Minutes: Board of Commission Meeting, 05/17/2006 COUNTY COMMISSIONER CHAIR FRED WARNER, JR
COUNTY COMMISSIONER TIM L. KERNS COUNTY COMMISSIONER DR. CARL STIFF COMMISSION CHAIR FRED WARNER, JR.
COMMISSIONER TIM L. KERNS
COMMISSIONER CARL E. STIFF, M.D.
BAKER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
The Baker County Board of Commissioners met for the May 17, 2006 Public Hearing
on the Baker County Public Nuisance Ordinance. Present were Commission Chair
Fred Warner, Jr., Commissioner Tim L. Kerns and Commissioner Carl E. Stiff, M.D.
Warner began the meeting. Almost a year ago, we tried to pass a nuisance task
force ordinance. At that time it did not seem to go over. Six people were
appointed and they were very dedicated, meeting every month for several
months. Worked through many drafts and many ordinances from throughout the
state.
Concerns from last public hearing:
1. some do exist in baker county
2. dangerous/safety issues
3. devaluation of neighboring properties
4. visual issues
Pat Sowers: did everyone agree on those concerns? We came to consensus that
there were issues, but weren’t sure what to do about them.
Warner: how do we not trod on private property rights, but still protect some
of these concerns. This seemed to be what the task force focused on.
Intentionally put people from both sides on the task force.
Now we have a new draft. The meat of it is general prohibitions. We spent a
lot of time working on definitions.
Warner went over the General Prohibitions Section
(need to add page numbers)
Article 2: Enforcement Provisions
Old draft said that County would go on private property and clean it up, but we
struck that and will now proceed with civil suit as an end result.
Bill Harvey: we had a lot of people giving input on the committee. We wanted
to set a program that set a standard for the county and we did not want to
infringe on anyone’s rights as best we could. Wanted to make it as far as
possible and the same countywide. Went through ever single line over and over.
Intentions are to help people to understand that there is a standard and to
work with people. For example is on the Enforcement Officer and the steps that
this person will go through. We are not here to hammer down on people, we are
trying to encourage, help. Setting a minimum standard. If they have problems
with enforcement officer, then they can come before the Commissioners.
Linda Gorham: worked and revised for an entire year. We each went over
different sections. The most important thing we did in this ordinance was to
try to make it fair to everyone within Baker County. Would encourage
suggestions.
Warner: we spent a lot of time on inoperable vehicles. We came up with five
inoperable vehicles.
Linda, most of the other ordinances throughout the state list five and its not
even as restrictive as other ordinances. Tried to make sure they discussed
agricultural vehicles.
Don Silva: not only do you protect the people with the nuisance, but the
people that live next door to them. This is why we have this. Do you have the
right to impact your neighbor and take their rights away.
Pat Sowers: is there no existing county ordinance? Warner: this is the first
attempt at it. In some of the zoning ordinances, there are little pieces. We
really had nothing that allowed the County to really do anything. If there were
safety, health issues, we could work with, but DEQ, even with oil drippings,
without a county ordinance, they were reluctant to come. Pat: thanked them all
for doing this as she is aware that it is contentious. Best way to work with
neighbors is to have a consistent standard for private and professional
property. Notice that there are exceptions for private operators.
Glen Swilling: most of this ordinance is taken from ORS laws that are already
in place. There is few stuff that did not come out of laws already in
existence. Should not be any loop holes. Document has been reviewed by County
Counsel. This ordinance is about a lineant an ordinance that you could have.
Hopes that it never becomes more stringent.
Warner: likes the lineacy in this ordinance, but will make it difficult for the
county to work with individuals. When do you determine that an abatement is
enough. We could revisit in a year or two.
Pat: concerned over Item C, within 200 feet of a public road. Seems limiting
the number of feet as a problem. If they get a citation, they could just move
their stuff back. Could you change the 200 feet to that you can’t see it
period with screening, with trees, fences, etc.
Bill: the problem is not five vehicles, the problem is 50-60 vehicles. We had
to have some marker point. Pat: doesn’t believe a distance measure is as good
as if you choose to have these vehicles, you need to screen them. Pat
recommended that the commissioners discuss her request.
Glen: she was speaking of a visual thing. That is something we are trying to
eliminate.
? Does this ordinance cover all junk? Warner: under waste, we have
definitions that described and under General Prohibitions part B.
Jasper: we use tires to move vehicles across the road. Warner: ordinance, we
are prohibiting from having them sit on the side of the road for months.
Glen: really need to pay attention to the definitions.
Bill havey: we took farming, logging and mining processes so that we are not
inhibited their needs, if it is a legitimate operation .
Linda: this is complaint driven.
Jasper suggested to take everyday out. Just normal agricultural operation.
Linda: about the vehicles Pat was questioning is that it is not ag, commercial
or farming, it is small acreage that have become the biggest complaints. We
made sure that we put in the 200 ft.
Gary Johansen: this 200 ft from public roads, what about drainages, where
wrecking yards and their oils, etc. going into the ground and drainage
ditches? That is against the law and enforcement is provided through DEQ.
Warner: it would fall under this ordinance as there are accumulated vehicles
there.
Jasper: is it the intent to bar the use of these vehicles to repair other
vehicles. Addressed under C(b). This approach will harm baker county
economically. We rely substantially on used parts.
Linda: we talked a lot of about that and the main thing that if these people
are going to run this as a commercial business, then they need to be zoned that
way. As a poor county, and we don’t have a tax base, the people needed to be
zoned in commercial if they want to have a commercial businesses.
Jasper: you are not doing the ag community any favors by this ordinance.
Pat: countered with that this particular planning commission and county
commission are only going to go after things that are really harming the
county.
Glen: that tractor junk yard was nto there when the comp plan was passed. And
that was put there unlicensed and shouldn’t be in that zone.
Bob Evans: how does this relate to power of the past museum. Bill: we do
address collectibles and part of that property is museum atmosphere and the
other is not. We are going to work with the others to fix the other half. Bob:
consent of incorporated municipalities.
Warner: baker city has a nuisance ordinance and none of the small cities do.
Part of this, was that we would put together an ordinance and then they would
enter into an IGA with Baker County to adopt our ordinance and would help to
enforce the public nuisance ordinance. Baker County has no jurisdiction with
our ordinance within incorporated areas.
Linda: when we started this, we worked with DEQ and one of things they said was
that there were state statutes, but unless the counties have these in place, it
was hard from them to come in.
Mary Bollard: she called DEQ about a problem across the street and they acted
like they were scared to death to go on the property without a warrant. They
took pictures, but did not do anything about it.
Bill: our intent was to establish an ordinance so that DEQ and State could be a
backup for us. As a local jurisdiction, we have to take the lead. We are going
to give them avenues to help them.
Kerns: have we addressed, or is there thought about what we do with batteries,
old fridges, etc. how do we make it easy for people to clean it up.
Bill: Baker Sanitary will take all metal for free for everyone. One of their
goals is to try to set up a recycling process so that we can one or two
weekends a year, take products to a certain point and there would be some help
financially to do this.
Warner: that is coming, there is a hazardous waste facility that will be housed
in Union County, but we will have a drop site in Baker, Halfway and Huntington.
Where you can drop off paints, herbicides, batteries, etc.
Linda: prisoners can be hired a minimum cost to go and clean up places.
Kerns: there are some people that can’t afford to get rid of their things.
Pat: has questions about enforcement provisions. 2.06 complaint: believes that
14 days is way too short of time to remedy a complaint.
Bill: the intent is that they make contact with the enforcement officer. Warner
described his interpretation.
Pat: delighted to hear that they will be working with people because she
believes it will be much more successful. In her neighborhood, they do not
want to file complaints and if they can visit with their neighbors and give
them resources. The Notice shall contain. , number 7, concerned that there is
a time limit that the plan has to be completed by.
Jasper: has learned a lot, a lot of effort went into this that he recognizes
and understands some of the problems. His chore is to see if he can criticize
what has been done. There are some things in hear that he is bringing up and
provided a copy of his comments. The constitution talks a great day of private
property rights. This document does not seem to recognize all of that. The
Constitutions recognize health and safety, but do not recognize general welfare
or beauty. Want to make sure that Bkaer County does not violate the
constitution. This document is full of vague words and gave examples. Who has
the authority and required skills to make these judgement calls, not many
people do. Section 1.05 (D): structural dangers, wouldn’t that require some
sort of analysis by a structural engineer? Section 2.10 Enforcement is a
problem with him. Baker County is the poorest county in the state of oregon and
it has nearly the oldest population in the state of oregon and some of these
requirements, even though we say in discussion that we will help people, the
ordinance does not say that. We have a law that says people will have to pay
$50 a day, they can’t pay it and then we will end up taking their property.
Warner: up to $500 a day. This draft applies to all, not just a few. When you
have a rule or law, you generally don’t selectively apply it. The cost to the
county to applying these rules will be substantial. You would find very few ag
people in support of this ordinance. In conclusion, does not feel that this
fits baker county very well. Heard that we need to do something so that state
agencies will have teeth, but not sure that we are in really that bad of shape
that we need regulation of this magnitude. Its not the people pushing it that
are going to have to pay the bill. It encumbances detail and debth that an
ordinary inspector can’t take care of, not as simple. It seems to imply that
the human enviornment is going to be perfect. Too strong in Baker County.
Would like to see cooperative part written into the document. Asked that they
think it over a bit and make changes that they can make.
Warner: the only time it would come to a monetary thing is if people tell us to
get lost. The 500 a day is for those people that would just ignore us. He is
comfortable with an amount that will bring people to the table, but understands
Jasper’s concerns. The fee is up to the board of commissioners’ discretion.
Don: it has to have an enforcement. Every one he has talked to in Ag is in
favor of it. Believes it will be widely appreciated. Farmer and ranchers are
going out of theere way to enhance their property and waterways.
Glen: his belief that most people do not intentially break the law. His
thought is that if the commission settles on this ordinance or something
similar, that a copy of the ordinance should be sent to every property owner in
the county, possible with their tax statements. Most people will do what they
can to get into compliance with it. Does not see a lot of enforcement you will
have to do.
Warner: will have least one more public hearing. We want the word to get out.
Will hold second public hearing on June 21st at 10am. Encourage neighbors to
come in.