City Council Meeting
Minutes for June 11, 2009
City Hall - 82877 Spruce St., Westlake, OR 97439

1.	Call to Order and Roll Call

Mayor Eric Hauptman called the meeting of the Dunes City Council to order at 7:03 PM. 

2.	Roll Call

Roll Call was taken by Dunes City Recorder, Amy Graham.

Present:  	Mayor Eric Hauptman, Council President Peter Howison, Councilor Susie Navetta, Councilor Robert Quandt, Councilor Richard Koehler, Councilor Rebecca Ruede, and Councilor Jamie Mills. 

Absent:  	None

Also Present:   Dunes City Recorder Amy Graham, Planning Secretary Lisa Ekelund   
 	  and 8 individuals.

3.	Pledge of Allegiance

All who were present joined in the Pledge of Allegiance.

4.	Consent Agenda

A.	City Council meeting minutes from 05/14/09 and 05/20/09
B.	Bills of the session through 06/04/09
C.	Receipts of the session through 06/04/09
D.	Revenue expense report
E.	Budget meeting minutes from 06/02/09

Councilor Quandt made the motion to accept the consent agenda and the motion was seconded by Councilor Ruede.  The motion passed by unanimous vote of 6 ayes and 0 nays.

5.	Announcements / Correspondence

Mayor Hauptman announced that Relay for Life is coming up and anyone who would like to participate should contact the office.

Amy Graham said she last year the staff volunteered a large amount of their time to the Relay for Life.  Amy Graham said she would like the support of the council before staff commits to the Relay for Life. 

Councilor Quandt said he would attend.

Mayor Hauptman said the council will support the staff with Relay for Life.

6.	Mayor's Report

Mayor Hauptman said he would like to see move volunteerism in the city.

7.	Committee / Commission Reports       [all available reports at end]

•	A report of the Communication and Education Committee was received by Councilor Navetta and placed on file.
•	A report of the Conservation Committee was received by Councilor Howison and placed on file.
•	A report of the Ordinance Review Committee was received by Councilor Howison and placed on file.
•	A report of the Parks and Recreation Committee was received by Councilor Ruede and placed on file.
•	A report of the Fire Commission was received by Councilor Ruede and placed on file. 
•	A report of the Road Commission was received by Councilor Quandt and placed on file.
•	A report of the Site Review Committee was received by Councilor Mills and placed on file.
•	A report of the Revenue Committee was received by Councilor Mills and placed on file.
•	A report of the Water Quality Committee was received by Councilor Koehler and placed on file.
•	A report of the Planning Commission was received by Planning Secretary, Lisa Ekelund and placed on file.

8.	Unfinished / Old Business

A.	Atkeson Property Appeal 

(Beginning of Verbatim Minutes)

Mayor Hauptman:  Now we have basically an appeal on the city's decisions on the Atkeson property.  Councilor?

Councilor Howison:  Yes Mayor, since I'm the one that initiated the original complaint, and there is the appearance of bias perhaps I would recuse myself at this moment.

Mayor Hauptman:  Thank you.  Ok, I'm gonna ask all the other councilors, is there anybody else that feels they should recuse themselves if they had conservations with any of the participants or anything like that.

Councilor Ruede:  I haven't had any conversations with Mr. Atkeson.

Councilor Mills:   Mayor Hauptman, I would disclosed that I have had ex-parte contact both with the complainant and with the Skeele's in this issue but I don't believe that I, it, will influence my decision or cause bias in any way.

Councilor Ruede:  Mr. Mayor, I have had ex-parte communication with the Skeele's, Kippy Skeele but I have no reason to believe that it will render me impartial.

Mayor Hauptman:  Ok, all righty then move on. (Inaudible from council) yeah impartial.

Councilor Ruede:  Bias.

Mayor Hauptman:  You're not biased right?

Councilor Ruede:  No.

Mayor Hauptman:  Ok, you know this hearing is being conducted under DCC 91.26 and I believe that Steve Turner is representing Mr. Atkeson.  Steve?

Mr. Turner:  Yes, that's right.

Mayor Hauptman:  Now, this, councilor's so you know, decision does not have to necessarily be rendered tonight, if anybody feels there's more information being needed to make a decision, that's well within your prevue so let's hear what Mr. Turner has to say and take it from there.  Thank you.  Mr. Turner?

Mr. Turner:  Is it ok if I sit or would you prefer I stand?

Mayor Hauptman:  If, you can sit.  If your comfortable yes.

Mr. Turner:  Alright, my name is Steven Turner.  My address is 4409 NE 144^th Circle Vancouver WA, 98686.  As Your Honor has indicated, I'm here as an attorney for Greg Atkeson.  Mr. Atkeson was unable to attend tonight because he had some pre-existing travel plans but he did want to obviously address this issue.  We're here on an appeal from a notice to abate a nuisance that the city has determined or the plaintiff has alleged is on the property that was recently purchased by Mr. Atkeson last year.  I submitted a letter to the council members and the Mayor last week and I know, I'm sure you get a tremendous volume of material before each one of these meeting so I think what I'll do is I'll just try to go through the high points of the letter.

Mayor Hauptman:  We have it in our packets as well so we can follow you along.

Mr. Turner:  Right so I don't want to, I mean if I'm repeating myself unnecessarily just say so and I'll move on.  I don't want to take any more of your time.  I know that you have a busy agenda.  The issue that's before the council tonight is whether under the council's nuisance ordinance in this situation it is better to charge the nuisance against the current property owner which is Mr. Atkeson or against the parties who created the nuisance.  And both of those options are available to the city under its ordinances.  I'll explain and it's clearly set forth in section 91.10 that the city can charge the nuisance against multiple parties and can choose between them.  Mr. Atkeson submits that it would be more equitable, it would be more effective, and it would be more efficient to put the nuisance charge against the party who caused the condition to exist.  It's more equitable of course because it should be the person who created the nuisance who is held responsible for that act.  It's more effective because as a deterrent, it would be better to put the nuisance responsibility on the party who created the nuisance so that other parties in the future would be less likely to create nuisances and then simply sell the property or pass the condition onto somebody else down stream and then say well now it's not my problem anymore and it would also be more efficient because especially in this case, as will often be the case, the party who caused the nuisance condition to exist will be in the best position to remedy that situation.  They're the ones who would have all of the information about how the nuisance came about, in this particular instance, there's a lot of information being requested for building permits after the fact.  Things like this it was the party that caused the nuisance to exist who would have all of that information. The history here is that Mr. Atkeson is a, lives in the Portland area, he was down on the coast just visiting, he saw a flier for this particular property and I submitted a copy of that flier, it's a black and white copy but this is a color copy and the flier looked enticing to him because it talks about a lake front lot with a beautiful cleared home site with septic approved, under ground utilities, and saying that the lot is graced by bridges and a large covered deck, a wide level nature trail that goes back to the lake, and a gated community of 8 homes is going to be developed so based on this information, Mr. Atkeson contacted the realtor, made an offer on the property, and after some negations over price, agreed to pay $354,000 to purchase this property with the hopes of building a small home on it as a vacation home and then potentially eventually as a retirement property.  Mr. Atkeson is not a lawyer.  He's a man with a high school education but he wanted to do his due diligence and he hired a lawyer to find out whether there would be any problems with building a home on this property and that lawyer's name who ultimately investigated that for him an individual named Randy Weatherhead who is an attorney up in Lake Oswego.  He had some contacts I believe with Greg Perkins and a Joy Gipson who at the time I think had various roles in the city, I'm not sure what their titles were, planning or what have you.  And had some conversations and talked about the property.  At no point did it come up that there were any existing violations on the property or that there would be any prohibition against building a home on the property so the report to Mr. Atkeson was, you know, that it's got no problems.  Mr. Atkeson then closed on the deal.  That was in April of last year.  Unfortunately several months after Mr. Atkeson closed on the deal, things started coming to light that had not come to light before, primarily one, while the creek is beautiful, it also has a 50' riparian setback that based on configuration of the lot the creek runs as a "U" through the lot and the 50' setback severely restricts where you would even be able to put a house.  That's academic of course because under the Dunes City Local Wetlands Inventory, it turns out that the entire property, based on the last inventory that was done, is a wetland.  There's been no specific delineation done for that property but it was designated wetland as part of a much larger track.  He found out further on, actually we found out several months ago that the entire property sits within an area that's been designated by the City in its Comprehensive Plan as Open Space lands which means even if you didn't have a creek and even if it weren't a wetland, you still couldn't build on it and he found out after the fact unfortunately that the existing structures were not permitted, there were no permits ever taken out for them, and now of course he found out based on the city's notice that they in fact according to the city, constitute nuisances.  Mr. Atkeson has been cooperative with the city throughout except for a brief period in the beginning when he was first contacted by the city to come look at his land and Mr. Skeele said don't let the city get onto your land but Mr. Atkeson quickly reversed direction on that and said to the city that yes you can come onto the land, you can do whatever you need to do.  He was going to hire Wilbur Ternyik to do wetland delineation.  Of course when it became apparent that it was more than just a wetland issue, maybe it didn't make sense to pay five or seven thousand dollars to have a wetland delineation done if it's not going to matter anyways so then he called Mr. Ternyik off and Mr. Ternyik did send a letter to the city that I submitted as an exhibit to my package in which Mr. Ternyik said that he thought Mr. Atkeson is a nice and honest individual and he was not responsible for any alterations of the wetlands or the riparian vegetation.  There was also some clearing apparently that was done before Mr. Atkeson purchased the property.  Mr. Atkeson has not changed a thing on the property.  He has never done anything to the property.  And so Mr. Atkeson is now in a position (inaudible) where I am trying to persuade the Skeele's to take the property back in what's called a rescission action where you would rescind the contract because it's not what the parties bargained for and Mr. Skeele would get his property back and Mr. Atkeson would get his money back.  It's too early to say of course how this is going to come out.  I hope that we're able to achieve for Mr. Atkeson what's fair in that regard but that's going to be before a different forum but the point is, is that Mr. Atkeson is obviously severely disappointed because he's put a substantial amount of money into this property, really likes the property, really likes the area, was excited to build, he'd already had a builder come out to look and he was ready and then one thing after another came out and he was getting further and further and further and further away from being able to build anything on this property and so he's obviously disappointed.  He does not have any interest in contesting the city's position regarding the nuisances.  I the city does what Mr. Atkeson is asking tonight and basically withdraw the nuisance charge against him and then reissue it against the party responsible who caused that condition to exist, Mr. Atkeson will cooperate fully and allow whatever access is necessary to the property to remedy whatever nuisance is out there, he's not going to stand in the way and say no you can't do this, no you can't do that.  He's going to give free reign to whatever's necessary to abate that situation and so fortunately the drafters of the ordinance had the foresight to realize that it's not a one size fits all solution and that under that section that I referenced before, 91.01 I may have misspoke and said 91.10 but under section 91.01 it says that the person responsible for the nuisance includes, includes the person who caused a nuisance to come into existence and here I think that the record is clear, the Skeele's have said this much in prior communications with the city in letters that they've written, that they put in the bridges, they put in the covered deck, they did whatever landscaping changes were done out there, they did it all in preparation for sale, all those conditions existed before Mr. Atkeson was ever aware that the property ever existed.  I'm obviously more than happy to answer any questions that any of the Councilors have but Mr. Atkeson requests that the city do what is equitable, effective, and efficient which would be to withdraw the nuisance charge against him, then if necessary, reissue the nuisance charge against the person who caused the nuisance in accordance with the city's ordinance.

Councilor Koehler:  Mr. Turner could you explain to me what the term buyer beware in contract law in Oregon is all about?

Mr. Turner:  Well I don't think actually "Buyer Beware" is a legal term.  Obviously, when you purchase something, you want to make sure you're getting what you paid for.  Mr. Atkeson did everything that he could do.  He hired an attorney to look into whether he could build on this property and he followed that attorney's advice.  I don't know what more a buyer could do than that.  Most buyers do not hire an attorney's before they buy a piece of property to check out these types of things so he went beyond I think what most people would do in this situation.

Councilor Koehler:  So how does one primarily the issue in that particular property is that it's land locked in, you know, within the Skeele confines so any access to that property, I don't know whether there are easements to.

Mr. Turner:  There are easements, it's not a land locked issue.  The parcel's not land locked, it comes with a legal easement to access the property.

Councilor Koehler:  Good.

Mr. Turner:  Yes.

Councilor Koehler:  So there isn't a problem with trespass which what.

Mr. Turner:  No.

Councilor Koehler:  I remember there was something in.

Mayor Hauptman:  Where we were at.

Mr. Turner:  You understand that, you would need to cross the Skeele's property to get onto Mr. Atkeson's property.  Mr. Atkeson has a legal right built into his deed to do so but the city does not, but Mr. Atkeson can then give the city the right as his invitee and say yes, come and that's what he did.

Councilor Koehler:  But I was just wondering if you, the purpose of escrow people and other attorneys is to get the advice and protect the buyer.  It's more on Mr. Atkeson for having hired these people as well as all of the advice of either the escrow or this Mr. Weatherhead the attorney and also the, the advice from Mr. Skeele.

Mr. Turner:  All I can say councilor is I hope that you're not on my jury but the issue tonight is not whether Mr. Atkeson should get his money back.  The issue tonight is who is the party responsible for causing the nuisance, who is it fair to go after that and then seek abatement from, who is it more effective to seek it from, who is it more efficient to seek it from.  The issue of the rescission action is something that's going to be determined if it's not resolved by a county jury in Lane County in Eugene.  Obviously there's arguments on both sides.  I believe that if a person is going to take it upon themselves to develop property that perhaps they should look into the legal entitlements that the property has and does not have before they hold it out to the public as a clean buildable lot. 

Mayor Hauptman:  Does that answer your question.

Councilor Koehler:  Yes.

Mayor Hauptman:  Councilor Quandt.

Councilor Quandt:  I've got a couple questions for you.  First of all, the, I feel really bad for Mr. Atkeson. You know I'm not ok with the, with the deal that he got from Skeele.  It's not a good thing and I feel like he got a really raw deal however, when we look at the ordinance here and we search for what kind of recourse we actually have and it does make mention of parties responsible and parties responsible being involved with abating the nuisance but the end game incentive is a lien on the property and if the, a nuisance is not abated then the incentive to abate is created by the fear of having a lien on your property.  Now there is no provision for, for producing a lien on Mr. Skeele who no longer owns the property or lives in Dunes City.  So whether the, there really is no transfer the abatement action to Mr. Skeele, there's no option to do that.  

Mr. Turner:  Well, I mean, let me see if I can break that down a little bit.  You clearly have the option to do it, the question is without the ability to lien Mr. Skeele, you're concern is he'll just discard it and do nothing because you can't put a lien on his property of course.  Liens are not the only way that fines can be collected.  If Mr. Skeele were to not abate the nuisance and if fines accrued, you could sue Mr. Skeele in a civil court of law and collect on those fines, and collect your fees under your nuisance statute for the cost of having to do so.  So you do have strong enforcement measurements and Mr. Skeele or anyone who would be charged with a nuisance by the city as long as they live in the state of Oregon or have some, and he's doing business in the State of Oregon, it's frankly, it's T&K Lands.  Perhaps, would act at their peril if they were to simply ignore it and disregard it, they could still be vulnerable to those liens or to those penalties even without the ability to lien property.  Now the other thing is I do believe that the Skeele's still own much of this property so that's not changed and if I am successful, the Skeele's will own this property again.  Now of course that may not happen for a while because the courts move slowly but there may be a day in the not too distant future where the Skeele's will actually own this property again.

Councilor Quandt:  I hope you're successful.

Mr. Turner:  Thank you.  So, you do have the ability to do it, you do not have quite the same cudgel of the lien but you still have the threat of fines and civil suit to collect those fines.  And what other consequences may come from simply disregarding a notice of abatement from the city.

Mayor Hauptman:  Councilor?  Anything else?  Any other questions?  

Councilor Quandt:  No questions.

Mayor Hauptman:  The, I think that.  Oh, I'm sorry Susie, do you have a question?

Councilor Navetta:  I'm not quite understanding why an attorney represented him and didn't check to see if there were proper permits on the property.

Mr. Turner:  Well, you know, the, one of my tasks here is to determine whether those attorney's committed malpractice and right now my preliminary conclusion is that they did.  Now they did ask the city for its permit file on this property.  There was no permit file because the Skeele's never asked for any permits.  Now, did the attorney's then say well wait a minute if there were no permits, how did the bridge and the gazebo get there, they didn't ask that next question and, you know, obviously attorneys are loathed to sue other attorneys but sometimes it's necessary.

Councilor Quandt:  Good. 

Mayor Hauptman:  As it should be.  Any other questions?

Mr. Turner:  But everyone needs to be responsible.

Mayor Hauptman:  Yeah.

Mr. Turner:  If you're gonna hold yourself out as a professional then you have to.

Mayor Hauptman:  Exactly.

Mr. Turner:  It's not amateur hour.  You're gonna charge fees.

Mayor Hauptman:   Not with that. (Inaudible mixed with Mr. Turner's next statement).

Mr. Turner:  If you're gonna charge several hundred dollars an hour you better know what you're doing.

Mayor Hauptman:  You betcha.  Councilors, any other questions for Mr. Turner?  Again, I want to kind of echo what Mr. Quandt said in that I have met Mr. Atkeson briefly, and at one time I met with both of you and I think he's a fine gentleman and I feel bad.  I really do.  I think in my opinion and I've purchased a lot of land over the years personally and I feel that he did everything a buyer should do except hire the right attorney because attorney that has any kind of land use knowledge would have gotten his fanny down and looked at the maps and come down here and what not and for that, if Mr. Atkeson can be considered guilty of anything it would have been guilty of being, you know, in awe of the legal profession possibly where he shouldn't have been cuz he didn't get what he paid for and truly the city understands that and feels bad.  I would love to see Mr. Atkeson here as one of our community members any time and you tell him, whenever he wants to come down, I'd be glad to show him around and, and, he could look at all the property and we'll give him all the background he needs.  I won't charge him.  What's in front of the council now is we could make a decision what Mr. Turner is saying is that basically is to if we pursue on the nuisance charges to pursue them against Mr. Skeele.  Currently there, they're be against Mr. Atkeson and just to give you an idea, precedent in this city, typically Mr. Turner is for a lien to be filed on the property and it is, the city has not in the past to my knowledge ever, you know, went to collections for you know, to get the money or even court if it's just a property with lien and you get it when you get it.  So that may or may not be a problem for you in the sense that and for the council that if a lien is put on the property, assuming that's what, we, the direction we want to go and that if you're successful in getting Mr. Skeele to take the property back he takes the lien back with the property and then Mr. Atkeson is, would not have any liability at that point.  I mean that's kind of the normal way the city's always done that but this council needs to make a decision, do, how do we want to handle this and do we want to handle it now, do we want to table it, do we want to have, we gotten, not really a lot of advice from our attorney who's just chomping at the bit to give us more so we could hold this over until possibly the next council meeting, you wouldn't have to appear, but to be able to have to, you know to discuss it or pursue it from that point.  So there, there we have it we've got kind of a couple of choices here.  Councilor?

Councilor Koehler:  Mr. Mayor, I, I think there are issues they we're not apprised of and I brought up contract law with the, the present attorney because it has to do with whether or not the burden of all responsibility on the property is, is to the owner after it's cleared the gauntlets of escrow, previous attorney and real estate agent and there are five, five people that are going to have to answer to the problems involved here.  I would prefer that we consult with our attorney because we're looking at the past owner Mr. Skeele, the contract law, the escrow company, the previous attorney, and the real estate agent and I don't know if we have a responsibility to be involved in that hornets nest but I would prefer that we at least talk to the, our attorney to review some of these objections.

Mayor Hauptman:  Ok, other councilors?  Do you wanna weigh on that?  Councilor Quandt?

Councilor Quandt:  What's your expected timeline for the other litigation involved with this and your attempts to give the property back to Mr. Skeele?

Mr. Turner:  Well I wrote a demand letter to Mr. Skeele probably two weeks ago demanding that they do what we've asked which is basically rescind the deal with certain compromises obviously, just, we wouldn't charge, we wouldn't seek any pre-judgment interest, we wouldn't seek any attorney's fees what have you.  The Skeele's have hired an attorney who wrote me back in saying I've just gotten this; I need a little more time.  I don't know whether their attorneys' recommendation is going to be yeah you have a problem here, you should settle this thing, or if his attorney's recommendation is going to be, you know, no we should fight this tooth and nail.  If the attorney's recommendation is to resolve it and the Skeele's follow the recommendation, it could be a few months if their decision is to fight it to the ends of the earth, then it could be several years.

Mayor Hauptman:  I think, Becky?  Becky had her hand up first, go ahead.

Councilor Ruede:  Mr. Turner, I just simply like to know if you have exhausted your inquiries regarding perhaps building, you know, perhaps mitigating some circumstances to that we would perhaps allow you to have a building permit.  There's you know, perhaps you could talk.  I mean I.

Mr. Turner:  Yeah.  I could introduce that.

Councilor Ruede:  There's some dialogue that could be had with the city and you know, maybe mitigate some wetlands.  I don't really know but I think we're kind of being asked to make a premature decision after, you know, just hearing a portion of what we could do because there, is it true that there's a septic approval on the property?

Mr. Turner:  No.  No.  No it's not but even if it were, it's very important I think for the council to focus on what it is that the council needs to decide.  Right now Mr. Atkeson is not asking for a building permit, no one's asking for a building permit.  Right now Ms. Ekelund and Ms. Graham were clear and I looked at the maps, that this property is within an area, and I have it in the comprehensive plan that it's designated open space lands.  Open space lands means zero development.  I don't even think that there's a variance available from that but put yourself in the position of someone who buys a piece of property with the expectation that they would be able to build a house on it and now finds out that it's burdened by a riparian setback, they might not be able to put the house to where they wanted to put it, that it's burdened by wetlands and they're going to have to either hire a wetlands delineation expert and/or a wetlands attorney to fight that because it's not only going to be the city, it's going to be the county, it's going to be the state, it's going to be the federal government, the U.S. Army Corp. of Engineers has jurisdiction over wetlands, it is a jurisdictional nightmare because I know because I have clients who have threatened to go postal because every time they think they've crossed the finish line building something on a piece of property that has wetlands on it, the finish line moves.

Mayor Hauptman:  Yeah.

Mr. Turner:  And you cannot force the government to ever make a decision if the U.S. Army Corp. of Engineers does not want you to put anything there, you can send in an application to them and they can simply never act on it, and you can't sue them for it.  So, this is, I, if I, and I am Mr. Atkeson's attorney now, my recommendation to him is that he move on because he will be tilting at windmills for 10 years and it's not just the city.  The question today, you say you asked the city to make a premature determination, the only determination and councilor Koehler this is true also, the only determination is who should the city be going after for the nuisance.

Mayor Hauptman:  Right.

Mr. Turner:  And you don't have to choose permanently one or the other but we submit that at this time, the right person to choose is the person who caused the nuisance and the person who's in the best position to fix it.  That's the only question that needs to be decided by the council is who should be responsible for the nuisance.  Not, does Mr. Atkeson get his money back?  Not does Mr. Atkeson get to build something on the property?  Those issues are way down in the future and so even if there were as septic permit it wouldn't matter but the truth of the matter is there is no septic permit.  What you have is a septic site evaluation that said yeah if you apply for a permit you might get one.  So, there is no septic permit issued and I have the site evaluation and it clearly says right on it this is not a septic permit, you would still need to apply for a septic permit.  So I'm sure the Skeele's have told you, oh we have everything permitted, it's ready to go.  It's not ready to go, that's what they told Mr. Atkeson.  It turned out not to be true.

Councilor Ruede:  Mr. Turner, my line of questioning was the, my line of questioning to you was because you said previously that they thought this was a beautiful place, they wanted to retire there, and now all of a sudden they changed their mind and I.

Mr. Turner:  I didn't say it's.  I'm sorry.  

Councilor Ruede:  That all I, that was the only reason I asked because I.

Mr. Turner:  Alright well.

Councilor Ruede:  I wanted to know.

Mr. Turner:  Yes.

Councilor Ruede:  If he.

Mr. Turner:  Oh no I mean Mr. 

Councilor Ruede:  Really was wanting to live here and pursue this, there would possibly be some dialogue that could take place that might eventually lead to something.

Mayor Hauptman:  I think what Mr. Turner said is that given it's a wetland it makes it an almost insurmountable mountain to climb.

Mr. Turner:  And Mr. Atkeson, he, he's paid his $354,000, he's paid tens of thousands of dollars of attorney fees and he's looking at a legal road that could stretch out years and years and so he was sincere in his desire to put a house there or else he wouldn't have bought it.

Councilor Ruede:  I understand.

Mr. Turner:  Yeah.

Councilor Ruede:  Thank you very much.

Mr. Turner:  And, yes.

Mayor Hauptman:  I think councilor Mills had a, Councilor you have a question?

Councilor Mills:  Yes, I don't have a question for you councilor but, well, I concur I think with what Richard is saying, and it's not necessarily because, I do want to hear from our council as to what options we have available to us and what consequences may result unbeknownst to us because of the situation but not only because of that but if you look, if we were to go ahead tonight and say ok yes the nuisance exists, then, and, and  Mr. Atkeson does not, then we as a city would have to go in and abate and some of the things that or could go in and abate and some of the things that we would be abating would be issuance of variances and that puts us kind of in an awkward position that may not have necessarily a monetary value to assign to it that could become a lien so I would like to discuss that with David.

Mayor Hauptman:  Ok.

Councilor Mills:  And because of that if they're through with discussion I would move to table this matter.

Mayor Hauptman:  Ok.  I, I think there was another hand up.  

Councilor Quandt:  Yeah.

Mayor Hauptman:   I think Susie, and then Rob.

Councilor Mills:  I withdraw that motion then.

Mayor Hauptman:  Yeah, and then lets.

Councilor Navetta:  I'd like to ask Mr. Eric Turner, who is Mr. Skeele's attorney?

Mr. Turner:  The attorney who wrote me the letter is named William Sherlock and he's out of Eugene.  Sherlock like Sherlock Holmes but that's his last name and he goes apparently by the first name Liam L, I, A, M, which I guess is an abbreviation of William.

Mayor Hauptman:  Councilor Quandt, did you have a question councilor?

Councilor Quandt:  Yeah, I was just gonna follow up on some of the earlier questions that I think, just so you know we're, by the documentation and what we've seen and what's been presented it's, it's  fairly obvious that Mr. Atkeson was mislead on a grand scale and there's the, the processes that we have available to us are like I've heard here tonight, a little bit unclear about whether we take it to circuit court and have to expend a lot of resources and years fighting another battle that could be fought through you getting the property back as a part of your suit, you're in process of trying to give it back to him because of breach of contract or however it comes out.

Mr. Turner:  It would be called rescission but I understand.

Councilor Quandt:  Rescission?

Mr. Turner:  Yes.

Councilor Quandt:  So that doesn't mean that I'm not curious about what the other remedy would be about having the actual person responsible for this mess abating the action and I'd like to be, I'd like to also get some more information on that.

Mr. Turner:  Right, and obviously, city has its own council and I am not as expert as your council would be in that.  I do know that the ordinance allows you to go after the person who created the nuisance which is obviously someone other than the property owner because otherwise it would just be the property owner and you wouldn't bother saying or the person who caused the nuisance to exist so obviously there's some intention there that it could be someone other than the property owner, it doesn't always have to be the property owner even though it's easy to lien.  The other question is I don't know why the lien has to necessarily have to be on the property upon which the nuisance exists and why you couldn't lien other property that's owned by the person who caused the nuisance.  Those are questions that I'm sure you'll want to ask your council.

Mayor Hauptman:  Right.
 
Councilor Quandt:  Yeah, and the, the.

Mayor Hauptman:  Exactly.

Councilor Quandt:  Also the, the Skeele's property is outside of city limits.

Mr. Turner:  It doesn't matter really.

Councilor Quandt:  So. No?

Mr. Turner:  They have property within it because I know that they own the other property near this and even if it were outside the city limits, I don't think that your lien power is limited to property within the city limit.

Mayor Hauptman:  Right I believe (inaudible), you know.

Mr. Turner:  But your own council will tell you that better than I would, it'll just cost you a little bit more.

Mayor Hauptman:  Alright, any other comments councilors?  Jamie was ready to make a motion, one of the considerations I think in the motion, currently we have an abatement and fines on this property.  I think if the motion is what I think it's gonna be is to hold over until at least next meeting, talk to our council, I think what we want to do and maybe make it part of your motion is suspend the fines until we get this worked out so the clock isn't ticking and.

Councilor Mills:  Oh, adding up, that's right.

Mayor Hauptman: And adding up, so I think that might want to be part of it so we're not being punitive here because we're not making a decision ok?  So, however you want to make a motion Jamie?

Councilor Mills:  You wanna do it or do you want me to?

Councilor Ruede:  (Inaudible)

Councilor Mills:   I'll do it.  I would move that we table this matter and during the pendency suspend the fines. Is that how we say it?

Mayor Hauptman:  I, yes, suspend, let's suspend. (Inaudible between Councilor Mills and Mayor Hauptman), suspend any accrual of the.

Councilor Mills:  (inaudible) extension.

Mayor Hauptman:  Of the fine, we want to suspend the decision; we're suspending the accrual of the fines.

Councilor Mills:  The accrual of the fines, during the pendency.

Mayor Hauptman:  Yes, during the, during the pendency?  Is that a word? 

Mr. Turner:  Yes.

Mayor Hauptman:  Pendency, is it?  Pendency?  I've never heard of that.  Did you get the motion I'm sorry to interrupt her nine times.

Lisa Ekelund:  I did.

Mayor Hauptman:  You're great, Lisa you got all that?

Lisa Ekelund:  Yes, yes I did.

Mayor Hauptman:  Good, alright, do we have a second on that motion?

Councilor Quandt:  Yeah, I'll second that motion.

Mayor Hauptman:  Ok, we have a second from councilor Quandt.  Anymore discussion councilors?  Alright, all those in favor of the motion that the, Jamie made, signify by saying aye.  

Council:  5 members of the council said aye in unison.

Mayor Hauptman:  All those opposed.  (No one spoke).  Ok motion carries so we're gonna suspend it and to our councilor and what we may wind up doing Mr. Turner, we've got, we've got your phone number and what not so should our councilor need to talk to you and I hope you can take his calls.

Mr. Turner:  Oh obviously. 

Mayor Hauptman: And work with us.

Mr. Turner:  Absolutely.

Mayor Hauptman:  Good, and let me say this that I think finally Mr. Atkeson got himself a good attorney, unfortunately it's always that way too late.

Councilor Quandt:  I was going to ask you if you could keep us informed on the progress in your actions against the Skeele's.

Mr. Turner:  Yeah, I mean as, the only way.

Mayor Hauptman: It would be nice if you could get a resolution.

Mr. Turner:  Right.

Mayor Hauptman:  He's gonna you know.

Mr. Turner:  The only thing that would possibly prohibit it which I think is unlikely is if there were any settlement that were reached to keep it confidential but I don't see any reason why there would be in this case.  Anything that happens of course in the courts is public record and I'm happy to answer questions so there's no reason why the city should not be kept informed of what's happening, they can be informed just like anybody else so I'll answer any inquiries along those lines.

Councilor Quandt:  Thank you.

Mayor Hauptman:  Thank you Mr. Turner, good job, thank you.

Mr. Turner:  Thank you.

Mayor Hauptman:  Peter you can come back now.

Councilor Howison:  Thank you (Councilor Howison returned to the dais).

(End of Verbatim Minutes)

B.	Audit Services – Audit vs. Review

Amy Graham said the new auditor submitted documents that showed the difference between an audit and a review.  Amy said she would like the councilor to keep in mind that they would probably not be able to do a review next year due to the amount of money that they will be spending on the road project.

Councilor Quandt asked what the benefit of doing a full audit would be.

Amy Graham said she believed the only benefit would be is that this is the first year that she was solely responsible as in the past there were several hands in the process.

Councilor Ruede said on a full audit, the auditors give there opinion in narrative form and they do more testing.  Councilor Ruede said she believes it is valuable to have the opinion of the auditors but she doesn't know if it's worth $5,000.

Councilor Mills said they are in a time of transition and there is animosity and difficult feelings and it's her opinion only that a full audit might help keep that at bay and put to rest any "hey you didn't" you know, kind of thing, the yack, yack, yack. 
 
Councilor Quandt said he doesn't want to put the city in a position where they may be vulnerable even if it were vulnerability in public perception.

Councilor Koehler asked if the full audit had been figured into the budget and Amy said it has.

Councilor Ruede made the motion we instruct our auditors to provide us with a full audit.  Councilor Howison seconded the motion.  The motion passed by unanimous vote of 6 ayes and 0 nays.

9.	New Business

A.	Changing the way Resolutions are numbered

Councilor Navetta said her concern is when you have an ordinance, they go in number progression and the way the resolutions are numbered, they could get missed.

Councilor Mills said perhaps an end of the year report stating how many resolutions and ordinances passed would help.

Mayor Hauptman said a summary is a good idea.

Councilor Quandt said there's no reason the numbering system has to start over at the beginning of each year.  

Councilor Mills said she would move that we begin a renumbering system beginning immediately, the system recommended by the recorder that is series 2009 beginning with resolution number 1 and then when it goes over to the next year the numbers will continue in sequence however the series will change with the year.  Councilor Ruede seconded the motion.  

Councilor Howison said they said they are going to do it immediately.  Councilor Howison asked if they are going to change the resolutions they have before them.

Councilor Mills amended her motion to begin the numbering system with the new fiscal year of July 1, 2009.   Councilor Ruede seconded the amendment.  The motion passed by unanimous vote of 6 ayes and 0 nays.

B.	Resolution 6-11-09 A – A resolution certifying Dunes City provides four municipal services.

Councilor Howison moved that the city approve resolution 6-11-09 (A).  The motion was seconded by Councilor Koehler.  The motion passed by unanimous vote of 6 ayes and 0 nays.

C.	Resolution 6-11-09 B – A resolution declaring the City's election to receive state shared revenues.

Councilor Mills moved that the city approve resolution 6-11-09 (B).  The motion was seconded by Councilor Howison.  The motion passed by unanimous vote of 6 ayes and 0 nays.

D.	2009 – 2010 Budget.

Mayor Hauptman said they have to have a special meeting because the budget was not advertised in the newspaper.

Amy Graham said the soonest they could have the meeting is 6/23/09.

The council set a meeting for a special session of the city council for 6/23/09 at 1:00 PM.

E.  Nuisance located at 83501 Jensen Lane

Mayor Hauptman said the city received a complaint and a staff report regarding the property.

Peter Howison said the original complaint was in December of 2008 but his new committee did review the report that the previous member, Cynthia Chandler made, and the committee agreed all except the newest member who didn't have an opinion, agreed that it did constitute a nuisance, that the violations that were reported on it at that time, the fact that the particular owner has not responded to the request to apply for the vegetation removal permit.

Mayor Hauptman said he's looking at the staff report and they have a pretty good chronology.  Mayor Hauptman said the last thing he sees on this is February 2nd.  Mayor Hauptman asked Lisa Ekelund where they are at and if she's talked to the property owners.

Lisa Ekelund said she hasn't heard a thing since February 2nd.

Mayor Hauptman asked if Lisa Ekelund knows why and if she talked to the property owners.  Mayor Hauptman asked if the property owners resisted cooperating.

Lisa Ekelund said the property owners seemed very cooperative when she spoke to them and she emailed the property owners the vegetation removal permit.  Lisa Ekelund said she has just not heard back from them.

Mayor Hauptman asked when the last time the city had any contact with the property owners.

Lisa Ekelund said February 2nd.

Mayor Hauptman asked how the council would like to proceed.

Councilor Mills asked if the conservation committee make recommendations for abatement.

Councilor Howison said yes, the current conservation committee reviewed the reports and agreed that it constituted a nuisance.

Councilor Mills said the abatement is correction, what corrective action in recommended?

Councilor Howison said the corrective action as recommended in the report by Cynthia Chandler.  Councilor Howison read a section out of Cynthia Chandlers report.  Councilor Howison said the issue is that they didn't get a vegetation removal permit.

Councilor Howison moved to declare this particular complaint a nuisance per our nuisance ordinance.

Mayor Hauptman asked if this was the motion and Councilor Howison said yes.  Mayor Hauptman asked if there was a second on the motion.

Councilor Koehler seconded the motion.

Mayor Hauptman asked if there was any further discussion on the motion.

Councilor Koehler said he's wondering because they have a newsletter coming up, how they could put this point across.  Councilor Koehler said every newsletter for the last 4 years seems to have revolved around this same issue.  Councilor Koehler said the question is, how do you allow people to read it or do you need door to door visits.  Councilor Koehler said he thinks the communication and education committee could decipher who on the shoreland has property and target mail just to them.

Mayor Hauptman said they should finish the motion then come back to Councilor Koehler.  Mayor Hauptman said they have a motion on the floor and they have a second.  Mayor Hauptman called for vote.

The motion to declare this particular complaint a nuisance per our nuisance ordinance passed by unanimous vote of 6 ayes and 0 nays.

The Council discussed how to educate the citizens on the rules of protecting the shoreland.

Mayor Hauptman called for a 10 minute recess at 8:40 PM.

The Council reconvened at 8:52 PM

E.	Resolution 6-11-09 C – A resolution granting the Road Commission the authority to review and authorize the placement of public utility facilities within the cities right-of-way

Councilor Quandt said they are attempting to speed up the process and keep the council involved with only the things they need or want to be involved with.  Councilor Quandt read resolution 6-11-09 C.

Councilor Howison questioned "public utility facilities" and Councilor Quandt explained their definition of facilities.

Amy Graham said that Central Lincoln People's Utility District (CLPUD) would be the main utility that would pull a permit.  Amy Graham said right now the way the law is written for this, CLPUD applies for a permit; it goes before the road commission and then it has to wait another month before the city council can hear it.  Amy Graham said the city council has heard a couple of these recently so this would take it to where the permit could be processed a lot sooner than 6 weeks.

Councilor Navetta made the motion to approve resolution 6-11-09 C and Councilor Howison seconded the motion.

Mayor Hauptman asked if there was any further discussion.

Amy Graham said she believes the city attorney emailed the Mayor with a sentence he would like to add to the end of that resolution.

Mayor Hauptman said the city attorney voluntarily added the following verbiage:  "Now therefore be it resolved the Dunes City Council retains and continues to have the authority to revoke all granted temporary right-of-way uses."

Councilor Howison said Councilor Navetta needs to amend her motion.

Mayor Hauptman said yes.

Councilor Navetta said she would like to amend her motion to state whatever the mayor said.  Councilor Howison seconded the amended motion.  The motion passed by unanimous vote of 6 ayes and 0 nays.

F.	Engineering contract for road work.

Councilor Quandt said this is the contact for the city engineers to perform work related to this years road work projects. Councilor Quandt said this includes 20 different streets; slurry's and 5 overlay projects. 

Mayor Hauptman asked if the city owns these streets and said he would like it cleared up before they are paved.

Councilor Quandt said the road commission is currently verifying ownership of these streets.

Councilor Quandt said the road department is beginning to keep files for documentation and records on each street.

Mayor Hauptman questioned why the city is paying for street lights in certain areas.

Councilor Quandt said in the past the citizens requested a street light and it was heard in front of the road commission.

Councilor Howison asked if the road commission pays for the lighting or if it comes from the General Fund.

Amy Graham said it comes from the State Street Fund.

Councilor Koehler asked if it is known how many street lights there are in Dunes City.

Councilor Quandt said they are trying to figure out all the lights in the County right of way so the county can pay for them.

Councilor Navetta said she believes the county requires lights at intersections.

Councilor Navetta said she noticed they are doing Wright Road, Collins Loop and 7^th Heaven and asked if they are going to overlay the part from Leavitt Loop from Wright Road to the other end of Leavitt Loop.

Councilor Quandt said he would have to review the map. Councilor Quandt said the factors that put these roads on the list are the pavement conditions index.

Councilor Howison moved that they approve the engineering contract for $17,000 for the roadwork that is described.  The motion was seconded by Councilor Quandt.  The motion passed by unanimous vote of 6 ayes and 0 nays.

G.	Ordinance #201 – An Ordinance amending sections 32.81 and 32.84 of the Dunes City Code, concerning the purpose and duties of the site review committee and declaring an emergency

Mayor Hauptman said this is a hearing and under city code section 34.2, it provides an ordinance may be enacted in single meeting of the council by unanimous vote of all council members present.  

Mayor Hauptman said section 34.3 provides that both readings may be by title only if no council member present at the meeting requests to have the ordinance read in full or if a copy of the ordinance is provided for each council member and all requirements for posting and advertising have been met.

Mayor Hauptman asked if the requirements for posting and advertising have been met.

Amy Graham said yes.

Councilor Mills said although it took her a while to find a code book that contained chapter 32, it appears to her that as chairman of the site review committee that this is merely a language clean up of clarification of current code to bring everything into compliance with each other.  

Councilor Howison said he has a problem about declaring this an emergency unless it's really urgent that they have something done.  Councilor Howison said he thinks this is a bad habit.

Councilor Howison made the motion to strike section 3 to delete the declaration of an emergency clause.  The motion was seconded by Councilor Quandt.  The motion passed by unanimous vote of 6 ayes and 0 nays.

Mayor Hauptman opened up the meeting for public comment. And there was no comment from the public.

Councilor Quandt made the motion to adopt Ordinance 201 as amended.  The motion was seconded by Councilor Howison and the motion passed by unanimous vote of 6 ayes and 0 nays.

Councilor Howison verified that they did the first and second readings on the ordinance.

Mayor Hauptman said "yes it passed unanimously; they did the first reading that passed unanimously and no second reading, no request to read the whole ordinance although we did".

H.	Revenue Committee appointment

Mayor Hauptman said they received an application from Tracy Quandt to join the Revenue Committee.

Councilor Mills nominated Tracy Quandt for appointment to the site review committee.

Councilor Quandt said this is a nomination for the revenue committee.

Councilor Mills amended her motion to state revenue committee. Councilor Navetta seconded the motion.  The motion passed by unanimous vote of 6 ayes and 0 nays.

10.	  Citizen Input on Unscheduled Items

Charlcie Kaylor of The Building Department 114 E. 14th Ave. Eugene, OR  97401

Charlcie said she is the building official though not much longer.  Charlcie read a letter that she submitted and is on file.

Councilor Howison asked if there should be discussion on this.

Mayor Hauptman said they had discussion when they voted to hire the other inspectors last month.  Mayor Hauptman said what Ms. Kaylor failed to reveal to the council was that he and Ms. Graham sat down with her boss, the owner, Dave Mortier, and explained exactly what the problems were, the fact that they were being paid up front to do inspections that they never finaled.  Mayor Hauptman said the city found half the inspections they did in 2008 had not been finaled and The Building Department have not been following up on the finals.  Mayor Hauptman said in all his years, he's never seen a more horribly run operation.  Mayor Hauptman said the left hand didn't know what the right hand was doing and they talked to Mr. Mortier about it, told him what the deal was, and said that they would pay them upon final inspection because that's when the work is done.  Mayor Hauptman said he's never heard of a service contract where you pay up front and in his opinion, they breached the contract long ago whether intentionally or because of disorganization, when they never finaled permits.  Mayor Hauptman said he understands the city just had a permit finaled that had been outstanding for 12 years.  Mayor Hauptman said in the meeting with Mr. Mortier, Mr. Mortier sat there through the whole meeting and really said nothing in his defense.  Mayor Hauptman said apparently Mr. Mortier never even revealed to the staff that they agreed the city would pay them upon final inspection because then they would know it's going to get done.  Mayor Hauptman said Ms. Kaylor needs to speak to the owner.

Charlcie Kaylor said she is an owner.

Amy Graham said she would also like to add in regards to the contract that Ms. Kaylor is speaking of that was signed back in 2005.  Amy Graham said that contract was signed on March 10, 2005 but the contract was not put out for bid until September of that same year and never once did the proposals go in front of the council.  Amy Graham said the contract was awarded to The Building Department again before the proposals ever went out, posted in the paper and it was never done legally.

11.	  Adjournment

There being no further business to come before the City Council, 

Councilor Quandt made the motion to adjourn the meeting and Councilor Navetta seconded.  The motion passed by unanimous vote of 6 ayes and 0 nays.

The meeting of the Dunes City Council adjourned at 9:27 PM.

The next special session of the Dunes City Council is to be held on June 23, 2009 at 1:00 PM.

The next regular scheduled meeting of the Dunes City Council is to be held on July 09, 2009 at 7:00 PM.

The proceedings of the Dunes City Council meeting were recorded on tape, and are filed in the City Recorder's office. The complete minutes of this meeting is filed in the City Recorder's office.  Upon approval by the City Council, these minutes will be available online at http://dunescity.com/minutes.htm

Respectfully prepared by,

________________________________________
Lisa Ekelund
Planning Secretary

Approved by the City Council on the _____ day of _____, 2009,

________________________________________
Eric Hauptman
Mayor

================= Reports =================

Communication and Education Report
June 11, 2009

Our small committee will be up and running this month as the 4^th annual Festival of the Lakes is just around the corner. The festival is the second Saturday of the month on August 8^th from 10:00 AM to 3:00 PM.  The committee consists of Linda Ash, April Dumas and Susie Navetta and expands as necessary. 

The letters to participants have already been sent out and soon responses will be coming in and reservations for time and space will be made available.  Christine May once again came forward to send over 60 letters to the participants.  This is the first step in the process.  Sub-committees will start to form to select speakers, food service, bakers, entertainers and press release writers. 

Councilor Richard Koehler will be handling the Newsletter this issue.  This year the theme for the festival and the newsletter is “What can I do for Our Town?”   All of the Councilors have been asked to submit articles for the newsletter regarding their committee functions and duties. 

Submitted by Susie Navetta

Dunes City Conservation Committee  [no report; minutes]
May 14, 2009

Draft Minutes

Present:	Peter Howison
		Judy Johnson
		Jim Rash

Absent:	Cynthia Chandler
		David Dumas

A Dunes City Conservation Committee was held at Dunes City Hall on May 14, 2009 at 2:00 pm.

The minutes of the April 2, 2009 were accepted with one change, “a change of every other month,” was deleted.  Now, to read,” It was agreed by the present members that regular meetings will be held whenever needed.”  The minutes were approved by a motion by Jim Rash 2^nd by Peter Howison.
	
o	A discussion of the review process of handling complaints followed.  A recommendation for a procedure was made that at least two people from the Conservation Committee must meet together when visiting the complaint sites.  A motion was made by Jim Rash 2^nd by Peter Howison to accept.  

Note:  Cynthia Chandler had requested today’s meeting to discuss Conservation Committee processes.  Especially, because of the way a fire complaint was handled re:  Burning on the property off Hwy 101.  Peter Howison explained that during his visit to the property he found the person doing the burning was a local lawn care specialist and he questioned if the burning had been done prior to the 1979 Ordinance.  In addition, all members of the Conservation Committee visited the site independently.  Peter Howison wrote an e-mail to the owner.  The Conservation Committee members had not gotten together to write up a follow up procedure.  Some of the problems are:  

o	Conservation Committee members are called at the spur of the moment.  This is a challenging situation.  

Peter Howison recommended that in the future the Conservation Committee members meet at the Dunes City Hall, go to the site, and then make a decision on the recommended actions.

Jim Rash mentioned that he thought we had a regulation that 2 members had to go to a site, but a lot of times during December 2008 and January 2009 just one went and an e-mail was sent to the others.  He agreed there should be at least 2 members at a site inspection.

Discussion was held re:  Site visit to Woahink Suites.  

The owner requested a tree removal.  

Peter recommended a vegetation removal permit.  He advised the caretakers on the required procedures.  He recommended advising on permits procedures of when to go to the Planning Commission and Nuisance procedures.  He also recommended encouraging more citizen generated complaints.  

This visit did not require a report, because it was not a response to a complaint.  Action is completed.

o	In regard to Education Outreach

	It is the plan to educate on the normal permit process

	There will be a July 1, 2009 mailing.

Peter Howison discussed that hopefully there will be one or two members added to the Conservation Committee next month.   He mentioned Cynthia Chandler is planning to resign. 

 Re:  Jensen Lane complaint:  David Bellemore, David Dumas, Fred Hilden and Cynthia Chandler did the report.  They sent a letter 2/2/09 informing them not to remove vegetation from the riparian area.  The owner was informed that an application for vegetation permit is required.  The owner, Clough, people in Portland, ignored the notification.  If there is a nuisance, they need to be required to do something.  Recommend:  Writing them a letter.  This recommendation should pass at tonight’s City Council meeting.

Peter mentioned that on Kiechle Arm there is mowed grass up to the shoreline.  There should be no mowing.

There should be more educating:

36” high vegetation to the shoreline, and there should be no mowing 50’ or below.  Brambles can be cleared.

Our challenge is to take the educational approach.  
Page 3

We advise the City Council to write a draft letter and give it to our Planning Commission, Lisa, for our Planning Commission members of the City Council, and Planning city officials and volunteers.  

Previous Complaint status

Ocean Blvd.

Peter Howison asked about the Ocean Blvd. complaint rectification.  Judy Johnson explained the 50’ riparian area has been redone properly and replanted as recommended and looks fine. 

There is construction on property on Woahink Lake which needs inspection.  The 
Conservation Committee will determine if there is any violation of any shoreland procedures.

The next meeting of the Conservation Committee will be July 9, 2:00 pm, at the Dunes City Hall.  Meetings at this time are planned to be scheduled every other month.  

A recommendation was made by Peter for a sub-committee meeting on Education.  Specifically on the subject of Vegetation Use Permits.

Judy Johnson 
Conservation Committee Member

Ordinance Review Committee  [no report; minutes]
Minutes – May 11, 2009

Councilor Peter Howison opened the meeting at 2:30 PM.  Those present were George Burke, Peter Howison and Susie Navetta

The topic of the meeting was the Septic System Maintenance Ordinance 173.   Since the beginning of the septic notices 176 residences have complied and 17 did not comply according to George Burke. The ordinance needs small corrections to be more effective and the word “Pumping” need to be put into the Ordinance as it is already present in Resolution 06-08-06.  New letters should be sent out to those residences that have not complied.  After identifying the adopted and signed documents it was decided that a review was needed by the members so presentations could be made at the next meeting. Susie Navetta suggested that an ordinance amendment needed to be located to up date the definitions as modified by Gary Darnielle.  Navetta will find the document.

Tasks:
Burke will work with the new office assistant Fred Hilden to get more septic data.
Navetta will locate Ordinance 194.
Does the Erosion Control Ordinance have line outs and a signature?   
Everyone make suggestions to modify Ordinance 193.
Identify the NAWT in the ordinance
Add pumping to the Initial Evaluation or
Add pumping to the Evaluation Standard
Remind the City of their duties
	Need for Business Licenses
	Notice housing additions of septic requirements
	Notice housing transfers of septic requirements.

Submitted by Susie Navetta

Next meeting – Tuesday, June 2^nd at 7:00 PM.

Parks and Recreation Report
June 11, 2009
Councilor Ruede

PARKS AND RECREATION REPORT

The Dunes City Parks and Recreation Commission did not hold a formal meeting in the month of May.  We have, however, been working as issues come up.

1.	The staff surveyed the situation around the overlook park and reported to me that it can be remedied by simply shoveling back the sand that was removed.

2.	On May 15, 2009 Governor Kulongoski proposed an emergency summer jobs program (OEJP ) to create at least 12,000 temporary jobs, employing un-employed Oregonians.  The program will require approval of funding by the legislature before it can begin.    The program is open to county and local governments and local non-profit organizations.  The deadline was May 29^th for proposal.

Amy called me with heads on the 28^th to write a job description for the position.  I did and she was able to submit the grant proposal for a part time Parks and Recreation Grounds Keeper for our Dunes City Parks Department.  

I want you to know I did include “shoveling of sand and bark” as part of the job description. Many thanks to Amy and Fred for their quick action that enabled us to take part in that program.

DUNES CITY FIRE COMMISSIONER REPORT

1.  The West Lane Emergency Operations Group met May 18^th at the fire hall.  The main topic of discussion was about the location of the container that houses the cache of emergency relief supplies.  It has been established that there will be two emergency containers.  One located north of the bridge in Florence and one located south of the bridge.  

2.  There was dialogue about the procurement of two emergency generators that will be located at the relief sights.    

3.	The consortium plans to hold a mock emergency exercise in June.

4.	The group voted to secure a website and explore linking opportunities to other organizations.  The focus of the website will be information and educational purposes.

DUNES CITY ROAD COMMISSION
June 11^th, 2009 Council Report

The Road Commission met May 18^th for its regular meeting.   
We have been preparing this year’s road projects and continuing to make improvements in the department. We are working on improving the efficiency of the permitting process and preparing to get started with our limbing and brush project. We purchased some of the equipment that the roads department should own for roadside liming and brushing including Weed eaters, blowers, cones, and the safety equipment to match. We are aware of the areas that need attention and we will be starting that in the next couple of weeks.

Given the fact that the county has cut our budget in half we have to adapt to a new strategy. It is cheaper to maintain the roads more often with a slurry seal than to wait till it needs a chipseal, overlayment or a reconstruct. 
It’s important for the community to understand some of the details behind this strategy. Chip seals have become rare. The lack of vendors diminishes the competitive process. Slurry vendors on the other hand are abundant and competitive. 
 The roads we will be maintaining this year were identified by our pavement management system. The list will be posted by next month. These are roads that if preserved now will save us money in the long term. We will get good bids this year and therefore be able to both take advantage of a bad economy and at the same time help improve it. This maintenance strategy and the pavement management system under it are credible to the federal and state governments. Enough so that they have decided to pay for it. The Small Cities Stimulus program has responded to our application with  $94,000 for the slurry program. This project preserves 20 streets throughout the City.  Also we have an overlay project involving 5 streets that will be paid for by the city. We are in the process of sending this bundled maintenance program to engineering in preparation for bid. Both these maintenance programs are scheduled for bidding in July and construction comes in August and September. In July we will begin communicating with the residents on the affected roads informing them as to what to expect and when to expect it.

Robert Quandt
Roads Commission Chair

Site Review Committee   by Councilor Mills  [no report]

Revenue Committee   by Councilor Mills  [no report]

Water Quality Committee
Councilor Richard Koehler

June's meeting will occur on 6-17-09 at 7 pm.   
No Committee meetings were held since last Council.

During the next and future meetings discussions will revolve around

    * Ford Way issues
    * Other locations in need of attention?   
    * Progressions of Woahink Lake into future?  
    * Siltcoos: preparations that makes sense. 
    * Meet with Honeyman Park director re water intake area and other WQ concerns.  
    * Developing a problem statement and solutions.   
    * Review septic maintenance revisions

Ongoing:

    * Prep Info for Festival of the Lakes and Dunes City Newsletter
    * Fertilizer and Maintenance Reduction for Honeyman Park
    * Future Ordinances – Stormwater Reduction and Business License
    * Grant for Siltcoos Lake Water
    * Honeyman Park signs “Please DON”T Feed the geese”

DUNES CITY COUNCIL 
PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT
JUNE 2009

Provided in the packet: 

The last planning commission meeting for May was cancelled.  The next regular meeting is scheduled for June 25, 2009 at 6:00PM.  

The planning staff continues to assist with meetings, minutes, customer service, permitting, inspection scheduling, file organization, information requests, training, and correspondence.

In the month of May, Dunes City issued 1 electrical permit, and 2 building permits.  

The Planning Department would like to thank everyone in attendance at the special CCI / Planning Workshop held on June 9, 2009.  Staff will continue its efforts in completing the ordinance so it is understandable, workable, and enforceable.

Spoken at the meeting:

The last planning commission meeting for the month of May was cancelled.  My staff report in the agenda packet states that the next regular meeting of the planning commission is scheduled for June 25, 2009 at 6:00 PM but this meeting has been changed to July 16^th at 6:00 PM.  At the meeting on the July 16th, the planning commission will host another stormwater ordinance CCI meeting.

The planning department would like to thank everyone in attendance at the last special CCI / Planning workshop for the stormwater ordinance held on July 9, 2009.  Everyone who contributed gave valuable input.  Staff will continue its efforts in helping with the completion of this ordinance so it is understandable, workable, and enforceable.

The planning staff continues to assist with meetings, minutes, customer service, permitting, inspection scheduling, file organization, information requests, training, and correspondence.

In the month of May Dunes City issued 1 electrical permit, and 2 building permits. And that is the end of my report.  Thank you.

###