Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2011-05-11 Work Session Minutes Deschutes County Board of Commissioners 1300 NW Wall St., Suite 200, Bend, OR 97701-1960 (541) 388-6570 - Fax (541) 385-3202 - www.deschutes.org MINUTES OF WORK SESSION DESCHUTES COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS WEDNESDAY, MAY 11, 2011 ___________________________ Present were Commissioners Tammy Baney, Alan Unger and Anthony DeBone. Also present were Dave Kanner, County Administrator; Erik Kropp, Deputy County Administrator; Dave Inbody, Assistant to the Administrator; Tom Anderson, Nick Lelack, Peter Russell, Peter Gutowsky and George Read, Community Development; Laurie Craghead, County Counsel; media representative Hillary Borrud of The Bulletin; and one other citizen. Chair Baney opened the meeting at 1:30 p.m. 1. Before the Board was Review of Economic Development Discretionary Grants. ƒ Central Oregon Police Chaplaincy - $400 – Chair Baney said she would donate the funds from her allotment. ƒ Central Oregon Youth Investment Foundation - $300 – The Commissioners granted $100 each. ƒ Bethlehem Inn - $5,000 – Commissioner Unger noted that this would help with fundraising. Gwen Wiseman of the Bethlehem Inn said that they appreciate the ongoing partnership, and this will help significantly towards working together on the issue of homelessness. There are others helping with this as well. Commissioners Unger and Baney granted $1,000 each; Commissioner DeBone granted $3,000. ƒ Deschutes Water Alliance - $750 – Commissioner Unger stated that he is trying to facilitate meetings of this group. He is very active in this group as well as many other organizations. Commissioner DeBone asked if this could be done if they are not a nonprofit. Dave Inbody said the County helped last year, but other jurisdictions contributed. Chair Baney asked how this could be authorized when other Commissioners are involved in similar groups that may need the same kind of assistance. Minutes of Board of Commissioners’ Work Session Wednesday, May 11, 2011 Page 1 of 6 Pages Minutes of Board of Commissioners’ Work Session Wednesday, May 11, 2011 Page 2 of 6 Pages Dave Kanner explained that there is a way to cover some of these costs. If the Board wants to purchase food for a meeting, this can be done, but just needs to be prudent. This applies when hosting a group that comes from other areas, but not, for instance, to cover staff meetings. Dave Inbody said that the Board is funded by other departments, which is why costs are generally those that help the County or departments as a whole. It is a judgment call for the Board. Chair Baney said if this kind of work is being done on behalf of the Board and the County, it seems appropriate to help. She and Commissioner DeBone felt that this should not come out of economic development grant funds, but a separate fund for this type of situation. 2. Discussion of a Notice of Dissolution of Howell’s Hilltop Acres Special Road District. Laurie Craghead said that this group has submitted its paperwork so this action is not needed. There are two different ways to dissolve a district. The district can petition property owners and have a hearings process. The other way is if the financial statements are not filed for three years. The District is alerted and given time to get their information in order and submitted. If it did need to be dissolved, the Board initiates the action, and County Counsel has to draft a financial report for the group. A hearing follows. If the district is active, they are given time to get their reports in order. If it is dissolved, the County assumes control and obtains the assets, but is not obligated to continue the services provided. Taxes are charged until the costs are repaid. 3. Discussion of Regional Economic Opportunity Analysis, and May 24 Forum (Johnson Reid). Peter Gutowsky said the event is on the evening of May 24. An agenda is being drafted, and he would like to have a Commissioner provide opening and closing remarks. (PowerPoint presentation) This activity will have some impact on the 2011-12 work plan, as there are potentially some additional responsibilities or more of a leadership role that will be required by Community Development. Jerry Johnson will summarize the analysis at the meeting. Minutes of Board of Commissioners’ Work Session Wednesday, May 11, 2011 Page 3 of 6 Pages A State grant funded the analysis. The Regional Advisory Committee consists of many Central Oregon governments, agencies and other stakeholders. The report will be more substantial and viable because of this involvement. It is difficult for State to attract large lot industrial users. Global recruitment is challenging. Recruiters and companies want to know that there is a diversity of sites in different areas that are shovel-ready. The study looks at how to maximize regional potential. This study is unprecedented, and not based on traditional studies that look at population numbers, etc. This report leverages the region as a whole. This is not being addressed under current methodologies. The region needs to work as a cohesive unit to market the area to recruiters. Strengths are a major highway, commercial airport and a good workforce. Negatives are some transportation problems and land use obstacles. What is needed are parcels of 50 acres or more, preferably flat; rectangular, with utilities; a viable workforce; and competitive prices for the property (i.e. cooperation of the property owner). The recommendation is that there is a short-term need for 50+ acre industrial sites. Most should be located close to employees and transportation. Government needs to be responsive and help with the regulatory process. The second phase of the DLCD grant was meant to develop implementation. There should be a regional governance piece. They want to always have at least six sites available, and those sites need to be ready. Bringing in a regional employer has a ripple effect on adjoining areas. The grant was never designed to get to that level. It was designed to find out what is needed and how to get that organized. They need to find out what qualifies and do the needed outreach. A document is being developed with the involvement of various area governments and community members. Mr. Lelack said that the framework is being developed for this new game. Regional funding mechanisms have been raised but immediately people think the topics are too big. The options for adjusting them will be part of this setting Realistically, it is the County and the DSL. Infrastructure details can be worked out if someone is interested, but it has to be already defined as large lot industrial. That means the infrastructure has to be in place. A lot has to do with getting it rezoned. Minutes of Board of Commissioners’ Work Session Wednesday, May 11, 2011 Page 4 of 6 Pages Mr. Gutowsky said the intent is not to place the entire burden on Deschutes County. The Oregon Business Development Department, with LCDC and the legislature have to be players and the region has to be a cohesive unit. Mr. Lelack stated that the comprehensive plan amendment adoption will help with this if done properly. The building blocks need to be in place in order to move forward. There has to be a site-readiness strategy to determine what is already available or viable, and what is lacking. Mr. Gutowsky semantics with Oregon land use law, but framework can be established. There are some steps in the way. Cities and other governments have to be careful not to get ahead of themselves and make sure a site is viable and that there is a willing property owner before tying up property. Mr. Lelack said that many of the roadblocks are there because of the State land use process. There is a lot of competition from other states who are able to be more flexible. The group has welcomed the input from 1,000 Friends of Oregon and other groups so that it can be demonstrated that the process was transparent and potential obstacles can be addressed. 4. Continuation of a Public Hearing on the Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan Update. Mr. Lelack said this guides location and design of rural development. Ms. Craghead stated that this is contrary to other things. They are asking that development be minimized so as to not have to expand roads, sewer or other infrastructure in rural areas. Mr. Lelack noted that this occurs through Code and a number of other ways through State law. Ms. Craghead said that it is a policy statement as to whether you want to go further. Commissioner DeBone explained that the lots are there, so it is not about wanting to develop more. Ms. Craghead said that the wording includes “unnecessary”, and it is unclear what that is. Mr. Gutowsky stated that this may run counter to destination resorts. It is not in the destination resort section, but it could be used by someone who opposes them. Ms. Craghead noted that the destination resort usually bears the cost, but it could be contrary and confusing. Cluster developments were then addressed. Ms. Craghead said that they require at least 60% open space. Minutes of Board of Commissioners’ Work Session Wednesday, May 11, 2011 Page 5 of 6 Pages Several parts of Section 3 were discussed, and some wording deleted while other language was added. In regard to regional problem solving goals and policies, Mr. Lelack said that it was based on the science at the time, but until more is known, it is hard to justify removing it. Ms. Craghead stated that it was in the Comprehensive Plan already in order to comply with other Statewide planning goals. 5. Update of Commissioners’ Meetings and Schedules. None were discussed. 6. Other Items. Commissioner Unger asked for a letter of support for Title II projects having to do with weed education and control and a collaborative process for forest care. The Nature Conservancy, COIC and other organizations cannot fulfill the total commitment, and the U.S. Forest Service does not fund administrative costs. The Board indicated its support. _____________________________ Mr. Lelack explained that Everett Turner’s term as Planning Commissioner is expiring. He represents Bend, and Christen Brown is a member at large. Both are seeking reappointment. Members can serve two terms or a total of ten years. Commissioner Unger said that both are doing a good job. They are up to speed and are going through the process. Commissioner DeBone added that it is a good time for continuity. Chair Baney said she feels it is offensive to ask them to reapply for their current positions. All three Commissioners want the group to stay as it is. _____________________________ The meeting concluded at 4:25 p.m., at which time the Board went into Executive Session to discuss personnel issues, under ORS 192.660(2)(a) and (b).