HomeMy WebLinkAbout2011-02-16 Work Session Minutes
Minutes of Board of Commissioners’ Work Session Wednesday, February 16, 2011
Page 2 of 11 Pages
2. Worksource Oregon: National Career Readiness Certificate.
Richard Erikson, NCRC Market Analyst, gave a PowerPoint presentation (a
copy of which is attached) on the NCRC (Oregon’s National Career Readiness
Certificate), which he indicated is nationally recognized and used to determine
employment readiness. Central Oregon was one of the pilot communities in its
development several years ago.
The NCRC documents the skills needed for about 17,000 jobs that were
profiled; these are skills that are often necessary no matter what the job field.
The benefits for the applicant are that the certification process is offered at no
cost to the applicant, but there is a time commitment to complete the training.
Employers feel that these applicants are better screened and have the skills that
are needed for a given job.
The benefits to the employer are numerous, including knowing that the
applicants are qualified and have the necessary skills, and retention numbers are
better. At this time, there is no cost to employers to use this service. A grant is
funding this work through June 2011.
Thirty-five states are now using NCRC. There are approximately thirty local
businesses that now prefer using this program.
Commissioner Unger said that he hears from employers who are frustrated by
workers who are not qualified. This is a tool that helps to show that the person
is ready. There are two testing facilities. The Bend office has a maximum of
45 sessions per week
The NCRC documents address skills in three core areas: applied mathematics,
reading for information and locating information, and an initial skills review
module. Some modules can be done from home.
Debbie Legg indicated that she would like to talk with Mr. Erikson in detail
about the program.
Erik Kropp stated that this could be easy enough to utilize, but is concerned
about what happens when the grant funds run out.
Mr. Erikson said that there still has to be that businesses’’ instinct to make sure
they select the right people. Those potential employees holding the certificates
do separate themselves from others seeking the same employment.
Minutes of Board of Commissioners’ Work Session Wednesday, February 16, 2011
Page 3 of 11 Pages
Commissioner Unger said he would like to see this endorsed now. Chair Baney
said that she is concerned about endorsing it when the County has no practical
experience using the services at this time. Mr. Erickson said there are no
strings attached.
Commissioner DeBone said that he has a problem with companies not nurturing
their employees. Mr. Erikson state that this helps companies avoid hiring
individuals who may think they have the necessary skills but in fact do not.
Commissioner Unger thinks that this helps the individuals seeking work to learn
more and to feel confident that they are prepared when they apply for a specific
position.
The Commissioners asked for a week or so to review the information before
committing to the program.
3. Comprehensive Plan Review.
Nick Lelack, Peter Gutowsky and Terri Payne came before the Board for the
second Comprehensive Plan work session. The dates for the public hearings
have been set for March 29 in Bend in the Barnes/Sawyer Rooms, March 31 in
La Pine at the Senior Center, and April 1 in the Sisters City Council Chambers.
There is an additional hearing schedule for the usual business meeting on April
5. It appears that 6:00 p.m. is an appropriate starting time for the off-site
meetings.
Ms. Payne pointed out that the majority of the agricultural land in the County is
either farm or forest, with limited uses. The question is how to participate and
work towards best utilizing the land within those allowed uses.
The population estimates go to 2025, and the question is whether the area can
support those numbers. Commissioner Unger stated that most lots that can be
developed are in south County. Ms. Payne said that they took into account the
‘red’ lots that cannot be developed, but there are still about 5,000 lots available.
These were platted before land use rules were established.
Rural growth is restricted by State regulations. Most new development will be
residential. The perception is that what can be done is very limited. However,
non-farm dwellings are a possibility, as are destination resorts; and land subject
to Goal exceptions. The trick is to analyze these properties, which are usually
very site-specific. The bar is high, but creating new residential lots is a
possibility.
Minutes of Board of Commissioners’ Work Session Wednesday, February 16, 2011
Page 4 of 11 Pages
Mr. Lelack said that Terrebonne and Tumalo can handle additional population
increases; and some developments have been created but not yet developed and
are not part of the numbers. They are not cities but unincorporated
communities. It is easier to add density there than in most rural areas.
Commissioner DeBone asked if there are areas where more lots are needed in
the future. Ms. Payne said that most people now living in these areas do not
want more density. Mr. Lelack stated that most of the growth would happen in
the cities as they increase their urban growth boundaries. Commissioner
DeBone asked if there are enough available lots for people to be able to buy and
build if they want. Ms. Payne stated that the study looks at this. Resorts are a
wild card. There is enough land available in rural areas for the population in
the future. It is more practical to promote growth within the cities and protect
the farm and forest lands.
Commissioner Unger said that the challenge is capacity, and some day in the
distant future, there will be a capacity issue. Ms. Payne said that it will be
beyond the 2025 projected numbers. Much depends on whether population
growth comes back and continues. And what happens with the destination
resorts depends much on what the legislature does.
Chair Baney asked if farmland is to remain based on soil type. There are a lot
of lands in this area that do not meet the classification for farmland as set forth
by the State.
Dave Kanner asked if Section 3.3 still applies. Ms. Payne said that nothing was
updated since 1979, so this mirrors the Statewide Goal. This is new language.
Mr. Kanner said that he finds it difficult to see that this as a land use policy. It
is more of a broad policy goal and aspiration. Ms. Payne stated that we have to
either keep what we have, react and change, or change first.
Mr. Kanner asked how this could be implemented through land use ordinances.
Ms. Payne said that Goal 10 only applies to cities because it has to do with
providing housing. In most planning, though, housing is a big issue. Work
with the cities has to be coordinated, and unincorporated communities are a
factor. The County plays a big role in supporting and coordinating. Mr. Lelack
said that Goal 10 has more to do with the types of housing rather than
determining where it will be.
Minutes of Board of Commissioners’ Work Session Wednesday, February 16, 2011
Page 5 of 11 Pages
Ms. Payne stated that the Planning Commissioner indicated support of this
change. It is hard to have affordable housing if land has a ten-acre minimum.
3.3.5 includes some changes. Right now granny plots cannot be done, but they
could provide a lot of affordable housing where it is needed. The State does not
allow them at this time. There is also a desire to develop co-housing, where a
small cluster of housing is developed for mutual support. This can protect the
rural character of an area but support additional housing where needed. 3.3.3
(a) and (b) were felt to be too detailed. Much of this had to do with the number
of livestock on a given parcel; Jefferson County has limits but Deschutes
County does not have this limitation on MUA land.
Laurie Craghead said that the Comprehensive Plan has to do with how to write
zoning code. Ms. Payne stated that the Planning Commission feels this is an
aspirational guide, reflecting what the community says matters to them. It is
kind of a placeholder. Mr. Lelack added that the Association of Realtors also
had ideas on how to move forward with some of the issues.
Coordinating with affordable housing providers does not mean the County will
provide the land, but can support their efforts.
There is a lot of language relating to cities but not counties in regard to
opportunities and challenges. Recreation and related services bring in a lot of
revenue. Working with the Bend Airport master plan and associated businesses
is included. There are home-based businesses that can function better with the
rules relaxed to allow more of them, within reason. And regional coordination
is important. There is a lot in the section on the rural economy relating to rural
industrial uses. When Goal 14 was instituted, which relates to areas that are
urban unincorporated, rural industrial, rural service center or similar use, some
areas did not fit into any classification, so these site-specific properties have
been retained. There are six policies of economic development that are fairly
general.
Commissioner Unger asked about the Redmond military facility, which he feels
is more public than private. Ms. Payne said this recognizes past practices and
allows continued use within reason. There are several properties that fit into
this category.
Minutes of Board of Commissioners’ Work Session Wednesday, February 16, 2011
Page 6 of 11 Pages
Mr. Kanner asked about policies regarding on-site sewage disposal and
community sewer systems. This seems to preclude any other solutions that the
DEQ might come up with. Ms. Payne said the DLCD feels this has to have
more constraints than a rural service center. There are just a few properties in
this category and there does not seem to be a massive need for change. These
could be reviewed in five years to see if that still makes sense.
Mr. Kanner stated that there is a large area in south County where there are
many parcels that cannot be developed as things are now. It seems that if
someone wanted a convenience store, it would not be possible to place one.
Ms. Payne stated that this has to do with nine specific sites, so would not apply
to other areas. A part of Deschutes Junction is one of them, as are River Forest
Acres and Spring River.
Ms. Payne said that there is an informational map that shows the specific
properties now being discussed. Chair Baney stated that it would be helpful to
have the maps available during the hearings, for reference.
In regard to Statewide Goal 7, there was a lot of agreement. There are two
policies to be discussed. Section 3.5.1 talks about natural hazard mitigation
planning. It has to be coordinated with where development might be allowed.
There was a lot of input from the public, but this is the only one that is
incorporated. Others are site-specific. Section 3.5.11 has to do with other
things to keep in mind.
Commissioner Unger asked how to address the surface mining site at Lower
Bridge. Ms. Payne said this is not a natural hazard, but it is an issue when the
use or need is no longer there. Commissioner Unger asked if this addresses
reclamation. Ms. Payne stated that reclamation is handled is under DOGAMI
rules, but this will be subject to discussion at next week’s work session.
Chair Baney said that some of the area was pre-land use regulation so there is
no reclamation or mitigation plan in place. It is frustrating because it seems like
the County has no jurisdiction at all over the problem. The Planning
Commission is interested in addressing the problems of these areas, like
noxious weeds and blowing dust.
Minutes of Board of Commissioners’ Work Session Wednesday, February 16, 2011
Page 7 of 11 Pages
Section 3.6 has to do with public facilities and services. People expect this to
be included in long-term planning. It says that in rural areas, services need to
be appropriate and limited to rural needs. Goal 11 applies. This also takes into
account expanding water systems or sewer systems.
The focus is on coordination. The County can encourage or support
development as appropriate. Section 3.6.12 is a staff recommendation,
basically a placeholder.
Commissioner DeBone asked if there is an easy way to learn more about this.
Commissioner Unger said that it helps to get individual opinions and go from
there. Commissioner Debone said he can listen to audio minutes and review the
written minutes. The Planning Commissioner minutes can be obtained either
way. Chair Baney said that the Planning Commission members are not shy
about expressing their opinions, either as a group or individually.
Regarding transportation and unmaintained rural roads, Commissioner DeBone
said that it seems like there is no plan to improve the roads while people with
wealth want to develop the land. Commissioner Unger stated there are arterials
and collectors, which should be the County’s focus. Commissioner DeBone
said there is no answer to give people who complain about their road not being
maintained. There needs to be a plan or clarity.
The Statewide Goal 8 has to do with rural recreation. There are no real
requirements, but it is a huge quality of life issue for the community. Most
recreational land is provided by public agencies. The focus is on coordination.
One policy has to do with park and recreation districts. Some properties are just
outside the city limits and it is hard for the districts to utilize the land. Section
3.8.3 has to do with the Millican area, which has a lot of BLM land. ATV users
are doing damage to private lands there, and the BLM apparently is not
overseeing those types of activities.
The Planning Commission came up with definitions regarding wedding events.
There was no agreement on private parks, so it was left out of the
Comprehensive Plan update.
Minutes of Board of Commissioners’ Work Session Wednesday, February 16, 2011
Page 8 of 11 Pages
Commissioner Unger asked about the creation of a rural recreation opportunity
and the accompanying amenities. Ms. Payne said there is a paintball park and
shooting range that fit into this.
Commissioner Unger asked about hang-gliding or paragliding. Ms. Payne
stated that they have to take off and land somewhere. Most of the time it is not
on an official location. Much might occur on BLM land.
Destination resorts fall under Goal 8 and Statute. This sets the standard for
resort mapping and development. Some were implemented by the County in
2010 and currently in litigation. There are three new policies, but they are
addressing the whole section. Section 3.9.4 talks about mitigating impacts.
The public stresses that resorts have impacts. However, it is not known how
much impact. Some focus groups met and tried to identify the issues. Section
3.9.5 addresses small resorts with only overnight units and no permanent
housing. The public and Planning Commission liked this model.
Section 3.9.11 talks about how to track what the destination resorts are doing;
what is being built and when. Things are approved individually and it is hard to
know how many overnight units are being built, how much open space is
available, etc. The industry is fluid, and it is hard to follow the master plan as
they develop in phases. Mr. Lelack added that sometimes a certain part of a
resort can end up under different ownership, or staff changes and the new staff
person is not familiar with the resort history. There needs to be a plan to track
these things. Section 3.10 addresses methods to identify certain areas that have
specific issues.
Commissioner DeBone is supportive of a vision on this issue. He will be very
active in it and can do a lot of community outreach.
Many residents came to the Terrebonne meetings. Except for large animal and
transportation issues, there were not a lot of other things brought up.
Commissioner Unger asked how counties can best work together on this kind
of thing. Ms. Payne stated that the plan talks about coordinating with local
jurisdictions, and Peter Russell attended a few meetings to answer these
questions. Mr. Lelack asked about having a specific policy for some of these
situations.
Minutes of Board of Commissioners’ Work Session Wednesday, February 16, 2011
Page 9 of 11 Pages
In regard to existing military sites, the military want an overlay zone for
notification purposes. It is an educational process so that people will know
more about the issue and locations. Commissioner Unger said that this also
protects the viability of the use.
4. Update of Commissioners’ Meetings and Schedules.
The Commissioners went over their individual meeting schedules at this time.
5. Other Items.
Chair Baney said that Representative Whisnant is introducing a transportation
bill. Representative Huffman is also introducing one. Rep. Whisnant was upset
that his bill was not on the Commissioners’ ‘watch’ list.
Commissioner Unger said he is not aware of which bills are being introduced.
The legislators need to take some action to keep the County aware of the issues
and which bills the legislators want supported. Mr. Kanner said the Public
Affairs Counsel tracks hundreds of bills and tries to make the County aware of
those that are important. Chair Baney asked for a list of the bills Rep. Whisnant
has drafted and what is a priority. Things are happening fast and it is hard to
keep track.
Nick Lelack asked if there is a staff legislative team that might be able to learn
more about these bills, and offer an opinion to the Board. Commissioner Unger
stated that some bills will not even move forward and it is hard to know which
ones.
Mr. Kanner noted that it is not necessary for the County to take a position on
every bill. In many cases, it may make sense to see what AOC feels about a
bill. It might be easier to identify which bills the County does not agree with
AOC on. Senate Bill 83 has huge implications for the County but AOC may
not care one way or the other. More often than not, AOC will have the same
position as the County. Commissioner Unger said that the League of Oregon
Cities may disagree or might not want to take a position.
Minutes of Board of Commissioners’ Work Session Wednesday, February 16, 2011
Page 10 of 11 Pages
Chair Baney said that some of the legislators do not agree with each other on
some issues. Bills 452 and 83 are important, and the Regional Health Authority
is another; and 2390 is a committee bill that should include appropriate
language.
Chair Baney asked the other Commissioners to try to become informed and
track bills that are within their areas of interest so the entire Board can be more
informed on what is going on in Salem.
_____________________________________
Rob Poirier of 911 has asked for support on a bill having to do with 911 issues
relating to cellular phones. The Board stated the letter as presented is okay.
_____________________________________
Chair Baney said that some letters the Board was asked to support might not be
as harmless as she might have thought. This involves a chair of a County group
backing something the Commissioners may not support. Mr. Kanner said that
this person is doing this not as a private citizen but as a representative of a
County-appointed committee. Chair Baney stated that this puts her in an
awkward position. The County supports certain principles but not necessarily
how things are being handled politically.
_____________________________________
Commissioner DeBone said he would like to get rid of the “board.org” on the
website. He is concerned about who should respond and how the others would
know what the response is. Chair Baney suggested that any response be sent
back to “respond all”. She said either she or Dave Kanner will respond as
appropriate.
Being no further discussion, the meeting adjourned at 4:45 p.m.