Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2010-06-23 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 23, 2010 ___________________________ Present were Commissioners Dennis R. Luke and Alan Unger; Commissioner Tammy Baney joined the meeting later. Also present were Erik Kropp, Deputy County Administrator; Tom Anderson, Cynthia Smidt and Eric Mone , Community Development; David Givans, Internal Auditor; Judith Ure, Administration; Scott Johnson, Health Services; Andrew Spreadborough, Central Oregon Intergovernmental Council; and seven other citizens. Chair Luke opened the meeting at 1:30 p.m. 1. Update on COIC Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy. Andrew Spreadborough presented information on COIC’s Comprehensive Economic Development strategy. Judith Ure asked about the requirement for separation of services regarding the La Pine Community Kitchen, relating to the food bank and where meals are served. Mr. Spreadborough indicated that there are strict guidelines as to what segments of the population are being served and who is eligible. Even the parking lot cannot be shared. To do both at the same location, the area has to qualify; or an income survey has to be conducted over the course of a year. Therefore, the plan is to proceed with the food bank program. Ms. Ure stated that the County still owns land next to the Senior Center in La Pine, but the Community Kitchen feels that the Newberry Business Park might be a better location. This property is not owned by the County. There are four properties that might work, and all are for sale. Discussion occurred regarding decisions that must be made to determine what the area’s needs are and how to pursue them. They are in contact with a variety of entities to work on programs. Minutes of Board of Commissioners’ Work Session Wednesday, June 23, 2010 Page 1 of 8 Pages Minutes of Board of Commissioners’ Work Session Wednesday, June 23, 2010 Page 2 of 8 Pages 2. Update regarding Septic Upgrade Financial Assistance Program. Tom Anderson updated the Board on this issue. A policy discussion was a situation where a property owner (Mrs. Farley) had sought NeighborImpact’s assistance after her septic system had already been repaired. The Board had asked for number regarding the potential pool of those who have had failed systems back to 2008. None of the 29 received loans; two applied but did not qualify. It is unknown how serious their situations were, but none appealed to the County for help. Most have received the $3,750 rebate, however. Mrs. Farley would have been disqualified at first because she was behind on mortgage payments. Since then she would be covered. Commissioner Baney stated that she is glad that there are those who want to help. She asked what kind of programs might be available. Commissioner Luke said he would not want to use the fund that provides the $3,750 rebate per site. Commissioner Baney sad that at the current rate, it will take some time for the program to get into full swing. 3. Discussion of Next Steps – Destination Resort Study. Nick Lelack gave some options as to handle this issue. (He presented a matrix with these details.) Commissioner Luke asked what staff wants to see out of a study. Mr. Lelack said they would like to see a definitive result and impacts. Commissioner Unger likes the idea of a focus group. Commissioner Baney would like to see the funds spent to get to the right result. Commissioner Luke said that if an economic impact study were done at the time Eagle Crest was developed, that would be valuable knowledge. The same for Sunriver and Black Butte Ranch. It is all speculation. Commissioner Unger said that he wants to know if impacts are being created that can or cannot be mitigated. Transportation is one of them. Commissioner Luke stated that at one time it was felt everyone benefited from road improvements, but then SCD’s were put into place. He asked if the things that are not mitigated benefit the economy as a whole, and does that balance with the potential negative impacts. Minutes of Board of Commissioners’ Work Session Wednesday, June 23, 2010 Page 3 of 8 Pages Commissioner Unger stated that there is some risk of success to resorts in this economy. They do not need impediments to this success. The Board decided that a modified approach would be best. 4. Work Session Discussion – Bed & Breakfast Hearing. Cynthia Smidt and Kevin Harrison said that a hearing is scheduled for June 28. The Hearing Officer brought up two questions, whether the board and breakfast is an allowed use and whether a shared well can be used. Mr. Harrison stated that uses in EFU land come almost directly to the County from the State. In 1991, the County adopted a bed and breakfast amendment, acknowledged by the State. The use of a bed and breakfast to room and board was changed about a year ago. It is basically the same use. This application became controversial with a neighbor in great part because of a shared well. The Hearings Officer feels that these are two different uses. Commissioner Luke feels that room and board is something that might be typical with a temporary laborer on a farm. Bed and breakfast could be a shorter timeframe. Mr. Harrison said the main differences in Code and State is that in the bed and breakfast the stay is limited to 30 days in a 60-day period. A room and board situation has no stipulation on stay. There is a limitation on meals that are served in a bed and breakfast; no such limitation exists for room and board. Commissioner Luke asked how they came to the decision that they are the same thing. Mr. Harrison stated that the State has to acknowledge an ordinance. There have been a number of instances over the years when the State has done so. Ms. Smidt said that they typically used the most restrictive in each case. Commissioner Baney asked what the applicant wants. Ms. Smidt said they want a room and board arrangement, not necessarily a bed and breakfast. Septic approval was obtained for a certain number of people already. Mr. Harrison said it is sized by the number of bedrooms, and they have six. One neighbor is concerned about the shared well. The applicant wants to demonstrate that the use would be for a room and board use. The first question is what the proposed use is. What comes up is the ability of the applicant to use a shared well for this use. The Hearings Officer indicated that any approval could be conditioned to cover all the issues. Either there would have to be a new signed well agreement, or the applicant would have to provide a judgment showing the well can be used for this purpose, or establishes a water source on the property. The other property owner has said that this use cannot be accommodated by the water system. Under State law, if it were to serve overnight visitors the State has to approve it. Comments from Environmental Health were received, and some testing would be required and it would have to be a public water system. The neighbor did not bargain on this. Commissioner Baney said that these seem to be conditions that can be applied to a decision. These matters seem to be more of a civil issue. Ms. Smidt would also change the condition of approval if it were a bed and breakfast and not a room and board (condition F). Mr. Harrison said they have to find that the site is suitable for the use and is compatible with surrounding land use. Operating characteristics. Commissioner Unger asked what is felt to be reasonable. This would be more like an extended family situation. Mr. Harrison said each property is different and there needs to be consideration of impacts on other properties. Commissioner Baney asked to see the language for both uses; what the differences might be. The ISO-day time frame ends in mid-July. 5. Discussion of Temporary Restaurant Licensing. Commissioner Baney said that she had a conversation with Scott Johnson and would like to continue on the same path. The County is an agent of the State in doing inspections and must remain in compliance. Some counties have determined that they will be more flexible. Some legal issues regarding equity have come up. If there are six or more food vendors, they can get a license for a month. If fewer than that, they have to get weekly licenses. This will take a legislative fix. Minutes of Board of Commissioners' Work Session Wednesday, June 23,2010 Page 4 of 8 Pages 1 Minutes of Board of Commissioners’ Work Session Wednesday, June 23, 2010 Page 5 of 8 Pages Eric Mone of Environmental Health said that statute for farmers markets or Saturday markets requires a weekly inspection unless there are six or more vendors; then it is once a month. They got pressure from the State to start doing more inspections in this regard. Other counties handle things in a different way. It is not fair that some counties do it one way and others do it another, making it difficult for the vendors. He hopes that weekly inspections are not required for the same vendor doing the same thing. Commissioner Baney said that recommendations have been drafted to provide to the legislature and a statewide committee. Health and safety are the priority, but at the same time, the community needs to be supported. She asked that some vendors who are putting on events present their ideas. Eric and Sharon Sande of the Redmond Chamber came before the Board. Ms. Sande said that they have had several vendors who cannot pay the County’s fee. Redmond charges $15 per event, but the County charges much more. The $15 helps to make sure the vendors will honor their commitment. They usually try to get six vendors, but this year they only have four. Mr. Mone said that there is a list of exempt foods that only require an annual license, such as popcorn or candied apples. If there are six or more, they are down to a monthly license. Commissioner Baney stated that there are questions about the cost of inspections, and how is having six vendors safer than having four, if that is the purpose. She feels that there needs to be way to support the community but cover the costs involved. There are variations of inspections and products. A carve out is that normally in the fee structure, the building, training and overhead is wrapped into the fees. She is thinking that this is a small number in relation to other things. Some vendors require more extensive inspections than others do. Commissioner Luke stated that it is not fair to other established vendors to ask them to help cover the cost of vendors who may not even be local. The cost has to be made up somewhere. Commissioner Unger said that the initial inspection might require more time. However, if they are doing the same thing all weekend or each week, it is overkill to charge the same each time. An event fee might be appropriate, and should be the same no matter where the event is held. The fees would be less if they were consistent each time. Minutes of Board of Commissioners’ Work Session Wednesday, June 23, 2010 Page 6 of 8 Pages Commissioner Baney stated that there are some behind the scenes work to be considered. Perhaps the vendors or event to organizers can do some of the expected work ahead of time, so they know what will be done. Mr. Mone stated that if there are 600 temporary events, a third or less have critical violations such as had washing, temperatures, etc. Those are corrected on site or they do not stay open. Very seldom are they unable to comply. The fees have been audited by the State to show the cost of doing business, and they say the amount is justified. Commissioner Baney does not want to see someone penalized just because there are one or two vendors. Mr. Sande stated that if there are more than six, the vendors do not make much money due to the competition. Lee Perry with Laid Out Events said that in 2006 or 2007, the fees were $40 for a booth, then went up to $80, and now are down to $70. They want to know why the fees jumped so much. There are 35 vendors for the Bite of Bend and it is felt that the fees are out of line. The restaurants cannot afford to subsidize this expense. Mr. Mone said that they inspect all restaurants, pools and other public locations in addition to the temporary venues. Mr. Perry said that he has been working on these events for about twenty years. In recent years the restaurant vendors said that they might not be able to continue due to the fees. It was not a problem prior to the fees being doubled. Tom Anderson said that the frequency might be the problem. Mr. Mone stated that once a month went to once a week for some vendors per State law. This drove the cost up. He said that the for-profit vendors can get a reduced fee if they are working at a benevolent event. Commissioner Luke said that the County could subsidize, as the money has to come from somewhere. Mr. Mone stated that there are different levels of vendors. Someone handling iced drinks would pay less than someone cooking food. Restaurants pay an annual fee but they can be open seven days a week and are not inspected that often. Mr. Anderson said that fees are averaged overall. They can sometimes isolate a specific type of permit and narrow the cost. There are different fees for pools, restaurants and other uses. They have a good idea of the cost of an FTE for this. Some will require more work than others. He said that it appears that an accounting is desired to figure out actual costs per vendor and event. This will take some time to perform. Minutes of Board of Commissioners’ Work Session Wednesday, June 23, 2010 Page 7 of 8 Pages Commissioner Luke said that it may not be fair to charge more to a vendor in La Pine just because the drive is further. Commissioner Unger suggested that the fee be reduced to $40 at this point, and work be done to change the law. Mr. Mone said that a lot of times the temporary vendors require more time and education. There are a lot of community events where food is served that they cannot even get to. Mr. Johnson asked if they are considering a reduced fee (Option A). Mr. Perry said that a lot of vendors have paid their fees in advance. Mr. Johnson stated that there would be a cost attached to refunding. Commissioner Unger likes Option A #1, which would require some County subsidy. Commissioner Luke asked if someone with violations would be charged more. Commissioner Unger would like to keep it simple and work done to change things at the State level. They want vendors to be available at the events to help make the events successful. A conference call with Commissioner Unger will take place during the Monday, June 28 Board business meeting to discuss this issue further. 6. Update of Commissioners’ Meetings and Schedules. The Commissioners briefly discussed their calendars for the rest of the week. 7. Other Items. Cindy Pasco of Project Connect said that a lot of volunteers are involved who are not affiliated with agencies or are employees who are donating their time outside of their normal work duties. Mr. Kropp said that the insurers and the County might be liable. Ms. Pasco said that sometimes events are excluded from policies in any case. A liability waiver is signed by each participant. Mr. Kropp recommended that a volunteer be tied to a group, but this is not practical. It is difficult for nonprofits to get event coverage. Also, it makes a difference whether the event is held during weekdays or weekends. Commissioner Baney asked if it could be moved to a weekday format, which might help with insurance coverage. Ms. Pasco stated that a weekend allows people who work during the week to participate, and it also allows volunteers and families to participate.