HomeMy WebLinkAbout2011-06-15 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, JUNE 15, 2011
___________________________
Present were Commissioners Tammy Baney, Anthony DeBone and Allan Unger.
Also present were Dave Kanner, County Administrator; and, for a portion of the
meeting, Hillary Saraceno, Children & Families Commission; Tom Anderson,
Paul Blikstad and Nick Lelack, Community Development; Laurie Craghead,
County Counsel; and six other citizens.
Chair Baney opened the meeting at 2:05 p.m.
1. Discussion of Request from High Desert ESD regarding County Funding.
Discussion took place regarding the program that is in jeopardy. Advocates
pointed out that in the long-term, the program will save the County money.
Chair Baney said that there could be years when no community investment
funds will be available, and asked for a backup plan.
Paul Andrews said that with advance notice, they would approach other entities
and the Districts so appropriate planning can take place. The School Districts
and the County are the logical partners in this.
Steve Swisher, Vice Chair of the Children & Families Commission and a retired
school superintendent, stated that his picture is more global than that. Over
time, this program is extremely important and is a core program for other
things, and he would like to find more permanent funding for these kinds of
core programs. A small levy might be approved by taxpayers for programs that
are cost-effective. It is a great return on investment for the dollars spent.
Chair Baney asked for his opinion on Early HeadStart. Mr. Swisher stated that
it is an important program as a part of prevention as well.
Minutes of Board of Commissioners’ Work Session Wednesday, June 15, 2011
Page 1 of 7 Pages
Minutes of Board of Commissioners’ Work Session Wednesday, June 15, 2011
Page 2 of 7 Pages
Commissioner Unger asked for clarification on how it works when the children
are so young. Mr. Andrews said that the hope is that they never touch the
Juvenile Justice system, but those that are at risk can be identified at that young
age.
Chair Baney asked if all school districts contribute. Mr. Andrews stated they
do. Mr. Swisher said that in Lane County, he was part of the original pilot
program, which was federally funded. Several of the Districts use their funds to
continue this work.
Commissioner Unger asked why this program went from a permanent status to
a competitive process. Chair Baney said that alternatives to incarceration were
analyzed to see if they enhance what the County already does. The thought was
that the dollars should go into community investment in general. The funds can
only be used for certain things by service partners. The funds are for the most
part discretionary. Dave Kanner said that it started out with the same people
asking for the same money each year. The County-run programs started being
funded out of the general fund and the others now have to apply.
Chair Baney pointed out that the biggest issue with this application is that the
deadline for submission was missed. Further, they have been partners for
fifteen years, but the County now provides half of the funding. The program is
beneficial, but if the County does not have the general funds to support it in the
future, the result is not good. She would like to see more efforts to obtain
community support.
Most counties are not able to invest in outside groups, as they have to make
sure internal County functions and services are supported. This is not a
mandatory program, and the County may not always be able to support them.
There are many great programs that deserve support, but there could be a time
when they will have to rely on other sources of funding.
Mr. Andrews stated that he was not aware that the County wants to have them
seek funding elsewhere. He fears that if not funded this year, the program will
go away. He would like to review this during the coming year to determine
how to handle future funding.
Minutes of Board of Commissioners’ Work Session Wednesday, June 15, 2011
Page 3 of 7 Pages
Commissioner DeBone agreed. Commissioner Unger would like to see the
Districts and ESD fully understand the complexities and the challenges. He
understands the issue and wants to fund them this year, but next year they need
to be on top of the process.
Mr. Swisher said that he wants to let the Commissioners know that he hopes to
work for them over the next few years towards making the program’s funding
stable.
Mr. Kanner stated that funds for the community programs come before the
Board next week, and the Board could choose to de-fund another group in the
amount of $25,000. Or, they could take funding out of the video lottery or
contingency fund.
UNGER: Move the video lottery contingency fund be adjusted by $25,000 to
allow for funding for the First Steps program through the High
Desert ESD for Fiscal Year 2011-12.
DEBONE: Second.
VOTE: UNGER: Yes.
DEBONE: Yes.
BANEY: Chair votes yes.
2. Review of Draft Event Venue Text Amendment.
Mr. Lelack gave an overview of the issue, referring to a matrix of
considerations for event venues that are not a farm use. The County would
draft a proposal to take through a public process; there is no existing proposal.
The text amendment would be relatively short and would relate to private parks
and events. This applies to farmland and not forest zones.
Commissioner Unger asked about the consequences of a private park on the
property and the owners; are there long-term ramifications. Mr. Lelack stated
that other counties have taken action to approve these, and some put in four-
year limitations. However, SB 960 means the land use would run with the
property. It would allow a limited use, which is not well defined, but would
require a license that must be renewed every two years.
SB 960 means the land use would not expire, but the license could.
Minutes of Board of Commissioners’ Work Session Wednesday, June 15, 2011
Page 4 of 7 Pages
Laurie Craghead stated that the use cannot be permitted outright. The SB
appears to be moving forward in the legislature.
Chair Baney said sometimes there is the practical application and the legal
process, which could be different.
Tom Anderson said that the land use could be allowed, but the use reviewed
every two years or so. Ms. Craghead asked what a violation would entail;
would a public process be required.
Commissioner Unger said there are other kinds of licenses or permits that come
up for review. There are expectations of the permitted use and they need to be
met. Mr. Kanner asked how this would be determined. There need to be clear
and objective criteria that makes it easier for staff to make a review. The
conditional use permit expires after four years, at which time the application has
to be reviewed. It could come before the Board and any violations or issues
could be addressed then.
Ms. Craghead confirmed that there are other reasons for a private park other
than weddings. There could be soccer fields or trails, or other kinds of uses. If
they are getting paid for the use, it is a commercial event.
Mr. Lelack said SB 960 is specifically related to farm use, such as a corn maze
or a fruit stand. A lot of properties might fall under this, but others will not be
able to demonstrate an event is related to any farm use. This is where the
private park comes in.
Mr. Anderson stated that the private park issue will solve some issues but not
all. The income task may be an issue if the use is challenged. There has to be
a working farm for SB 960 to come into play.
The Commissioners agreed that they need to continue forward regardless of SB
960 since the ramifications of its passage will not be known for a while.
Mr. Lelack brought up setbacks, and whether landscaping or berming might be
required. Mr. Anderson said that septic systems is also an issue. Perhaps the
Board does not want to get into whether porta-potties are adequate, but in any
case, he feels that hand-washing stations are necessary.
Minutes of Board of Commissioners’ Work Session Wednesday, June 15, 2011
Page 5 of 7 Pages
The Commissioners felt that if the use is temporary, the portable equipment is
appropriate. Minimum standards should be porta-potties and hand-washing
stations. A lot depends on whether permanent structures are built for the use.
Most parks have restrooms, but the siting and construction have to be permitted,
and whatever is required for sanitation would have to be met.
The limitation would be 20 events in a calendar year, which each event being
one day. Mr. Lelack asked if any kind of notification is desired. SB 960 allows
for fewer events but they can last longer. As far as set-up and take down times
are concerned, SB 360 does not stipulate. Ms. Craghead said she feels that the
set-up and take down are not a part of the time allowed for the event.
Mr. Lelack said that a lot of people live on the property but others do not and
just let it be used. Ms. Craghead said they can apply for a modification of
approval as well. She said that even if there is no charge, there needs to be
compliance with building codes, etc.
The legislature should be done with this soon. There would be a public hearing
in September and then eventual implementation.
If something does not happen or happens, it shifts the conversation. Ms.
Craghead said the County may be able to be more restrictive in some ways.
Mr. Anderson said in two of the situations, they would be implementing State
law. The other one gives the Board discretion. They need to be good at
labeling the use and setting up the criteria.
In regard to property boundaries, it can be easily challenged as far as the
activity areas are concerned. The County could be challenged ass to
notification. Ms. Craghead is talking about notice only.
Mr. Anderson said the site plan review distances would be reviewed when the
site plan is submitted. However, it could be difficult to enforce if they decide to
move something.
Chair Baney said that perhaps they could allow just the wedding and not the
reception. Most of the angst seems to relate to having receptions.
Commissioner Unger stated it is a mass gathering and it would be hard to get
around this. Some people may want to have the wedding in a church and have
the reception in the country. And enforcement would still be difficult.
Minutes of Board of Commissioners’ Work Session Wednesday, June 15, 2011
Page 6 of 7 Pages
The proposal will go to the Planning Commission for its input, and there will be
one more work session with the Board (probably on July 13) before it goes to a
Board business meeting, allowing for a 45-day notice.
3. Update of Commissioners’ Meetings and Schedules.
None were discussed.
4. Other Items.
Mr. Kanner stated that the County is entitled to three seat appointments on the
EDCO Board. Lori Hancock of Sisters and Lee Smith are on the Board along
with Dave Kanner. Mr. Kanner said that the committees do much of the work.
Commissioner DeBone asked how he can get involved. Mr. Kanner indicated
that Mr. Smith may decide to step down anyway. The cities have seats on the
Board but do not provide much funding.
Chair Baney asked if the County can request another member. Mr. Kanner said
that the request will be made.
____________________________
The 911 User Board is interested in creating a new district and going out for
more stable funding so they don’t have to pursue a levy so often. The new
district would take in all but a small portion of the old district. The process is
complicated but would make the district more stable. It is not just Deschutes
County but other counties in the region. 911 is handled differently in the other
two counties.
The Commissioners thought that it might be a good time for a tri-county
meeting again. Commissioner Unger stated that they would need to include
more than just the governing body in something like this.
The meeting ended at 3:50 p.m., at which time the Board went into a
brief executive session under ORS 192.660(2)(b), a personnel matter.