Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2010-05-27 - Planning Commission MinutesCommunity Development Department Planning Division Building Safety Division Environmental Health Division 117 NW Lafayette Avenue Bend Oregon 97701-1925 (541)388-6575 FAX(541)385-1764 http://www.co.deschutes.or.us/cdd/ MINUTES DESCHUTES COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION DESCHUTES SERVICES CENTER 1300 NW WALL STREET, BEND, OREGON, 97701 MAY 27, 2010 - 5:30 P.M. I. CALL TO ORDER Meeting was called to order at 5:30 p.m. by Chair Chris Brown. Members present were Vice Chair Ed Criss, Merle Irvine, Keith Cyrus, Richard Klyce and James Powell. Absent: Todd Turner. Staff present were Tom Anderson, Community Development Director; Nick Lelack, Planning Director; Peter Gutowsky, Principal Planner; Terri Payne, Senior Planner; and Sher Buckner, Administrative Secretary. Approval of March 11, 2010 minutes with one change to Commissioner Klyce's comments on page 3. II. PUBLIC COMMENTS Mike Neary proposed that the Commissioners make a recommendation to the Board that funds raised form the sale of properties in La Pine's new neighborhood be earmarked exclusively for a comprehensive, sustainable groundwater protection program in the Upper Deschutes River Basin. Vice Chair Criss said that the Local Rule that was passed included some financing that could have been used from the sale of BLM land that was given to the County. A deal was struck with Palisch to build a new neighborhood and help those people. Over the course of time the land has not been purchased, so the projected money has not come in and the funds are much less than expected. People are afraid that the money will not be used appropriately and not for sewer feasibility studies. There were threats from some people in County government, and last July, the Board gave the groundwater protection program back to the DEQ. We are going tp need money no matter what the final solution may be. Chair Brown wanted to discuss options for the resolution. Nick said that this deals with the Local Rule that was overturned. He would want to check with Tom Anderson and County legal counsel to see if it was in our purview as to where the monies would be spent. It may not be the County's decision to distribute funding from this program. Mike Neary indicated he would like a recommendation so that the Board, not the Planning Commission, would be responsible to allocate the money. Chair Brown asked if a Quality Services Performed with Pride statement was being made about events that occurred in the past which he was not a party to. He would like a staff member to provide more information so the Commissioners could vote on Mike's proposal. Nick said that staff could provide more information at the next meeting. Tom Anderson said that this was a budget issue and has come up before, and it may not be a County land issue per. se: ` The Commissioners have in the past made recommendations that they felt kro"holy about, for items not under their control. All new funds from the new neighborhood are easily trackable and not comingled with other funds. Commissioner Irvine and Tom discussed the funds being in a dedicated account. The revenue stream for the sale of land in the new neighborhood has dropped dramatically due to the economy. There is also other revenue through the TDC program whereby a developer in the new neighborhood would pay as a cost of development into the financial assistance fund. Commissioner Irvine asked Mike if he was concerned that these funds would go somewhere else, and Mike said yes. Chair Brown asked for clarification of "earmarked" versus "dedicated." Tom said by "dedicated," he meant "accounted for separately." He has also heard the Board members say they are unable to bind future usage of funds, but their current intention is to keep the funds separate. Chair Brown and Commissioner Cyrus felt that more information is needed before making a decision. Commissioner Powell and Chair Brown discussed the possibility of having a policy in place, as this could happen in other areas besides South County. Nick and Chair Brown discussed staff providing a timeline of events before the next meeting. Commissioner Klyce requested having the timeline indicate the original agreement with the BLM, and Tom said it was an act of Congress. Commissioner Irvine felt that he would not be interested in the numbers, as Commissioner Klyce had also indicated, but rather in commitments made to the people in the affected area. Nick said that staff would try to have information in the packet for the next meeting, but it will be difficult since we also have all three community plans,; and other items on the next agenda, plus a holiday Monday which will reduce preparation time. Ron Sharbaugh said that he was frustrated after the meeting and spoke about a book called "Good Calories, Bad Calories" (see printed submittal). He would like to see the County out of the lead on the issue of nitrates in South County. He also wanted to support Mike Neary's comments. Commissioner Powell asked Ron about his background which is in computers and electrical engineering, including designing mammography software and software for satellites. Robert Ray wanted to discuss the La Pine groundwater issues in this section of the Comprehensive Plan. The area needs its own Plan and does not have one at this time. The document needs to be revised and sent back for peer reviews by the government entities. There has been no testing to confirm the data that have been presented. Unlike the information as presented to the public, the DEQ is not in charge of this issue and is still in a subservient position to the County. This has been money driven with no enlistment for reduction of nitrates from the commercial end, no memo of understanding with the commercial entities, no equitable enforcement. The County only wanted money from fees which they would not get from commercial entities. The DEQ is currently working to develop a sustainable solution, but ,the "back door Local Rule" hinders this process. He feels the Commissioners are more connected with the people than the Board and he does respect their positions. If the Board.;does not listen to them, they are not listening to the citizens. He would like a motion to recommend to the Board that the "back -door Local Rule" be rescinded. 2 Nick Lelack mentioned legal advice from County Counsel saying that neither any officers of the County, including the Commissioners, nor staff should discuss any issue that is the subject of pending litigation. If any one of the Commissioners has an interest in the lawsuit or potential conflict of interest, they should recuse themselves. Any members of the Commissioners who are also members of the Citizens' Advisory Group (CAG), for example, should not comment. Chair Brown asked if the comments referred to a specific section of the draft Plan. Robert said it was difficult to divide up, but he was concerned with protecting the groundwater in South Deschutes County. Commissioner Klyce asked if ATT systems are being required throughout South County. Robert said that if a system fails or is part of new construction, it has to be replaced with an ATT system. Commissioner Klyce asked if this was the case regardless of the results of a perc test, and Robert spoke about the distance from the river being one of the considerations. Commissioner Criss said he is a'. member of the CAG; his attorney told him he is considered a "class" of person `because he is among thousands who would be affected, but his name is not on the lawsuit. Lee Wilkins said she supports the letters received and Robert Ray's previous comments. She spoke about Goal 5 of the draft Comp Plan covering• exploring, installing and monitoring innovative treatment methods, as well as other language which will saddle South County with these systems. We are not going anywhere and CDD staff has done an end -run around the Commissioners. Nick responded that this was adopted ten years ago and nothing has changed in this draft; there is no "end -run." Also, we might need to be able to give some more information regarding Mr. Neary's resolution before the next meeting so the Commissioners can discuss their opinions about the proposed motion. III. DISCUSSION (continued): TA -09-7 AND TA -10-3, Minor Changes to Deschutes County Code for Guest Ranches and EFU Zoning (by statute not requiring a public hearing) - Paul Blikstad, Senior Planner. Paul spoke about the applications and related Senate bills. The changes would make our Code consistent with State law. Nick mentioned that sometimes we do not change the Code for minor legislative amendments due to the length of time and cost involved. Commissioner Powell and Paul ;discussed some conditional uses on non -high-value EFU. Commissioner Criss asked if changes could be highlighted in some way. Paul said that ordinance numbers are listed in each section of the Code, but there is not enough room in the Code to highlight all the changes. Nick said that Measure 49 is still in effect, and we still track what changes are made and when. Motion: Commissioner Irvine motioned to recommend to the Board that they approve TA - 09 -7 and TA -10-3. Seconded by Vice Chair Criss. Motion passed unanimously. IV. DISCUSSION OF REVISED WATER POLICIES/KYLE GORMAN, FORMER WATER - MASTER — Terri Hansen Payne, Senior Planner. Terri said we are suggesting removal of the "key issues" sections, and we may consolidate 2.5 and 2.6 so all the "water" is in one chapter. The policies recommended by community members constituted an extensive amount of input and have generated some concern, but they are provided to generate discussion. _3_ Kyle Gorman, currently Regional '.Manager for the Oregon Water Resources Dept., formerly Watermaster from 1993-2001, responded to questions submitted by the Commissioners. Overall, the Deschutes River begins as groundwater springs near Little Lava Lake. There is a tremendous amount of precipitation from the mountains — up to 150 inches annually - which recharges the river west of here. This is in great contrast to what we receive in Bend which averages 11.8 inches, 25 miles away. Redmond averages 10 inches annually. Our weather pattern is more reflective of that dry area; but we are blessed with the water supply from the Cascades which are young in geologic terms and readily accept precipitation flowing through their aquifers. It is a tremendous resource. A 1998 USGS/OWRD/County/Confederated Tribes of Warm Springs groundwater study concluded that about 3500 cubic feet per second is recharged into the aquifer annually. This is a lot of water. The Deschutes River at Benham Falls is around 1700 cubic feet per second, so it's double the flow - on a daily basis, year in and year out. It is a very large, very productive resource and easily flows through the system and is easily accessed through groundwater wells. Little Lava Lake heads south for a few miles and water is then stored in the Crane Prairie Reservoir and used by three irrigation districts in Deschutes County and a small portion of Jefferson County. This flows through springs into Wickiup Reservoir, continues to Bend and enters Jefferson County. Water was stored in Wickiup Reservoir starting in 1944 — the gates are closed in mid-October to a minimum flow of 20 cubic feet per second (the average natural flow at that time` is:about700) and opened when the irrigation season begins in April. In dry years, the flow is indeed 20 cubic feet per second; but in wet years, like we experienced in 1996-1997-1998, the flow in the winter ranged from 500-1200 cubic feet per second and promptly flooded about a dozen homes in the area because they encroached on the river channel. The Deschutes River at Tumalo has to be managed below the average natural flow at all times — probably the only place on earth where this happens. This will be a continuing problem and will be exacerbated due to growth. The Deschutes River has been noted as the most even -flowing river of its size anywhere in the world, and that was prior to the Irrigation District diversions and the dams on the river system. The Deschutes River proper is supplied by groundwater — Spring River, Fall River — and those tributaries provide very consistent, high quality water. Flows in the Little Deschutes River can range from 10 cubic feet per second to 1000 cubic feet per second just a couple of months before. We have about 2000 cubic feet per second on average in July that come into Bend, and about 100 that leave Bend. The Deschutes River Conservancy and others have worked diligently to take Irrigation District water rights and lease or transfer those rights in -stream for either temporary or permanent bases; and this has changed the flow below to Bend to be a maximum of 30 cubic feet per second. This summer we're projecting the flows to be 140 cubic feet per second. That 140 is also made up not only of leases and transfers, but conserved water — there has been a significant amount of conserved water put in -stream last. year. Swalley has put the largest amount of conserved water into the river to date — 28 cubic feet per second due to added piping. The State of Oregon is the in -stream restoration leader for all western states. Chair Brown asked why the districts are doing this — what is the motivation? Kyle said that during the heyday of development and growth, people were putting houses on land that was formerly irrigated, and the rights were put in -stream. It benefits the stream, and they are shown as working cooperatively with the folks whose mission is to improve stream flow. Also, they are not losing that water right base from their water rights certificate. The water districts are working to cooperate and improve stream flow. The Deschutes Basin volcanic 4 material below us varies greatly in thickness, materials, etc. There is sand, asphalt, pumice, gravel and lava flows, all of which are piled and mixed. Aquifers in the Midwest are not regenerated like ours, where water continually comes in and runs out at a great rate. Chair Brown asked how long it takes for the snow to arrive through the aquifer. Kyle said that it is hard to be specific, but looking at observation wells along the Cascades we will see water changes in a month, either after the snow melts or we have a big rainfall event, which is a pressure response and not the same water. It may take 1000 years for the actual water molecules to trpveI,,from the mountains to the aquifer. Commissioner Powell asked whether there was another aquifer. Kyle said not really - there are other small "zones," but no other real aquifers below ours. There may be clay layers between the smaller zones which make the water less permeable so it moves more slowly than layers composed of larger materials. Vice Chair Criss wondered if the John Day formation is a hard pan layer. Kyle said that those older rocks are very impermeable and act as a barrier to groundwater flow. They outcrop on the northeast side of the Deschutes aquifer and prevent flow to Prineville. The John Day formation underlies that basin — no one really knows how far it goes to the west and no one has really drilled deep enough to know how it lies. Even less is known about La Pine. The High School has a well that is 1400 feet deep which probably does not come close to reaching the John Day formation. Vice Chair Criss mentioned someone from La Pine who testified that there were five aquifers. Kyle said he had never heard of this. Chair Brown asked about senior and junior irrigation rights, and Kyle said that these are the fundamental basis of the Oregon Water Code. If you have a 1905 right, you are pretty much guaranteed water all the time on the Deschutes River. On Wychus Creek, however, the majority of rights have an 1895 priority date so you may not get it there. The oldest priority date gets the water first, and rights get cut off as stream level drops. Tumalo Irrigation District would have shortages if it were not for a backup creek. Chair Brown discussed irrigation methods an asked whether future use would be restricted if a water rights holder has 100 -acre rights but cuts back to 25. Kyle said the owner can install the most efficient irrigation system and irrigate the whole property or try to continue with the current system and only irrigate 25 acres. Chair Brown asked what happens if all the water is not used — what is the incentive not to use it up? Kyle said the landowner is not obligated to use all of the water. The State encourages efficient irrigation systems so districts have more water. State law says that if someone applies for conserved water, 25% has to go back in -stream, with a maximum of 75% in some cases, and depending on funding involved. Chair Brown asked about water rights on developing land. Is there any course of action where an owner can transfer an irrigation right away in exchange for a right to drill and create a water supply for a subdivision? Kyle said yes — the State allows for the transfer of water rights to another use and/or another place. A water right can go from irrigation to another use - municipal or industrial, for example. This has to go through the Water Resources Department. In the Deschutes Basin, we have a system called the mitigation program, the only one in the State. If a person wants to irrigate a piece of property by a well — they can drill the well, apply for a groundwater right from the State and purchase mitigation credits from either a mitigation bank or someone who created mitigation credits, show the State that they have those mitigation credits and obtain the groundwater right to irrigate the land. To date, the mitigation credits; have only been created by in -stream leasing and in - stream transfers. 5-- Commissioner Irvine asked Kyle to explain "in -stream leasing." Kyle said that in 1987, the State Legislature enacted the in -stream water rights statutes. Prior to 1987, believe it or not, in -stream uses were not considered beneficial. After 1987, the law changed, and someone who holds a water right for out -of -stream use can transfer it temporarily or permanently in - stream for beneficial purposes in -stream. In the Deschutes Basin, there have been thousands of parcels of land that have temporarily taken that water right off the land, put it in -stream for a few years to beneficially use that water right in -stream; and then once the lease expires, it comes back onto the land. It can be done for protection of the water right from forfeiture (if you don't use it every five years, there's a statute that says it will be considered abandoned). The in -stream leasing program protects those water rights from forfeiture. Sometimes people want to help the river — a fisherman buys a piece of land and doesn't want to have to mess with changing irrigation pipes, and that water can be put back in -stream to help the river and improve stream flows. It is a very common and large volume of activity related to leasing in -stream in the Deschutes Basin — greater than anywhere else in the State. Commissioner Powell asked about "adjudicated" water, referring to a situation where private companies formed to distribute that water and there were losses in the canals. The adjudicated water covered those losses. Is this Basin over -adjudicated? Kyle said that prior to 1909, a person who wanted to initiate water use would stake a claim beside the river. The term "adjudicated" means it was initiated prior to 1909. In the Deschutes Basin, the judge allowed for a transmission loss which is fairly unique. "Over -allocated" is a hot button issue — he will say that the Deschutes River at Bend is over -allowed to 3000 cubic feet per second because the flow is only 1400. We have supplemental flow from the reservoirs to make up for it in the summertime. The State Engineer withdrew the Upper Deschutes River from further appropriation in 1913. There is water available in other systems; however, it is very minimal. Commissioner Powell asked how efficiency and cost of delivery are affected by taking a larger parcel and dividing it into smaller parcels. Kyle said these create many problems and conflicts, because everyone wants to use water on their pieces of land all the time instead of one owner controlling it. This requires more water. Commissioner Powell asked whether an earthquake would disrupt flow; Kyle said probably not due to the size of the flow. He would be more worried about homes, roads, etc. Commissioner Cyrus said there are wells in his area that are 50 feet deep, 100 feet deep, high -production wells that are 250 feet deep, etc., and the water finds the easiest way to move. Commissioner Klyce asked about the effect of single-family domestic wells on the water table, and Kyle said there was virtually no impact. There are 3500 cubic feet per second flowing, and recently the effect of the entire area was calculated at 3-4 cubic feet per second (cfs). Commissioner Klyce asked about water testing and nuclear testing/radioactive residue in Opal Springs. Kyle said these are variable; the water follows a very twisted path through a large system. Kyle and Commissioner Klyce discussed the level of impermeable material due to pressure and depth where the spaces are all filled in, usually at around 2000 feet at higher elevations. Vice Chair Criss and Kyle discussed transmission losses which can be as high as 65% for the Arnold Irrigation District. Kyle said he had noticed the draft Code mentions regulating exempt wells, and the State does that. Kyle said that monitoring shows the water table has dropped about 10 feet in the County; in Umatilla it has dropped 400 feet. In Klamath Falls, the Bureau of Reclamation can only deliver about one-third of what it used to. The water table has dropped 20-30 feet in a month due to the groundwater pumping in that area. Commissioner Irvine asked about a policy in the draft Plan regarding a'moratorium on new land uses drawing groundwater that recharges Wychus Creek. Kyle said it would be difficult to figure that out. Commissioner Cyrus asked about impacts on the Deschutes where it enters into the Columbia. Kyle said you cannot see a difference — the mouth flows from 4500 cfs to 10,000. The climate that drives the river system is much more influential due to the size of the river — the amount of water withdrawn here cannot even be measured. Chair Brown and Terri discussed combining 2.5 and 2.6 and issues raised by the communities. Chair Brown mentioned a "filtering process" taking place before we spend time on the ' X'd" items. Commissioner Irvine, Commissioner Cyrus and Chair Brown felt that some items may already have been taken care of on a statewide basis. Commissioner Powell felt it was important to look at and hear the policies ("X's") because a suggestion may trigger other discussion. Chair Brown felt that the water sections merited more review, especially after Kyle's presentation this evening. Future scheduling was considered, including review of the water 'section on June 24. Commissioner Irvine and Terri talked about the action items and redrafting of the text. Three members may meet to narrow down some of the points of discussion. Commissioner Klyce felt that Commissioner Cyrus should participate. Chair Brown felt we should ask Commissioner Turner. Commissioner Klyce also thought Vice Chair Criss should participate, after asking Commissioner Turner. Commissioner Powell mentioned he had done the river study. r':x .�. t�. V. DISCUSSION OF REVISED FARM POLICIES/OSU EXTENSION — Terri Hansen Payne, Senior Planner. There were no major issues with this area. Nick said that Dave Hunicutt was meeting with Richard Whitman about scheduling a meeting to implement HB 2229. VI. INITIAL REVIEW OF SECTIONS 2.8 WILDLIFE, 2.9 OPEN SPACE AND SCENIC VIEWS 2.10 ENERGY AND 2.11 ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY POLICIES — Terri Hansen Payne, Senior Planner. It was decided to eliminate the "key issues," which are making things more confusing. The Commissioners discussed statements about minimizing negative economic impacts and protecting private property rights. Commissioner Powell asked if these would take precedence over natural resources, and Chair Brown felt that it meant that they would be given priority — the rights of property owners are a priority but not absolute. Commissioner Powell asked if this would apply to all of the Goals and what the history was. Terri said we had heard a real dichotomy frorp, the.; public — some moved here because of the wildlife and wanted it protected, and others want their rights to have priority. We put a policy in the land use section that said to keep in mind that everything has an impact on people's interests and property, sort of a general statement. Commissioner Irvine said he would like to make sure that when we come up with new programs, policies, etc., we look at both sides and make sure the farmer or whoever still has the ability to use his land. It kept popping up so we decided to put a statement in the land use section that covers the whole document. 7 Chair Brown spoke about federal/state regulations overriding anything we do here. When we have the ability, though, we want to recognize stakeholders' rights. Commissioner Klyce mentioned that one of the things that came out of the South County meetings was that people felt their land rights were being violated. He also mentioned that 80% of the County is set aside for wildlife and scenic views because it is owned by the federal government, and this has to be taken into account. Chair Brown mentioned the inter -agency letter and suggested that Commissioner Powell should also take a look at that for history. The Commissioners discussed statements in the draft Plan referring to "no negative impact" versus "no net negative impact," and "restoring" versus "improving" wildlife habit and management of land. Nick distributed a copy of the wildlife management plan for Mammoth Lakes, California, which includes language about being "stewards of primary wildlife habitats through public and/or private management programs such as construction of active and passive recreation and development areas away from the habitat." The Commissioners agreed they liked this language. Chair Brown spoke about the difference in perception between those who live on the land and those who visit it a few times a year. The Commissioners spoke about coordination with agencies, non -profits and private organizations to provide information, and the need to put general information in the Comp Plan rather than specifics which may not be relevant in a few years. Some of the Commissioners were not comfortable with using the term "incentives." Federal, state and County jurisdictions were discussed and, for example, federal control over where and when logging could take place during bird nesting season. The Commissioners talked about the definition of "open space," and Commissioner Klyce asked about the State approach. Terri summarized Goal 5, the basis of which is intended to protect resources and which dates to 1973. Peter discussed the procedures for inventory, determining the significance of an area under consideration for protection, evaluation of the area socially,, economically, energy -wise, etc. Chair Brown thought that perhaps there should just be a. statement ;saying we endorse Goal 5. Terri said we are trying to identify issues that came out of the public process for the last year and a half. Open space, scenic views, wildlife, water were things that people cared about, the reasons why they moved here and extremely important to residents. Commissioner Irvine felt that people who are reading the document should not have to go to Goal 5 to find out what it says. Nick said that most of the inventory process is very straightforward except for scenic views which are more complicated. Peter suggested indicating that we recognize the importance of Deschutes County's open space and views while recognizing that future development will need to be reconciled. Commissioner Klyce mentioned two instances — solar farms in Christmas Valley and a court case in Bend eight years ago involving a barn being built which obstructed the views of the neighbor's property. The court held that the neighbor did not have a right to the view. Everybody hates change, but it is kind of inevitable. Terri said she will work on the language. Commissioner Cyrus said there are several mandates — identify, protect and what is significant? Chair Brown again stressed the importance of not being too specific. Commissioner Powell suggested indicating we need to recognize the importance of open space, and Nick suggested "open space and aesthetic resources." Commissioner Klyce spoke about wanting the Comp Plan to contain statements like this and not minutiae. Terri mentioned the problem of making, it so general that it does not say anything. Commissioner Klyce thought that most of ,the detail should be in the Code and not the Comp Plan. Commissioner Powell, Chair Brown, Commissioner Klyce and Nick talked 8_ about using "encouraging innovative approaches" and being "stewards of the natural environment" as some of the language. Regarding energy conservation, Chair Brown and Nick discussed language and whether "crafting land use regulations..." should be used. Commissioner Klyce wondered what we could use for language that would not create argument but will allow for renewable energy facilities. Nick suggested "be a leader in the use of alternative energies." Commissioner Powell mentioned a report he had heard about the impact of wind farms. Each wind tower needs to be maintained each day as well as all of the roads maintained. If not, they fail, and if funding dries up the landowner is stuck with all of these towers and no reserve for owners who may be leasing the land. The County needs to look at this if the report is true, and we need to allow modification and alternate energy plans. Economics could be one layer, open space could be one. If you give planning the options through multiple layers, there are checks and balances. Chair Brown said he is really conflicted about wind farms. We are dealing with a situation where northern and central Oregon are being developed for wind farms. He has read that the efficiencies are coming so strong and so fast that the turbines from 10-15 years ago are very inefficient compared to what they are designing now. What happens to these if they are abandoned? We have a monument to our infidelity to the land. He believes in the technology but thinks we have to be very careful as to how we craft the language. Peter mentioned that the wind ordinance that will soon come before the Commissioners does have an abandonment section. If it is inoperable for 12 months, it has to be taken down. Nick and Terri suggested language saying "crafting land use regulations to permit renewable energy facilities while addressing local impacts." Commissioner Klyce wanted to include the word "stewardship." Nick and the Commissioners discussed more of the language from Mammoth County: "Reduce energy demand by promoting energy efficiency in all sectors of the community." Commissioner Powell asked why 2.10.9 was so specific. Terri said it came from another plan that we were reviewing which contained more detail. Terri and the Commissioners discussed removing duplications. In 2.10.11, Chair Brown wondered whether the phrase "where feasible, new development should be channeled into existing cities and unincorporated communities," should be located in this section regarding energy. Terri said that the current energy chapter is almost all about transportation and minimizing impacts, and it refers to putting development in central locations. Commissioner Klyce felt this is essentially a foundation of Oregon's land use laws — it does not need be stated because the laws as a whole already do that. Commissioner Powell asked if we are incorporating enough flexibility into the Plan as we go through it. Peter said that after the Planning Commission makes its recommendation to the Board, there will be an opportunity to go through the entire Plan again, and the Planning Commission has an option as to where the County should be spending its limited resources over the next 20 years. Maybe we will focus on the Big Look bill, etc. As long as the policies provide the general framework, we can get there. Commissioner Powell said we can pare this down and make it pretty sparse, so he wanted to make sure there is enough there to deal with. Terri said we are indicating where there are staff recommendations that we think are important and the Board can review those. Peter mentioned the public hearings that will be held in the fall. Commissioner Klyce felt that we are not restricting what happens — we are trying to leave more maneuverability. 9 The Commissioners discussed recycling. Commissioner Irvine suggested eliminating the words "and compost." Chair Brown asked if Goals 1 and 2 could be combined. Nick and Chair Brown talked about the County being the leader for public sector projects and suggested language to that effect: "Set an example for environmental stewardship in County operations and capital projects." Nick and the Commissioners reviewed Goal 6. Peter and the Commissioners felt that 2.11.5 was redundant. Noxious weed and invasive species control were discussed. Chair Brown wanted to encourage rail transportation. VII. DISCUSSION OF AICP CODE OF ETHICS: Nick Lelack. Nick, Terri and Peter would be subject to these regulations. There are two issues — one is what we hear from the public, and the other is that we are expected to keep the long-term impact of our recommendations in mind. These can come into conflict with the Planning Commission since they are citizen members and can have biases. We recognize that there is a potential inherent tension built into the process. We are fine with the tension, but we wanted to make the Planning Commissioners aware that if we move forward and disagree, it may be because of something we heard from the public or something else. We may be ethically obligated to move in a certain direction. VIII. PLANNING COMMISSION & STAFF COMMENTS. Nick said we are scheduling some meetings regarding the Economic Opportunity Analysis. The Board has adopted our work plan for the coming year with priority given to County projects. We may aim to have a retreat in August. We will be recruiting for Commissioner Cyrus' seat starting next week. Commissioner Klyce wanted to keep fallout from happening as it did from the last retreat. Nick said his meeting minutes were very general, and a past Commissioner provided more detailed minutes which became the basis for the article in the newspaper. Chair Brown felt that former Commissioner Quarter was not happy being in the minority in this case. Commissioner Irvine mentioned the possible extension of Commissioner Klyce's term and said he had enjoyed working with him. IX. ADJOURN There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned. Respectf Ily submitted, Sher Buckner, Administrative Secretary NEXT MEETING — June 10, 2010, at 5:30 p.m. at the Deschutes Services Center, 1300 NW Wall Street, Bend, OR 97701