MINUTES

WASHINGTON COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS

DECEMBER 8, 2009

CONVENED: 10:13 a.m.

BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS: Chairman Tom Brian Vice Chair Andy Duyck Commissioner Dick Schouten Commissioner Desari Strader Commissioner Roy Rogers

STAFF: Robert Davis, County Administrator Rob Massar, Assistant County Administrator Dennis Mulvihill, Government Affairs Manager, CAO Philip Bransford, Communications Officer, CAO Dan Olsen, County Counsel Kathy Lehtola, Director, LUT Brent Curtis, Planning Division Manager, LUT Joanne Rice, Principal Planner, LUT Mike Dahlstrom, Program Educator, LUT Bill Gaffi, General Manager, CWS Margot Barnett, CPO Coordinator Jim Thiessen, Audiovisual Technician Barbara Hejtmanek, Recording Secretary

PRESS: Jill Smith, The Oregonian Kurt Eckert, Hillsboro Argus

APPROVAL OF MINUTES: November 24, 2009

Chairman Brian began this meeting by mentioning the memorial service being held later today in Tacoma to honor the four fallen police officers from Lakewood, Washington. He said that as a community—and a democracy—we benefit every day from the bravery and dedication of the men and women serving in our law enforcement agencies, including those serving here in Washington County. On behalf of the Board of County Commissioners, as it conducts its routine duty within our system of democracy, Chairman Brian asked that today’s meeting be dedicated in honor of the four Lakewood officers and their families.

Commissioner Rogers felt this is an appropriate way for the Board to conduct today’s meeting. His heart went out to the families of the four officers who were needlessly killed.

Commissioner Schouten agreed with this dedication.

1. CONSENT AGENDA

It was moved to adopt the Consent Agenda.

Motion – Rogers 2nd – Schouten Vote – 5-0

HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

1.a. MO 09-334 Approve Agreement with Oregon Health and Science University to Support Merlo Station High School Health Center (Approved Under Consent Agenda)

1.b. RO 09-100 Approve Amendment to the 2009-2010 Agreement with the State Health Division for Funding to Provide Public Health Services and Approve a Resolution and Order Increasing the Department Appropriation by $1,351,770 (Approved Under Consent Agenda)

SUPPORT SERVICES

1.c. MO 09-335 Accept Bid/Award Purchase Order for Aerial Tree Trimming Truck for Fleet Management Division (Approved Under Consent Agenda)

2. ORAL COMMUNICATION (2 MINUTE OPPORTUNITY)

Robert James Claus, 22211 SW Pacific Highway, Sherwood, Oregon, said that Sherwood has started a series of what are turning out to be extensive public hearings over major changes. He told the Board that he has documents that state that these changes are no one’s business—not even the citizens of Sherwood. Mr. Claus reported that 80,000 cars are coming to a light industrial property (57 acres in downtown) during the peak traffic period. He said that the city is in negotiation with Wal-mart, Kohl’s, WinCo, and a number of other mass merchandisers. Mr. Claus stated that this will be exactly what happened with Home Depot. He recalled the following sequence of events in that case:

• Home Depot was light industrial. • The city manager and staff deemed the application complete. • They let it sit for 120 days. • Walt Hitchcock and the council sued and later fired the city manager. • They found out that they could do nothing about an application done that way.

Mr. Claus held the opinion that this is exactly what has happened with Keith Mays and Jim Patterson. He said that the county needs to watch this because it plays a supportive role to other government agencies. Mr. Claus added that ODOT had no idea that this was going on. He regarded this as a major zoning shift and predicted that it will back traffic up on Roy Rogers, Tualatin Sherwood and 99-W. Mr. Claus believed that county staff will want to look into this and not play a supporting role because this will impact the entire county. He expressed support for the Board’s dedication of today’s meeting to the Lakewood officers.

The Board now advanced agenda item 4.a. and considered it first.

4. COUNTY ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE 4.a. MO 09-333 Approve Amendments to the Tigard Urban Service Agreement

Joanne Rice stated that the amendments to the Tigard Urban Service Agreement are related just to the Exhibit regarding provisions of park and recreation services. She specified that this amendment would note the possibility of the creation of the proposed aquatic park and recreation district. Ms. Rice reported that this matter has been acted upon by Tualatin Hills Park and Recreation District and the City of Tigard. She mentioned that Metro has yet to act on it. Ms. Rice explained that after this, the Board would conduct the public hearing on the proposed petition.

It was moved to approve the amendment to Exhibit D of the Tigard Urban Service Agreement.

Motion – Rogers 2nd – Duyck Vote – 5-0

3. PUBLIC HEARING – LAND USE AND TRANSPORTATION 3.a. MO 09-336 Consider the Proposed Formation of a Special District (Tigard-Tualatin Aquatic District)

Joanne Rice observed that this is the second public hearing for the proposed petition to create an aquatic district to operate the two pools at the Tigard and Tualatin high schools. She reviewed that the Board continued the matter from November 24, 2009 in order to

provide additional time to complete some steps. Ms. Rice reported that last evening, the City of Beaverton approved an endorsement to the petition. She said that the other outstanding issue that would need to be resolved before the Board should act on this matter is the amendments to the petitioners’ economic feasibility statement. Ms. Rice commented that the county has only just now determined that taxes would need to be levied in 2011, rather than 2010 as assumed in the economic feasibility statement. She requested that the Board continue this matter for one week to allow the petitioners time to submit additional information about the economic feasibility statement. Ms. Rice related that Kathy Stallkamp says that the petitioners have been working with the Special Service Districts in terms of how to go about addressing that.

Chairman Brian said that it is the Board’s understanding that a continuation of one week does not provide much time and expressed the Board’s willingness to continue it additionally after next week.

The public hearing was opened.

Kathy Stallkamp, 17635 SW 131st, Tigard, Oregon, told the Board that the petitioners have already done some research in the event that they did not get money in 2010 for taxes. She said that they have already contacted the Special Districts of Oregon, worked out what the loan would be, and developed an economic feasibility statement. Ms. Stallkamp was prepared to turn that in within the next day. She stated that a few issues were just identified with the legal boundary by the Department of Revenue and so the petitioners will work on those. Ms. Stallkamp said that a continuation to next week will likely allow everything to be turned in to staff and approved by that time.

Cheryl Coupe, 15855 SW Windham Terrace, Tigard, Oregon accompanied Ms. Stallkamp but did not have anything further to add.

Chairman Brian thanked the women and said that the Board admires the citizen action exhibited by the petitioners in an effort to take care of needs in the community. He hoped that the details could be worked out in time for campaign season before the election.

Commissioner Rogers commented that it seems as if these issues are a frustrating knit in the law. He asked if the county could contact the Department of Revenue on the petitioners’ behalf to see if we could get some kind of waiver or interpretation. Commissioner Rogers wanted to help the petitioners.

Dan Olsen replied that the Office of County Counsel has been in contact with the Department of Revenue. He said that the Department of Revenue has not consistently applied the statute over time and added that this is one of the first times that it has really become an issue. Mr. Olsen stated that his office is talking with them about the possibility of the Department of Revenue issuing an order directing counties in terms of how the statute should be applied, which would have the advantage of addressing legal concerns and providing for statewide uniformity, which everyone wants. He said that the

county has also had some conversations with the Special Districts Association about a possible legislative fix and what the impact of that might be. Mr. Olsen summarized that his office is working on the issue and he feels that there are some alternatives that would allow this to proceed further. He said that this is a case where we are talking about using the boundaries of an existing school district and that makes it a lot easier to suggest that this one ought to be allowed to go through.

Commissioner Roger appreciated what staff has done. He said that it would be helpful if we could coordinate the efforts around this last little curve ball so that the petitioners know what is going on. Commissioner Rogers asked if the petitioners can contact the Office of County Counsel directly or if they must go through him.

Dan Olsen responded that Brad Anderson and Chris Gilmore in his office have both had a lot of conversations with the proponents. He said that what we are doing now is trying to make sure that there is a Plan B and Plan C in place, even though we are all hoping that we can keep Plan A moving forward.

It was moved to continue this public hearing to December 15, 2009.

Motion – Rogers 2nd – Schouten Vote – 5-0

3.b. MO 09-332 Conduct Urban/Rural Reserves Hearing and Provide Opportunity for Public Comment

Chairman Brian noted that the Board advertised one hour for today’s hearing on this matter and an open period of time for next week’s second hearing. He observed that that would only allow for about 16 people to testify, while about 40 persons have signed up. Chairman Brian said that the Board will try a few things today to accommodate as many people as possible, including:

• Asking those who submit materials in writing to submit those and keep oral comments brief • Extending the one-hour advertised time period to some extent • Allowing those who wish to do so to express agreement with other speakers • Trying to accommodate everyone today, if comments are kept as brief as possible

Chairman Brian announced that next week’s hearing will occur at an evening meeting.

Brent Curtis reviewed that the 2007 Legislature passed a bill called SB 2011, which had to do with creating a new approach for the Portland Metropolitan area to undertake growth management. He said that it provided for urban reserves and rural reserves. Mr. Curtis explained that an urban reserve is a place where the region, if there is a need to

expand the Urban Growth Boundary (UGB), would go first. He defined a rural reserve as a fundamental promise not to urbanize over the long term. Mr. Curtis recalled that part of SB 2011 required LCDC to adopt an administrative rule to help more fully articulate the provisions of urban and rural reserves; this was adopted in January of 2008. He said that from that point forward, the region (and each county in the region) has been involved in looking at and applying the new provisions of SB 2011 and the administrative rule— trying to figure out where to have urban reserves and rural reserves.

Mr. Curtis explained that the law laid out “factors” or “criteria” that had to be applied and these were the concept around which urban and rural reserves would be identified. He reported that the region decided to look at an initial study area of about five miles from the existing UGB. Mr. Curtis added that that boundary has been adjusted somewhat. He said that a series of analyses were done, that looked at and applied the law to determine where we could find urban and rural reserves. Mr. Curtis stated that in Washington County, that work was done simultaneously and with the guidance and assistance of the Washington County Reserves Coordinating Committee. He spoke of the rich tradition in Washington County of convening the local governments of the county to work together on looking at public policy issues. Mr. Curtis indicated that in this case, a Coordinating Committee was developed to look at urban and rural reserves for Washington County and to provide guidance to that process and the Planning Directors, who provided technical assistance. He reported that the Committee met on a monthly basis and provided the oversight that moved the urban reserve study forward.

Mr. Curtis mentioned that a key part of doing the work was to simultaneously look at urban reserves and rural reserves—not to try to decide one in advance of the other. He summarized that a very systematic series of analyses does that. Mr. Curtis stated that another key part of doing the work was to coordinate at the regional level: there was a regional steering committee, which provided oversight and direction to the CORE 4. He specified that the CORE 4 consists of the following:

• An elected representative from Metro • An elected representative from Clackamas County • An elected representative from Multnomah County • An elected representative from Washington County

Mr. Curtis said that the CORE 4 effort was to coordinate the application of factors and identification of urban and rural reserves on a region-wide basis. He stated that that particular process had its own citizen involvement program and the county’s process had a coordinated similar citizen involvement process. Mr. Curtis indicated that staff submitted a packet of information today, which includes a long list of meetings that engaged the public in Washington County, in the cities of Washington County and throughout the region. (Please see Meeting File for staff report.) He said that, ultimately, the work was prepared and went before the Coordinating Committee. Mr. Curtis went on to say that prior to their decision in the middle of September, the Coordinating Committee had an extra legal public hearing to take testimony from interested individuals

about the draft recommendation that came from the Planning Directors. He recalled that as part of that public hearing, notice was sent to every property owner within the study area depicted on the map so that they could participate in the hearings. Mr. Curtis identified that hearing as occurring on August 20, 2009. He stated that on September 23, 2009, the Coordinating Committee adopted its recommendation for urban reserves, rural reserves and undesignated lands.

Relative to the urban reserves process, Mr. Curtis stated that the “factors” or “criteria” were really very important in applying this. He said that the urbanization work (the focus on applying the urban factors) was done with two kinds of main considerations:

• First and foremost, the cities examined what their aspirations were—both inside their city, in their city centers and corridors, and the extent to which they believed that the long term vision of their city and their aspirations might involve the additional provision of land to the existing city outside the UGB. • As part of that consideration and as part of the application of the factors, each city prepared what was called a pre-qualifying concept plan. This is basically application of the law (the factors) and an identification of how the properties could be used to create great communities. This included providing for communities of the future in relationship to the existing city aspirations within the city and paid particular attention to employment and residential needs.

Mr. Curtis said that as a result of the analyses and the public hearing, the Coordinating Committee adopted a recommendation. He referred to the colored map and identified the following:

• Green indicates rural reserves (110,000 acres) • Orange indicates urban reserves (34,000 acres) • White indicates undesignated, neither urban nor rural reserves (27,000 acres)

Mr. Curtis said that upon that determination by the Coordinating Committee and some final advice and determinations and coordinations at the regional level by the Regional Steering Committee, the CORE 4 (elected officials from each county and elected official from Metro) began the task of looking at and discussing what the regional decision would be for the identification of urban reserves and rural reserves. He stated that the idea was to, by the end of the year or into January of the new year, make a decision, have it reviewed by the public and endorse an agreement by the region through bilateral agreements between Metro and each county of which lands should be urban reserves and rural reserves.

Mr. Curtis said that many steps have been taken from the provision of the new state law in 2007 to this point but added that there are a few more steps to go. He indicated that this is an extra-legal hearing in which people get an opportunity to once again talk about this recommendation and the status of the work that has been done by CORE 4.

Chairman Brian spoke of the work of the CORE 4 and reviewed the current status of that work. He walked the Board and audience through the map in an effort to let them know where things stand at the present time on the Washington County side of these trends. (Please refer to color map in the Meeting File.) Chairman Brian emphasized that no decisions have been made, nothing is unanimous and there is no actual agreement. He talked about where the conversations are trending and his latest understanding. Chairman Brian stressed that these are not unanimous—not even on the Board itself. The Chair’s remarks included, but were not limited to, the following:

Note: Originally, numbers indicated the need for more discussion. Originally, letters indicated areas where CORE 4 preliminarily agreed. Since that time, the letters do not mean as much.

UR-1 This is in Multnomah County but impacts Washington County. Last week, Multnomah County has asked for a designation of “undesignated” here—i.e., not urban or rural. More will be discussed on this.

UR-B This is designated urban reserve area and has not been controversial. It is recommended to round off the Bethany area along a natural water feature. Originally, the City of Hillsboro had proposed a large area (5,600 acres) in West Union as urban reserves; this is no longer being considered as urban reserves; there is a distinct trend to consider down to West Union as rural reserves. The area between West Union and Highway 26 is still in discussion.

UR-2A This is still in discussion. South of Highway 26, there is a trend for that to be urban reserves but this is not undisputed.

UR-F The latest trend is to not designate this urban, as indicated. To the west, where the school district has a school site, there is some interest in that remaining urban reserve but the rest of UR-F going rural reserve. In exchange, a like sum acreage would go north of the highway and Council Creek and be bounded by McKay Creek that would be urban. Rural reserves would surround two areas.

UR-4 The City of Forest Grove requests this to be urban reserves and there is a trend to allow that.

UR-16 The trend is to make this undesignated.

UR-D There has been no objection to this being urban reserves.

UR-G There is general discussion that this (South Hillsboro) be urban reserves. It has not been decided if the urban reserves would go down to Butternut Creek, which diagonally bisects that property, or if it would be urban reserves down to Rosedale Road. The trend is to use Rosedale Road as the break.

Former UR-5 A striped area on the map (formerly UR-5) is no longer considered for urban reserves and quite likely rural would come all the way up in that striped area.

UR-6 This would append to the City of Beaverton. This area is still in discussion.

UR-H The trend is to add this as urban reserves to the Beaverton area and there does not seem to be controversy about this.

UR-I This tends to be urban reserves.

UR-7 There has been discussion that part of this be urban reserves and the rest rural reserves.

UR-DD This was one piece that has now been split for conversational purposes because UR-DD is generally thought of as being okay for urban reserves.

UR-K This is generally trending to urban reserves.

UR-9 This is trending to be urban reserves but is a controversial area.

Chairman Brian announced future public meetings relative to urban and rural reserves:

• There will be another CORE 4 meeting tomorrow. • The Board will have another public hearing beginning at 6:30 p.m. on Tuesday, December 15, 2009 • The CORE 4 meets again on Wednesday, December 16, 2009

Chairman Brian reported that it is hoped that the CORE 4 can recommend a map unanimously. He said that by December 18, 2009, Metro would like to be in a position to distribute a draft intergovernmental agreement (IGA) to the public so that the public can see the language included in a potential agreement between Metro and each county. Chairman Brian stated that the IGA would also include an urban and rural map. He indicated that throughout January, there will be all kinds of public outreach sessions and public comment periods. Chairman Brian said that January would be used as a kind of final review by the public and the agencies, with the idea that final adjustments would be made in February. He went on to say that at that point, if there is enough agreement, this Board would have an official vote as to whether to enter into the IGA or not; Metro would have the same decision. Chairman Brian explained that thereafter, if that was approved, we would have codes and ordinances to adopt and then change our maps, codes and policies. He stated that the regional map agreement goes to LCDC later in the year for review and approval by that agency in accordance with State law.

The public hearing was opened. Written, as well as oral, testimony was received.

Frank Mesmer, 26960 NW Meek Road, Hillsboro, Oregon, stated that he lives in the area (UR-C) and spoke in support of designating it as urban reserves. He said that he and his family own 15 acres on the south side of Meek Road and live on two acres on the north portion of the property. Mr. Mesmer explained that he leases the other 13 acres for dry land farming of grass seed, clover or hay. He said that his work takes him away from home and added that he could never make a living by trying to farm this property alone. Mr. Mesmer was concerned about the future economic health of Washington County and the employment opportunities in his area. He cited unemployment statistics to support his desire to diversify the economy and stimulate job growth wherever possible throughout the region. Mr. Mesmer stated that there is a serious lack of developable industrial land in the Portland Metro region and that businesses are forced to move elsewhere. He said that the urban and rural reserves planning process promised to make wiser choices and offer better opportunities. Mr. Mesmer went on to say that Metro has made it very clear that we are supposed to make efficient use of the public infrastructure that is already serving the residents and businesses of the region. He questioned why regional planners and Washington County officials recommend using Highway 26 on the north or Highway 210 on the south as hard boundaries to contain the urban reserves and restrict future growth. Mr. Mesmer did not agree with using a U.S. highway (26) or a State highway (210) to designate these growth areas.

Walt Duyck, 1640 NW Cornelius-Schefflin Road, Cornelius, Oregon, stated that his family has been part of the agricultural community in Washington County for decades. He agreed with a majority of large lot property owners north of Cornelius that the best land use designation for this area is urban reserve. Mr. Duyck alleged that only one or two farmers who rent land to grow dry crops and who want to keep land values down oppose urban development north of Cornelius. He said that the land south of Dairy Creek and north of Cornelius is not profitable for farming, with income barely enough to pay taxes. Mr. Duyck testified that it can be valuable, though, in growing jobs. He divulged that he and his neighbor want to develop an industrial park on their land. Mr. Duyck wanted to have urban options north of Cornelius. He said that there is plenty of room outside this area for sustainable, commercial agriculture.

Tim Duyck, no address given, stated that most people south of Cornelius do not want urban reserves while most people north of Cornelius do want the urban reserves. He thought going with the majority would make the most people happy. Mr. Duyck did not think setting up a 50-year plan was ever a good idea but favored going north of Council Creek if you are going to do this. He did not believe that anybody can predict 50 years of growth or think that Council Creek is good enough. Mr. Duyck argued that Dairy Creek would make more sense for a boundary, combined with Verboort Road. He alleged that the Farm Bureau does not speak for the majority of farmers.

Carrie Richter, Attorney, Garvey Schubert Barer, 121 SW Morrison, Portland, Oregon, represented “Save Helvertia” and wished to talk about areas 2A and 2B. She stated that county staff’s position is that since all of the lands in Washington County are foundation lands, additional distinguishing features are needed to identify which lands are worthy of preservation. Ms. Richter said that these additional features identified by staff favor land far away from the existing UGB, allowing the adjacency factor to control. She remarked that the lands adjacent to the UGB are designated lower tier and less suitable for rural reserves; they are therefore proposed for urban reserves. Ms. Richter stated that this approach is inconsistent with the language of the factors set forth in OAR 660.027.0060. She commented that an overwhelming amount of testimony has been presented to suggest that Helvetia area lands are more profitable now than they have ever been, given restricted supplies of irrigation water. Ms. Richter said that if water is going to be limited in the future, given climactic changes, it makes sense to preserve those farms that have low water needs and not destroy them in favor of heavy water consumers. She remarked that factor 00602C (the factor dealing with long term agricultural sustainability) does not prioritize with water above those without water; rather, it talks about those lands that have water where needed. Ms. Richter testified that Helvetia farms are profitable and have been, in many cases, for over 150 years. She said that any assertion that these farms are less productive because of limited water is without basis. Ms. Richter moved to the topic of parcelization. She stated that the factor requires an inquiry into the existence of a large block of agricultural land—land with a concentration or cluster of farm operations. Ms. Richter maintained that parcel size is irrelevant to the inquiry, where parcelization does not appear in the language of the factor. She said that the question is whether there are a number of clustered farming operations in the area and reported that Helvetia residents have established compliance with that factor. Ms. Richter stated that staff notes that physical features can help define boundaries. She said that staff has noted flood plains, golf courses and roads. Ms. Richter commented that roads—according to staff— form a consistent linear boundary compared with boundary lines. She stated that if roads make suitable physical features for defining boundaries, then U.S. Highway 26 should be allowed to continue to serve its purpose of separating urban uses to the south and rural lands to the north. Ms. Richter asked the Board to preserve Helvetia as it currently exists because this will help continue to make Washington County, as well as the region, the greatest place.

Mason Beinlich, 10440 NW Jackson Quarry Road, Hillsboro, Oregon, told the Board that he is ten years old and lives on Dos Sequoias Farm in Helvetia. He likes living on a farm and listed the animals living there. Mason asked the Board to designate the area north of Highway 26 as rural reserves. He said that when he is the Commissioners’ ages, he would like to see Helvetia the way it is right now—beautiful and historical. Mason was proud that his farm hosts a Community Supported Agriculture (CSA) that grows food year-round. He stated that every year, children from his class plant and harvest vegetables on his farm. Mason reported that in the fall, they donated over 600 pounds of tomatoes, peppers, eggplant and cabbage to the Oregon Food Bank. He mentioned that his farm has 125-year-old Sequoia trees on it. Mason wondered what would happen to those trees if this land was designated as urban reserves. He asked the Board to preserve those trees and this beautiful, historic community as rural reserves—including the area south of West Union. Mason reminded the Board that these decisions will affect him more than they will the Commissioners. He characterized himself as the face of the future and his farm as paradise.

Audience applause was provided to Mason Beinlich.

Commissioner Strader was moved by Mason’s testimony. She said that it is so nice to see youth that care about this land as much as the Board does. Commissioner Strader agreed that Helvetia is special. She thanked Mason for taking the time out of his school day to testify regarding the importance of agricultural land to the county.

Chairman Brian told Mason that it is great to have him here today.

Dave Armstrong, 1560 NW Cornelius Schefflin Road, Cornelius, Oregon, supported including UR-3A in the urban reserves. He said that he owns eight acres next to Walt Duyck and spoke of their desire to develop their land into a small industrial parcel. Mr. Armstrong stated that he participated in the program to re-do Cornelius Schefflin Road and the bridge. He was chagrined to see that industrial was planned for the south side of the city and was happy to hear that we are now leaning away from that position. Mr. Armstrong believed that the money and infrastructure have been invested in the north side. He wanted the opportunity to develop his land and therefore wanted it placed in urban reserves.

Eric Thorsgard, 28035 Andy Riggs Road, Grand Ronde, Oregon, represented the Confederated Tribes of Grand Ronde. He was a tribal member there as well as Cultural Protection Coordinator and interim Tribal Historic Preservation Officer. Mr. Thorsgard explained that his job is to work with state and federal agencies to protect cultural resources. He said that Washington County—like every other county in Oregon—is non- compliant with Goal 5. Mr. Thorsgard stated that there are a great deal of archaeological, cultural and historical resources scattered throughout the areas under consideration for the new urban growth boundaries. He said that the county needs to consider those resources that already exist. Mr. Thorsgard related that UR-2A and UR-2B are of specific interest to the tribe right now. He displayed photographs of archaeological resources that are actually found in the area. Mr. Thorsgard revealed that there are also

two known burials in the location. He stated that there are a great deal of archaeological resources that need to be taken into consideration during this proposal. Mr. Thorsgard denied that the tribe is anti-growth but reported that the tribe wants every agency and municipality to grow in a sustainable manner—that not only takes into consideration the local groups and agencies but also tribal concerns. He said that as a sovereign that seated this land on January 22, 1855, the tribe never ceded rights over burials or cultural material that was left on location. Mr. Thorsgard regarded those things as the tribe’s responsibilities. He wished to partner with Washington County, Metro and any other agency that is interested to make sure those things are addressed and dealt with in an adequate manner. Mr. Thorsgard stated that there are state and federal laws that maintain those responsibilities on the agencies that have the land holdings. He said that Washington County and, specifically, the Board have the responsibility to look into those things. Mr. Thorsgard looked forward to working with the technical staff and to watching all of the Commissioners meet with the Tribal Council to discuss these issues in further detail. He wanted to ensure that tribal concerns are met and that we can partner in the future on these and other projects.

Chairman Brian could tell that Mr. Thorsgard would be a great resource to the county and expressed appreciation for that. As to sacred and special sites, he noted that there is already a lot of area in the urban area that might not be developed and considered, for example, for roads. Given the federal and state laws, Chairman Brian wanted to know if there is a process in place to protect these sites regardless of whether they are in or out of an urban area.

Mr. Thorsgard responded in the affirmative. He added that it takes the responsibility of individual agencies to identify them and to work to protect them. Mr. Thorsgard commented that Goal 5 is a law that has no teeth and also has no funding to allow agencies to do the work. He reported that the only county in Oregon that has met Goal 5 is Coos County; they achieved that by partnering with Coquille Indian Tribe and developing probability charts/maps that allowed the cities and county to identify and mitigate areas of specific interest to tribal concerns during construction processes. Mr. Thorsgard remarked that Bandon was a village inhabited for over 1,200 years that was systematically destroyed by tsunamis and rebuilt at least seven times. He explained that these locations have a great potential for burials. Mr. Thorsgard related that burials are very contentious and the accompanying lawsuits can be extremely expensive. He said that those places can be identified by working in conjunction with the locals. Mr. Thorsgard was aware of five other individuals who live in UR-2A with collections they would like listed on the State Historic Preservation Office data base.

Chairman Brian asked if that area (and even broader) is aboriginal to the Grand Ronde.

Mr. Thorsgard replied that that area was seated by the Atfalati or Tualatin Kalapuya people, who relocated to the Grand Ronde reservation and the Siletz reservation.

Commissioner Strader had spoken before with Mr. Thorsgard and thanked him for his testimony. She believed that Nez Perce and the Confederate Tribes of Warm Springs also seated the area.

Mr. Thorsgard responded that Warm Springs used to come to trade in this location and interact with the locals. He clarified that it was not specifically seated by them because they did not have permanent villages here. Mr. Thorsgard said that the Nez Pierce tribe has several burials of folks in Washington County but he did not know their exact locations. He believed that the Nez Perce are talking with locals to identify where those are located.

Commissioner Strader mentioned that she will meet with some of the tribal members from the Nez Perce tomorrow night.

Helen Van Dyck, 1000 SW 331st Avenue, Hillsboro, Oregon, said that she and the majority of her neighbors support an urban reserve designation for the area southeast of Cornelius. She stated that she would submit the remainder of her testimony in writing.

Jim Standring, 12670 SW 68th, Tigard, Oregon, spoke in favor of an urban designation for site UR-2B. He indicated that this is directly across from existing Urban Growth Boundary industrial properties. Mr. Standring referenced a Metro discussion relative to transportation needs totaling $20 billion and added that a $75 million intersection will be placed at that location. He stated that all nine state agencies—including the Department of Agriculture—have endorsed this site. Mr. Standring told the Board that profit from his property has never covered the tax bill.

Loren Rogers, 4901 SE Witch Hazel Road, Hillsboro, Oregon, represented the Hillsboro School District. He told the Board that when talking about expansion and development, it is important to keep in mind that schools will be needed. Mr. Rogers stated that at the present time, the district has property just to the west of UR-2A, property just to the east of UR-2B, property in UR-F, and property in UR-G. He indicated that these are slated for future schools. Mr. Rogers stated that future school locations should be a priority in development.

Pam Gates, 27007 NW West Union Road, Hillsboro, Oregon, stated that she lives directly across the street from UR-2A. She said that her husband is a fourth generation farmer on both sides of his family. Ms. Gates told the Board that she and her husband own 309 acres and that these have been in the family over 123 years. She said that if the land around her is designated as urban reserve or undesignated, it makes expanding her operation extremely difficult because speculative buying drives up the cost of land and she could not pay for land with farming. Ms. Gates did not understand what industrial parks mean because one in the area contains retail and commercial businesses, a pizza parlor, etc. She did not understand why commercial and industrial lands cannot have higher density, why they cannot have buildings more than two stories tall, and why they cannot have parking garages. Ms. Gates did not understand why we keep paving over

foundation agricultural lands—some of the most fertile lands in the United States. She also did not understand why Washington County is not promoting and supporting the business of farming that already exists. Ms. Gates reported that there are over 30 self- supporting farms in the Helvetia area, farming over 5,000 acres. She stated that these generate dollars that come from outside of Oregon and outside the United States. Ms. Gates asked the Board to designate the land north of Highway 26 as rural reserves and to continue to promote farming.

Becky Sowders Palm, 9205 NE 70th Circle, Vancouver, Washington, began by yodeling and then said that she is a yodeler with the Helvetia Swiss Alpengluehn singers. She recalled that in 1889, her ancestors came to the fertile farmland and quiet community of Helvetia because it reminded them of their homeland. Ms. Sowders Palm explained that the name was given to the town because of the rolling hills and valleys that were so similar to Switzerland. She recalled that her great grandfather built his home and grew wine grapes on the land that is now Helvetia Winery. Ms. Sowders Palm described the rich Swiss heritage in Helvetia and many annual events. She asked the Board to make Helvetia rural reserve and to keep it that way.

Robert Ferrie, City Councilor, City of Cornelius, 2601 S. Dogwood Street, Cornelius, Oregon, had a list of 34 people that have large acreage both north and south of Cornelius. He said that only one “is against this”. Mr. Ferrie said that he “strongly disagrees with the trend that is happening now, as mentioned during today’s briefing”. He clarified that the trend is restricting what he would like to see.

Chairman Brian asked if Mr. Ferrie would support to the north and oppose taking UR-F off.

Mr. Ferrie stated that we need land both north and south.

Vice Chair Duyck asked what area Mr. Ferrie’s signatures cover.

Mr. Ferrie was not certain.

Lee Hodges, 6250 NW Jackson School Road, Hillsboro, Oregon, stated that he lives about halfway between Evergreen and Sunset Highway. He said that that area has been farmed by his family for 130 years. Mr. Hodges did not see how it would be feasible for 50 years to hold the boundary at Evergreen Road. He stated that the only place the boundary can move is the Sunset Highway, which offers a large physical separation of rural and urban. Mr. Hodges was concerned with the State Agency Report, which is the genesis of Waibel Creek as a potential boundary. He said that there are a lot of arguments against that—the largest being the traffic that will be generated. Mr. Hodges recalled that when the interchange went in, ODOT projected less than 2% growth per year. He estimated that 25 years out, you would be looking at 50% growth in traffic on Jackson School Road. Mr. Hodges reported that two years after it opened, by ODOT’s measurements, there had been 100% growth on Jackson School Road and 200% growth

on Scotch Church Road. His point was that we are already at our limits of capability in using that road as an agricultural access. Mr. Hodges said that all of his large equipment comes on Jackson School Road because he is not big enough to own combines, etc. He stated that if the City of Hillsboro develops the 700 acres at Evergreen and Jackson for housing, this will have a huge impact on the Jackson School Road traffic and make agriculture virtually impossible. Mr. Hodges said that he has spoken to the planning staffs at Metro, Washington County and City of Hillsboro and stated that none would endorse that as a reasonable planning alternative. He hoped that the Board would see that that is not a wise choice for the county.

Chairman Brian asked if Mr. Hodges would prefer to see urban reserves up to Highway 26.

Mr. Hodges replied that if there has to be movement of the urban reserve boundary, it should go to Highway 26. He added that it cannot stop partway in between.

Dale Rockwell, San Juan, Idaho, identified himself as a long-time land owner in the Cornelius area, southeast of the highway. He stated that his land is dry land and not profitable to farm. Mr. Rockwell reported that his land abuts the 40 acres purchased by the Hillsboro School District and also abuts the Spear property. He wished to be in the Urban Growth Boundary so that he could develop his land. Mr. Rockwell related that Spear is willing to donate land toward the river for greenspace. He said that the City of Cornelius has a water line that runs across the east side of 345th and so it has been partly urbanized already. Mr. Rockwell believed that the whole area should come in—not breaking it at 345th. He wanted a larger area to develop in order to help pay for the infrastructure.

Tom VanderZanden, 15903 NW Logie Trail Road, Hillsboro, Oregon, represented his family and their farming operation called Walter J. VanderZanden Farms, Inc. (They have two places on Jackson School Road—one south and one north of Sunset Highway.) He said that the one south of Sunset Highway is at the intersection of Old Scotch Church Road and Jackson School Road and is 245 acres. Mr. VanderZanden told the Board that his two brothers continue to farm their operation, as well as other land in Washington County and elsewhere. He said that the six members of their Board of Directors all have a deep heritage in Washington County. Mr. VanderZanden reported that they have voted to support urban reserves. He stated that their farm has already been substantially impacted by urbanization and that the current UGB is inadequate to meet the future needs of Washington County. Mr. VanderZanden said that although all six have been blessed with a rich farm heritage, they collectively realize that McKay Creek and the Sunset Highway provide a clear and secure boundary equal to the task of setting a line that is to last for 50 years. He stated that all of the farm’s directors appreciate this novel effort to think long-term and hope that they can assist in making the decision truly lasting and visionary.

Sue Marshall and Brian Wegener represented the Tualatin Riverkeepers, 12360 SW Main Street, Tigard, Oregon, and received extra time to speak on behalf of a group. They displayed and narrated a PowerPoint presentation. (See Meeting File for Tualatin Riverkeeper’s submittal.) Sue Marshall’s points included, but were not limited to, the following:

• Avoid areas where there are natural areas by meandering the boundary to avoid them. These lands, although there is some development allowed, cannot be developed to urban densities that are desired. • Where natural resources cannot be avoided and come into UGB, Title 3 and 13 do not adequately protect water resources. The IGA should assure that additional protection would be provided related to hydrologic function addressing the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Fisheries 4.d. rule under the Endangered Species Act. • Protection of the National Wildlife Refuge is very important to Tualatin Riverkeepers. The latest map does not reflect the acquisition boundary, particularly in the Tonkin geological area. • Tualatin Riverkeepers would like the process to be as transparent as possible, understanding that there are multiple conflicts in so much of the area being considered. The criteria should be called out and specified as to how they are weighted and inform policy decisions.

Sue Marshall then discussed areas on the map, such as the following:

• UR-B: A good deal of this consists of the Rock Creek headwaters. There may be small portions that do not have a conflict that could come in but, by and large, it is dominant with water resources. • UR-2A and UR-C: Waibel Creek is a major tributary of McKay Creek and runs diagonally through both of these properties. McKay Creek provides cold water habitat for salmonids. • UR-3A north of Cornelius and Forest Grove: major confluence and floodplain of Dairy, McKay and Council Creeks. These creeks and their floodplains should be avoided. If Council Creek cannot be totally avoided in the urban designation, then additional protection should be applied beyond Title 3 and Title 13. • UR-16: This is nearly 100% floodplain natural resource area. There is no rationale for bringing this in and designating it urban reserve. Brian Wegener recommended against leaving it undesignated. Tualatin Riverkeepers wants this to be rural reserves. • UR-F: Some areas could come in although there is a significant portion of the Tualatin River National Wildlife Refuge and the confluence of Dairy Creek as it comes into the Tualatin River. Dairy Creek needs to be protected because this is the channel that opens up miles of aquatic habitat. • UR-G: There is less conflict but there are still significant streams. Butternut Creek was mentioned as a possible boundary and Tualatin Riverkeepers would go along with that.

• UR-6 and UR-H: Headwater streams take up a good portion of these areas.

Chairman Brian complimented Sue Marshall and Brian Wegener for their clear written submittal, as well as their maps.

Commissioner Rogers asked if it is better to be in or outside the urban reserve area for protection of the land.

Sue Marshall responded that it is better to be designated rural reserve for protection of the land. She stated that there are other tools that can be applied in the rural areas.

Chairman Brian said that we will work with the Tualatin Riverkeepers as we proceed over the next 30 days.

Bob Burnham, no address given, stated that he and his family own 112 acres in UR-1, which is actually located in Multnomah County. He recognized the struggle the Board is undergoing in order to get to the right answers to accommodate Metro planning requirements. Mr. Burnham represented the East Bethany Owners Collaborative in UR- 1. He indicated that this is approximately 400-500 acres just east of what is now North Bethany and the greater Bethany area, as it is now being defined. Mr. Burnham told the Board that the Collaborative will be providing additional documentation next week. He stated that this is a 50-year vision process, which needs to be neutral in its application. Mr. Burnham predicted that there will be 1,000,000 more people in the metropolitan area in the next 20 years. He noted that Multnomah County has taken a little different approach to this than Washington County. Mr. Burnham said that his property is “conflicted ground”—hillside, heavy clay, non-irrigated, unmanaged timber land and hay fields. He stated that as East Bethany develops, it will need schools and related that schools are proposed to reside adjacent to his property. Mr. Burnham remarked that Clean Water Services serves that area, with the increase in capacity south of Springville Road. He concluded that Washington County and Multnomah County should get together for final drafting.

Joe Hanauer, no address given, stated that he owns the 189-acre Butternut Creek property, just west of 209th between Butternut Creek, near Murphy Lane and Rosedale Road. He focused his comments on UR-G, specifically the Rosedale Road boundary. Mr. Hanauer said that government bodies recommend Rosedale Road as the southern edge of South Hillsboro and, therefore, urban reserves. He explained that there are two reasons for Rosedale:

• One uses ODA’s criteria. • The other deals with South Hillsboro itself and what it can provide to the region.

Mr. Hanauer addressed the ODA criteria and why they support the Butternut Creek property as urban reserves. He said that the 189-acre Butternut Creek property is not used for agriculture production today; it consists of an overgrown tree nursery with trees

over 30 feet in close spacing. Mr. Hanauer stated that the site lies in a critical groundwater area, where additional water supply is not available for farm use. He said that if water was available or through dry land farming, huge trees would need to be removed at a prohibitive cost and therefore the property will not be farmed. Mr. Hanauer reported that the Butternut Creek property has 25 adjacent parcels: many are less than five acres, 18 are less than 10 acres, and only two properties are used for agricultural production. He said that the UGB surrounds 64% of the Butternut Creek property and that part of the Butternut Creek property and others between Rosedale and Butternut Creek are already in the UGB. Mr. Hanauer went on to say that they also lie between two roads used extensively by commuter traffic without continuous shoulders for agricultural vehicles. He stated that when all lands are considered, 88% of the perimeter of the Butternut Creek property is in conflicting use, with more than 100 residences within ¼ mile of the property. Mr. Hanauer indicated that his information comes from a study done by the Kennedy and Jenks organization, which is a widely respected environmental sciences firm that studied the area based on ODA and LESA criteria. He said that the South Hillsboro plan has the potential to provide an enormous contribution to make this the greatest place. Mr. Hanauer stated that it can set the standard for compact design, walkability, carbon sensitivity, connectivity and affordability. He pointed out that over half of the South Hillsboro plan is south of Butternut Creek. Mr. Hanauer commented that without the area between Butternut Creek and Rosedale, there is no South Hillsboro plan or support for a Town Center.

Pete Truax, Mayor, City of Forest Grove, 3131 Forest Gale Drive, Forest Grove, Oregon, represented the City of Forest Grove today. He said that the City of Forest Grove appreciates the process which has been followed in exploring the designation of rural and urban reserves. Mayor Truax stated that the city—while concerned over the proposals currently before the CORE 4—understands the need for coordination on a regionwide basis. However, he related that Forest Grove’s own economic opportunity analysis indicates the need for more industrial acreage in sites large enough for industrial and job development. Mayor Truax was also concerned about living space for the people who are coming to live in Washington County, in general, and Forest Grove, in particular. He urged inclusion of the area known as Urban Reserve 4 in the urban reserve. Mayor Truax stated that this 477-acre site would allow Forest Grove to plan for residential and industrial/commercial development. He hoped that if the rural designation was to move along the edge of Council Creek and Highway 47 to the east of UR-4, that a portion of that remain undesignated so as to allow for ultimate extension of David Hill Road to the east. Mayor Truax said that the David Hill Road extension would serve as a relief to the Thatcher/Perdon/Verboort Road route to Sunset Highway. He stated that the traffic flow and safety issue of the intersection of Perdon Road and Highway 47 is well known to the residents in the area. Mayor Truax said that these positions taken by the city reflect an effort to cooperate with others on this somewhat involved and, at times, contentious process.

Don Jones, 2707 Knox Ridge Terrace, Forest Grove, Oregon, said that he is speaking on behalf of the Forest Grove Economic Development Commission, of which he is Chair.

He stated that the Economic Development Commission’s job is to ensure the vitality of the community of 21,000 people—primarily through supporting current businesses as well as bringing new jobs to Forest Grove. Mr. Jones said that the Commission has been working hard to compete for new jobs and has found that the city is already limited in terms of sites large enough for industry. He stated that having UR-4 designated as an urban reserve would help greatly in these efforts. Mr. Jones was encouraged to hear that there is a trend toward that request.

Fred VanDomelen, 16828 Alder Circle, Lake Oswego, Oregon, addressed a white dot of land between UR-G and UR-F. He wanted this to be included in the urban reserve. Mr. VanDomelen stated that this small piece of property consists of 382 acres and is wedged between Minter Bridge, Morgan Road and the Tualatin River. He indicated that the Tualatin River borders two sides of the property. Mr. VanDomelen said that of the 382 acres, 152 acres are in the floodplain. He reported that there are 19 owners: 18 private owners and Metro owns 61 acres of the total. Mr. VanDomelen said that four large owners with 285 acres of the total (including Metro) own all of the land in the floodplain, leaving the four large owners with 133 acres net out of the floodplain. He stated that this property is adjacent to the City of Hillsboro, some of the properties along Morgan Road are on city utilities, and this is within walking distance of both the elementary and high schools. Mr. VanDomelen said that it is particularly desirable to put the floodplain into public ownership and, according to Metro’s greenway goal, to protect, enhance and promote access to the river and flood areas. He stated that this would provide a flood area contiguous with Jackson Bottom. Mr. VanDomelen remarked that this is a pocket of land that you can only get to by going through the City of Hillsboro. He stated that it has over three miles of Tualatin River frontage and is completely isolated from any other agricultural lands. Mr. VanDomelen said that this is no longer viable for residential agricultural use and that his family quit farming there over 15 years ago because it was not economically feasible. He stated that this is a parcel that has a natural boundary (Tualatin River) and said it is inconceivable that it would be preserved as farm land when you have to go through the city to get to it.

Karen Palenik, 3453 SE Walnut Street, Hillsboro, Oregon, stated that she, her sister and nephew are property owners of the 63 acres currently in an area recommended for urban reserve. She added that Metro’s Chief Operating Officer, too, makes this recommendation in a report dated September 15, 2009. Ms. Palenik identified her property in the center of UR-F—on the south side of the highway between Hillsboro and Cornelius. She stated that her front 6.5 acres are adjacent to the current UGB line and a farm/ranch store neighbors this. Ms. Palenik said that the property is in a rectangular configuration and that a Portland and Western Railroad Line separates the front six acres from the back 56 acres. She believed that her property meets and exceeds the criteria for consideration of the urban reserves designation. Ms. Palenik said that the property frontage is along Tualatin Valley Highway, with accessible public transit, water, sewerage, gas and electricity. She stated that the land is mostly level and clear of trees. Ms. Palenik reported that her property was a dairy farm before 1970 and has since been leased to a farmer for growing seed crops. She said that there are no irrigation or water

rights to Dairy Creek and that the property is land-locked and only accessible at the highway. Ms. Palenik recalled that in 2002, the Cornelius City Council unanimously voted to support her proposal into the UGB, saying that it was suitable for commercial development. She asked the Board to include her property in the urban reserve designation.

Steven Radtke, 24100 NW Dierdorff Road, Helvetia, Oregon, mentioned that he runs the CSA on the farm Mason Beinlich (who testified earlier) lives on. He addressed the issue of local food security. Mr. Radtke said that his CSA currently feeds about 90 families on just over two acres and also serves four Intel campuses. He explained that you can do quite intensive farming on very small acreage and make it profitable. Mr. Radtke employs two people full time and two persons part time to grow vegetables, fruits and flowers. He urged the Board to designate as rural reserves all of the study areas north of Highway 26, including Helvetia.

Wendy Mortensen, 17845 NW Solberger Road, North Plains, Oregon, testified that she and her husband have farmed in Washington County over 35 years. She requested that the Board support the recommendation that foundation land north of Highway 26— including UR-2A—be designated rural reserves. Ms. Mortensen said that the area is high value farm land with working farms. She stated that Highway 26 is a better buffer than West Union. Ms. Mortensen said that once land north of Highway 26 becomes urban, it will be hard to hold the boundary and prevent land speculation further north. She described Helvetia as a viable, rural community and added that, if urban, the area will no longer provide high quality recreation to the region as it does now. Ms. Mortensen stated that expanding the boundary will use transportation resources that we need for rural roads, existing, and planned urban roads. She identified herself as a member of the Rural Road Operations and Maintenance Committee (RROMAC). Although she spoke for herself today, she remarked that the most difficult issues that RROMAC deals with are the urban and rural interface and transportation funding. Ms. Mortensen commented that road infrastructure alone for the 1,182 acres in the UR-2A area is estimated to cost $339 million, if the costs applied to the North Bethany area are used. She said that the planning numbers don’t include costs for the road improvements adjacent to the development and added that, typically, that traffic is dumped on adjacent rural roads to the detriment of agriculture and forestry. Ms. Mortensen stated that holding the UR-2A boundary at Highway 26 would provide the best protection.

Richard Smith, 12640 SW Clark Hill Road, Hillsboro, Oregon, told the Board that he is a member of the Washington County CCI. He stated that CCI members were at several times at odds with the makeup of the committee that made these determinations. Mr. Smith said that they felt that the rural community was very under-represented in this endeavor. He mentioned that he did not get a reply to a written comment that he turned in at one of the Open Houses, as he had requested. Mr. Smith questioned why the rural residents affected by the urban designation were not personally contacted to see whether they wanted to be in or out of that designation. He spoke of unintended consequences

and described how his personal situation falls into that Catch 22 situation. Mr. Smith said that if a person is a long way from a city and is in urban reserves, then that puts that person in a hole if he needs or wants to sell.

Melissa Jacobsen, 1650 NW Susbauer Road, Cornelius, Oregon, disputed the earlier testimony of Walt Duyck and was appalled by the greed demonstrated by a Cornelius City Council member who spoke. She stated that all of the residents whom she has contacted who signed a petition north of Council Creek and east of Susbauer Road are opposed to expanding the UGB, converting valuable farm land for industrial and residential development. Ms. Jacobsen was not ready to turn in the petition with 25 signatures because she is still collecting others. She encouraged the Board to fully utilize all the land that is currently available and already zoned for development. Ms. Jacobsen stated that these people are mostly long term residents, who have worked hard to establish roots. She said that her home is the only home her daughters, who are now college students, have ever known. Ms. Jacobsen related that they settled here to enjoy a peaceful way of country living and asked how many people can say that they enjoy the view out of every window in their homes. She did not want to look out at a factory, business or massive development of obnoxious ‘clone homes’. Ms. Jacobsen imagined that the Board would feel as she does if their homes were threatened. She asked what Cornelius has to offer people who are thinking of moving here. Ms. Jacobsen questioned where the aesthetic appeal is if you pave over the beautiful farm land north of the city. She has seen people take pictures of the field in her back yard when it is blooming with clover. Ms. Jacobsen’s opinion was that development of this area would ruin it. She felt that if put to a public vote, people would vote to preserve farm land. Ms. Jacobsen concluded that this is the only responsible thing to do. She proposed a compromise wherein the area north of Council Creek and east of Susbauer Road be deemed a rural reserve.

Chairman Brian commented that nothing is unanimous. He called attention to the fact that people have legitimate, sincere points of view and differences. Chairman Brian said that somehow, by the time we get to the end, we will sort this out as best we can.

Ms. Jacobsen retorted that it has been an emotional roller coaster and that it is very unsettling.

Chairman Brian invited Ms. Jacobsen to stay tuned because nothing is definite, especially in that area.

Deloris Grossen, 8320 SW Canyon Drive, Portland, Oregon, told the Board that she owns 126 acres of farm land with the most fertile soil in the Willamette Valley. She identified her lot as located between and adjacent to Mr. Standring’s lot, between Highway 26 and West Union Road and ¼ mile west of Helvetia Road. Ms. Grossen said that this property has been in her family for over 100 years and has been farmed continuously all that time and even prior to that. She stated that the property is foundation agricultural farm land, as designated by the Oregon Department of Agriculture. Ms. Grossen reported that there

is a Native American site on the property that is on the inventory of the State Historical Preservation’s office list. She questioned how the farmers are supposed to maintain their standard of living if farm land is urbanized. Ms. Grossen stated that many local businesses would be affected, such as farm machinery plants, fertilizer, seed, storage warehouses, and other farm-related businesses. She wanted her farm land to be designated as rural reserves. Ms. Grossen said that Highway 26 and Helvetia Road should be the hard edge or buffer between urban and agricultural use. She remarked that one of the goals of Senate Bill 1011 is to protect land most in danger of being urbanized. Ms. Grossen said that her land is within ¼ mile of the UGB. She stated that the county has the ability to protect land as rural reserve if it is within three miles of the UGB and if it is foundation land. Ms. Grossen concluded that her land merits protection under these criteria. She asked Vice Chair Duyck to get his fellow Commissioners to realize the importance of preserving our farm land.

Vice Chair Duyck responded that his colleagues are very thoughtful in their deliberations. He felt sure that they would pay attention to Ms. Grossen’s testimony and consider it in the process.

Sam Van Dyke, 40926 NW Verboort Road, Forest Grove, Oregon, stated that he has farmed this property, as his family did for three generations. He said that he bought the property 20 years ago, when his Mother died. Mr. Van Dyke wanted to keep his options open and did not want to be tied down to rural reserves. He stated that his land is bordered by McKibbon Road and that down the road is property owned by the Forest Grove School District. Mr. Van Dyke wanted to see the urban reserves follow Verboort Road. He testified that traffic on that road makes it hard to turn out with farm equipment from his property. Mr. Van Dyke asked that the urban reserves be expanded to Verboort Road. He disagreed with testimony today that farmers will not farm land that is in the urban reserves.

Linda Peters, 25440 NW Dairy Creek Road, North Plains, Oregon, recalled that when she was on the Washington County Board of Commissioners, one of the hardest things in a process as complex as this one was to hold on to the big picture and to be able to work back from the goal to the decisions right in front of you. She wanted to help everyone in the room to focus on the big picture and hoped that this would get us to some areas of commonality. Ms. Peters felt that everyone would agree that whoever is living here in the next 40-50 years will need:

• Farmland for food • Clean air • Clean water

Ms. Peters invited everyone to join her in an imaginative exercise by which this big picture would be created. She pictured vibrant, self-renewing cities with thriving green economies in the valley, with safe neighborhoods for families of all sorts, where thriving industries provide good jobs and produce goods and services that help sustain the whole

region. Ms. Peters envisioned people getting around safely by foot, wheelchair, bus, rail and car inside the cities we already have as well as new places that we have recently added. She said that surrounding and supporting the urban area would be lush green Tualatin plains—some of the world’s finest farm land. Ms. Peters stated that encircling the foothills are vineyards, orchards, family farms, as well as cultural, historic and recreational attractions. She perceived the deep green forests sheltering the watersheds and wildlife in the upper valleys and on ridgetops and welcoming people for hikes and picnics. Ms. Peters pictured Mt. Hood and Mt. St. Helens still standing bright and white in the clear air, just as they do today. She stated that the reserves process gives us tools that may serve that vision. Ms. Peters believed that the first tool is the designation of rural reserves to protect the Tualatin Valley’s foundation farm land. She said that you hear about conflicts with transportation problems and so forth and concluded that this is what the rural reserves can help with. Ms. Peters stated that smart growth does not start with paving over farm land; rather, it starts with being good stewards of what we have. She wished everyone concerned with this process wisdom, courage and common sense as we move forward to our decisions.

Chairman Brian asked if the correct action would be to continue this hearing.

Dan Olsen replied that this is not really a hearing but the Board could continue consideration of this matter to the December 15, 2009 meeting.

Commissioner Rogers asked for clarification as to the status of these hearings. He observed that a public hearing denotes that there is going to be some kind of recommendation at the end. Commissioner Rogers recognized that the Board would build consensus but not necessarily on December 15th; that may occur during January and February.

Chairman Brian wondered if this is a hearing of public testimony or a legal public hearing.

Dan Olsen responded that this is not a legally required public hearing but it was advertised as a public hearing. He said that “public hearing” has both a legal connotation and a generic connotation; he concluded that this falls into the latter category. Mr. Olsen characterized this hearing as a formal opportunity for the Board to receive comment. He added that what the Board chooses to do with these comments and how the Board chooses to structure the use of the information is entirely up to the Board.

Chairman Brian summarized that the discussion and any opinions rendered or votes taken are not necessarily grounded in the normal “findings”. He announced that the Board is going to have another hearing of the public next week at 6:30 p.m. and will continue accepting comment.

Commissioner Schouten stated that the persons who spoke today had their opportunity and the Board will hear from people who have not yet testified on December 15, 2009.

He hoped that the Board will have some deliberation and discussion. Commissioner Schouten acknowledged that this has gotten complicated. He wanted the Board to nail down some things that will lower the level of complexity and help get us to where we need to go.

Chairman Brian said it will be difficult but, in fairness, the Board will not allow folks who have spoken today to speak again on December 15th. He stated that this is not to say that similar interests cannot be represented by someone else.

Commissioner Strader agreed with Commissioner Schouten’s comments. She said that the large number of emails that she receives tells her that there is a lot of interest by the public to know how each individual Commissioner feels about this process. Commissioner Strader stated that it is important that, by the end of the next hearing, the Board provide feedback on the process and how the Board individually and collectively think about these things. She said that she is on the record with a lot of concerns about the lack of over-simplifying agricultural land designations, for example. Commissioner Strader stated that we are getting to the place where you have what she likes to call agriculture and agricultural crime. She noted that we have been leaving it up to farmers who start debating what is legitimate and what is not when really, as public policy makers, that is the Board’s job. Commissioner Strader hoped that by December 15th, we get to the point where Commissioners can really start talking about some of the issues they have with the process and where we are heading.

Chairman Brian thanked everyone who came today. He appreciated the speakers’ politeness, careful listening and courtesy to each other.

5. ORAL COMMUNICATION (5 MINUTE OPPORTUNITY)

Sharon Cornish, P. O. Box 312, Hillsboro, Oregon, stated that the Board is her only government: she is not in Metro, the UGB, or the city. She said that she has put in her own infrastructure, has put in her own road, has called for her own telephone poles, etc. Ms. Cornish characterized the City of Hillsboro as “very pushy”. She reported that Hillsboro has looked at acreage around Evergreen and Glencoe for a reservoir. Ms. Cornish went on to say that Hillsboro has contracted with CH2M Hill and CH2M Hill contracted to purchase the right-of-way for the city. She said that there are two willing sellers: one has two acres and one has three acres. Ms. Cornish stated that that is enough for the reservoir. She acknowledged that they are not happy with the price and that negotiations are ongoing. Ms. Cornish reported that now, the city has asked for five more acres to the east of the willing sellers. She identified that this is a single woman raising children, whose husband died about eight years ago. Ms. Cornish related that Hillsboro is threatening that woman with condemnation because she did not want to sell. She reiterated that the Board is the only government for that land and said that the county allows AF-5 (utilities). Ms. Cornish told the Board that residents have beat three cell towers and that the only one in the area was court ordered. She did not want this

reservoir and said that she suggested that it go up on the Jackson reserve for industry and added that there was a willing seller (Juan Cortez) of 11 acres there. Ms. Cornish said that now, we are in reserve of housing, which she felt should be commercial instead. She predicted that there will be multiple lanes, rather than three, on Glencoe and Evergreen. Ms. Cornish stated that she has to go clear across town to get gas. She summarized that she just does not like the City of Hillsboro doing all the planning. Ms. Cornish believed that the county is pretty blasé about this in terms of being strong in planning. She questioned how the City of Hillsboro—outside of its jurisdiction with its consultants— can threaten residents with condemnation. Ms. Cornish said that the city has not posted any paperwork upstairs at all. She stated that the city had 12 years to find sites within city limits. Ms. Cornish recalled that a pipeline was put in in 1996 and 1997. She stated that all three reservoirs that the city wants are outside the city limits. Ms. Cornish mentioned that she is battling the city all the time. She said that she wants more strength from her one and only government. Ms. Cornish did not like threatening single women who own property with condemnation. She stated that the city does not need more than five acres and has verbally said that. Ms. Cornish commented that the city wants 10 acres and says that if it does not need all that acreage, the city will lease it back to citizens. She did not know who would ever accept that proposal. Ms. Cornish asked the county to have a conversation with somebody about this threat.

Chairman Brian said that it is appropriate that we try to look into this and get more information on it.

6. BOARD ANNOUNCEMENTS

Commissioner Rogers adjourned the meeting today in memory of the Lakewood, Washington police officers—a terrible tragedy.

Commissioner Strader mentioned that there was a horrible situation in Washington County over Thanksgiving weekend: women and children were lost to domestic violence and the growing epidemic caused by the current economic situation. She observed that people are finding themselves in situations that they have never known and they do not understand the services that exist for them. Commissioner Strader commented that, unfortunately, the mental health epidemic we are facing in the county is reaching essentially a state of emergency. She reported that the Sheriff’s Office has told her that there is no way to identify these people because they have never been in the system and have never shown signs of mental health issues or instability before. Commissioner Strader said that having three family deaths over Thanksgiving weekend is a clear indication that we need to put this on our radar screen and think about the future, with Christmas and New Years coming up. She advised holding our community people very near and dear to our hearts because there are a lot of people out there in dire situations.

Chairman Brian agreed that there has been a vexing number—not only in Washington County but throughout the region—of family violence and murder/suicides.

Commissioner Strader related that there were 15 deaths in 30 days in the region.

Chairman Brian found this odd and wondered what is at the root of this.

Commissioner Strader said that they do not know except that people are finding themselves in dire situations and have no hope.

Chairman Brian announced that the Board will meet again next week at 6:30 p.m. He explained that the evening meeting has been moved up due to the holidays. Chairman Brian thought that people would appreciate having an evening hearing on the urban and rural reserves.

Commissioner Schouten stated that following the December 15, 2009 Board meeting, the next meeting will be on January 5, 2010.

7. ADJOURNMENT: 12:46 p.m.

Motion – Rogers 2nd – Schouten Vote – 5-0

MINUTES APPROVED THIS ____ DAY ______2010

______RECORDING SECRETARY CHAIRMAN