ ~ Planning $__________ [ ] Restaurant $_______ pel Subsurface Sewage $______ [ ] Other $_______ Total amount ofFee(s) requested to be waived: $ -t;/--IJ., ¥.,3~. ~ The applicant shall provide a written explanation of the request and explain why one or more of the criterions stated below are satisfied. The request will be reviewed by the Community Development Director and a response will be provided within ten business days. Criterion that must be met to qualify for a Fee Waiver: A. The applicant meets the criteria for indigency and at least one of the following conditions. Indigence shall be established by the financial hardship process attached (refer to Affidavit of Indigence and Request for Fee Waiver form). 1. There is an immediate need ofthe services to CDD to protect the applicant's or public's health or safety. 2. Where granting the waiver will create a long term efficiency of a Code Enforcement issue. B. The request is from a nonprofit organization that has encountered an extraordinary hardship that could not have been anticipated in planning for and funding of the project; and the fee waiver will benefit the community. (NOTE: Community Services may be required by the CDD Director for some or all of the waived fees.) RECtiVED BY: -""-"b::J'---,1____ NOV 0 5 2012 fee Waiver Policy and Form January 2006.00c Page 7 ~R~DBY: CLOVERDALE RURAL FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT 68787 George Cyrus Road Sisters, Oregon 97759 (541) 5484815 05 November 2012 Mr. Tom Anderson ~IVED Director BY: ) --­ Community Development Department Deschutes County NOV 0 5 2012 117 NW Lafayette Bend, Oregon 97701 DEL~~8Y: Email: Tom.Anderson@deschutes.org Telephone: (541) 385-1704 Subject: Request to Waive Fees 67433 Cloverdale Road Parcel A, Tax Lot 203, Map 15-10-25 SE 1/4 of the NE 1/4 of Section 25, T15S, R10E, W.M. Deschutes County, Oregon Dear Director Anderson, I am writing this letter to request a blanket fee waiver as allowed by County Ordinance for the placement of a factory-built structure at our Fire Station No.2 location (67433 Cloverdale Road, Sisters, Oregon). Included in our request is a full variance for set­ back requirements. We are requesting the fee waiver because (a) there is an immediate Public Safety need and (b) the fees contribute a financial hardship to the project. Other issues relevant to this request include: • The use of the site will not change. The location has been used continuously as a fire station for the past thirty-eight (38) years. • The placement of the factory-built structure will not reduce, nor add to, the roadway capacity on Cloverdale Road. • Vehicle access to the site will use the existing driveway. • The structure is factory-built and will meet all applicable codes. 1 Fees included in the Blanket Fee Waiver Request County fees we have identified for placing the factory-built structure on our property and for which we request a blanket fee waiver include: NOTE: All numbers are estimates. • System Development Charge $3,000.00 • Planning Fees (site plan, etc) 4,995.00 • Full Variance/set-back requirements 2,600.00 • Septic Permit (pressure distribution system and electrical) 1410.00 • Septic/electrical Permit 114.80 • Plumbing permit: water and sewer lines 250.00 • Foundation Permit (24x66) 570.00 • Other Permits (for connection of utilities) 500.00 Electrical Permit (panel) Plumbing Permit connection HeatingNentilationlAir Conditioning TOTAL PERMIT FEES $13,439.80 The Proposed Project It is the desire of the Fire District to place 1600 square feet factory-built structure at our Fire Station No. 2 location. The current structure at the above referenced locations is a pole-barn building erected in 1974 for the storage of firefighting equipment. A recent analysis of our emergency responses showed that. residential development over the years as occurred in the southern portion of our Fire District. The development has been accompanied by an increase in alarm activity. Approximately seventy percent (70%) of our alarms occur in the southern area of our District. In order to reduce our response times in the southern area, it is our plan to locate the Fire Chief and Deputy Chief to Station 2 and implement a resident volunteer firefighter program with volunteers living at Station 2 to supplement our traditional volunteer response. Variance Request for Set-back Requirements The Fire Station No.2 property is a triangular shaped area of approximately 1.26 acres. Because of the triangular shape and limited area, there are challenges in placing the factory-built structure on the property and construction of the septic system. Also, future plans, as funds allow, are to renovate the existing pole structure to allow additional space for firefighting equipment. A variance allowing zero set-back would allow us to maximize this small land area, site the building in the most advantageous position and allow for future modifications to the existing fire apparatus building. 2 Background of the Cloverdale Rural Fire Protection District Cloverdale Rural Fire Protection District is a special district organized under Oregon Revised Statutes. The Fire District is located in the triangular area between Sisters, I Redmond and Bend. The Fire District began operation in 1963. We are funded by property taxes. Our permanent rate is $1.0924 per thousand dollar of taxable property value. I The Fire District operates from two fire stations; Station 1 in the north area of our District and Station 2 in the south area. Station 2 is a pole-barn building originally constructed I in 1974 to shelter firefighting equipment. I We protect an area of fifty (50) square miles with a year-around population of approximately 3500. The area we serve is primarily agricultural and residential in nature. We provide emergency response to sections of State Highway 20 and 126 I which run through our District. J The Fire District is staffed with two employees (Fire Chief and Deputy Chief) and 1 twenty-three volunteer firefighters. I ~ Financial Aspects Relating to the Fee Waiver As mentioned, our permanent tax rate is $1.0924 per thousand of taxable property value. This tax rate is the lowest of any fire district in Deschutes County. Property tax J revenues are our primary funding source. (Our total revenues, for fiscal year 2010­ 2011, were $320,581.) 1 We are working to maximize our limited purchasing power with a factory-built structure for office and dormitory. We have significant financial limitations related to the completion of this project and ask you to consider this in light of our request. Thank you, Director Anderson, for your consideration in this matter. If there are any questions regarding our request, please contact me directly on my cell phone (541) 480­ 4222. Sincerely, Thad Olsen Fire Chief Cloverdale Rural Fire Protection District 3 OSCAR S BUILDING RL Allen Group :384 SW 5th St Madras OR 97741...,f?E;1F 5414752220 Date: November 14,2012 Rick Allen To: From: RE: The City of La Pine has been working with stake holders in the La Pine area in developing a new model to provide economic development services. In late summer the County notified the La Pine Industrial Group (UGI) of the desire to change the current model to something that would work better for all parties. The County wanted the community to work on a solution and report back with the City of La Pine taking the lead. After several weeks we have a draft of what that model would look like. Deschutes County has been a long time partner in the La Pine area by establishing the La Pine Industrial Group, which developed and sold industrial lots building up reserve funds in excess of $200,000. With the incorporation of La Pine into a City, the time is right to adopt a new model that will allow the City of La Pine to assume more of a leadership role while working in partnership with Deschutes County to achieve those same goals the County set in 1996. The plan we will be discussing today was built after meetings with Deschutes County, La Pine Industrial Group Board Members, City Manager, City Council Members, Economic Development for Central Oregon and the La Pine Chamber of Commerce. Models that have been built in Redmond, Prineville and Madras were reviewed and considered in our Draft plan. Locally 25 people were interviewed in person and 500 comments were recorded. In this plan we would request the City of La Pine and Deschutes County through an Intergovernmental Agreement (lGA) work under the same IIgeneral" rules, policies and precedent that were established in the original agreement between the County and LlGI. That agreement would serve as a good template to build an IGA today. The City would assume the management of an economic development program they plan to establish with EDCO memorialized in a Memorandum of Understanding built off successful models in the region. I have attached the DRAFT MOU between EDCO and the City of La Pine along with DRAFT rules, guidelines and structure of what would become a new formed La Pine Economic Development Group AdviSOry Board (LEDG). We would request the County work the City of La Pine in establishing an IGA that would formalize a 5 year commitment between the parties to provide the management, representation and marketing of County owned lands in the Industrial Park and economic development services in the La Pine and Sunriver area by utilizing the funds that were built up over the years by land sales in the La Pine Industrial Park by LlGI. The City along with its partners look forward to working with Deschutes County to grow jobs, construction and develop property that includes County owned lands that can continue to support a program that worked so well for years. rJallen@rlallengroup.com DRAFT Summary La Pine Economic Development Group (LEDG) Program Agreements City of La Pine and EDCO Memorandum of Understanding i City of La Pine and Deschutes County Intergovernmental Agreement I Advisory Board Appointed by EDCO and City I 1 Funding City ofLa Pine $20,000 44% (General Funds) I Deschutes County $20,000 44% (LiGI Funds) Private $ 5,000 12% (Sunriver, Business, Utilities, Banks) Total $45,000 Program Specifics The employee would be an EDCO Employee Employee must live in the La Pine or Sunriver area Office space would be donated at City Hall by the City The position would be .5 FTE Five year commitment Up to 12 member Advisory Board will manage the program locally with direct supervision provided by EDCO Board Members will serve 3 year terms with membership to include banking, accounting, utilities, industrial business, commercial business, Sunriver interests, City of La Pine and Deschutes County Officers are limited to a one year term in anyone officer position to allow great involvement Employee will work to develop, lease or sell lands owned the County in the Industrial Park I MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING This Memorandum of Understanding ("MOU") is between City of La Pine, Oregon (UCity of La Pine") and Economic Development for Central Oregon, Inc. ("EDCO Jl ), and shall be effective , 2012, and shall remain in effect for five years unless terminated earlier in accordance with this MOU. RECITALS: EDCO and City of La Pine have expressed an interest in working more closely on continuing and expanding the efficient and effective industrial (traded sector) and commercial development program for the City of La Pine area, which includes business recruitment, expansion and retention activities. The City of La Pine community is prepared and motivated to have a local manager and support for implementation of this multi-faceted economic development program over an extended period of time. In addition, City of La Pine is prepared to facilitate, work and collaborate with Sunriver, Deschutes County, local chambers and business leaders in the La Pine area to achieve the economic development for the region contemplated by this agreement. For mutual consideration, it is hereby agreed as follows: AGREEMENT: SECTION 1 SERVICES TO BE PROVIDED BY EDCO EDCO shall establish a complete economic development program that is based locally in the City ofla Pine (hereinafter "Program"), to serve City of La Pine as well as the area outside the incorporated city limits including the Sunriver area. EDCO shall hire, employ and direct a half time (.5 HE) Program Manager for the Program who will oversee all elements of the Program, parallel to EDCO's outreach efforts for business recruitment,expansion and retention activities in other geographic areas. The Program wULbe project and/or client-based to provide substantive solutions, one company at a time, relating to workforce issues, business finance, marketing, access tei incentive programs, real estate development and other factors impacting businesses. Pursuant to this Agreement, EDCO agrees to use commercially reasonable efforts to provide the services set forth on Schedule 1, performed and created in accordance with the specifications set forth on Schedule 1 (the "Services"). EDCO will initiate recruitment of the Program manager within thirty (30) days of EDCO's receipt of $2,500, in funding from City of La Pine or at EDCO's discretion anytime prior to the receipt of said funds. City of La Pine shall cooperate and work with EDCO to ensure the delivery of Program Services under this Agreement. EDCO will present a I -MOU Agreement -EDCO/City of La Pine quarterly Program report to the City Council at a public meeting that includes a revenue and expense report of the Program to City of La Pine. SECTION 2 COMPENSATION AND FUNDRAISING 2.1 Compensation and Funding. City of La Pine shall provide funding to EDCO on an annual basis to run the Program. Such funding includes contributions collected by the City of La Pine from Deschutes County and other public entities. The total of this funding shall be not less than $40,000 for the first 12 months, but shall be prorated based on the Program start date according to a fiscal year Each year thereafter for a period of at least four (4) years, EDCO and City of La Pine will determine the amount of funding necessary to run the Program; however, the amount of funding provided by City of La Pine to EDCO shall not be less than $40,000 annually. Each quarter, EDCO will bill City of La Pine one quarter of the annual amount of funding less one quarter of the private fund raising donations received by EDCO in the previous quarter. 2.2 Private Fundraising. It shall be the responsibility of third-party volunteers, in conjunction with private sector businesses within City of La Pine, Sunriver and the unincorporated area, to ensure and maintain adequate funding and fundraisingto support continuation of the Program and Services that are the subject of this Agreement and for payment of all compensation and expenses due to EDCO for the Services provided under this Agreement. All fundraisingdollars raised by and within City of La Pine shall be used for . Program purposes only. Private funding donations may be made directly to EDCO orto City of La, Pine (which will then be transmitted to EDCO). Any private funding donations received by EDCO will be reflected on City of La Pine's quarterlybifl. 2.3 Government Funding. EOCO will maintain separate financial, tax and accounting aspects relating to Program and Services rendered. However, City of La Pine is responsible for maintaining its own financial and legal accounts reSUlting from its contributions to the Program and/or those made to City of La Pine from other public entities or private sector businesses for the Program. 2.4 Office Space. The Program and this MOU are contingent upon City of La Pine and/or the local business community providing proper and adequate office space, utilities, supplies and equipment to EDCO free of charge for EDCO Program personnel. EDCO shall be responsible only for phone and Internet charges. EOCO and City of La Pine shall work to ensure adequate office space. 2 -MOU Agreement EDCO/City of La Pine 2.5 Board Representation. Representatives from the City of La Pine community will play an active advisory role in monitoring and improving services delivered by the Program. With the expansion of services and financial contributions to EDCD which it is anticipated will result from this Program, an additional seat would be added to the EDCD Board at EDCD's determination, raising representation of the City of La Pine & Sunriver area to a total of two for the period of time this Agreement remains in effect. City of La Pine will appoint this second representative upon authorization from EDCD. These members would be eligible to serve in officer positions and on various EDCD committees. 2.6 Program Personnel. The Program shall be run by an Economic Development Manager who shall be selected by hiring panel composed of the EDCD Executive Director and five community leaders selected jointly by EDCD and City of La Pine. The Program Manager shall be an EDCD employee, and all oversight, management, supervision and direction of the Program Manager will be the responsibility of EDCD, which shall also have the sole right to determine salary and merit raises or bonuses and any other compensation and benefits, and to terminate. However, feedback from City of La Pine, either through its elected officials and/or an Advisory Board, on the Program Manager'sperformance is expected. The Program Manager must be a resident of the La .Pine or Sunriver area. 2.7 AdVisory Board. A local Advisory Board will be established to provide direction and feedback, as necessary and appropriate. The Advisory Board will be composed of no more than twelve (12) members, who shall represent the La Pinel Sunriver area and the public and private investors of the Program. The Advisory Board will meet monthly (or as otherwise agreed) to provide ideas, contacts, policy direction, feedback on results, and help with fund raising efforts. The members of the Advisory Board shall be selected by mutual agreement between EDCD and City of La Pine, and shall serve terms of three years. There will be an official review by the Advisory Board as to the continuation of the Advisory Board as outlined in this agreement in comparison to the formation of a legal non profit corporation or others options that would enhance or improve the providing of services that are attached as "Schedule 1". That review and recommendation shall be provided to the City of La Pine and EDCD in writing between the 32 month and 36 month from the date of this agreement. 3 -MOU Agreement EDCO/City of La Pine SECTION 3 RELATIONSHIP 3.1 Independent Contractor. EOCO will be an independent contractor of City of La Pine. EDCO and the selected Program Manager will not be an employee of City of La Pine. EOCO will be free from direction and control over the means and manner of providing the Services. EDCO will have the authority to hire other persons to provide or to assist in providing the Services and will have the authority to terminate those persons. 3.2 No Agency Relationship. This Agreement does not create an agency. relationship between the parties and does not establish a joint venture or partnership between the parties. 3.3 Indemnification. Each party shall be solely responsible for their own conduct with respect to any action taken related to this Agreement, and each party agrees to defend, indemnify and hold the other completely harmless from and against any and all claims arising out of the negligent or illegal acts of the other. SECTION 4 LIMITED WARRANTY 4.1 Warranty.EDCO warrants to City of La Pine that the Services will be performed by qualified personnel in a professional manner, in accordance with the specifications set forth on Schedule 1. 4.2 Disclaimer ofWarranties. Except for the express warranties in this Agreement, EOCO expressly disclaims all warranties with respect to the Services/express and implied. SECTION 5 COVENANTS OF THE PARTIES 5.1 Compliance With Laws. Each will comply with all applicable laws. 5.2 Governmental Authorizations. Each will obtain and maintain all of the licenses,·permits, registrations, and other governmental authorizations required to conduct the Program and perform the Services. SECTION 6 INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS 6.1 Definition. "Creative Work" means any work that EOCO creates or has created in connection with the Services or any other services provided by EDCO. 6.2 Work Made for Hire. The Creative Work is, was, and will be specially ordered and commissioned for use by City of La Pine, and is a work made for hire for copyright purposes to the extent it qualifies as such under applicable law. 4 -MOU Agreement -EDCO/City of La Pine 6.3 Assignment. City of La Pine assigns to EDCO its entire interest in the Creative Work (if any), including but not limited to all copyrights, patent rights, trade secret rights, trademark rights, and other intellectual and proprietary rights in the Creative Work. 6.4 Moral Rights. City of La Pine assigns to EDCO any moral rights that it may have in the Creative Work, and waives any right to assert any moral rights in any portion of the Creative Work. 6.5 Perfection. At the request and expense of EDCO, City of La Pine will sign such documents and take such actions that EDCO deems reasonably necessary to perfect, protect, and evidence EDCO's rights in the Creative Work. SECTION 7 TERMINATION Absent a renewal in writing executed by the parties, this MOU will terminate upon the earliest to occur of the following: (a) Five (5) years from the effective date of this MOU; (b) Lack of adequate funding to support and maintain the Program, as determined by .eDCO; (c) Upon the written agreement of the parties; (d) . Upon 90 days' written notice by City of La Pine or EDCO; or (e) Upon notice byEDCO to City of La Pine or vice versa, if either party materially breaches this MOU and fails to cure the breach within 20 days after notification. SECTION 8 GENERAL 8.1 Binding Effect. This Agreement will be binding on the parties and their respective heirs, personal representatives, successors, and permitted assigns, and will inure to their benefit. 8.2 Amendment and Notices. This Agreement may be amended only by a written document signed by the party against whom enforcement is sought. All notices or other communications required or permitted by this Agreement must be in writing. 8.3 Waiver. No waiver will be binding on a party unless it is in writing and signed by the party making the waiver. A party's waiver of a breach of a provision 5 MOU Agreement EDCO/City of La Pine of this Agreement will not be a waiver of any other provision or a waiver of a subsequent breach of the same provision. 8.4 Severability. If a provision of this Agreement is determined to be unenforceable in any respect, the enforceability of the provision in any other respect and of the remaining provisions of this Agreement will not be impaired. 8.5 No Third-Party Beneficiaries. The parties do not intend to confer any right or remedy on any third party. 8.6 Remedies. The parties will have all remedies available to them at law or in equity. All available remedies are cumulative and may be exercised singularly or concurrently. 8.7 Attorney's Fees. If any arbitration or litigation is instituted to interpret, enforce, or rescind this Agreement, including but not limited to any proceeding brought under the United States Bankruptcy Code, the prevailing party on a claim will be entitled to recover with respect to the claim, in addition to any other relief awarded, the prevailing party's reasonable attorney's fees and other fees, costs, and expenses of every kind, including but not limited to the costs and disbursements specified in ORCP 68 A(2}, incurred incomlection with the arbitration, the litigation, any appeal or petition for review, the collection of any award, or the enforcement of any order, as determined by the arbitrator or court. 8.8 Entire Agreement. This Agreement contains the entire understanding of the parties regarding the subject matter of this Agreement and supersedes all prior and contemporaneous negotiations and agreements, whether written or oral, between the parties with respect to the subject matter of this Agreement. Dated effective: . _______-', 2012. CITY OF LA PINE Ken Mulenex, Mayor Steve Hasson, City Manager 6 -MOU Agreement -EDCOICity of La Pine ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT FOR CENTRAL OREGON, INC. Roger Lee, Executive Director MOU Agreement EOCO/City of La Pine 7 SCHEDULE 1 Services La Pine Industrial Park (Deschutes County Owned Real Property) • Manage the real property owned by Deschutes County in the La Pine Industrial ~ Park. • Facilitate the promotion, development, sale and lease of the real property owned by Deschutes County in the La Pine Industrial Park. • All real property transactions are subject to the conditions established between the City of La Pine and Deschutes County through an Intergovernmental Agreement ((GA) Recruitment • Develop, coordinate, implement and monitor a City of La Pine economic development marketing and recruitment plan. • Identify targeted business sectors and develop strategies for recruiting within these sectors, including cluster development. • Make business recruitment a community-wide effort utilizing all resources and organizations in cooperative efforts. • Coordinate the efforts of all public and private business recruitment entities to deliver a consistent message to the business community-internally and externally. • Provide coordination for the on site selection process between the business client and the land developer. • Maintain a communication network among financial entities, real estate firms, private developers and governmental agencies with a direct interest in development activity. • Serve as an advocate for business expansion projects in areas such as siting, permitting, inspections and occupancy during the project development. • Manage the industrial/primary employment recruitment process. • Manage the City of La Pine Enterprise Zone, including marketing to new firms, and coordination with the Deschutes County Assessor's Office and applicable state agencies. • Coordinate all of the above stated economic development activities in the unincorporated areas in southern Deschutes County and Sunriver area in addition to the City of La Pine. Expansion and Retention • Proactively seek business expansion and/or relocation opportunities. 1-Schedule 1 (MOU Agreement EDCOfCity of La Pine) • Provide oversight review of job retention and expansion programs. • Maintain and update the industrial property inventory to facilitate filling needs of both new and existing businesses. • Perform retention interviews and identify the top five systemic constraints that should be addressed. • Develop and implement retention strategies, partnering with local regional and statewide agencies. • Aid existing businesses in reaching their growth potential. • Gather and update website information related to resources and services for existing businesses. • Conduct seminars and workshops to educate business leaders, community leaders, and elected officials on the value and need for economic development. • Manage the City of La Pine Enterprise Zone, including outreach to existing eligible companies, and coordination with the City of La Pine Assessors Office and state agencies. In addition to these items, EDCO will work with City of La Pine to formulate realistic, but forward looking metrics, including: • A target number of completed business development projects (retention, expansion and recruitment); • A target number of new, primary family-wage jobs; • A target amount of new, taxable investment; and/or • Success/completion of strategic local projects (industrial park development, workforce initiative, etc.). As with current measurement policies at EDCO, only projects where local or regional economic development efforts have played a lead or contributing role will be counted in the metrics. 2 -Schedule I (MOU Agreement -EDCO/City of La Pine) La Pine Economic Development Group (LEDG) Advisory Board Advisory Board Member Job Description Advisory Board Members agreed that economic development (including new job creation, retention of jobs, sale of county owned industrialJands and capital investment) in the La Pine / Sunriver area is the importan6riission and will support implementation of the program to forward this objeqi~~>The purpose of the Advisory Board is to provide to the La Pine Economic Developffi~ht:Group Manager with: . ....... ",.'.:".. • Advice on program and policy direction;:: . • Ideas for key efforts and initiatives,<i>i:.•. • Contacts for business, governmentand.other individuals, ageri~ies critical for success; '" ....... . • Goals, measures and metricsfor program··~LJccE!~S; • Feedback on results;'.., .'" • Public support for economitd~V~IClpment in thglCiPine / Sunriver area and the efforts of the Economic Dev~18pmeht:Manager. . . Additionally, it is.th·e~81~'()f1:he AdViSO'ry,BOardt~:.···· • Attend A~~isorvBoard:~eetingS;.' ..•. '.. :~~f~1~~C:~~~:~:'$~.~~s~~~~i;:;Y~:'a'rd Member Code of Conduct; {.Establishp6Iicjes bywhic:h the Ad~i~8ry Board and its members shall conduct ·..meetings, medl~'comffiJhication, and other activities; ·C"ordinate all fJ~,dtaising~ff()rts for underwriting ofthe program (public and private sector)i<'..... • Com'n1tJnicate with their respective.sponsoring organizations as to the activities of the p~hgram. ....... I La Pine Economic Development Group (LEDG) Advisory Board Advisory Board Guidelines I. Charter/purpose The mission of the Board is to provide advice, guidance, support and advocacy for the La Pine / Sunriver office of Economic Development. The Board's role is advisory to the Manager in regards to setting goals and polices as outlined in the Memorandum of Understanding. II. Objectives More specifically, the Board will assist the LEDG Manager: • in establishing objectives, identifying opportunities, and developing strategies and supporting their achievement; by providing advice and counsel to the Manager on pertinent matters, internal as well as external, so as to relate the programs goals to the community; • by assisting the LEDGManager in assessing the job market and helping him stay in tune with trends in industry and die economy; • the Board will serve as a liaison withbusiness, industry, and government agencies and acquaint community members with challenges and opportunities; • by assisting the LEDG Manager in acquiring the resources necessary to advance the mission: espeCiallY by taking an active role in private fund-raising efforts Ill. Membership The Advisory BoardwHl be composed of no more than twelve (12) members who live and/or work in the La Pine / Sunriver area. The members of the Advisory Board shall be selected by mutual agreement between EDCO and the City of La Pine and shall serve terms of three years. There shall be four officers on the board: President, Vice~President,Secretary, and Treasurer, Up to 3 Ex-officio members can serve at the discretion of the Board;b~t do not have voting rights. President -The president shall "Chair" at all meetings of the Board. The President shall have and exercise general charge and supervision of the affairs of the Board. Vice President-Has no authority over the board, but will be asked to "Chair" the board, or perform other duties, if the President is unable to attend, or should resign. SecretQry -The Secretary shall insure that Minutes of all meetings of the Board are kept. TreQsurer-The Treasurer shall give financial reports at least quarterly to the Board and a financial report at the end of each fiscal year. MQnQger-Shall provide staff support to the Board, and act as a liaison between the Board and the community. The Manager will participate in all Board meetings, and take direction from the Advisory Board; will give a Manager's Report at each meeting, discuss problems, concerns or other issues related to the job, and keep the Board informed of possible business leads/recruitment/retention/expansion projects. Quorum -Constitutes a majority (greater than 50%) of all currently appointed Board Members to be present at a Board meeting. The presence of a quorum shall be required for the transaction of all official business. The Board may adopt a lesser quorum by resolution. Attendance -Any Board Member not attending over fifty percent of scheduled meetings during a twelve month running period and/or with a gap in attendance of more than three consecutive meetings, will, at the discretion of Board Members, be removed from the Board. Resignation -Any Board Member may resign at any time by giving written notice of such resignation to the Advisory Board. Such notice may be delivered at the principal business office of La Pine Economic Development Group, PO Box 3055, La Pine, OR 97739 Vacancies -In case any Board seat becomes vacant by death, resignation, retirement, disqualification or any other cause, the majority of Board Members may elect a Board Member to fill such a vacancy and the Board Member selected shall hold office and serve until the qualification and election of his successor. RemovQI-Any Board Member may be removed from office by the affirmation vote of two-thirds (2/3) of all the Board Members at any regular or specia I meeting called for that purpose, for nonfeasance, malfeasance, or misfeasance, for conduct detrimental to the board, for lack of sympathy with its objects, or to render reasonable assistance in carrying out its purposes. Any Board Members to be removed shall be entitled to at least five days notice in writing by mail of the meeting of the Board at which such removal is to be voted upon and shaH be entitled to appear before and be heard by the Board at such a meeting. Any Board Member may be removed at the written request by both the City of La Pine and by EDCO. IV. Officers Officers of the Board will be voted in by the Board. They will serve a one-year term in anyone office. The President will "Chair" meetings of the Board and work with the Manager in formulating agendas. Any future standing committees and their chairs will be appointed by the President of the Board upon consultation with other Board Members, who will then appoint committee members. V. Meetings The Board will determine the meeting schedule, time and location. Committees will meet on other dates as appropriate. Meeting formats will vary depending on agenda, setting, and timing, but will typically be informal to encourage open discussion. The Manager will be responsible for informing Board Members of meetings, and disseminating agendas, and other important documents, at least five days before each Board Meeting. La Pine Economic Developme Group (LEDG) Adisory Board Code of Conduct General Support Members must represent unconflicted loyalty to the interest of the Advisory Board. This accountability should not be, or appear to be, subjecttpjnfluences, interests or relationships that conflict with the interests of the Advls(f~CBoard or the economic development program. Advisory Board Members sh(),titd~fLJndamentally understand and support economic development and its specific act~viti~s~fs[outlined in official documents, and strategic and/or operational pJa.I1S."i~';, Members will support the structure upon;W~i~;hthe partnershi~haS'b,e,en formed, in this case, the Memorandum of Understandirlg,(ryrOU) be~""een the 1dt::~llead organization, the City of La Pine and EDCO, the,s~lect~d,;¢Ql1tractor. Bo~rdh1embers will know and understand the goverrlrl"lgcJocuments(i:e~:A&Visory Board GUidelfrH:!s, Job Description, Code of Conduct and;,Pdlitical"policy, etc:jt'~;,;; Members also must havfi! a desire fof'th:<~~~C~SSOf thel~df;Manager at heart for the program to reach itspote!1tial. ,; \;'< Personal Conduct' Member~inust;.condud,iheni~~i~~s;irl:a rnann~r.which maintains the integrity of the AdvisorVBoa~d'~rl(teconoffiic,developri1~r1tprogram and its standing in the community. Me~bers are exp~cl:~d:to con:a~¢ themsel~~~'with courtesy and consideration for others\Nhile retainingt~~.abilitVtbbe constructively critical where and when appropri~te. " ,<,:c, Members and Volunteers m~V:~not attempt to exercise individual authority over the policies and operatl'or)s ofthfiprogram except through their roles as voting members of the Advisory Boara:Or,,~dlunteer committees. Staff members may not attempt to exercise individual authOrity over the policies and operations of the program except through their specific job responsibilities and established supervisory structure. Communication Outside of Meetings While some productive work by Advisory Board Members with the local Manager and other leaders in the community may necessarily happen outside of Advisory Board Meetings, the setting of policy and direction must be done by the Advisory Board unless speCifically assigned to a committee or task force by the Advisory Board. During meetings, active debate and discussion is encouraged. Once a decision has been made by the majority of the Advisory Board, it is the duty of Advisory Board Members to support that decision within the community, even ifthey may personally disagree, as is a fundamental principal for all board operations, public or private. Media Communications Members and volunteers in their interaction with the press and the public must recognize the inability of any individual member of the Board or Committee to speak for the Board except as expressly authorized by the Advisc>rY-a6ard President. Unless otherwise assigned by the Advisory Board, all media;c::¥hij,unications pertaining to the economic development program in La Pine / SUl1riV~rsho~I&I:>.e directed through the Manager or Advisory Board President. Conflict of Interest It is the policy of the Advisory Board that no M~l'l1ber .~h:~II'derive any per~cihal profit or gain, directly or indirectly, by re'a~bri'ofhis or her s~rVi~~ to the Advisory Board. There may be no self-dealing or any cond~c::t'(Wprivate busiriess.or personal services between any Member and the Advisory Board,exc~pf,those condJeteqin an open and objective manner to ensure equalcompetitive(jpportunitv~ndequa(~~cess to information. Board members or.VbIJrl1:·~ercommittek'membefs'll1~sfnot ~~;e'their positions to obtain employmehtSNith any:6flhe partn~rc>rga'nizati~nsihvolved with the La Pine Economic Developh,~nt Groupf6r themsel~~~:familY members or close associates. Should a Member orvolunte~r~~sirE!emploYiBE!nt, he or she must first resign. Confid~r1tiality"i••"'" Confid~htiality is frequently a criticaljssue with business development projects, both for existing 26 rn panies and fbrthose corisidering relocation or new operations. Information pertaining tc,spedfic business development projects will be generalized by the Manager in reports anddiscussion to:~rotect the community and companies involved. Advisory Board members nilJs~underst~nd the sensitivity of companies to keeping information confidential and notdi~cl()~e information to anyone outside the Advisory Board. Funding for the program is administered through the City of La Pine, which is a public corporation and subject to public information laws. However, all Members must hold strictly confidential all issues of a private nature, including, but not limited to, issues related to private businesses, contributions from individuals, businesses and other private entities, and all personnel matters. La Pine Economic Development Group (LEDG) Advisory Board Political Policy Political Races By virtue ef its purpese and missien, the La Pine Ecenemic D~velopment Greup Advisery Beard is interested in lecal and state issues affecting ecenemic~~y~i6pment; hewever, it shall net, by reselutiens or etherwise, be cemmitted to. support,:~r{y;i::~ncJidate fer effice. Neither the program Manager ner Advisery Beard member~rriayusehis'9r her cennectien with the ecenemic develepment pregram while giving:.a'{;persenal endbt~errent er suppert to. any candidate er public issue. . ,".: .Political Policies .".:,', ' The AdviSOry Board may take pesitiejhsonJecal, re~idri~I:~~d statewide ballot issues, that will be placed before the veters er ether'goJf¥thrtt~ntal bedies;.impacting ecenemic develepment and the everall business climate issues:<Jhe Ad~jsc>~yBeardshc;uld be presented with beth pro and cen reperts prier to(rllClking a deci~i'i6n~ It i~l"ec()mrnenct~tfthat these be in writing and presented to. the BearcJ:witl, areasenable tirlie toni,?iew~'rierte discussien. An Advisery Beard positien ef suppert,:6r eppesitiQ~i will reqtiire;~ twe-thiri:l~' vote ef approval by these in attendance after a qutirum has b~~h establish~(h., After establishing a pesitien, the Beard will determine th,eapprepriat~,/neth()d'stoinfermk~ecific individuals, the membership and the general publittfl~t'i~)rl..keepfngWith itsCddepf cOilduct. public'restimOny, su'~~~rtt~tte~~rpOSitiOn~ta~ements for Development Projects . : ". ,,\", ...... :; .. As a leader f~reconemic de~:'6p:menti~"the La Pine I Sunriver area, it is expected that the Manager ef thel.afline EcenemitDevelepment Greup will be asked regularly to provide written or oral testimony t(jld~i'li planni~~commissions, city councils, and other official local decision making bodies which ~r~:'pa..r:t":~frthe development precess. The Manager shall report and provide a summary or dr~ff6.f'Such communications to all AdviSOry Board Members at least three working days prior to when such testimony or ether official communication will be presented or sent. If there is a specific concern or concerns raised by such draft communication by a majority (greater than 50%) of the Advisory Board, it may choose to elevate discussiens to include procedures covered under the "Pelitical Policies" section above. Public Testimony on Issues Other Than Related to Development It shall be the general pelicy of the La Pine Ecenomic Development Group to only take positiens or previde public testimeny en topics related to the development process, business climate and other issues directly pertaining to economic development. La Pine Economic Development Group (LEDG) Advisory Board Electronic Voting Procedures Electronic votes may be held between physical meetingSf9f;~'~::purpose of urgent issues that need to be addressed between meetings. Electronic voi~~~~~i~!led at the sale discretion of the President. The motion to be voted on shall be.:di~tri~uted b~i~~~resident. The eligible voting body will consist of all current committ~~;~embers. Eligible v~~~"~'Will submit votes to the current President and another Board Mem~~;'~i~.e-m~iL,~n eligible ~dtktmay submit a vote to the President and another B6aid'Member byt~ie~Hbne. lhe Presidentrhust verify such ,'"' .... ,..... :, .;. a vote in order for it to be counted. Appr~S~fofa motio~·;t~rough electronic vote requires a 2/3s majority of all currentcommitteeme1nber~.~e~ults of all'~l~ctronic votes between physical meetings are.r~cordecJinthe meeting,mil:lllte~foHhenexfmeeting. ';'; .:\\