CId -j:9l0Q0'Ll-Lh-L uwuwctql BtrFORE THE DESCHUTES COTJNTY
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
ln re the Applicalicrn./br a L4ariiuans Grou' File No. 247-i 8-000205-A t)lttration h1t:
LINDA A. HOPMAN, Trustee ofthe Linda ,4.PPELIANT'S M EMORANDU M A. Hoprrran, Revocable Living Trttst,
Applicant.
l.
(Setback)
T[is application should havc becn denied at steff level. The primar]' rcasoll inr derlial rvould he the thilurer to apply the apprnpriate sethack of 100 feet {}onr ri propefiy line.
'lhe applicapt has proposed a non-corlrl')liant setL,ack from the noflliern propel1y lirie rn''hich is the properties line closest to tire proirerty or.r'ned [r]' the appellant and Dale ancl Debra S'rith'
(See Exhibit ii. Attacl.red as Exhibit 2 is a more derailed map showing an approxirnate location fior a marijuana grow site that woulcl confornr rvitlr the required setback. If necessary, the applicant ca1 certainly provide adiJitional screening fiom Flighi.vay 20 fbr the proposed greenlrouses in a complialt location. It nould appear that tlie oniy reason fbr tire revised location is to urovc the marijuala opelaliorl closer to the neigirbor's property and theil resideuce ancl lurther ft'otn the appl icant' s residence,
J'here is aclclitiolal propertv to the east of a compliant site wirich is only separated b,v a small irrigation ditch rvhich coulci easil,v be culverted and crossed *r'er. The aPplicant has cliosetr
* FII"CII I,A\1I GROI.P. P(] Page 1 Appellant's APPeal I l0 SW 5't'.1t.. Soile ? Wiliianr l-ti\2{ll8-i}3-tg r\ppellartl's Appcr:l.docr fl:riiientste lfiN,tcConniok, wiiliarn\lr4clornrick. Rcdnlrnd. OR9?i56 Phorc': 541-f l6-l-588 I--ax: 5,tr I --'1 I 6- l94l not to compl)' rvifh tlre requirenients of the code but lo seek aulhoritl' to nrove fhe operation closer to the neigl:bor's propefties and their homes.
Also attacherl as Exhibit I is a photograph o{'lhe suhject priJp€rty. It shorvs ialgc boulders and ItVs placed close 1o Iligl*vay 20. These appear to Lre in rhe LM area. There also appears to be ser.,eral HVAC systerrs (bores) stored in the huilding which ra'ill presur"nabll'be r-rscrd for the marijuana operation.
It is oply a malter oi- c1rmrnoit sel1se that the marijuarna operatioll. as proposed b,v lhe applicant" alnrost acljacent to the property line belrveen the appiicant and the plopert]"' or'vned by
than Sr"nith. ald the McCornrick propei-ty is going to Iiave a larger inipact vis-a-vis ltoise ancl odor if it rvas properiy situatetl rvitirin the sctback' ll.
{Noise and Odor)
The clerails of the greenhouse buildings have trcl been provided. The applicarrt has iridicared t6at she rvill not be operating any HVAL. systems in evenittg or at nighl tirr"re. This does
.ot seem to make a lot o[sense, as odols anrj heat will builcl trp in the greenhoi:ses. particuiarly if rire roof and rvalls are irnpermeablc. The appellant believes that those tTuildings wiii have
system used at rright, the logic;rl resuit tre the cloors overhead doors. lf thess is no exliaust "vottld beirrg utilizecl to exhaust air from the thcilities.
Fisally. it r,vouhl be appropriate for lhe applicaltt to submit information that clearlt'
I'ogger systelr clernonstrates hor,v these systerts control ador rather than just clairlring tlre proposed controls odor.
* FITCil Lj\\l' (;ROlll', P{: Fage 3 Aptrrellarrt's APPeal 210 SW 5'r'51.. s{ritc : Alpe lllrnt's Alipcai-docx C:ii:tienrsiEFI,iN.leCornrick. lViiliarn\NlcCnnriicli. Williatrl LLi\?O18-03'19 l{etlnrond, OR 97?56 Phone: 54 I -i I 6- I i S8 Far: 5.1 I --l I 6- l94l TII
(Public Interest)
It is rveil knorvn for now tliat there is an over production of ntariiuatra in Oregon. The U,S,
Attomey's office has indicated that the arnount of marijuarm glown vis-a-r,is the actual matteting in Oregon are signiiic.antly out of balance. It is also reporled that much olthe over prcduction of marijuana is going to black markets and presumably out of state to areas where recreational marijriana is not legal. Considering this overproduclion, it rvould seem inappropriate ior the coultly'to continue to approve marijuana grilw opelations which are l) illegal under federal larv and 2) possibly contributing to climinal activity in other states or use in violation olthe rules and regulations adopled by tlie state of Oregon. Until there are rnalistic state controls over mariiuana grorv operations, additional facilities would seem to exasperate the problem of overlrrodnction &nd illegal activity rather tirarr soh'ing it.
It is rvould therefore be in the public interest to deny additional mariiuana operaiions until there cap be a complete review of the control procedures, not only lacally. br.it tluoughout the state of Oregan. A defineil suppl.v a:rd demand for the legal use of tnarijuana, should be attained first ratlrer than continuing a system that fosters quasi-crirninal or criminal operations both within state and out ofstate.
Dated this ft) da1'of March 2017
RespectfuIIy submitted.
FITCH LAW GROUP P.C.
By: Edw.ard P. Fitch. OSB #782026 Attorney for Appellant F1T.C1I I.AW GRflt:p, pC Appellant's APPeal Page 3 - 210 SW 5d' St.. Suite 2 Appellont'sAppeal.doc.'< Ct6tients',f-pfil',tcCornrick,Wiiliam\McConnick.\VilliamLLl€018-01-l-q Ittdnrond. OR 9?756 Phonc: -541-3 l6-l-588 Far: 541-llti-i943 Deschutes County Froperty lnforrnation - Dial Overview Map
-:Bt ih-ri+ir**.s.'$gffi4€S'i.'*: 1 i:.
Map and Taxlot; 1611230000515
-{
EXHiBI Deschutes County Pnoperty lnforrnation - Dial Overview Map
+,nJ.
\
."n;r-
# t rl ,# T r! '
.iii
*
De:cFrtrtee C rt;lClntre. Geo!-'yr, Iarlhsla' .rEiGS. AcroGRi[t. lGi'j. anc iir.]
Map and Taxlot: 161'1230000515
EXHIBITJ PAGf;*l*orl* t:
J CERTI FICATE OF FILING
I hereby certify that cn Marclt _: 2018, I personally suburitted the foregoing
Appellant's Menwandum File No. 247-18-000?05-A fbr filing with the Deschutes County
Board of Commissioners :
Attn: BoCC Deschutes County i300 Nw Walt St.,2"d Flr Bend OR 9770A3
CE,RTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I hereby cer1ifu thal l served tlie foregaingAppellant's Memorundum on March 20th.
2018 by mailing/personal service to said pa$ies a trlle copy thereof contained in a seai er:velope witir postage prepaid *ddressed to said parlies: 'fotal Living Organic Farrns, LI-C Brent Goodrrran f:4682 Cook Ave.. #26 64711 Otter Rurr Lane Bend 0R 97703 Bend OR 97743
Dated tltis })Q_day ofMarch 2018
FITCH LAW GROUP. PC
By: Edrvard P. Fitch. osB #782026 Attorney fi.rr Appel lant William McCormick
Page I CEI{.TIFICATE OF FILINC/SERVICE rI-TCI-I LA\Y GItOtiP, PC - tn o"' Sr.- Suile ? (l:\Clients\EPf\l\4cCornrick. Willianr\McCornrick. \Yillianr LU\CER'IIFICATE OF FII-lNG.dr-tcx t ttt Rednrr:nd- OR 97756 Phonc: 54 I -3 I fi- I 583 Fer: -\,11-3 I6- 19.13 ffiffi#H$Vffiffi
&FR r ? rfi{$ 4/nl2a18 Seschutes fr*urtt',ll '; , pot Rd, Bend Or 97703 Re: Neighbor to a farm 19189 Dayton il l#,".-
To whom it may concernl ln 2012 my wife and I purchased the above-mentioned farm on Dayton Rd with dreams of reviving the farm and open a produce stand and bed and breakfast. As we were pursuing our dreams and goals, when the property adjacent to our properfy - 65320 Highway 20 and across the street 65325 Highway 20 became marijuana farms. I will admit that I was very concerning how these changes would affect your goals and dreams - especially our bed & breakfast. The smell, noise, the type of employees that a pot farm would attract and security risks by producing medical or recreational marijuana to name a few of my concerns.
I am G0 years old and have lived in various homes in three States over the years and I can honestly say and happily convey that my fears and concerns have not manifested themselves for the past five years and I do not see them occurring in the future.
Furthermore, I was presently surprised to watch these hardworking men and women transform the rundown horse property into a well-groomed working farm. They work between 7:30 am to 5:00 pm. Every employee I have encountered in the past five years have been respectful and courteous to my wife, myself and our produce costumers and bed & breakfast guests. Being so close to the farm, the odor concern has not transpired - yes there is on odor during harvest but it's not bad and have yet to receive a negative comment frorn our bed & breakfast guests in five years (the odor is much better than a pig or dairy farm which I have lived near both over the years). With the cameras, alarm and new fences around the pot farm address my security risks. They appear to be doing all they can to protect them and us from unwanted visitors. I cannot ask for them to do more to secure the property. Jaeob (the farm manager) and his family have been very helpful and kind to my family and have freely reached out to help me on my farm - he is a great neighbor. I truly wish that all my neighbors were as nice, polite and helpful as Jacob and his family have been over the years. Again, this is also true with every employee from the pot from I have met over the years' lf you have any questions at all or would like further information concerning the pot farm next door, please do not hesitate to contact me at 541'-419-5770.
David & Donna Brehm
19189 Dayton Rd, Bend Or 97703 Isabella Liu
From: Arleigh Mooney
Thank you for letting me know I could reply via email. lwork during the time the hearing willtake place on 4/4.
As I have told you before I have filed a complaint with code enforcement back in August 2017 pertaining to Ms. Hopmann's facility residing at 65320 Hwy 20, This is the one she currently is running on the corner of Dayton Rd and Hwy 20. My concern in August 2017 was the noise of her fans on her 7 greenhouses that she runs 2417 during the growing season and the putrid smell that renders my outdoor space useless. ln January 2018 John Griley from Desch Co Code enforcement called me and stated in fact she was told her fans were above the decibel level allowed and that she would have to install appropriate odor suppression systems in her greenhouses.
As recent as last week they turned on their fans for 2 days then turned them off. They were give till May 1st, 2018 to become compliant. At this time no work has been done on the greenhouses. They have started to move in potting mix and materials to start planting. But no work has been done on the fans or the greenhouses.
This alone tells me that if she has no regard to bring her current facility up to code, she will have no regard for those same restrictions at her new facility. That in its self should be enough from keeping her from starting a new facility on a new site. Her disregard for the rules let alone the impact on her neighbors should be enough.
My self and my family have had to deal with the impacts of her facility and her lack of following the rules for 3 seasons. I am not going to hold my breath that she will get the facility she has up to code let alone care in the least whether her new one is up to code. I think past practices need to be considered as far as she is concerned and deny her application for a new facility. She already has the area smelling like a giant skunk farm, I say we don't give her the chance to add to the pollution she is already creating.
One thing you can be sure of on May 1st, I wili be contacting Code Enforcement again to do a spot check of her current facility.
Sincerely,
Arleigh Mooney 65290 Hwy 20 Bend, Or 97703
1 Isabella Liu
From: Arleigh Mooney
Good evening lsabella,
We received the notice of application for this file. I am unclear as to what type of marijuana grow they are asking for.
you iell me if The issues I and most residents in the area has is that their are so many grows in this area it is stifling. Can grow of there is any kind of limit on how many grows you can have in one area? lt seems crazy that now I will have a some kind or another on all sides of me. Not to mention that the county doesn't have anything in place for a inspection upon completion of these facilities. To get a building put up I haye to apply for permits and have it inspected. lt seems wrong thaithese places don't have to do the same, At this time I have had to get involved with code enforcement to try anO git issues at both the grows around me to be compliant with the counties requirements. Your own requirementsl Why does tiiat fall on my shoulders? That doesn't seem right to me. But again I'm not making money off of them.
I know it is about money, but come on. Are you looking fonruard to the day that there is nothing but wall to wall facilities all along Hwy 20? So muih for a scenic by way. We applied for a permit for a shop and were told one of the restrictions was rather it couldn't be seen from the hwy because it was a scenic by way. l'm pretty sure visitors to Central Oregon would in line not see green house after green house along the beloved scenic hwy. Right where this facility wants to go is right with our view of the Sistersl Sut, I'm sure that doesn't matter. ls the county going to start compensating us when we try to eventually sell our property and can't get buyers because it is a marijuana wasteland? put I have lived on this property for over 40 years and was here way before all of these facilities were in. Do we no longer have the right to live a peaceful life in the country?
Not to mention the health impact we are experiencing from the grows around us. I am just wondering what Deschutes County is going to do when they are able to establish a connection between my health issues and the mass growings that have been allowed around ,s. i hope they are prepared to pay the compensation, I hope all the money is worth central Oregonians health and safety. I guess aslong as the county understands they are on the hook for it since they are overriding the legality of the federal law.
So there are my two cents worth which is not worth enough to stop ihe greed of Deschutes County and the utter disregard they have for their citizens.
I'm not really sure why any of this process is even done. I'm sure no one has ever been turned down as long as they have the money to pay the permit fees.
A. Mooney Isabella Liu
From: Nunzie < [email protected] > Sent: Friday, September 29,2417 1:16 AM To: Isabella Liu Subject: 247 -t7 -00A7 55-AD
247-r7-OOO7 55-AD Dear CDD I am concerned at the frequency that CDD is evaluating land applications by administrative determination. Where mj is concerned there are multiple complexities to applications and this application has further complexity with the LM overlay zone.
Kindly schedule a hearing for 247-17-A00744-AD as there are many issues facing marijuana grow operations that are not compatible with the LM overlay and which CDD seems oblivious'
CDD also is quite uninformed to water for marijuana grows. Kindly advise the date that staff took a site visit of the above property'
I am not within the notification distance so kindly add me to your notification list. And please confirm that a public hearing will be held on the above file number, not simply a shoe in by administrative determination.
Thank you in advance Nunzie Gould 541-420-3325 llPage .$-:[.{"]}:.i VLii-}
. a l'.i;l Izze Liu, Assi stant Planner Deschutes County Community Developrnent 117 NW Lafayette Ave' Bend OR 97703 ati on. IIE: 247 -17-00075 5 ; Re creational Marii uana Gr ow Oper Dear Ms. Liu: Market Road, I represent Williarn P. McConnick, owner of 18930, 18800, and 18870 Couch Bend OR 977A3, producticn- The above referenced applicaticn is for five greenhouses, for a recreational marijuana 4758'420; manufacture, processittg rit", but without retail sales, to be licensed under ORS Mar$uana grow sife registration system ("grow-op"). From page 2 of Applicant's Narrative: ;,it prop*Jed rnarijuana production on the subject property supports a vertically aiigned business . I strugture that inclucles muitiple properties, u pto""tiing facitity, and a dispensary," Marijuana 'Medical for As of November g,2016,28 states and the District of Columbia legally allow marijuana The first state personal meriical use. Rules surrounding the use of medical marijuana vary by state' 1996 with Prop. 215. States i' the union to legalize the medical use of marijuana was California in that allow medical marijuana include: Aiaska, Arizona, Arkansas, Califomia, Colorado, Michigan, Connecticut, Delaware, FLrida, Hawaii, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Dakota, New Minnesota, Montana, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexico, North York, Ohio, Oregorl Pennsyivania, Rhode Island, Vermont, Washington, and the District of the fact Columbia. It is important to recognize that these state marijuana laws do not change that using mariiuana continues to be an offense under Federal law' Medical riurijuana in the U.S. is controlled at the state level, Per federal law, cannabis is illegal as not actively noted in the iontrolled Substances Act, but the fecleral government has stated they will use of prosecute patients and caregivers complying with state medical rnarijuana laws' However, or medical marijuala outside otttr* state iaws for illegal use or trafficking is not tolerated by state federal govemments. 2!Fa1s* The application is opposed for at least the following reasons: i) Violation of Federal Law and other risks presented. No mari.juana cultivation, possession, or distribution permitting is disclosed so as to make the recreational grow operation legal under the Federal Controlled Substances Act. 21 USC $801 er seq - piohibits the distribution ancl delivery of a controlled substauce, psychotropic substances and marijuana remains a Schedule I controlled substance under federal law' Since most if not all banks will not accept cash or other proceeds from an activity that may involve funds obtained in violation of federal law, or may raise issues of money laundering, zuCO, or other possible federal law violations, substantial cash may be present at the operation' Such risk is not consistent with farming activity, safety to adjoining property owners, and public safety in general.2 Security for the grow-op and marijuana or cannabis products is not addressed by 16e applicant, beyond having OLCC mandated security cameras. 2) power. CEC advises by attachment to the appiicant's naruative that additional power facility upgrades will be required to facilitate the grow operation by instailation of a, ,,1200 an p thr"" phase 480 volt service." Additional power intenuptions may be risked by this power drain for substantial electricity consumed by the grow-op. It is not disclosed if applilant will pay for this upgrade, and if so, whether applicant can meet that financial burden. Aiternatively, it is not disclosed whether this cost wiil simply be passed on to the CEC ratepayers, ionditional approval should address whether this upgrade must be completed prior to greenhouse construction and grow-op, start-up. 3) parking is suggested to be for seven space$. A number of employees will be necessary to operate the iacility (up to five is suggested but not prornised). If 50 or more daily trips during cultivation, liarvesting, packaging, and distributing, occur, the traffic counts and parkiirg requirements would be expected to vary upward significantly. A traffic impact rtuOy *uy-not be required, however, parking should be adequateiy addressed by the applicant. DCC 1B.1tb.O:OC. Trip number lirnits shouid be imposed as a condition of approval. 4) Septic and plant waste water. With a nurnber of ernployees, harvesters, processors, and distributors using the premises, no provision appears to be made for septic and drain field approval. See Onsite waste water treatment systems OAR 340-071-0100 el seq. "Port-a- potties," are not visually attractive. Plant-greenhouse waste water control is not addr.essecl. Sanitation may be the cluty of Oregon DEQ Environmental Soils Division, bgt should at least be a condition of approval, i.e. that appropriate facilities to manage 2 It is recognized Ordinance No. 2016-015 allows recreational mariiuana as an outright use. The Staff and Conrmissioners may u'ish to consider if authorizing a grow-op may violate Federai Law. The issue may not have been raised in all or any prinr applications. Authorizing a grow-op that violates federal law is therefbre raised for error preservation reasons. 3 | i-'ii 1.1 cr the human waste of occupants and employees are to be constructed and maintained by applicant.3 on 5) Noise. The applicant's noise limits for the applicant's, "existing greenhouse operation the adjacent pioperty," "are 39 dBa and exceed[s] the noise levels set by this section." Applicant's Nagative p. 24. Doubling of greenhouses and use of humidifiers, drying fans, odor controls and fans, lights, securiiy systems and alarms, and necessaty noise created greenhouses vs' are violative of DCC 1S.116.330(8X11) - Noise. Why the proposed five the existing three owned by applicant and tested by Colebreit wouid lessen the attendant noise levels, is not clear. 6) Odor control. Engineering should be by a certified engineer, certified in the specific area of grorn op odor introl *ing u, "closed ioop extraction system." Processing must be related Aotre in u futty enclosed room meeting Oregon Structural Specialty Code, Oregon Specialty Code and Oregon Fire Code. Satbty equipment for employees must be piovided, These conditions should also be addressed and imposed. ?) Water-irrigation. There is no information provided that a substantial amount of water year utilized forihe operation, which would presumably not be seasonal but would require round usage, wiil not aclversely affect ihe adjacent well water levels and functionality of provided' existing .aietts of adjoining property owners. No well log query information is as much as Nor if ihe applicanf s op*iution causes acljacent wells to require re-drilling by bear 500 ft. as is istirnated would be required, why the adjacent property owners should that cost. Amourrts of water to be utilized is not specified. There appears to be 17 acres of iffigation water available for use on this 29.66 acre site. Dcc 18.116.330(BX13). 3 l+0-0zt-0120 -Jurisdiction and Policy (1): DEe may enter agreements with local goverrunental units authorizing those units to become nie'u agents for peniitting onsite systems, inclucling receiving and processing applications, irruing p"ermits, *rrforcittg, and perfonning required inspections for onsite systems that do not ,.quir! wpCF permits. die r.iulns those responsibilities for systems in non-agreement counties and for ail systems that require WPCF permits. (2) Each owner of real property is jointly and severally responsible for: (a) Treating wastewater generated on that property in conformance with the rules adopted by the commission; (b) Connectilg all plumbing fixtures from which wastewater is or may be discharged to a sewerage facility or cnsite system approved by DEQ or an agent; (c) Maintaining, repairing, and replacing the onsite systetn on that property as necessary to ensure proper operation of the system; and replacemetlt' (c1) Complyilg with all requirements for construction, installation, maintenance, 073. and repair of Jnsite systenis required in this division and OAR chapter 340, division 4lllage S) Community conformity-traffic. Appiicant's existing grow operation believed to be iocated u"roi, the road from the present applicant's site, should not be expanded to this quiet agricultural comrnunity. To create, quoting from application nartative, "The proporri marijuana production on the subject property supports a vertically aligned business structure that includes multiple properties' a processing facility, and a dispensary.,' Between the two sites, retail purchasers' traffic flow would obviously be increased dramatically. Estimated production by number of plants, or poundage, and historical production quantities for applicant's existing operation are not disclosed. Applicant does not disciose if the applicant's existing grow operation is licensed tbr only meaicat marijuana, or if it is, will it become an additional recreational facility as is being proposed in this application as one of the, "multiple properties." 9) Fire risk to adjoining lands. Applicant states only that the grow-op is in the Rural Fire protection District #2. Fire protection for processing of cannabinoid extracts, additional fire risk, specific grow-op fire protection for this proposed site, and protection for adjoining properties and improvements is not addressed' that only soiar light rvill be used for production' 10)' Lighting. Applicant states apf,ticani does irot suggest that arlificial lighting may not be used in the immediate f,rtur*. A prohibition o?creating five "glowing" greenhouses between 7:00 PM and 7:00 AM should be imposed as a condition. 11) Setback. The applicant acknowledges setback will be less than the 100 ft. required, but asks for exception for thr south property line to be 35 feet. It is unclear how reduced setback will lessen visual, odor, noise, and adjacent property owners privacy' 12) Conrlitions: As was done in in247-t7-000208-AD &.247-17-A00209-LM the followilg conditions are requested to be imposed if the application is to be approved: ..ONGOING CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL A. Lighting: The following lighting standards shall be met. 1. Inside building lighting used for marijuana production shall not be visible ogtside the bgilding from 7:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.nr. ou the fcllowing day. 2. Lighting fixtures shall be tirlly shielded in such a manner that ail light emitted clirectly Uy ttre lamp or a cliffusing element, or indirectly by reflection or refraction, is proiecied below the horizontal plane through the lowest light ernitting Pa*. 3. The light cast by exterior light fixtures other than marijuana growing lights shall comply witir DCC 15'l0, Outdoor Lighting Control' 4. All exterior lighting shatl be shielded so that direct light does not project off site. 5ll)lgc' B. Oc{or: The proposecl odor control systerr must at all times prevent unreasouable interferenie wth neighbors' use and enjoyment of their propefiy The odor controI system shall be maintained in working order and shall be in use' ventilation, Cl. Noise: Sustaipeclnoise fiom mechanical equiprnent usedforheating, air conditioning, odor control, fans and similar functions shall not exceed 30 Agtnl *.ururJ,l at nny property line between l0:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. the followng day, D. Fencing: lf fencing is rised, it shall be finished itr a muted brown, green, or laturaiwood coloi and shall not be constructed of temporaly natelials such as plastic sheeting, hay bales, talps, etc. E. Screenipg: The existing tree zurd shrub cover screening the development from the public right-of-way oi adjacent properties shall be retalned to the rnaximum extent possible. This provision does no1 prohibit the rnaintenance of existing larvns, removal of dead, diseasecl or hazardous vegetation; the commercial harvest of forest pt'oducts in accordance with the Oregon Forest Practices Act; or agricultural use of the land. F Securiry Cameras: lf security cameras are used, they shall be directed to record only the subject propeity and public rights-of-way, except as required to cornply with requirelnents of the OLCC or the Ol-lA. G, Waste; The marijuana waste receptacle shall be stored in a linited access alea inside the piocluction facility, in the possession of and under the corltrol of the OLCC licensee. H. prohibitecl Uses: The uses listed in DCC 18,116.330(20) shallbe prohrbitedon the subject proper"fy so long as Marijuana Production ancvor Processing are concluciecl on the site. tvtarijr,zura procluction and processing are prohibited in any outdoor area. l. Annua[ Reporting: The anriual reporting requirements of DCC l8' ll6 330(D) shall be met. 30 in J, Height: No building or strucrure shall be erected or enlarged to exceed feet trerght, except as allowed under DCC 18.120 040'" very yours, Lawrence W CC: Client To the Deschutes Co. Planning DePt: My name is Dale'Smith & I live at 19000 Couch Market Rd, in Bend. My property neighbors t-inda Goodman, the property that is requesting a change in land use, to put in greenhouses for growing/processing the production of Cannibus. She already has one across the highway. We 6an smifl the plants during harvest as it is. I can't imagine having the greenhouses even closer and more of them. We moved to the Tumalo area fsr the beauty of the area and the ability to have a small farm to raise livestock and hay for animals. I am very much Epposed to the thought of my neighbors acreage covered in grbenhouses for growing Marijuana (which is not federally legal). I don't want io see the glori of grow lights, smell the plants or have our ground water being used for irrigating their crops! My wife, Debra Smith, and I would not have bought this great property if th.is op-eration was next door. The proposed plan of this expanded operation is on the other side of our fence! I can assure you ihai it will drive down the value of our property along with others.near by' You limit the pot-ential buyer to these places and it will drive down value and interest in living here. Let's talk about the beautification corridor. I have done improvements on my property over the years. One of which was adding a machine shed. I had to have approvalfrom you on the color 6t ttre metal we used, on a building that is over a half mile from the Highway. So, allowing a large Marijuana grows to happen a few hundred yards off-th.e highway, in plain sight, is now alldwed? [can onty imagine the distraction these types of places will be as motorists are heading down Hwy ZO. You start allowing this, and there will be no going back..You will see greenh6uses all d6wn the highway from Bend to Sisters. Grow lights going at-all hours of the 6ay. people will no longer want to live in their homes, buyers will be steered from owning property in Tumalo and we will be selling out for less to more growers. I understand the revenue at stake here for the County, but have them take these operations out where they are already allowed or some new, uninhabited area, not in the back yards of Tumalo families. lf we wanted the grow operations in our back yards we would have bought in Alfalfa. Would you want one next to your property, your Grandkids and your family? Thank you for your time and I hope you can make a decision to keep peace within the neighborhood. Sincerely, Dale Smith ST:$ &e" 86i{ RfrCfi[Vfr# r!,Y: { :",,.,f1}ili17 i;;r., r" { tv'i:f{f;# ffi Y: To the Deschutes Co. Planning DePt: My name is Rachelle Smith-Mose & I live at 19100 Couch Market Rd, in Bend, with my husband and our 3 kids. My property neighbors Linda Goodman, the property that is requesting a change in land use, to put in large greenhouses for growing/processing the production of Cannibus. She already has one operation across the highway. We can smell the plants during harvest as it is. I can't imagine having the greenhouses even closer and more of them. We moved to the Tumalo area for the beauty of the area and the ability to have a small farm, raise horses, hay, livestock and our kids. We have 3 kids, ages 15, & two 12 year olds. The operations cannot be close to schools, but you are allowing them to be in backyards of people opposing the operation with kids? What happens if we need to sell our place, I imagine it is going to be a challenge with these large grow operations next door. The proposed plan of this expanded operation is on the otheiside of our fencel I am worried this will drive down my property value. lt will be an eye sore!!l Let's talk about the beautification corridor. How does this fit inside the perimeters of the "scenic byway"? I don't believe it does, I feel like we don't have a say in any of the operations popping up. How many have been turned down? lt seems there is too much money in it for the County to really care about the other tax payers (home owners), that actually use their farms for producing meat and food for sustainability & stay inside the guidelines of the rules in Place. My biggest concern is water table levels. I assume that watering that many plants with thit large of an operation, using ground water that directly will affect everyone with a well nelrby. Which will be added costs for us if we have to have our wells drilled deeper I understand the revenue at stake here for the County, but have the growers take these operations out where they are already allowed or some new, uninhabited area, not in the back yards of Tumalo families. lf we wanted the grow operations in our back yards we would have bought in Alfalfa. Would you want one next to your property, your kids and your family? Thank you for your time, we know this isn't an easy process. Sincerely, Rilil,fi11-"Iij Rachelle Smith-Mose flY: **-d"dA* s[P i] s ;'_tlii hJ[[iVHF{[:# h; Yr Isabella Liu From: Nunzie < [email protected] > Sent: Friday, September 29,2017 12:52 PM To: Isabella Liu; Nick Lelack; BRYANT Robert W Cc: Carol Macbeth; Paul LiPscomb Subject: Re: 247-17-000755-AD agency notification list Attachments: Mailing Labels NOA.pdf; ATT0000i..htm Greetings CDD and ODOT It appeais rhat the applicant property ar the 65325 US i-lwy 20 address takes access directly from US Highway 2A,"yetODOT was not a noticed entity in the proposed land use or request for agency comrnents. grow I respectfully request that you notice ODOT and allow their input on the proposed marijuana employrnent operation located at this limited sight distance driveway. As you know US Highway 20 is a freight route and there is no left turn lane or deceieration iane on US 20 to the propedy serve the driveway i ASSZS Highway 20. This means that not only wi!l there be folks turning into to from Westbourrd US Highway i0 travel, but there likely will be stopped vehicies on US Highway 20 waiting tum into the proposed tnarijuaua grow facility' I strongly suggest that the above application be piaced before a public hearing and not managed adminltrativJv bV CDD which sliould have at the very least noticed ODOT before tomorrow's close of comments. Please enter this email into the public comment re247-17-A00755-AD Thank you Nunzie Gould On Sep 29,2Al7 , at 12:33 PM, Isabella Liu wrote: Nunzie, Attached is the copy of the mailing list for the Notice of Application. please refer to Dial for all documents related to this file. All documents that are part of the record including public comments and agency comments will be scanned into Dial. https:/ al.desch utes.orelReal/ lonmentDocs,/ 132'J.15 From: Nunzie Imailto: nunzie(opacifiercom] Sent: Friday, September 29,2AI7 12:30 PM To: lsabella Li u < lsabe[a. Liu @deschutes.ors> Subject: 247 -17 -OQA755-AD age ncy notifica tio n I ist Kindly email the agency notification li$t for 247-I7-000?5s-AD and provide the named irdividuals at each rgency ifavailable. Thanks Nunzie Gsuld 2 Richqrd ond Lindo Rode 65375 HighwcY 20 Bend, Oregon977A3 Seplember 27 ,2017 Tzze Liu, Assistont Plonner Deschutes County Community Developnent 117 NW Lofayette Ave. Bend, Oregon9TTOB RE: Proposed Lond Use Applicotion, File 247-17-000755-4D Recreotionol Morijuono 6row Operotion Deor Ms. Liu: We are writing to exprass our concerns ond opposition to the proposed recreotional morijuono production-monufocture, processing site to be built next door to our proPerty of the obove oddress. We liva in o neighborhood of family farms olong the landscope corridor on Highwoy 20. Even though we are on o busy highwoy, we con ossure you thot this is ond hos been a peocef ul neighborhood. We are very concerned obout the degrodation of f his neighborhood with multiple grow fqcilities in close proximity. Lindo Goodmon olreody owns o grow focility directly qcross the street frorn this proposed site. Another grow,owned by Mott Moson, is just down the highwoy o short distonce. The new buyar of the corner lot on Doytonond Highway 2A olso hos stcted the inteniion of building a grow focility. Pleose see the atfqched map with highlighted porcels. Thot is o potentiol of four morijuonc grow focilities along the highwoy in o tight radius, with this proposol moking o daf inite number lhree. This high density of grow fscilities would hove o detrimental ef f ect on our neighborhood in severol woys, The "skunk" smell olreody drifts obout unpleosontly with the existing two focilities, ond will be exacerboted with eoch odditionol grow. Graws are dependent on well wqter usage yeor round, while the existing hayf ields only use poid-for irrigotion water for 3-6 months. ff grows ore allowed in high density os in this proposol, it is reasonoble to concludethe high well usoge could lower the wotar tobles ond adversely aff ect neighboring wells. ft is not reosonoble ond right thot neighboring property owners could be required to re-drill their wells, especiolly st their own expense, so this pnoperty con pursue a f ederally illegal drug operat ion. High power usqge is onother reol concern. 6rows require on exorbifqnt omount of electricity fl1e00 omp three phose 480 volt service " is quoted by CEC) to keep the plants f lourishing ond to process them in this high desert climote, ond con off ect the power grid if in too close of proximity of ona onother. Further,we sow no provision to prevent the lighting from thegreenhouses to rodiqte oll hours of doy ond night, negotively impocting our neighborhood. All of these very volid concerns would adversely aff ect cll of our property volues. Who will wqnt to buy o property thot is surrounded by mcrijuanq grows sove onother mqrijuqnCI grower? Mountqin views will only go so fqr to lure o buyer, Whqt of the londsccpe corridor? We had to get permission os to whot color to point our house ond born, yet no one cores how mony morijuono greenhouses line the highway? fs this whqt we wqnt trcvelers ta see on their way to Bend? We have fried to be underst*nding of property owner rights now thflt mariJuonfl hos been ruled to be o crop. But in reolity, it is q crop only in nome. The requirements of high electricity ond woter, the obnoxious smells, ond the noture of the crop render it on undesiroble oddition to o neighborhood, especiclly in high density. Please consider these real concerns ond our objection to yet onother grow within o such o tight rodius in our neighborhood ond in such proximity to our own property. Thonk you. Richord Lee Rode Lindo Rode 54t-280-2701 [email protected] September 29,2017 Attn: Izze Liu, Assistant Planner, Community Development, Deschutes County I urge you to refuse the application for adding another marijuana facility in Tumalo, this one directly on Highway 20,65325 Highway 20. The application is under fi\e247-L7-000755-AD, Linda Hopmann Revocable Living Trust. I have grave concerns of the extra traffic burden that would be placed on Highway 20, where cars normally are going 60 mph. I live on Couch Market Road and already have difficulty in trying to make a turn onto Highway 20 from my residential road. The applicant already owns the existing large-scale operation on Dayton Road, with listed address of 65320 Highway 20. This is a 7 green house operation, with processing warehouse. There would certainly be increased traffic crossing Highway 70 between the 2 facilities, if you allow it to be built' The Existing operation across Highway 20 is already a burden to the neighborhood with noise and odors that i can hear and smell from 3/q of a mile away. An additional 5 greenhouse operation would be 7a mile closerta my home. I also think the additional excessive amounts of water that would be taken from the aquifer would be detrimental to the water supply available to existing landowners and farmers in the area. The facilities are slated to be built very close to the irrigation ditch of Tumalo irrigation and possible runoff or herbicide misuse that fouls the irrigation water could be devastating to the farmers downstream. The newly proposed facility would impact a score of hobby farmers, residents and landowners who have lived here for years before recreational marijuana production was approved in just Deschutes County. We already see another new large greenhouse that was built this year a short way further towards Sisters on the opposite side of Highway 20 from the new license request. I thought the mar'rjuana grow operation further West on Couch Market was for sale since the death of the owner. I saw an illegal outdoor burn there last week that I called in to the fire department. Why give out more applications when existing facilities may already be available? Every day I see more evidence of the decreased livability in rural Deschutes County and the cities of Bend and Redmond. Central Oregon is no longer the wonderful place to live that it used to be. Please don't keep making it worse' Krista Knoernschild Couch Market Road Bend, Oregon 97743 Isabella Liu From: Nu nzie < nunzie@ pacifier.com > Sent: Friday, September 29,2A77 4:18 PM To: Isabella Liu Subject: 247-l-l-0AA755-AD 65325 Hwy 20 (Hopmann) Hi lsabella Kindly enter this into the record re 247-t7-OO0755-AD 65325 Hwy 20 (Hopmann) yet it has been scanned It appears that the application materials normally titled Burden of Proof was a color document, into a B&W document as presented by CDD' file? Would you kindly post a true representation of the original color document to the weblink for this give perspective. I am unable to see the photographs with any clarity or orientation arrow to Applicant states it is attaching a plot plan, then argues that a plot plan is not needed' proposed To better understand the new internal roadway across the EFU lands that is planned to access the that the greenhouses, would you kindly identify the soils on which the proposed roadway will incumber and the acreage 24' long roadway will cover? How many acres of agricultural land will be developed with this proposed internal road system? planned a shield? Are there trees already along the proposed internal roadway? or are these as future Please show a color map of the mapped TID water rights' please identify whether applicant proposes to grow mj in the ground or in pots above ground? right called Nursery Use This matters as if the plan is to grow in pots than the applicant needs a different type of water (NU). (TlD) water Rights lf mj is proposed to be grown above ground, then by oregon Law, the Tumalo lrrigation District cannot be used. in direct soil in the ground TID water can only be used for irrigation water meaning only for plants whose roots Srow the (i.e.not in pots) operates another Applicant speaks to vertically integrating this into her existing marijuana business. As stated, she planned be integration between these marijuana grow operation across US Highway 20. lt is unclear whether there is to 2 sites at 65320 US HighwaY is not aligned in a straight crossing and 20 and 65325 US Highway 20. The transportation system across u5 Highway 20 there is a very short distance even if applicant were to use Dayton road {either of the twoi to access across Highway 20, would be at a very slow of travel that would occur either Eastbound or Westbound on US Highway 20 and hence this freight whose mission is to not speed: not at the posted 55 mph. This is of big concern as our community is filled with pay to drive accesses needless to have to slow down, and our community is filled with tourists often who don't attention say road intersections along Highway 20. side of Highway 2-0 travel to the Let me give you a for - instance, when harvest time comes, will employees from otie othertaxlotacrossHighway 20forthisverticallyintegratedbusiness?if sohowwill thetransportationsystembe mitigated? I Kindly advise where across the property CEC will be stringing the added power? ls this planned to be above ground power or burried powei?Will any tiees be femoved, limbed br topped to facilitate the larger phase of voltage? Kindly advise the height and species and quantities of trees on the pian: are these junipers? ponderosas? other? Regarding BOP page 30 D Annual Reporting: Kindly email the February 2017 Annual Reporting including the Consent to lnspect form that applicant was to provide for it's 65320 Hwy 20 property as this speaks to whether in fact applicant has complied with this section of the code for it's existing mj production site. Simply asserting that an applicant will comply is not basis to Prove that applicant has complied with this criteria. Traveling Westbound on Highway 20, which specific Cascade Mountains will be seen with the proposed white plastic roofed greenhouses in the fore? Whereistheproposedparkingareafortheemployeesofthemarijuanagrow? Howmanycontainersareplannedtobe located on site, where? and how will these be screened? The Burden of Proof lies with the applicant to prove that they meet the criteria. There needs to be a distinction between Applicant Materials (BOP) and the next iterated Findings of a Decision. At the moment, applicant easily states that it meets thru writing FINDINGS, but the specificity of what applicant will actually do is unclear Please read this application carefully and as a new planner get the expertise you need to produce an accurate Staff Report. Le. it is insufficient for CDD to repeat applicant's RESPONSEs and to use those RESPONSES as FINDINGS. Also, there are waterways thru this property as applicant has identified being the Canal system as such these waterways should be used for setbacks. lcouldnotfindthe1LxlT"plotplanthatisrequiredonpagel.oftheapplicationform. Kindlyemailindigitalformat. Thank you Nunzie Gould 2. Isabella Liu From: Nunzie < [email protected] > Sent: Friday, September 29,2011 5:48 PM To: Isabella Llu Cc: Kimberley Priestley Subject: 247-77-0A075-AD Hopman additional public comments (new wellat 797 feet deep) Attachments: DESC-60810 65325 W. Highway 20 (GoodmanHopmann).pdf HiAgain lsabella: Please enter this into the public record: Kindly explain the purpose for the new exempt groundwater well DESC 60810 which was drilled to 797 feet on the subject property adjacent to the Ag Building B in the NE corner of the property (see map on page 3 of attached pdf) which is also subject to the marijuana land use application in Deschutes County 247-17-OAA745-AD. On this map appear to be other storage containers that are not shielded from Highway 20. What is the plan for the use of Ag Building B and how will vehicles parked here be screened? There is no reference to this new well and what function it serves the property or to the proposed agricultural marijuana growbeingappliedforlandusepermit. PerhapsifCDDhadnotifiedOWRDofthelanduseapplication,wecouldbetter understand the function of this new groundwater well. So kindly email OWRD the land use notification24T-17-O0075-AD and extend the comment record accordingly I think it is inappropriate to drill a new groundwater well under an exempt well status if the object is to use this well for either mitigation or nursery use. Staff needs to provide the public with a color map of the site with sufficient identification so that the legend is readable {B&W is insufficient) Please advise when the color site plan will be uploaded to your CDD website. Thanks again, Nunzie Gould WDLL I.D. LAT]IiL# ST,,\TE OF OREGON DESC 60810 124141 IVATER SUPPLY WELL RIiPORT START CARD # 1033515 (as requircd by ORS 53?.?65 & OAR 690-205-0210) 2t2u2017 ORIGINAL LOG # (1) Orvncr Wcll Li j firsl Narnc Il'{LJ.JT l-ast Narre COODMAN {9) l,OCATlON OF WBLL (lcgal description) Company TLO FARMS County rx-scuwr_s Trvp l€.00 .S , N/S ilangc I 1.00 E EAV Wlvl Address 64771 OTTER RUN LN 51 5 Sec ll4 ollhe __S^E.-""_- r/4 Tax l-ot tsENl-l State UK 977t)l .23-_ ll}j__* - 'l'*x MapNunrbcr I6l 1230000521 Lot (2) TYPE Otr WO Lat _" or-a{.l.JJ)2\43. ., DMS or DD A I ldr.rlln I 2A {t} 5ir l.ong " or -l2l 36917778 DMS or DI) (2a) 1'[.:R,,\'1'l ON + Frorn Stl Plsrc Wld Thrd {i" Street address ofrvcll f Nearest address Cosine:f*-l mrn il r)5llt W HWY 20 lll:.N R 97703 Scal: (3) (IO) STATIC WATER LEVEL Ilate + Air Rota ry uua flc,'aul* l- lnug"' f- lcnut. i,aro Rolary otl'cr n -.-- -lornplercd Wcll l lt't llo17 644 (4) PR0POSED USE lxl Donrestic Iln;gation f ]cn,"mLrnitv Flowlng Arlesian? Dry Flolc? |l lndustrial/ Comrncri.-ial l] l,ivestock f] u"rvatt:rin g Al lrR IIUAR1NG ?.ONES l)eplh water lYas first found 740.()0 --,* ['rhcnnal [lnl".tlon i] Othcr SWl, Datc Frorn To Est FIow SWL(psi) + Swl,(lt) (Attach '797 (5) BORS] HOLE CONSTRUCTNON Spccial Standarti | | cr)llv 2.116/2017 740 Denth olCornnlcted Well 7s7.00 ft BOi].E IIOLE SEN L, sacksl Dia From To lr4aterial Frotn Tn A.mt t2 0 2sa Ilanicilile ti 140 s '72 -__L_* 290 797 Ca lculated l'-e ment 77 s 45 l) WELL LOG cround llevarion 3380.00 How \vas seal placcd: lt4ethod [n fn ffic [n Fronr Kott,". POI]RED DRY SNND PUMICE 0 CLAY GRAVELS SAND BROWN ), 17 Backfill placcd fron: -_- fl to ll tulaterial --"..., CINDF,RS REI) t7 a9 l-iirer pack from 11. lo ft Material _.---._._ Size _,_ CONCLOMTRATE BROWN GRAY LNYEITS 28 165 lype- Arnount Expiosivesuscel:--- f]Yes - CI,AY BRO\{IN 165 2-13 (5a) ABANDONMENT {JSING IJNTIYDRATED BtrNTONITB CONCLOMERATE PURPLE 274 310 P.cposed Amo!nt /rctual Arnount LAVA GRA}' 2't4 LNVA BROKEN 310 325 6) ("AS NtilL r4"Y4_q!_{Y FRAC'ft.lRlll) )lo 3B3 1L'r Dia l- Frotn To l.ia{ Plstc Wld Thrd LAVA BROKEN 383 '18,] 8 2 2t)a 25U tEt CINDERS 389 401 6 0 t97 t88 txl BASALT 401 4t5 n C{}NGLOMEIiATE 415 423 { RASAI,T 423 445 H BASAI-TCLAY'iRAY SEAMS 445 490 Siroe Inside Othcr l.ocation of shoc(s) ltA.lA-Lr. !j,e4v 490 Tenrp casrng Dla_ Irrorn 'fo CINDERS RED 549 Iv., RAS /r l .T CONGI.OM IIRATE BROw'.N 590 (7) PERF'ORA'I'IONS/SCR EENS BASA L]' FIIA (.-'f UIi F.I) 664 Perlorution"l lvlethod MACHINI] Screens T],fc Mate rial Date .Starte d??!ql 1 __ Completed ].],?Aqll PcrlT Casing/ Screen Scrn/slot Slol # ol Tclcl ( (iotr s lri:; l rtronded) lYatcr Wr:ll Con.qtrtrctor Cel'tifirn perlormed Perf Li ner 6 777 I I certity th0l the work I on lhe constnlction, deeperittg, elleration, or abandonrrent of' this rvell is in cornpliancc rvith Oregon rvater supply rveil constrLrclion siattdords Malcrials used and itrfortnalion reported abovt: are lrJe 10 thc bcst ol' rnv krrori ledgc and bel ief. L.icense Numkrcr 759 Datc Zl2lnAlT (8) !Yl:,1.1. I ll,3 I Ii irtllltlnulll { fst ing ttme rs I horrr .'iigri:d 'f IIOMAS Ii p1.{- t( i[-fiied) O PLunp Q naiter O Air O Fio\virg Anesian (bonded) 1'l/aler lvcll Conslrucaor Ce rtil'icaf ion ?o ?9C I accept responsibilil-\' for thc corstrucljon, decpening, alteration, or abandontnent work periorrned or this u,ell duriD€i the constftrclion dales rcpcned above All'.vork pcrlbrrncd durir;g Lhis lirre is in corrpliancc rvillt Orcgorr rtaler suppll' tvcll couslrLrclior stal]riards 'lhis report js true io the best ofrry kttorYlcd-erc and Lrelief. Tcrnp.rttlre 54 "F Lah anal-i,sis Ycs 8l' 'l-DS ri'rt t1 l.icensc Ntrrrber y72g Da',e WilL-f []v"' {riescribc lrlrlr l aJnount l.lri I 2l21t20lj tlt l ili l. Srgred .lz\Cl( trllBA-q Conlnct Inl'o (optional) 2ol 3 \4/ELL I.D, LABEL# WATER SUPPLY WELL REPOR'I'- DE,SC 60810 124141 STARl'CARD # continuation pagc 10335't 5 2t2y20t7 ORIGINAL LOG # (2a) PRIi-ALTERATION Water Quality Concerns Dia I Frorn To Gauge Stl Plstc wld l'hrd Fronr To Description Arnouni Urlits Material Frorn To Arnt sacks/lbs (10) STATIC WATER LEVEL (5) BORE HOLE CONSTRUCTION SWL Date from To Est Flow SWI-(psi) + SWL(ft) BORE HOLE SEAL, secksl Dia From Tc Malerial Frort To Anrt lbs {lnlulrlir FILT]]R PACK (r1) WELL LOG Frour To Material Size Material From To SANDSTONE CONCLOMERATE LAYERS 141 797 (6) CASTNG/LINER Casing Liner Dia 4 From To Gauge S1l Plstc Wld Thrd (7) PERFORATIONS/SCREENS Perf/ Casing/ Screen Scn,/slol Slot t ol Tclc/ Liner Dia rLnl To Comrn ents/Remarks YARDS s^Nr] cRoi.]] 25 I EET -310 l tiFT {8) WE!,L TEST'S: Minintum tcsting timc is t hour Yield gal/rnin Drarvdorvn Drill sternlPunrp dcpth fluration (hr) l)ai,e 3 oj'.1 WATER SIJPPLY WEI-l- REPOlt l - Map with locatitx DESC 60810 identiiied urLtst Lt nll;tchcd aitd shrll inr:lrrilc 3tl apptoritttatc scnlc nnd n0rth ailo\\, 2t2ltzfi17 ap of Hole $,fr'.\'. OREGOH STATE OF Oregon Water Re.$ou rces Department T/IJELL MAP LOCATISN 735 Summer St tlE, Sslem OR 573,91 Thb map is supplemenialto ihe ?/ATEF' SUPPLYWELL REPDRT tsfl319€&0900 ffi LSCATIGN OF II1IELL Well l-ahel:124'141 Latitude:.1rt 1711944r1 Datitnr:y/GSD4 Pri nted : February 21, 2917 Langitud e: -12 1.36977/78 Tn wn sh i p,'Ra n g elSectr o n/Q u arte r-Q ua rte r Se ct i a n : 3i,tCl*.li3tR:Tirs.ni'sp is ict€sd:.J ta rsi'r*::nt i:* t /i\4 165 11E 23 NUVSE *pplcxin::i*lore l*tr il.€ t *il itirxstlBl€[.]# l? t,. sr g rueJ . rs *' i.:'. nfrurg E'n ..,r. t' tr! ;n,:+r. Address of Well. Prsvided LY rreil c*ns trudc,e 65325 W HWv20 e.s0511 Tolzze Liu, Assistattt Platttrer, Deschutes Cotrnty Re: Filc Number 247-17-000155-AD 65325 Hwy. 20 Please do not approve the Application for a marijuana production facility for the above referencecl propefiy. Traffic and I-lwy 20 access - Highway 20 is an exlremely busy road at all hours of the day arrd night. The average speed is approxirnately 60 rnph on this open road. As a resident of Couch Market Road. the closest road to the proposed site on the west side of Highway 20, I can attest that it is extremcly difficult to enter the highway, especially wlten turning nofth onto Highway 20 f1onr Couch Market Road. The access to the proposed site will be difficult, and rvill beconte extremely more difficult with the owner of the proposed site also being the owner of the grow operation located at 6fi2A Hwy, 20, which is across the highway frorn the proposed site. Traffic going between these sites willmake Highway 20lravel even more dangerous than it is, a fact that is docurnented by nurnerous accidents, some fatal. As a major highway in the area, it is prudent for ODOTto give its opinion on the impact to the highway of these operations. Willr seven greenhouses and a processing facility on the east side of Highway 20 and five proposecl greenlronses on the west side of Highway 2A, iltat is au extreme amoullt of Ltse for these facilities and I believe poses a significant danger to vehicle, bicycle, arrd pedestrian traffic in lhe area. Water usage - the amount of water r'lecessary for the proposed operation, evidenced by the drilting of a new deep well, will place an increased burden on the aquifer, and may cause wells of neighboring properties to run dry or cause a need for a deeper well, all at a cost to existing property owners. Contrary to wlrat some might say, water is a finite and precious resottrce, atrd in a year of low srrowfall, significant burdens are placed on both water itt the aquifer, as well as irrigation water, in this case, Tumaio Irrigation District. It is well documented that marijuana grows use significant rnore water than more traditional crops. With respect 1o the irrigation carral, llre close proxirnity of the proposed greenhouses conld cause waste and herbicide misuse arrcl could cause farnrers downstream to suffer irreparable lrarnr to their crops. No information is provided for water usage in the proposed greetrhouses. Will it be frorn irrigation or well? Are the plants to be growu in pots or in tlie ground, and if in pots not in the groltnd, I believe irrigation water canrrot be used. If irr pots, a Nursery Use watcr riglrt is needed. As to septic and rvaste water, the applicatioti is silent. Noise arrd odor - the applicatiolr referelrces a study, however, Ilone was attached to tlre application" This is a rnandatory requirenient and rnust be subrnitted and evalLlated. Porver arrd electric - CEC has advised that upgrades to service will be necessary. The upgrades arrd the orrgoilrg usage could cause other property owners 1o have low attd dirninished service. CEC rvas silent as to rvho r.vould pay for the cost of tlre upgracle. ProdLrction - One owner ol 12 glcenhouses on trvo parcels separated by a niajor lriglirvay is rtot consisrent rvitli lii,ability in this cornrnr-rnity. Tltet'e is tto ittlorrnation provided for production astoLytts on eithc.r of these two propeffies, but reasotrable people calt see that this is an excessive alnount of productiorr, and a significaut drain on our watel' and electric resources. While the area of the greerrhouses may present low fire risk, tliis is Central Oregotr, and any activities can cause a wiclespread flre. This was not addressed in the application. If the proposed grow is to be vefiically integrated witlr the existing facility on the east side of Hwy 20, lras it been deternrined if that facility's use as a processing facility rrealts that this is one operation on two land lots, rather tltan two separate operations? Existirrg residerce - There is a residence tltat occupies a pofion of 65325 IJwy, 20. The residence is occupied by a farnily, including one young child. I-las it been detennined wlrat the impact of a grorv operation will be on property with a mirror child? Would this be considered a public safety risk? Federal law - As rnarijuana is a controlled Schedule I substance under Federal law, its production should not be allowed, until suclr time as Federal law changes to allow its production, sale, distribution, etc, Tlre applicatiorr contaius several portions where the owner irnplies concern for adjacent propefiy o\ryners. My property is kitty corner to the subject properly. If you are to approve the application, I would like to see a requirement fcr additional screening so thal I do not have to look at five greenhouses every tirne I look outside. While I realize there may be no such fomral requirement to do this, it is something neighbors do for each other. While the owner's existing grow olt the east side of Highway 20 is screened on its west side so as uot to be visible frorl Highway 20, the east side has no screening at all and is visible from that side in full, showing no regard for neighbors. If the owner does not want to accotnmodate this, then it invalidates the concerns voiced for neighboring properties, attd would cause one to wonder as to the intentions of compliance. Respectfu lly su bm itted, Mark Murzin Turnalo, Oregott October 2,2017 Attn: lzze Liu, Assistant Planner, Community Development, Deschutes County I urge you to refuse the application for adding another marijuana facility in Tumalo, this one directly on Highway 2A,65325 Highway 20. The application is under file 247-17' 000755-AD, Linda Hopmann Revocable Living Trust. There is already a seven greenhouse operation, with processing warehouse, located across Highway 20 from the newly proposed marijuana facility. There would certainly be increased traffic crossing Highway 20 between the 2 facilities that are owned by the same party, if you allow it to be built. lt is already difficult to make a turn onto Highway 20 from Couch Market Road because this parlicular section of the highway is located on a curve where cars have been reduced to one lane in either direction and are normally traveling at 60 mph. As I stated above, the applicant already owns the existing large-scale operation on Dayton Road, with listed address of 65320 Highway 20. The existing operation across Highway 20 is already a burden to the neighborhood with noise and odors that the neighborhood can hear and smell from3/a of a mile away. Please reject this proposed additional 5 greenhouse operation on Highway 20. Many of the landowners and farmers in the area believe that it is inappropriate to allow the additional excessive amounis of water that would be taken from the aquifer for such a facility. lt would be detrimental to the water supply available to existing landowners and farmers in the area. There is also a Tumalo irrigation ditch located near the slated building site and the runoff or herbicide misuse that fouls the irrigation water could be devastating to the farmers and ranchers downstream. Who is going to be monitoring the contamination issues? Critical questions, over and above my previous comments, include: does the proposed site meet access requirements; have the owners supplied proof frorn the Oregon Water Resources Department with regards to water usage; have the owners provided screening and fencing designations which will be considerable since it is on Highway 20; and have they submitted a means for storing and disposing of marijuana waste under the control of the OLCC licensee? Every day ranchers and farmers see more evidence of the decreased livability in rural Deschutes County. Central Oregon is no longer the wonderful place to live that it used to be. Would you want to purchase property that is slowly being parceled off to marijuana growers? Please don't keep making it worse. Deny this application. Thank you for your consideration. Betty Faller 18765 Ridge Crest Road Bend, OR. 97703 Isabella Liu From: Nunzie < [email protected] > Sent; Monday, October 02,2017 B:03 AM To: Isabella Liu €c: Peter Russell Subject: 247-L7-AAA7 55-AD more public comment Attachments; SOS - Corporation - Assumed Business Name Filing Records - 130694995 Tumalo Living Organic Farms, ,pdf; ATT00001.htm; SOS - Corporation - Assumed Business Name Filing Records - 80877393 The Herb Center {Hopmann).pdf; ATT00002.htrn; Mailing Labels NOA.pdf; ATT00003.htm i{i Isabella Please add this to the public. record and further to my multiple emails to you of Septernbet 29,2917 Kindly noticc the Deschutes Counfy Sheriff Department for agency comment on the proposcd land use application for rnariiuana grow. The reasou for this is ihat CDD can only go thru the County Sheriff to ascertain whether applicant actualiy obtains a1 OLCC license fcrr the proposed land use action that CDD is being asked to issue a land use permit for. Additionally CDD is not allowed to inspect the Hopmann property across the highway without the Sherilf so CDD actually doesn't now the condition or parameters of operating of the Hopmarur property across the highway. I)eschutes County Sheriff should be inforrned during this process of the proposed application. The Sheriff also has historical knowledge of the applicant's marijuana grow and processing facility across tlie highway. In your notice of application, it states that the property is located in Bend which is not accurate. The subject property is located in rural Deschutes County a distance frorn the Bend City Limits and has a Bcnd address' Applicant states the proposed marijuana glow is to be vertically integrated into applicant's other businesses. Appticunt operates a marijuana processing facility across Highway 20 at 65320 Hwy 20 whicir abuts Highway 20 and takes access off Dayton Road & 1 ; that properly was formerlY knowu as Whyde's. Applicant also operates a retail dispensary in Bend known as Tire i{erb Center at2205 NE Division Street wliicir operates 7 days a r,veek. /di Applicar-rt's h4aterials states that the proposed production facility will be verticaily integrated into thcir other brisinesses arrd therefore transportation eitlrer of procluct or personnei is part of that verticality. 'fhe proposed site takes access directly lrom US Highway 2A at 65325, The grey driveway passes a yellow resiclence ancl leads to Building B at the south side of tire property, There is a dirt track fi'om the grey drivcway that crosses the Tumalo Irrigation District's West Branch canal, is this dirt track/roadway used for an easemetrt to the Tumalo h'rigation District fbr access to their canal? IF so how will TID employees be kept away f}om the proposed grow? It appears that the ciilt track will be increased to 24'wide and cross this bridge to access the ptopos.O greenhouses? propane lanks. new proposed agricultural buildings, white square next to that newly proposeA building (unirientifiable by any legend). It is unclear wlrether any existing ti'ees on the southerly prop*tty line rvilibe cut, thinnecl or killecl during the construction of tlre 24' wide roadway surface and/or the cul de sac" Kindly give details of tlie ploposed 24' roadrvay inciuding the basc, and surface and capacity to carry ptopane andior fire trucks during all u'eather conditions, Tl'rere are proposed several propane tanks at tl-re south side of the greenitouses and it is unciear wliether a heavy propane delivery truck and/or fire trucks wiil be able to serve the area. Tiris is a LIFE HEALTH SAFETY issue lbr deliveries and aiso fcr on site emplnyees. Kindly advise the weight canying capacity of tire bridge within the property that crosses this Tumalo in'igation District West Branch canai and provide the building permit fbr that bridge. Before any drive/ road is proposed to be extended across EFU zoned land, the bridge must be cerlified to carry the proposed load and any TID agricultural water rights must be lernoved from the area covered by the roadway and/or roadway extension. It has come to my attention that the yeilow home on the subject property is lived in by Jacob Hawes, wife and a young ehild. Applicant has not shown how the young child will be prevented access to the marijuana production site especially since the driveway to tire property passes the very honie the child resides iu and there is no other access to the proposed greenhouses other than past this home. When you make your site visit, please ascertain how the resident child and/or their play friends will be prolected fiom accessing the proposed marijuana grow site. According to ORS recreational marijuana grow sites require a SAFE and lockable site for marijuana which are either bolted to the ground or weigh more than 750 pounds, it is not clear u'here these are proposed to be located on the subject property. Please identify these on the site plan. Ycu will notice that there are now rnany metal drop box or contain ship boxes or semi-ffuck sized trailers that are appearing in our rural Deschutes county. These are unsightly, unattractive, reflective metals which are not native to out landscape and are neither native nor natural to our landscape as such metal fieight boxes are not corrrpatible with the LM scenic area of Central Oregon. Applicant has not identified what type of SAFE it will use, where it will be located, the dimensions or height of the SAFE or how it will nreet the criteria of the LM zone. One suggestion is for such SAFE to be located indoors in the existing Red BARN that is north of the yellow house. 'l'li* sit,:: pliir': lias in rvriting !l x ?CI'parkirrg spirces houreverthere are nnlv 6 actual purliing $pitct$ drawn. Kindly identify where ail of the parking will be located on the property and whether any of this parking is for the yellow house where tiie child resides. Are there metal reflective fans proposed for the greenhouses? if so, kindly show locatiou and material type and color (these are not shown in the elevation drawing of the greenhouse) Is it reasonable to assume that ernployees are to park at tire identified spaces and then walk 800+ feet to thc - ttrr"tltrsi greerilitiir5*? If you live in Bend proper you likely live on a 50' wide iot, so who far are you wiliing to park fronr your home each day and night? I think it is highiy probably that employee vehicles u,ill be parked as close to the greenhouses as possibie. Kindly provide detail in your stal'I'report. Where is the septic tank, the septic leach field and the reserve septic leach fieid; these are not shown on the sile plan. (it's important to not drive or crush these with heavy vehicles) It is tirrre for Descliutes County to ironor and enforce the criteria of the LM zone. Tlte reason our rural community has barns is to contain larm needs; The rurai area does no1 nced metal boxes littered about. T]re puliiic holcls CDD accountable lor r"rplrolding the LM corridor and scenic natural beautl,of our community. 2 Oclor Contlol: the standarcls in the County's marijuana code do not control oder from wafting off premises, Skunk 6dors are not compatible with the LM corriclor where one has to roll up your windows when traveling op ODOT's US I{igliway 20 cluring the experience of our hot desefi days when enjoying our outcloor vistas oiwhel bicyclilg thru our rural country side. The odor control standards do not protect from marijuana's offensivc and pervasive skunk smell' OWRD is our state agency with oversight to our public waters: CDD must also notify OWRD cf thc proposed land use action since the'newly drilled dornestic exempt well DESC 60810 located next to Building B at the south east alea of the propcrty as of today is not authorized to be used for marijuana. If appiicarrt proposes to use the exenpt well fbr the mari!uana production or processing or for ernployees, then OWRD not TID has juriscliction. Additionally the exempt domestic well cannot be used for rnarijuana: it is the Deschutes Mitigation Rules apply based on Consumptive Use us/ Please confirm rvhen CDD will notice OWRD Kilcily advise where o1 the property applicant will be ccmposting their product (whether indoors or outdoors) and kindly advise the setbacts for this compost site to the property lines and to the open watcrs of tl:e TID West Branch canal. If your site visit is after October 5,2017 it is likely that the TID canal wili be dry as their irrigation season I think shuts off Oct 5th this year. What is fte proposed AG building for, heigirt, size, use vagueiy delineated in the SW eiid of thc property page 74? It is unclear from the site plan whethel 'conifers' are ponderosa trees or juniper trees. Please provide a specie for each tree otl 1he site plan and give dbh and heights, Please also give a count for each tree. Tumalo Iryigation District is planning to pipe rnore of their surface canals in which case there will not be trees abutting the burried pipe. CDD needs to be cleai on how Applicant rvill mitigate their proposed mariiuana grow if/when T'lD pipes it's canal. This needs to be addressed in your staff repofi. Does applicant inteld to have a water storage tank next to their greenhouses? if so wliat is the size of this, color then and wliat type of water will it hold? TID water, well water, water trucked in? if there is no u'ater tank, your staff report should state that 1o water tank will be installed. The list of agencies noticeci is not yet postecl to your dial weblink. I attacli the list you ernailed nre, but for the recorel woull you kindly post the tut.e lirt to dial and also post to dial when the additional agencies you will be notifiecl: which include ODOT, Deschtues County Sheriff, OWRD' It pray seern that mj production is an aliowed use in EFU but there are matly mally intricate variables which CDD is tasked with making sure are noticed and pennitted properly. The most important is the putrlic SAF'ETY a'd COMpi-IANCE in ourcommunity. Renember that mj is a lederally illegaiproduct: it is not onions or hay rvhich allow the pubiic and chiidren to be tlear. There are several namcs that are appearing in various aspects of the proposed property: these include: Li6cla Hopmarrn, Brerrt Gogdrnan, Tumalo Living Organic Farms ABN, Total Living Organic Farrns, LLC and Li'da A. Hoprnann l{evocable Living Trust. The Herb Center, TLO. Which entity is the one continuous entity that wili be tasked u'ith obtaining the complete land use application and relevatrt perrnits fi'om CDD and each o{.l1e governing agencies? If there are multiple entities, this makes CDD's job oltrackitlg very difficult, a'd it also makes foicode enforcernent's job ditficuit. I strongly suggest that CDD think in the long run hor'v to lnanage tlris eonrplex issttc. 3 Finally please identify r,vhy CDD gave agency conrment to f)cpartment o1- State l-ands DSL (see atlachcci notification list) Thank you for your astute attention to lhese r-ssues Nunzie Gould 541-42tj-332s .:i APPLICATION FOR REGISTRATION E.FILED Corporation Division Mar 23,2017 wwwlilinqjneregorcom OREGON SECRETARY OF STATE REGISTRY NUMBER 1 30694995 TYPE ASSUMED BUSINESS NAME ENTITY NAME TUMALO LIVING ORGANIC FARMS BUSINESS ACTIVITY AGRICULTURE PRINCIPAL PLACE OF BUSINESS 65320 HIGHWAY 20 BEND OR 97703 USA NAME & ADDRESS OF AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE 108322397 - TOTAL LIVING ORGANIC FARMS, LLC 64682 COOK AVE # 26 BEND OR 97703 USA REGISTRANT/OWNER BRENT GOODMAN 64711 OTTER RUN LN BEND OR 97703 USA COUNTIES DESCHUTES Irage 1 Corporation Division ffiw www.fi linginoregon.com OREGON SECRETARY OF STATE By my signature, I declare as an authorized authority, that this filing has been examined by me and is, to the best of my knowledge and belief, true, correct, and complete. Making false statements in this document is against the law and may be penalized by fines, imprisonment, or both' By typing my name ifi the electronic signature field, I am agreeing to conduct business electronically with the Siate of Oregon. I understand that transactions and/or signatures in records may not be denied legal effect solely because they are conducted, executed, or prepared in electronic form and that ita law requires a record or signature to be in writing, an eleclronic record or signature satisfies that requirement. ELECTRONIC SIGNATURE NAME BRENT GOODMAN TITLE REGISTRANT DATE SIGNED 03-23-2017 Page 2 APPLICATION FOR REGISTRATION E.FILED Corporation Division Oct24,2011 www.fi li ngi noregon. com OREGON SECRETARY OF STATE REGISTRY NUMBER 80877393 TYPE ASSUMED BUSINESS NAME ENTITY NAME THE HERB CENTER BUSINES$ ACTIVITY PHARMACIES AND DRUG STORES PRINCIPAL PLACE OF BUSINESS 2205 N.E. DIVISION STREET BEND OR 97701 USA NAME & ADDRESS OF AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE 672146-93 - DE AMSTERDAM 2205 N.E, DIVISION STREET BEND OR 97701 USA REGISTRANT/OWNER 672146-93 - DE AMSTERDAM couNTlEs BAKER, BENTON, CLACKAMAS, CLATSOP, COLUMBIA, COOS, CROOK, CURRY, DESCHUTES, DOUGLAS, GILLIAM, GRANT, HARNEY, HOOD RIVER, JACKSON, JEFFERSON, JOSEPHINE, KLAMATH, LAKE, LANE, LINCOLN, LINN, MALHEUR, MARION, MORROW, MULTNOMAH, POLK, SHERMAN, TILLAMOOK, UMATILLA, UNION, WALLOWA, WASCO, WASHINGTON, WHEELER, YAMHILL By my signature, I declare as an authorized authority, that this filing has been examined by me and is, to the best of my knowledge and belief, true, correct, and complete. Making false statements in this document is against the law and may be penalized by fines, imprisonment, or both. By typing my name in the electronic signature field, I arn agreeing to conduct business elecironically with the State of Oregon. I understand that transactions andlor signatures in records may not be denied legal effect solely because they are conducted, executed, or prepared in electronic form and that if a law requires a record or signature to be in writing, an electronic record or signature satisfies that requirement. ELECTRONIC SIGNATURE LINDA HOPMANN Page 1 inGreOf {itV5l:ip :E9tt-. . . - B[ND, OR 9]703 6ARY E stND, oR97?02 LIVING TRUsT llsr]{d.g,l$"s{u$L DINt), OR9770t MARKfr RO BEND, Oft tRAttf,Rol-)ilr.YJ nAt TRU5' IrlUflzIN, MARKA TTEE TTAT {100-457 , -_, BEND, OR-97702 _ ---... BOX 5781 rBEllB, OE 9t?08 .. . .B!!D.,$ 17-75S,AO BOX 5B1s BSND. Ofi 97708 ROXOWSXI, RONALD H & PAMEL T TTEES-- IT BTND, OB9?703 DISTRICT BTND, OR 97103 JT T8 H!6HWAY 20 ISONO COUCH MAB([.T RD IllNo,0n!1701 BEND, OR 97703 AL HWY 20 HOPMANN, I-INOAATTEE OTTER RUN TN s7703 At 20 OR 97101 SUSN NW LAFAY€TIE AVE F O BOX 6005 8en.l, OR 97?08-50C5 co. BUITDING SATFff co AVE P O.gOXi005 oR 9??08-5005 755.4D 'T co. PETT R RUSSFIL From: Nick Lelack TO: Isabella Liu Subjectr FW: testimony regarding Hopmann appeal Date: Tuesday, April 10,2018 5;29:09 PM Attachments: Gauld Exhibit. Hoomann aooeal, TID water riohts mao dated 4-11-2018.odf Nick Lelack, AICP I Director DESCHUTES COUNTY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPT I 17 NW Lafal'ette Avenue I Bend, Oregon 97703 Tel: (541) 38s-1708 I Cell: (541) 639-5585 Enhancing the lives of citizens b-v delivering qualit-v sen:ices in a cost-effectil/e manner ---Ori ginal Message----- From: Nunzie lnrai]to:mrnzieG)!racifier.conr] Sent: Tuesday, April 10,2018 5:06 PM To: Nick Lelack ir {: ir 4t{ i : 1 r:, | | i! tr'!-j,.t:,r-r'.t ,t9' .r6 1a.*F&ar ,(r'trl* f. q 1 d $ $p tl 0.035 0.02 0.10S Date Created: October 5, 2S17 L Richord ond Lindo Rode 65375 Highwoy 20 Bend, OP,97703 April 70,20tB Isobello Liu Assistqnt Plonner Deschutes County 117 NW Lofayette Ave. Bend, OP97708 RE: Proposed Lond Use Applicqtion, File ?47-17-000755-AD, Appeol F ile 247 -tB -000 2 0 5- A Deor Ms. Liu, We sre writing os port of the oppeol process to the proposed grow next door to us ot 65325 Highwoy 20, Bend, OP. 97703. The Notice of Appeql listed obove hqs 4 tenets listed, qnd the oppliconts ot the heoring held April 4, 2018 fqiled to sotisfy ony of the objections. First we will qddress the setbo ck exception request thot olso is in the londscope monogement zone on Highwoy 20. There is no volid reoson to gront the set-bo ck exception to ploce greenhouses 60 f eet from the odjocent property. Another 40 feet would not make thot much diff erence. Further , the tree borrier thot the oppliconts mention sre o, f ew stroggly Juniper trees that would minimolly provide cover f or lhe greenhouses both from the rood ond the neighbors. Whileweagree this is the leost obtrusive ploce to hqve greenhouses, we f eel the trees qre not q suf f icient visuql borrier f or either tourist trqffic or the neighbors on either side. At the April4 Appeol Heoring,you mentioned thot you ond the plonning commission decided thot greenhouses did not come under the jurisdiction of buildings thot needed to conform to the londscape monogement zone. Our question is, then, why do the oppliconts need 480 wattoge to the greenhouses?If the greenhouses require electricity, especiolly this much electricity, then they ore surely considered permonent structures, qnd thus should be considered under the londscoping regulctions. We feel thot this decision is in direct conf lict with the spirit of the londscoping monqgement zone on Highwoy 20. The second reoson stoted for the oppeol is thqt the opplicont hqs foiled to demonstrote sufficient control on both noise qnd odor qt the opplicont's existing site ocross the street. The opplicont's spokeswomqn odmitted ot the heoring thot lhey were woiting for their recreotionol morijuona OLCC license (they olreody wete q medicol morijuono site)before implementing their odor control system on their existing site. Thot meqns they hove been out of complioncefor odor ond noise since December 8,2016 by the provisions of DCC18.116.330 (B) (10-12 ,76,17.) During the hqrvest seoson, especiolly, the smell drifts scross the highwoy so strongly thot you con smell it going down the rood if your window is open. We con smell it ot our qddress north of the property, ond the previous owner of the proposed grow could not sit on her porch without being sickened. This was the previous owner's stoted reoson for selling to both us, her neighbors, qnd to Bill McCormick, os stoted ot the hearing by Bill McCormick. This constitutes, ot the very least, o no foith relationship with these oppliconts. They were oble lo get owoy with not complying becquse there hqs been no county or stote oversight on medicql morijuono compliqn ce in over oyeor. Why, then, should ony of us believe whot they so eornestly ossure us on this new proposed grow? For exomple,ot theheoringthe spokeswoman stoted thot no ortificiol lighting would be used on the greenhouses, so one would ossume eleclricity is only needed for the fons qnd odor control, o system they hove only voguely olluded to. This omount of wottoge would surely not be needed for odor control. ff so, where is the engineer's report on the exscf system being implemented qnd why thot much electricity is needed? And whqt obout the noise? The spokeswomqn soid she cqn't show the Boqrd of Commissioners whot hqsn't been put in ploce yet. This is totolly bockwords. They need to prove to the Boqrd ond the County Plonning commission thot the odor ond noise will be compliont BEFORE getting their lond use permit. Whatever products they intend to use ore surely in ploce somewhere else, the mqnufocturers surely hove testimoniols, engineers surely con be exoct on the specif icotions ond how the mitigotion will work. Bock to theelectricity, whot guorontees do we hqve thot the qpplicqnts will not put grow lights in the greenhouses qt o loter dote? With thqt omount of electricity at their disposol, it would be on eosy tosk. Continuing on the no foith principle, qnd to the third oppeol item, we hqve no concrete ossuronces, other thqn the opplicont's word, thot the newly dug well, so conveniently ploced neor the proposed greenhouse site, will not be used for the grow. The opplicont's spokeswomqn stoted thot the well might be used for "woshing out pots and things like thot." Whot is to prevent them from using it for irrigotion os well? Indeed, their initiol lond use opplicotion for this grow stoted thot odjocent properties might needto drill their wells qnother 500 feel. Why would this be if they ore only using Tumqlo Irrigotion woter rights? We need mo?e thqn their word, olreody compromised by their non-complionce with their existing grow focility qcross the street, on the use of their well. A couple of other inconsistencies ore os follows. The opplicont's spokeswomon stoted there wos no bunkhouse.Wehsve enclosed o picture of the bunkhouse, olong with the outhouse situoted next to if. The prior owner hod f inished out this building os qn slternqtive ploce to sleep for her son qnd her husbond's fomily to stoy when they visited, qs the residence is o tiny one bedroom house. During the hqrvest seoson there wos evidence of q number of people stoying in the structure by the number of cors ond lights inside the building. There oppeared to be someone stoying in the troiler on site untiltodoy, which interestingly hos been moved to their property qcross the street. We don't reolly csreif someone stoys in the troiler, or the bunkhouse for thqt mqtter, but the issue is the oppliconts lied obout it. This is yet onother no foith/trust issue thot is disturbing. The spokeswomon olso stqted thot they hove 6 or so employees just like the prior owner did. Noncy Vernon never hod employees. She hired limited controct lobor hoy processors, os ourselves, to plont ond hqrvest her hoy or fix her f ences. At no time did she hove 6 or more employees going in ond out of her p)oce, ond living of her ploce, over on extended period of time. The horvest seoson hqd qn impoct on the subject property just for their existing site across the street in 2017. This impoct would be intensified if this propo sed grow is permitted. Finolly we would like to oddress the county meefing held on April ?,2018 ot 1:30. This supports the fourth tenqnt on the Notice of Appeol. At thot meeting Tommy Boney stoted thot she is in fovor of instituting o "pouse" on occepling opplicotions for grows. Phil Hend erson seemed ro ogree. She olso recommended q cop on the number of grows ollowed, especiolly in Tumolo ond Alfolfo, the two oreos thqt hove been most impocted by runowoy grow sites. This proposed grow is cleorly in Tumqlo Pleose refer to the ottoched mop thot we included lost September 27 in our initiql objection to this proposed grow. There qre qlreody o number of grows on Highwoy 20 in the immediqte vicinity. Why on eqrth would there be opprovql of qnother grow DIRECTLy ACROSS THE STREET to the some owner? It doesn't reolly matter if esch site hos its own OLCC license. The off ending sights, odors, ond noise will be doubled in q confined sreo, comprising both sides of the londscoping corridor coming into Bend. It is this scenorio thot we ossume coused Tommy Boney to consider on opplicotion pouse, ond cops on grows in Tumolo. With this kind of grow density, the neighborhood (yes it is q neighborhood even on Highwoy 20) will be overwhelmingly oltered both in terms of guolity of life ond property volues. The County needs to seriously consider the direction it wqnts Deschutes County to go. Do we wont tourists to come over the mountqins to see miles of hoop houses on Highwoy 20, to hove to roll up their windows to ovoid the smell os they come into Bend? To repeot the phrose we hapless residents continue to pleod, "enough is enough!" ToIzze Liu, Assistant Planner, Deschutes County Re: File 247 -17 -000755-AD, Appeal File 247 -18-000205-A 65325 Hwy.20 These comments relate to the Appeal filed by William McCormick for the above referenced property, and are in addition to my previous comments in response to the application filed. Please do not approve the Application for a marijuana production facility. Setback - While applicant makes the argument for a setback to provide for the best location of the greenhouses on the properly, I believe an exception to the setback rules should only be made for exceptional or unusual cases. I do not believe applicant has demonstrated this to be the case and the application should be denied because of this. While a variance for the setback would prevent the greenhouses from being as visible from neighboring properties, approval without the variance would produce a lesser amount of screening from Highway 20 and neighboring properties. As to the screening, it was brought up at the appeal hearing that some of the screening vegetation could die with some site work to be done for the new greenhouses. This would produce a lesser amount of screening in the LM Zone. If the Board decides to approve the application, then I would favor approval with the setback, as that would produce a lesser impact to neighboring properties. Prior owner of property - At the appeal hearing, applicant stated that their operations would have the same amount of traffic on the propefry, and coming to and from the proper-ty as existed with the prior owner. Applicant stated that to be six employees. The prior owner did not have any employees. She hired subcontractors on some occasions, but that was not typical. The prior owner leased the operation of the field adjacent to the proposed grow site. In most years, it was leased to the neighbor to the north. Such leasing only resulted in the lessee using his tractor to tend the field, and did not result in the traffic that the applicant states. The prior owner of the property had reduced enj oyment of her property prior to the sale of the property. She told me on many occasions that was due to her smell of the marijuana grow across Highway 20, which was owned and operated by this same applicant. The applicant did not have proper equipment to alleviate odor and noise, even during the period she was supposed to under the County regulations. I live over a half mile from that grow, and was able to smell the product on certain days, not all days. As the applicant operated with a disregard for the rules, and at the hearing misrepresented information regarding the prior owner, why should the County take the word of the applicant that it will comply? Bunkhouse and RV - The applicant stated at the appeal hearing that the bunkhouse and RV were not used as additional residences. While I cannot be certain, I can tell you from personal observation that such bunkhouse and RV had other vehicles parked near them and lights on during nighttime hours. With respect to the one bedroom home on the property, while it may not be a prohibition within the regulations, there is a very young child residing there. This type of operation does not seem right with this situation. Has it been determined what the impact of a grow operation will be on propefty with a young child, or if this is a public safety risk? Integration with property owned and operated by applicant across Highway 20 - At the appeal hearing, applicant stated the two operations would be separate in all operational aspects. This does not seem to be realistic and applicant did not come across as convincing with its arguments. As such, approval should not be granted, as if two operations are integrated" that would mean there were multiple operations on multiple properties. This also creates a public safety and traffic issue on Highway 20. As to Highway 20, both of these properties are located in heavy traffic areas with relatively high speeds, and with two Dayton Road intersections with Highway 20 that are not the best of intersections. Dayton road has skewed alignments to Highway 20 making travel from Dayton Road onto Highway 20 and travel from Highway 20 onto Dayton Road difficult and dangerous. Highway 20 is one of Oregon's tourist transportation routes to Deschutes County's largest city. It is an emergency route and freight route, and it is important that land uses approved adjacent to such important transportation routes never place these routes in jeopardy of serving their purpose for safe travel. Water usage and waste - Applicant has drilled a well of 900 feet. This does not appear to be consistent with the existing use of the property or the proposed use, and gives the appearance of an intent to use the water to supplement the water obtained from Tumalo Irrigation, both during and after the irrigation season. This will place an increased burden on the aquifer, and may cause w'ells of neighboring properties to run dry or cause a need for a deeper we1l, all at a cost to existing property owners. Contrary to what some might say, water is a finite and precious resource, and in a year of low snowfall, significant burdens are placed on both water in the aquifer, as well as irrigation water, in this case, Tumalo Irrigation District. It is well documented that marijuana grows use significantly more water than more traditional crops. Having this well can mitigate and supplement usage from Tumalo Irrigation in a year or years where less irrigation water is available. With respect to the irrigation canal, the close proximity ofthe proposed greenhouses could cause product waste and herbicide misuse and could cause farmers downstream to suffer irreparable harm to their crops. There was no discussion by applicant on this topic. Noise and odor - This is a mandatory requirement and must be submitted and evaluated. I do not believe applicant provided enough information on noise and odor mitigation. The burden here should be on the applicant, not on the County. The public should have the right to comment on this once the information is submitted by applicant. Production - One owner of 12 greenhouses on two parcels separated by a major highway is not consistent with livability in this community. There is no information provided for production amounts on either of these two properties, but reasonable people can see that this is an excessive amount of production, and a significant drain on our water and electric resources. While the area of the greenhouses may present low fire risk, this is Central Oregon, and any activities can cause a widespread fire. This was not addressed in the application. If the proposed grow is to be vertically integrated with the existing facility on the east side of Hwy 20, has it been determined if that facility's use as a processing facility means that this is one operation on two land lots, rather than two separate operations? Neighboring properties - Applicant mentioned at the appeal hearing that it was a good neighbor and minimized the impact on existing properties. In operation. applicant does not demonstrate this on its existing property. Applicant's disregard of noise and odor mitigation for a long period of time and lack of screening to minimize the impact of greenhouses to neighboring properties is apparent. The County should have reason to doubt future compliance. While not in the regulations, I believe the Board has the ability to interpret its Code to deny the application for some other pertinent reasons. These include the lack of prior compliance, the density and close proximity of this grow with others, including the existing grow operation owned by applicant, and the public safety issues related to traffic entering and exiting from Highway 20. As marijuana is a controlled Schedule I substance under Federal law, its production should not be allowed, until such time as Federal law changes to allow its production, sale, di stribution, etc. Respectfully submitted, Mark Murzin Tumalo, Oregon From Lance Piatt To Isabella Liu Subject The file number is247-t7-000755-AD address is 65325 Highway 20 Dale Friday, April 06, 201B B:26:32 AM With respect to the Hopmann application. This is as cut and dry as it gets. Set backs are set backs. If they are so stupid as to infringe on this from the start, then to hell with the application. It starts this way now... shit rolls down hill. They'll be a pain in the ass from here on out. No. .. 0 tolerance for this. Crap, I had to move my building plans 7' because of a stupid 30 year old law... "solar set back". for f#@$ 2 days a day. NO NO NO on variances!!l! This shouldn't even be a question. Lance Piatt [email protected] 541 815 0332 Cell Red lbex Solutions lnc, Rescue Respons Gear Rigging Lab Academy Raven Collective Media Trails 2 The Sea 6v-06$o@ -Bt'LhL "5nq+ RECHVED FILE 247-19-000161A Marijuana production at; APR 0 Z ZrlE 25606 Alfalfa Market Rd. Deschules County CDD Bend, OR 97701 T&N Alfalfa LLC 25590 Alfalfa Mkt. Rd. Bend, OR 97701 March 31, 2019 Jacob Ripper, senior planer Deschutes County Community Development PO Box 6005 Bend,OR 97708 Dear Mr. Ripper; We would tike to offer testirnony regarding the production of marijuana at 25606 Alfalfa Mkt. Rd. (subject property). We are protesting the approval on the grounds that the action has and will continue to place an undue hardship on the adjacent properties, The activities at the site create an attractive nuisance as well as odor and an untenable and reprehensible traffrc situation. The continued development of the nearby properties only makes matters worse. Approval of a medical marijuana grow site on the subject property caused significant negative impact. Most notably at25590 Alfalfa Mkt. Rd. ( Looney property). _,1 The subject property has a legal documented 30' roadway easement along the West and Northwest sides of section 22 at 25840 Alfalfa Mkt. Rd. (Tye property). The fact that the owners of the subject property have failed to utilize this easement should in no way have impact on the other properties. This easement has direct access to Alfalfa Mkt. Rd. as well as direct alignrnent with Dodds Rd. thereby inferring its serviceability. "Hunter Rd." in this instance is a generic term used to denote access to the area in the Northwest corner of section 22. This track predates most development in the area, Hunting was prevalent after the introduction of the canals that provided flood irrigation shallow ponds prornoting wildlife. A minor branch terminated in and created secluded------r ' :\' this area. To restrict access, prevent trespass or increase serviceable acreage, a concerted effort was directed at elirninating access over the easement located on the West edge of 25840 Alfalfa Mkt. Rd. (Tye property).These activities included flooding, trenching,fencing,rock piles, blocking with a large truck and removing a cattle guard over the ditch. The solution was a culvert placed on Lot 104 (Looney property) by Bill Tye and Norm Perkins providing an outlet for Elk Lane to Alfalfa Mkt. Rd. and then Elk Lane no longer followed the canal onto Tye property. Elk Lane is the recorded frontage for lot 104 (Looney properfy). It was quite easy to divert traffic onto the uninhabited Lot 104. A new driveway and gate was established on the (Tye property) at the easement to align with Dodds Rd. Lot 104 was then purchased by Ron Dye and an easement created to ensure access to the North. Now everybody has use of this easement. The burden of this all is most notably placed on Lot 104 (Looney property) and the residents therein. The quality of life has been degraded and the property value affected. Extra utility poles and iines erected, piping of the irrigation ditch, a culvert extension and head-wall constructed, not to mention the roadway improvements all at considerable expense. Once there was 2 households using this access now there are 5, and more on the way. The ever increasing traffic becomes more than a nuisance. Lot 104 is only 165' feet wide. Removing 30' for a roadway 10' for inigation piping and 5'for electric and communication linei leaves littie for setbacks and normal household activities. When the grow site (subject property) was active the traffic was especially bad. Wb could not get the non resident traffic to slow so we kept making improvements on the roadway. This did not help the dust situation as much as hoped, and dust abatement measures are expensive and only temporary. The subject property operators have not contributed to help recti$r this . The odor wasnlt just from the grow site but from the vehicles in transit. Having children and pets along the 1300' frontage was especially worrisome. As a Professional Engineer and Professional Land Surveyor with SunCountry Engineering and Surveying and then later with Tye Engineering and Surveying, Bill Tye had the means, motive, and opportunity to obfuscate and transfigure the adjacent properties. Every subsequent survey has different conclusions. Pins missing or mysteriously found, pins relocated. Previous surveys gleaned for advantageous markers and origins. Maps having an'ows extended or otherwise tampered with. Tax roles and property deeds call out the easements. These records are not under the purview of the beschutes County Road Dept.. Contradictory documentation with regards to the property lines and access easements along the South V+ comer of sections2l and22 were initiated by Bill Tye. This is clearly a conflict of interest and as fuch the County Commission should consider this information before allowing further development in this area. The expansion of the grow site (subject properly) to 5 greenhouses and adding a residence there more than doubles the access issues. The (subject property) already has a roadway easement. Why is it not used? The blocking of this easement has only benefited one party (Tye property) and caused considerable angst and expenditures for others. Lot 104 is in the Cascade View Estates subdivision and as such pays a tax assessment to the Estates road district. The "Hunter Rd." is not within this road district, not called out on the deed, and not maintained by the Estates Road District. The 30' roadway easement is maintained thru local cooperation. It is imperative that Deschutes County put this "Hunter Rd." in it's proper place insuring access and creating asafe thruway for commercial use and further development. This would be a mere extension of Dodds Rd. Please hnd enclosed copy's of some of the documentation pertaining to access issues and conflicts. As you are aware there is considerable paperwork on this subject at the County Road Dpt.. Thank you for your attention in this matter. Yours truly Crrl Terry Looney Nancy Breniman T&N Alfalfa LLC 25590 Alfalfa Mkt. Rd. PO Box 1609 Bend,OR 97709 t€^p1i"@.Flwryq:ffi fiEc.Elv,ffi Ronald Dyc 25610 Alfalfa Market Road APR 0 Z Bend, Oregon 977O1 ?aB 541-318-6322 DeschuteE rondye@YKWC,net CountyCDD May,2,2019 Jacob Rlpper, Senlor Planner Deschutes County, Oregon RE: Change of Status and Access 25605 Alfalfa Market Road File 247-19-000161-A I am the owner of 80 acres 17-1+22 tax lots 400 and 50O, of property dlrectly North of the appellant's property. I have llved here 30 years and bullt the road now used to access the applicant's property. lwill call the /r mlle portlon on lot 104 of Cascade Vlew Estates, the Ncnr Hunter Road. Thls road ls Contccted. I built the road on Lot 104 after I bought the property in the 198O's because Mr, Bill Tye, of Tye Engineerlng and Surueylng, contlnually flooded the easement that mlmicked the Orlglnal Hunter Road. lt ls a 3O' road and utlllty eosement created by Baxter Moore recorded as 2223-D-395, when He owned allthe property ln the area abutting C.V. Estates, and created lt to access 4 tax lots North of and behlnd both Mr. Tye's and the applicants property, The Orlglnal Hunter Road is located across the fence east of lot 104 C.V. Estates. Hunter Road was literally a hunter's road as deplcted in enclosed maps. Thls easernent traverses both Mr. Tye's property and the appllcant's property. (see lncluded mapl and glves the appllcant access to the all weather road named Wllard Rd., Alfalfa Market changes narne to Wllard at lntersectlon with Dodds. This also glves access to my property also. Mr. Tye clalmed the easement wasn't valld because it wasn't speclflcally llsted on hls Deed, although his Deed speclflcally sets aslde'the existence of, Roads, rallroads, lrrlgatlon dftches and canels, telephone, telegraph, and power transmlsslon facilltles' without deplctlng them lndivldually. (copy lncluded) Historlcally this road has been here since at least 1922, (see maps) By uslng hls posltlon as a clvll englneer, it requlred me to use attorneys to respond. He was demandlng I repurchase a new easement from hlm! I purchased lot 1O4 of C.V. Estates and bullt a road on lt to bypass the sectlon he contlnuolly flooded. His next move was to block my drlve wlth a hay truck on the 32O' sectlon where the roadJogs East. Mr. Tye had clout wlth the County both as an englneer that supplied engineering and survelng to County organlzatlons, and the Road Departme$ where hls brother worked. Pg.1 ol 2 W5,"+ a -"-*a!:FF:rylwffiryJs Ronald Dye 4t2t2019 Slx Months after I constructed the road to bypass the flood area Mr. Tye went to the Road Department and got them to declare Huntcr Roed was on my lot 104! ltwas outrageous. Every other County Agency lncluding the Tax Assessor's Offlce dlsagreed and Mr Looney (current owner) contlnues to pay taxes on thls road bed. Most disturbing was the Hard Board Copy of the Cascade Vlew Eststes had been altered. The coples before this dlspute showed a 30' road and utility easement as Baxter Moore depicted them ln flllng 223-D-395. Now the hardboard had arrows added that went across the property line to tax lot 104. An ordinary citlzen cannot remove the hardboard copy from the County's control, however a Civll Englneer can. I belleve that ls what happened. There is much evidence that the New Hunter Road was never part of lot 104. Most impresslve ls the fact that every other road wlthln the boundarles of C,V. Estates have the dlmenslons deducted from the lot dimensions so the owners aren't paylng taxes for a public road. Lot 1O4 does not. Mr. Looney's lot 1O4 had 2 prlvate easements created by me for rny sccess and another for my nelghbor. lt has now bloomed to 5 properties 6s the County allowed more bulldlng to the North. There is a posslbility for 4 additional. Lot 104 is only 165'wide and you remove 30+ feet for road and irrlgation and thls makes the road very close to Looneys house and shop. The road is level and stralght, Vc mlle long and vlsltors lgnore the need to slow down past Looneys house, especlally dellvery drlvers. Dust is massive, The apptlcant's grow operation ls a huge contributor even though they claim otherwlse. Appllcant even had the nerve to clalm they had mitlgated the lmpacts they had ln2017. Theydld not mltlgate, they did not grow a crop ln 2018r lf you authorize the expanslon of the Grow operation make lt condltlonalto them uslng thelr own easement onto the all weather road Wlllard/Alfalfa Market. They currently do not possess a drlveway permlt on the New Hunter Road and as this easement is currently overused I believe one should be denied, forcing them to develop thelr own. The road bed ls still there and only requlres gravel and some fence work. :\. \t Dye I sqfPo*+ D.q*.Js E.L P.c--,<.^eo DESGHUTES COUI l'l=40O' See Mo9 t6 r5 500 40 zl z? h D ,y D{f 500 i 25 t ro 3700 (.{ ilt' "o' t,r:1 s- 48 F ta I I tr, o I t0 6000 = cf3" r400 : o I v\ I t I :t 49 I I .I I .\ I I or\-,eN OO : S|OO I I lJ i'i ri 72 : I I I t I 'oo 8400 I l 77 ! I I i L l 76 75 z+ lrs j :itol ,1. 4oo g3oo i ,F' i I I 'i ; o roo I : I l 7 \( AG"I I ! i. I t7t4? #*:Effi:-#-*ryffi *ll ??-nt rl .. 'L,;':.'. tr vit 312 ',,r,6JS h'i\ i it-\\'i'\' l)l: i:1.! lln.iil l t'!::r111'.. is rr'qtr.-::.itt! , ;ril ;i!.\ Sl:ll(.t!l(.ltti: sll;rli bC Stttl tr,: rr,lt) l'i. i{.,:,' : l:.!. i. " l.t,l . , len,.! . +il i.,'?Oi li ;nl.l .iil.-\-\Ll.l. S. :,l0nltl:. itrrslr;rr..,[ irrrri rt i t'c, ii r'1,r \.:: !-rir:r 1: .: I ..r ,lr L,:i (:i ! c i rr 1 f1:rl;Jii"lilli, :1rr "ilili.i, r1:i.ii..,.f ttlc sinl,l^, {'r..r.rrr,c , :|i.,' f i, 1i1fg;'r11-g ir:*.r'i.1'.:,,:11 -i.,,.,,;,.,pr,., l-rr.tr il f c;tcirnlr rl,l:((,rr- L.-tc Ol.r:I ;rS sltt't:.if icir llr' 5i'1 l'rr1111 li1. 1.f i11 1 St'D,li;(:T't'0 ilre t(!r..i.(rxing r..tc,:.gr.t irrns : c.r$ l. ..\s.liSclrrsr_.Ll l-.r.rhe, :.t.\ i.fll, rlrt, prclrrist,.* |r.i....;irr rl,.';:1'f,ii'e.rl .lt;lfe L,u'".ii :(,:lL\ir1r t. l;t;-:;i iir.tl t-rri i.:rt,,, ;i;: $ ..\t .ril' i ili!:' Ihrt :::riri l;*iil I is .!isq,,rirl ii';t,Ll i..i. Sii.ir' 4 itsc ilir'..i:r'rrl!('l'tv r.'ili bt' ,o-.t!r.i....Ct ir, rrtlr.iii it(tl;il ,,,ia: , Lrt' t)(rn;tit ics irittl ilt(c.l-esi P rleril i'slCs : fatt r.'i:ihi r: iJ rrri ii tlli (! ri: ,i)i.itIicr l,.ir:ct [.1 rpIc... t't'gtrl ;t t irtrts, atssc$snlL.t) t s irrrtl ! icns tlr Lrl'Crlll .l . Hi.qlrt-s rrf rlrc r:rrhlic rn Slt'(r(\tSr rtr;rds :rr:ql lrie.n- liilYs - -l'ltc trtr.' (i!lsi(l(.t.irt iorr.l'rrr tltis c(rn\jc..:i i;ct is 1 :20, QO$. 4t) Fi*;- i. +.;!-;..-' IIJ'l'f:l) 1f1i.:- .l;t r' 9 t " r;,,.i.i: .t,.i,. t: i; ! -ti . 4.r -ri _.--; ,, t,iNI:t.t--3 :' trt'obTlli'' 0il t:G0t; ) ) s-*. f llr.schtrt r.s ) tltis t. ,l,l*', ,:+ - .,.-?"S:$il--. . I :)7e, l)cr.:ioni,l t)' be f iii C':ile lllfr rrc irb(ll'(' nnficri hAr-Tr:R s. NoilRn'io;:.':;oing rrlri .rij.l\Nrir.L .HOORI: , hrr.sh ?In(t ll trd rrife, rrntl 3q,[,llowlerlgcrl ri;, ir_ stl.umctlt to hc thci ,' \r() i un l;,rr, ,trt ln.l .lclrt. ""'s Cnrr:.:. Iilii: iir, m] #ci : :.j'oi I #n#sl *,,-' )ty Ccrn'n i,is,i o,r r:.r1, i .es l.-.!jlf;.* P"c*-tq^wo El DESCHUTES COUI l'r'4oO' n see Mop l6 l5 t 40 zt / D ''f' 600 25 I t' '0 3zoo .t a M' u't* \,.! \' .4.,L. \.,v6. ., $"-" i 48 GT n g d tr d0 )o 6000 = d 1400 ri, @ {J ppt;..;P1 I @ i 49 I i I I I "ksvE*Sf,^.ar\ I 00 6roo I ! l'/ t' 72 00 8400 l: I I I I ! I 77 I t. t I I l I I I i t. 76 t. 75 z+ ,i zs ii'ror l!roz L' 400' 9300 f F F I I i I I I 9 roo ( it I I I : i I I 2A z7 I l I 17142 tVr, tlt- ) -*+. !fr,rr- D a a. o, 6ll $tg. b{ {tl f.rrr,, "'Ta:+J sw'- {*u. i"w'. Ltt J6t'- l+.- I ?'*. 3' \u", sft^ gow" tsE il E WrW' sE' t p Erwl r sE. { I w t { E E'w' SE. SE' d wtwE! sEA 6 Er W'Ea sEr I! o wtElEr sE'sE' o .nl ot f\J o n \'.t IoZ -o o \ 'fuY o t { a ba v t n ,1 -z lttl t, I l, € @ lI.. k s ( s"r-s $C? l*, lr t\ +-i .q? 'a_ @ tslF c0 t t 'ls- L 4a t'l q, { -?€ -O \u,. t0 't'-'rt- .4, 1,. * c6' 'l- i ql 0j o \ t*o- N "qs,^ ; +4- $ o tltr-. O +lo sb' tqs'r' { 636 x b. 7 -{ NOO Q c.{ 'sF1s€1 o\ \ -] \-r E'w'wlsEa ,Ea q l\ QI { q h wtE'w'sEl 984 { >q. a * l t ga d ol'4 I €'E W' sEr s 68.' o 3tn w'w'E'58158+ J* aolJl- o qi N E'w'E'- 5E1 sEl \ o 2 { t! w"Ez E1sEl t\t I E2€'8" sEl sEr I /300 l4'. 30 Po o4 (ut,tity Fatarrra,n * 6 27 - 532O 5 \J \ \ AJ I n-l I ot fit'1p { di {fi h *s? :-. slr$:t ",- rl l' {x ll rdr l I oll L a{. l' .i(l' IP I s\ I :n ,t I t ,.1 iq. l \- rS I fTl ic: :tt-i!: I 7:r lr |7 F;- I *1, I s't't :L ( .tq o\ .D iq , oI 6 , $e I :\ D C- g) s. c. ls .;t o e e t c a a!] I ! crl ii tr P tiJ { $ ar 3 lb $ FOWELL sUtrtsS' I d72 ilt D^Jl;n o* t162 I' t ul ,Z i S 'fitfiat{a, ordra'" clYa I I I":zc'(" 4,rl{@t!.61.A:l\.ErJ*\.,id!lj']9':if,!,.|i,,.--:-' DEPANTME i? oF TX€ riltEiton SUNEAU OF RECIII ATION NATION OESCHUTES I tvE3ttcAtloffS-oREcoil s0 U UNIT COnOls E R MAP oRAWi. . Conol line ?iacEo. igobte londs D-t t :. *: ,'t: / -r"..: I:i!,. I :r.l::t:.i.:t\ rr:sb.+:.ri : ','i.i r ;; :;r. . .r: ii iri' ; i i .. .i , ,r; r ;; "!; s .\ .::tr- ': Lr. 'i::1 ':r:.::jiia:iir' ::i.i r 1 ;:: 1,.*t ;: :1: 1 !.+ 1rr'-1"r,i. t ".. )3 rs l- lj F G $. \ ''frfr;4.{rie. IH: (f) 'i b r::1: ,t f. I i rili- , i.r'i. ij. :iu:ri: ir:, :.,' i 7,27 Ac. (# 1i t i i.; fi!i:.: @ AF @'"" Ledge r,.t r:;: ti 'i:, /3 /g ; .n .. :f; r.lri:i1.: ;t j iir lri ;: r rr i.l;'i' : iin*i*ri+:ii'*riiilli;*i Ja:: iE" <' 'i. 'lno'r {=d, #h; : ,*. ! r- 6W E,W.'EE - ;:i:i' C+rs rq \ thctrd, ffi,-{$, ,1 1r : :rtt' I *t$ I 29 /m,Ac ; :l t. ; i i:i'i.j .. ':+ 9,79 l(osle ' ?':,, o(nf{ t,2l fr. w, P n: tScq/e,' / 2O0' ;iiljjlilt:'i! "opee\1 ;; :J::rr.ii;'r'rr;d 1 OEFAR'MENI OF TAE IilTEIIOA !uRlau 0FFECLlrArroi oEscxuT€s ATION rNvE3TtoAtrofls.onEcoil s T HUN conols GE R AL conol line igoble londs I t2- /nJ""* t h"41u, 72 r;zv / Ashley Williams Frcm: Denise Dudley Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Flagged IEXTERNAL EMAIL] Dear Council Members, I was at the meeting on Wednesday, March 27th contesting the application to grow recreational marijuana at 25605 Alfalfa Market Road. I live at 25600 Alfalfa Market Road, so I am very invested in the decision you come to. I felt that the applicants were not entirely honest with you when they stated that they had not had a violation since 2017. Actually, I am fairly certain they have not been growing since 2017. When we bought the house from Tom Moore, he stated that they had not been in production for a year at least, and since living at this house, I have not witnessed any sign of people on the property, or even usin! the road to get to the property (except once or twice in 5 months) So when they state that they no longer have been getting any violations it kind of loses it's value - they are not growing! And when they did grow, they got violations. And now you are considering increasing the size of their operation, and yet, they proved themselves untrustworthy and not in compliance already. What is the possibility that they will be in compliance when they have a bigger facility - they didn't do it before on a smaller scale. My husband had an issue with their figures on water usage. Beyond the fact that they are not in compliance with some of the statues of the water use agreements in Alfalfa, they seem off on their figures. I didn't hear these figures myself, but my husband understood that their $'t water usage for the years of growing (obviously not in the past two years when not growing) was 2,O00,000 ,{^u gallons a year - which figures gallons gallons '"'/' out to 1200 a day, not the 500 they claimed, and if they are i, 4fl growing exclusively in greenhouses, their growing season is even shorter, so more water per day. \,., ' .F Everything I can find about growing recreational Mar'rjuana says that Oregon has an overabundance of the crop, therefore it begs the question - where are they going to sell their product? lf they stay in legal channels (selling within the state) how can they recap their investment? Why were they not successful in growing medical Marijuana? I believe you have a duty to consider what kind of element you are allowing into our community. lf they can't perform legally, what is your responsibility when they start selling illegally? What is our recourse, as community members? ln conclusion, these people have proven that they can not or will not follow the rules already, and have gotten violations when working in a smaller facility. I cannot see what makes you believe that they will follow the law when working a larger facility. Daniel Tye's lawyer also pointed out many places where they are either in violation, or not in compliance with the statues governing the Alfalfa water usage. lt seems to me that if you give them the OK, given the details that Mr. House's lawyer went over, you are making sweeping changes to the statues that govern the water usage in Alfalfa. 1 lhopethatyouwillconsiderallof the membersof thecommunityof Alfalfa,and most especially the members that actually live in the community - not people that want to have a facility there, but don't Iive there, when you decide on this matter. Thank you, Denise Dudley 2 From: David Doyle X'rom: Matt Cyrus Deschutes County Board of Commissioners Re: 247-18-000890 AD Commissioners, I hereby submit these comments in support of tlre above nentioned application on belulf of the Deschutes County Fann Bureau. 1. Greenlrouses are cornmonly used in agriculture and have been recognized as an agricultural building throughout the state. The Nursery industry is Oregon's largest commodity and relies heavily on greenhouses and graveled nursery areas independent of tlre underlying soils. lrttns://oregonfresh.net/education/oregon-asricultue-production/oregon-nursen'-industry/ 2. Marijuana is a legal crop grown in an Exclusive Farm Use (EFU) zone. The EFU zone is reserved for industrial use agriculture. is zone. is sometimes noisy, smells bad, and not be friendly local residential uses. This-'his not a residential Industrial agriculture nay to is why it is zoned EFU and rvhy new homes are required to acknowledge such uses in this zone and why Oregon's Right to Fann .aws protect agricultural uses in these zones. 3. Most of the county's marijuana codes, in general violate state statute, in that tlrey exceed reasonable Time, Place, and Manner restrictions on the use of EFU lands for the production of legal marliuana. The county has no business regulating water use as this is tlre under tlre proper authority of the Department of Water Resources. Sincerely, Matt Cynrs, Prcsident Deschutes County Fann Bureau 2 Merch fl8, gtl'lg Tb whom it may concern, I am undsey Sheddan and my husband h tJavld Sher[dan. tllle hav* 4 qhlldrcn and fl.rn eg$O acrefar,n'r [n Alfalfa. \i/a haw owpd our land forlS ysaru novtr.ln tflat 15 ]f€ars we haue hed our hlr sharu of bad expsrlsncree wltti nelghbnrsl I'm wrlsng tnday on behalf sf Carn€Kin lfea and Eavld Huuse. They nwn tlra land that neighbors ue to th+ west' lfile have gredty snjoyed hadng them:next door: They affi klnd, helpfu!, and nespectfull UVe hav6 nevar had any problenrs wlth the s,msll {$rrln# from thetr land. ln fnlalrlng l ju+t want to expruos horiu much vue sppreclate sharing a Sence wlth ttrern and we hope they are able ta utlllp thelr pruperty ln tlre way they.desire' fr haue totefi falth that vrrl]ft do lt well end not cff !$E eftyon* eny hasele., Thank*.you for your f m+; Stncerelp Davld and Llndsey Sherldan Ashley Williams Frcm: TCC - Alice Tye Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Flagged IEXTERNAL EMAIL] Jacob, Please accept my comments (attached) for the open record in the Tye appeal of the Yee/House application. Thank you very much, Alice Tye 1 Jacob Ripper, Associate Planner April212019 Deschutes County Comin unity Development Jacob.Ripper@deschutes:org :RE::submittalto'theqpsn RecordforAppealof Marijuana Production,at2S6OOAiratta Market Rd. (247-18:00089o.'A0) Please consider the following comments expressing my concerns regarding the Tye appeal of the Yee/House application to convert:from medical to recreatiohal mariiuana productiori; I attended the hearing on March 27, 2019 and would like to submitthis to the Open Record. lam BillTye's widow. 7; in'his preientation on March:27, 2019, Mr. aftempted talcomparewaterluseiormarijuana production to water use 1or' 6 lypical farrh crop. He incorrectly stated that Bili tye raised:and irriiated alfalfa hay, but in reality; our hay has:been a'grass hay crop. We'also iriigated acres of grass pastures on otrr pioperty, Mr; Yee'neglected to ciarifi/ that he was,iomliai'inggibundwatdr firim a welilwhich hismarijuatta facllity uses), to surface irrigation'water (whiCh pastures ahd far:m ciops use). Very different souices and intended'for diffeient purposes: Mir'rjuana productioh does,not use surfaie ,.farm irrigation water/and ittherefor:e should not be blindly treated by the County aS if it Were a true crop'i. Fu*hermore, "farm cropst' usefarmland; while the marijuana plants are in pots and do not touch th€ fdmrland ioil. 2: Before sdmethihg like this can be approved; acturate information neeiis to be gained,sn the quaritity of thefiesh;:potable well'water that therapplicantuset:howit'ii,beifig,gged,,6hd:how it,is disposed of ortcE. it becoines wistewater, Thefe is ah'eady information to indicatethat the quantity of weii water mariiqlna in the lsed for:growirrg:and,processing Atfalfa,area i5 drving uB nea'rby domeitic WellS; Farm famiiiei;need well witer for: EVerydalrliving.,lt:ij'not aightrthat marijuana facilitiel carr be.ailowed to take large quantities of water from this limited aquifer when such use adversellr affects the use of tiue domestic weiisndeded by Alfalfa reiidents, Additionatly, is the marijuana wastewater (with the impurities it nowcontains from prodessing the:pialrts); cohtaminating t6e water supplyfor hearby wells or.har:ming wiiUiite, birds, inSects, of domestii enimals? 3, Irrilated farinland (mps,or pastures) has the:b'enefit of prwidiiig fu6i1"1,1o. ail forms of wiidlife includin$:insetts bnd birds; lt also maintains the green icenid pastures and fields which make up,thel desiied landscape oflruial'areas; A,maiijuanaiacility:is,an ind(is*iel business thaidoes:nohe ofthis: tt is not compatible and degrades everything that is valu€d in:a rural community and a rurailcountrySide, It degrades what Deschutes County has alWays:treasured. 4; Typicalfarms and randhes in,DeSchutds'County are relativelysmall, are owner.opbiated:and the owners attually rdside and liveithere.: lt is:their home.:They develop and use their property for a rural lifestyle'and they want to enj,oy'their surroundings"This facitity,adverseiy affects those residents and their enjoyment of their:home; property; and community. Farmers, ranchers, and their families would nbt chciose- tollive on their own property if it was the source foi bbnoxious odoii; endless noise, annoying lighting, and had a stream of traffic,going ip,sn6 rut. they,woutd not,raise.a famiiy there,if theif empfctyees had criminal records; were druig users.,or'had dunious paits. Farmers; ranchers, and other rural reSidents and their families do notrwant to be neighbors to such places either, and gimplf should not have to be, there isa huge difference in issues'relardin$:marijuana "usCl'versuS'"productioh and proieising.'r Ev€n though the State'and Deschutes Cbuhty:may have approved the use of this product; the citieens (and possibly the Deschutes Couhw Board of Commissioners) were Rot adequately informed and did not understand or get to weigh in on how it would be grown and piocessed; or what dieadful and Unfortunate impaCts there Could possibly'be. We had no clue; I urgd the Commissioners to' please support the health and well-being of the nlfalfa neighbors and reject the Yeb/l-louse application, Please consider the above issues and conCern! and consider the true impacts. this marijuana faciiitv (as well as allthe otherS in the area) are heiming,the landscape; culture, and livability of Alfaift- especially for. its closest neighbofs; lt is just ilot,compatible and brings too inany unnecessary and undesirabte impacts; frustration, and Stress to the nei$hbors; Thank you for considering my commeht5: Mry AtICE.TYE TyeCattleCo @yahoo :co m Ashley Wlliams Frcm: Lindsey Pate Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Flagged IEXTERNAL EMAIL] Hello, Please see the attachment for my testimony in support of the land use application filed under 247-18-000890- AD. Happy to answer any questions. Jacob, will you please confirm this will get entered in the record? Thank you and have a nice week! Lindsey Pate CEO and Co-Founder at Glass House Grown, Award Winning Craft Cannabis President at Cascade Cannabis Association, Cenffal Oregon's Cannabis Business Advocacy Group Lindsey@sl as shous egrown. com 541-213-9306 EL ASS HO usE GR ofllrt 1 April2, 2019 1 Dear Chair Henderson, Vice-Chair Adair and Commissioner DeBone, Thank you for letting me speak to why I support the staff's decision in approving the land use application located on 25606 ALFALFA MARKET RD, BEND, OR 97701 for cannabis farming (File No. 247-18-000890-AD). My name is Lindsey Pate and I live in Terrebonne on Exclusive Farm Use Land. I served on the Deschutes County Marijuana Advisory Commlttee (MAC), I am an owner of a craft cannabis business and I am the president at Cascade Cannabls Association. As I have said in the past, I grow more and more concerned about the state of cannabis land use in Deschutes County. This appeal is another example of an application that meets the code and yet we are disputing the validity of an agricultural farm crop being grown on Exclusive Farm Use Land in Oregon. Back when we starting discussing the regulations, it was stated many times by the current Commissioners at the time, the Planning Commission at the time and by members on the MAC, that we as a County wanted to create an opportunity for Craft Cannabis farmers to operate in the regulated cannabis market here in Oregon. During my time on the MAC, I learned a lot about The Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan, which specifically calls for Deschutes County to preserve farmland and protect both current and future agricultural opportunities via the Exclusive Farm Use Zone by supporting stakeholders in studying and promoting economically viable agricultural opportunities and practices (DCCP, Policy 2.2.10)and encouraging smallfarming enterprises, including, but not limited to, niche markets, organic farming, farm stands or value-added products (DCCP, Policy 2.2.11). Supporting craft cannabis farmers utilizing EFU land is a terrific way to actively meet the intentions of the Comprehensive Plan and I have no doubt in my mind that Mr. Yee and his family will contribute to the craft cannabis market; which is a niche market, it is organic farming, and it results in value-added products. As the applicant, Mr. Yee has proven via his burden of proof that the use can adhere to the code that was created to govern local cannabis businesses in the unincorporated areas of Deschutes County. The staff, who are both highly qualified and professional in their work, have deemed this application to be complete, approved and have clearly stated in the decisions that those concerns have met the county's code. Ultimately this is a land use that is permissible for the subject property's zoning and meets the code. Our land use process should not be so overly burdensome and lengthy that it prevents law-abiding farrners from participating in a regulated system. When the State of Oregon voted to allow adult cannabis consumption, localjurisdictions were given autonomy to opt in or out of cannabis operations, and Deschutes County after, a very lengthy process choose to allow cannabis businesses in our unincorporated land. The question is not should this business be allowed to operate but if it meets the code. Please treat our cannabis farmers with respect and give them an equal opportunity to use their farmland for just that, farming. Thank you for you time, Lindsey Pate CEO and Co-Founder, Glass House Grown President, Cascade Cannabis Association 54L-923-O42A Resident in Terrebonne OR on EFU land. Private Mailbox: 2660 NE Hwy 20, Ste 610-443 Bend, OR, 97707 GtA 55 HOU5I 6r0wN lntegrity Service Excellence Transparency Ashlev Williams Frcm: td tammy Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Flagged Forwarded message From: td tammy Dear Commissioners, It is ABSURD that this application was approved due to the history of applicant (Cameron Yee) NON COMPLIANCE with OLCC most recent: OLCC news release of February 2I,20I9 llunchbox Alchemy 2 violations must pay $8,415.00 or 51 day suspension / license CHC laboratories LLC managing member Cameron Yee. I have also found non-compliance on Mr. Yee on below listed dates: May 2,2017 July 26,2018 August 24,2018 By approving this particular application ,you will be adding more Non-Compliance to the very Rules and Regulations you sought after to research and implement to avoid and deter such actions by a NON-Compliant Applicant. Our Law enforcement and Code Enforcement can not keep up with the Marijuana Grows that are already approved at this time, especially in the Alfalfa Market area now. The property Owner has had previous Code Enforcement Complaints on this property previously. Who is going to enforce regulations and rules on this ?. By reviewing documents it is clear access is a real PROBLEM. I dont like to request that the previous file of application and then appeal be opened and submitted, but I feel it is pertinent as it is just a REPEAT application that is NOT COMPLETE and Does not adhere to the required RULES and REGULATIONS put forth by (YOU) Our County. I stand behind "OUR COUNTY OF THE TIME,PLACE AND MANNER IT WAS GIVEN TO IMPLEMENT" of this new industry. If we are going to have this new industry it needs to adhere to our county rules and regulations, If it doesnt, the application should NOT HAVE BEEN or BE APPROVED. I am completely Oppossed to the approval of this Application. I clearly cant understand how it was originally approved with all the NON - COMPLIANT issues it has ! Please take time to review the facts relating to this Application. # of appeal file I wish to be openedis24T-T7-000612-AD . Respecftrlly, Tammy Threlkeld 23344 Alfalfa market rd. Bend, Or 9770I 1 Ashlev Williams Frcm: Johnshort@usa,com Sent: Wednesday, April 3, 2019 3:43 PM To: Jacob Ripper Subject: Fwd: Scan Attachments: 201 90401 scan20201 6.pdf; ATT00001.htm IEXTERNAL EMAIL] John A. Short CCB # l97l2l Water Right Services, LLC PO Box 1830 Bend, OR 97709 54t-389-2837 [email protected] Begin forwarded message From: "[email protected]* @ Date: April 1, 2019 at9:24:58 PM PDT To: [email protected] Subject: Fwd: Scan Hope this helps! John A, Short CCB# Lg7t?t 541-389-2837 Water Right Services, LLC PO Box 1830 Bend, OR 97709 iohnshort@usa. com oreqonwater, us Begin forwarded message From: JohnA. Short<@t Subject: Scan Date: April 1 ,2019 at 1:19:54 PM PDT To: John A. [email protected]> 1 April 1,2019 Deschutes County Commission Re: Water rights cunently approved on 25606 Alfalfa Market Road, TL I7L4220001400. Dear Honorable Commissioners: At my client's request, I'm writing to hopefully answer questions pertaining to the currently approved water rights on the above referenced 30 acreproperly. Special Order Volume 107, Pages 2BAfi attached records Oregon Water Resources Deparhnent's Final Order approving Transfer T-L?2,6F^ locating said water rights on said properly: Mr. Cameron Yee was among the first Deschutes County cannabis,growers to secure water rights through this fransfer appiied for February 1,2016. The only condition concerningpart of constructing the system is # 8 requiring installation and mairrtenance of a totalizing flowmeter, accessible with notice by the Watermaster. Recording or reporting water use is NOT a condition of this water right. The nursery watering system must be totally constructed by October I,2023 unless an extension is applied for and approved. Mr Yee has always.been helpful and anxious to be legal in the process. As with any water right, the actual amount of water authorized is listed as a maximum rate and duty - NOT underlying explanations of maximum rate of, volume per acre. This right authorizes up to 0.04 cfs (18 gallons per minute) and 8 AF (2.6 million gallons) annually. For comparison, a 36 acre inigation water rightjust down Alfalfa Market Road (also attached) authorizes up to 0.41 cfs (184 gallons per minute) and 108 Af (35.2 million gallons) annually from their wells. Hope this helps. Thank you all for serving Deschutes County. Sincerely, John A. Short Water Right Semices, LLC P.O. Box 1830 John A. Short CCB# l97l2t [email protected] Bend, OR 97709 541-389-2837 sAAA4,slgCgSJeaELsS BEI'O'RD Tm WATERRESOURCES D&P,AR MENT OF THE STATE OFOREGON h the Matter sf Transfer Applicatio.n ) FTNAL ORD:ER APPROWNG A T-12263, Deschutes County ) CI{ANGE.IN POINT OF ) APPROPRIATION, A CHANGE IN ) PLACE OF USE, AND A CFIA}IGE IN ) CFIARACTER OF USE Anthority Oregon Revised Stahrtes (ORS) 537.705 and 540.505 to 540.580 establish the process in which a water rightholdu rnay suhndt a request to Eansfer the point of appropriation, 1{ace of use, or character ofuse authorized under an exisri4g water righl Oregon Adrninistrative Rules (CIAR) Chapter 690r Division 380 implement the shtutes and provides the Department's procedures md citeria for ev.aluating transfer applications, Applicant DAYID HOUSE 13 LINCOLN TAIIREL ROAD BI"AIRSTO\trn i,, NJ 07825 Findings of Fact 1 . On February i , 2016, S20 Dr!$,IAI\4ICS filed an application to change the point of appropriation and to change the place ofuse and to change the character of use under Certificate 90952. The Departnnent assigned the application nunber T- 12263. 2. Notice of,the application fur tr,ansfer wes published on Febnrary 9, 20l6,pursuart to OAR 690-3,80-4000. No cornrnents were filed in respo$se to the rrotiee. On August 31, 2016, the Departnent 3. approved anessigr,rmentgf Trarsfer "Application T-12?63 to Dmrid ltronse. 4. On Decemb er ?2, 2A16, the Departrrent csntac,ted the applicant's agent to noti$ thern of deficiencies inthe applicationandmap. onJanuary Tl,zol7,rhe applicantos agent submittednewmaps and ammded applicatiunpa.gonresolvingthe.deticiencies. On Decernber 8, 2015, Transfer Application T-l2Zt4 wes filed,, on Deeember 10, 2015, TransferApplicalionT-l22l5 was fiIed on January 1,1.,2016, TransferApplication T-12241 wtrs filed, cn,February l, 2016, Transfer Applicatiots T-12264 and T.tr2265 were filed. These trausfers all rnodify thE siuhe right, describid by Certificate 91952,ttrat has been Thisfirralordsis,subjecttojudicialrevlew,byttre,CourtofAppealsunder,OR$ lss.4S2.Anypetitionforjudicial, review mustbe filod wirhin the 60day timeperiod,specified by ORS 183C8?(1). Pu$uant ro ORS 536.0?5 and OAR 13740?-067$, You may petiticn for judicial rwiew or petitiort the Director for remnsideration of this order" A petition forreconsideratibn may be granted'or denied,bythe,Dhector, andifno action is ta*en rrithin 60,days followingthe date the 'petition was,fi1e4 the petition,shall be deemed denied. T- I 2263 lfo;approve.salr Page I of5 Special Order Yolunre 107 P,age *13 proposed to be rnodified in T-12263. Certificate 90952 shall be canceled after all transfer applications are processed. 6. On June L6,20'17, the Department mailed a copy ofthe draft Preliminary Deterr-nination proposing to approve Transfer Application T^12263 to the applicant. Thl draft preliminary Determination cover letter set fbrth a deadline of July 16, ZA|T,fo-r the applicant to respond. 7 On July 2:1,2017, the Department received a request to extend the completion date to five years, the completion date will now be October I,Z0Z3. I On Septernber 5,2017, the applicant's agent provided the necessary information to demonstrate that the applicant is authorized to putsue the transfer. The applicant requested that the Departmentproceed with issuance of a Preliminary Determination. 9. On October 11,2A!7 , the Departrnent issued a Preliminary Determination proposing to approve Transfer T-12263 and mailed a copy to the applicant. Additionally, notice of the Preliminary Detennination for the transfer application was published on the Department's weekly notice on October 17,2A17, and in the Bend Bulletin newspaper on Ociober 14, and zl,ZQ,l7, pursuant to ORS 54A.52A and OAR 690-380-4020' No protests were filed in response to the notices- l0: The portion of the right to be transf,erred is as follows: Certificate: 90952 in the narne of,NIKKIASUMMER RAIN MALLGY (perfected under Permit G-11126) Use; IRRIGATION OF 1.9 ACRE Priorify Dates:OCTOBER 12; l99A FOR IRRIGATION USE Rate: 0.04 CUBIC FOOT PER SECOND (CFS) FOR IRRIGATION Soureer ONE WEIL, within the DESCFruTES zuVER BASIN Authorized Point of Appropriation: Twp Rns Mer Sec o-o Measured Disiances 640 FEET NORTH AND I4OO FEET EA ST FR.OM 17S 13E WM r6 SE NE THE CI/4 OFSECTION 16 Authorized Place of Use; IRRIGATION Twp Rng Mer Sec o-0 Acres l7s 13E WM l6 NENE 0.5 17S t3E WM I6 SW NE 0.1 17s i3E WM l6 SE NE 1.3 i1. Certificate 90952 does not specify the inigation season, nor is an inigation season specified by basin program or decree. Consistent with OAR 690.250, the inigation season is March I through October 3I. T- 12263,pd.approve.sah Page 2 of5 SpecialOrder Volume 107 Page }\\ 12. Transfer Application T-l226gproposes to move the authorized point of appropriation approximately l0.rniles firrm tlre sxisting point of,aplmopr*atiOnto: Two R$s I Mer Sec 00 6S0FEETSOUm{ l7s l4E WM 22 NW SW AND 7OO EEET EAST FROM TTE WI/4CORNER OFSECTTON.22 13. Transfer Application T-12263 proBoses to change the ch;arac'ter of use 1g nursery uss. 14. Transfer Application T-12263 also proposes to change the place of use ofthe right to; TlvD RnA Mer I Sec 0EO Acrss 175 14E wM{ 22 NW''SVf 1.9 1'5. The,amormtofwaferused forNURSERy OPERATIONIS islimitedto adiversionsf 0,15 cubic foot per second per aere and 5.0 affe feet per acre per year. For the inigation of containerizu.d nur$6ry.planh, the amourrtof,water diverted is timited to ONE=FORTTEr,'H of one cubis foot per second (or its equivalent) aild 5.CI a$c feet per acre per ycar. For,the irrigation af in-ground nurcery plants, the alncunt ofweter diverted is timitba to ONE- EiGlf[IETH of one cubic fooJ per se_cond lgt itr equivalent) and 2.5 acre feet per ssre per year' The sse,of water far NURSERY OPERATIONS rnay be nrade at any time of the'year that&e use is berrefieial. Forthe irrigation of any ofher,crop, the arnountof wate. divertsd is.limited to ONE-EIGHTIETH ofone cubic foot per second qor its equivatent) and 2.5 acre feetperacre during the irrigafion:s€nson of€ach year, 1,6. Using the nursery rate and dufy described in Finding of Fact No. 15 above, the rate of di,versiotl, place of use, and quantily proposed 9f\ry.ater for the nursery use under the portion of the right for irrigation usE strall be lif,ited to a rnanimlrm,rate of diversian of,0..S4lubic ftot per secand (cft) during the irrigation seaso$ of each year, a place sf.use of,0"2$6 acre,irt area (0'04 cfs + 0,15 sfslacrs : A,266 a*e), and a total volur-ue diver.fed ofnot to exceed 1.33 acre foot (0,266 acre x 5.0 aere feet : 1.33 ,acre foot) dr:ring the irrigation season of March I tbrough October 31, firrther limited to: Containeitzed nursery plants - A rnaximr:m rate of djversion of 0.04 cfs, a place of use of + 1.6 acre (0.04 cfs 0.025 cf#acre), and a maxinrum total volume diverted of A.O acre fest fl.6 acre,x 5.O acre feet per acre) during the inigation season of March I through October 31, or trn-ground nursery plauts-- A umxirnum rate qf div€rsion of 0.04 cfs, a plaee of use of 3.2 acres (0.M cfs + 0.01,25 cfs/acre), and amaximr.un total volume diverted of 8"0 acre feet (3.2 acre x 2.5 acre,feet,per acrg) during the inigation season of March I through October 31. Transfer Review erfterio,{OAR 690-3 I 0-40 I 0) l?. Water has beenused within the last five years according to the terms and conditions ofthe right. There is qs information in:the record that would demonstrate thatthe rightis su\iect to forfeitlre under ORS 540,610. T-l 2263.pd,approve.sah Fage 3,ofS Special OrdgrVotrume 107 P4e 4lf 18. pipeling A PumP, and sprinkler system sufficient to use the fullamount of water ailowed undertlre existing right were present within ,O* 6yg.!e4r period prior to submittal of Transfer Application T -l 2263 . 19- The proposed changes, as conditioned, would notresult in enlargement of the right. 20. The proposed changes would not result in injury to other water rights. 21. All other application requirements are met. Conclusions of Law The change in point of appropriation, change in place of useo and change.in character of use proposed in Transfer Application T-12263 are consistent with the requir.ments of ORS S3T.70S and 540.505 to 540.580 and OAR 690-3S0-5000. Now, therefore, if is ORIIERED: 1. The change in point of appropriation, change in place of use, and change in character of use proposed in Transfer Application T-|2263 are approved. 2. The right to the use of the water is restricted to beneficial use at the place of use described, and is subject to all other conditions and limitations contained in Certificate 90952 and any related dqcree. 3' Water right Certificab9A952 is cancelled. A new certificate willbe issued desuibing that portion of the right notaffected by this transfer and transfercT-I2214,7-lZZl5,T-lZ24I, T-12264 andT-12265. 4. The quantity of water and place of use allowed for the proposed nurseryuse under the portion of the right for inigation use shall not exceed a rate of diversion of,0,04 cubic foot per second (efs), aplace of use of 0.266 acre in area, and a total volume diverted of not to exceed 1.33 acre foot during the irrigation season of March 1 through October 31. Containerized nursery plant use shall be limited to arate of diversion of 0.04 cfs and a place of use of i.6 acre in area, further limited to a total volume of water diverted of 8.0 aore feet during the irrigation season of March I to October 31. In-ground nursery plant use shall be limited to a rate of d.iversion of 0.04 cfs and a place of use of 3,.2 acres in'aiea, further lirnited to a total volume of water diverted of 8;0:acre feet during the inigation season ofMarch I through October 31. 5. The quantity of water diverted at the new point of appropriation shall not exceed the quantity of water lawfully available at the original point of appropriation. 6. Water shall be acquired from &e same aquifer (water source) as the original point of appropriation. 7. The former place of use of the transfbrred right shali no longer receive water under the right. L Water use measurement eonditions: T - | 2263 .p d.approve ;sah Page 4 of5 SpeciatOrderVolume 107 Page }\b a. Before water use may begin under this order, the water user shall install a totalizing flow meter, or, with prior approval of the Directo4 another suitable measuring device at each new point of appropriation. b. The water user shall maintain the meter or measuring device in good working.order, c. The water user shall allow the Watermaster access to the meter or measuring device; provided however, where the meter or measuring device is located within alrivate structure, the Watermaster shall request access upon reasonable notice. 9. Full beneficial use of the water shall be made, consistent with the terrns of .this order, on qr before October tr20ie3. A Claim of Beneficial Use prepared by a Certified Water Right Examiner shail besubmitted by the applicant to fhe Departrnentwithin one year after the deadline for completion of the changes and fi.rll benefrcial use ofthe water. 10. After satisfactory proof of beneficial use is received; a new certificate confirming the right transferred will be issued. Dated at Salem, Oregon this Z( day of November, 2017. Administrator, for Thomas , Director Oregon Resources Department Mailing date: fiInV o ol,nt., T-l2263.pd.approve. sah Page 5 ofS Speciat Order Volume 107 PageaF STATE OF OREGON COUNTY OF DESCHUTES CERTIFICATE OF WATER RIGHT TIIIS CERTMCATE ISSUED TO DAVID AND KARENROWE 19971 PENN RD WALTON, OR n49A confirns tlie right ro use rhe waters of WELI,S NO.'S I AND 2 in. the DRY RwER BASIN for IRRIGATION OF 36,0 ACRES. This right was perfected under Permit G-12745, The date of prior$y is OCTOBER 2, 1995. The amount of watet to which tbis right is €ntitled is limited to atr amouilf actually beneficiirlly used and shall not exceed 0"41 CUBIC FOOT PER SECOND, or its equivalent iucase of totation, measured at the wells. The period of the allowed use under this right is limited to April I through October 31 of each year. The wells are iocated as follows: WEIL NO. 1 .I{E 1/4 N8 1/4, SECTION 25, TOWNSHIP 17 SOTfiI{, RANGE 14 EAST, W.M.; 225 FEET SOIJTH AND 562FEETWEST.FROM TIIENECORNEROF SECTION 25: AND WELL NO. 2 , NE I/4 NE 1/4, SECTION 25, TOWNSHIP 17 SOUTI{ RANGE T4 EAST, W.M.; 444 FEET SOUTH AND 585.FEET WF,ST FROM THE NE CORNER OF SECTION 25. The amount of water used for irrigation, together with the amount secured under any other righl. existing for the.same lands, is lifrlited to ONFEIGHTIETH of one cubic foot per second per:actre, or its equivalent for each acre irrigated and shall be further limited to a diversion of not to exceed 3.0 acre-feet per acre for each acre irrigated during the irrigation season of each year. The.use shall conform to such.reasonable rotation system as may be ordered by ttre proper state ofFrcer. A descriptiou of fhe place of use to which tbis right is appurtemnt is as followsi NE 1/4 NE 1/4 36,0 ACRES SECTION 25 TO TAISHIP 17 SOIIIItr, RJ,}IGE 14EAST, W"M. Measurement, recording and reporting conditions: A. The water user shall install a oeter or other suitable mearuring device as approved by the Director. The water user shall mainain the.meter or measuring device in good working order. B. The water user shall allow the watermaster access to the meter or rneasuring deyice; providcd however, where the meter or measuring device is lixated within a. private. strucurre, tbe watermaster shall request.acc€ss upon reasonable notice. c Ttre Dhector may require.the water user to keep and maintain a record of the amount (volume) of wster used aud-nay require the water user to report water use on a.periodic schedule as established by the Director. In additioq the Director may reguire thc water user to report general watpr:use irdorrration; tlie periods of water ust and the ptace and naftre of u$e of wate.r undcr &e right. The Director ma11'provide an opportunity for the water user to submit alternativp reporting procedures for review aad approval. G-r4176.SB PAGE I OF2 7&99 PAGETWO ,If substantial ifferference with a senior water right occurs due to withdrawal of water from any weli listed on this right, then use of water fromthe wetl(s) shall be discondnued or reduced snd/or the sehedule of witbdrawal shall be rcgulated until or uriless the Department appraves or implements an glternative adninistrative action to mitigate the iaterference. The Depaftnent encourages junior and senior appropriators to iointly develop plans to rnitigate interfetences. trJse of water under authority of this right may be regulated if anaiysis of data available discloses that tie appropriation will measurably reduce the surface water flows necessary to maintain the free- flowing character of r scenic waterway in quantities necessary fot recrsation, fish and wildlife in effest as,of rhe priority date of ttre dght or as those quantities may be subsequendy reduced. The well shall be maintained in accordance with the Generatr Standards for the Constnrction and Maintenance of Water Wclls in Orego,n. Faiture to comply with any of the provision of this right may result in action includiug, but not fimited to, reshictions on the use, ciyil penalties, or cancellation ofthe right. The right to use.water for the above purpose is restricted to beaefieial use, without waste, on the lands or place of use described. The water user is advised that new regulations may require use of best practical technologies or conservationpractices to achieYe this end. By law, the land use associated witir this water:use must be in compliance with statewide land*use goals and any iocal acknowledged land-use plaa' The use of water shall be limited when lt interferes with any prior surface or ground water rights. WXTNESS the signature of the Water Resources Director, affixed APRIL f4, 2000. Pagel Recorded in State Record of Water Right Certificates numbcred ?6499. G-14176.S8 4.t Ashley Williams From: Lindsey Pate G € LA S S tr HOU 5 E 0 t= GROWT{ 1t T' o t! E lJl o G' o. 00 ? I(tl (\lo ro tr o E (!o Packet Pg. 131 4.f Addition Burden of proof information for subject property, 25606 ALFALFA MARKET ROAD, BEND, OR, 97701, File No. 247-18-000890-AD. More details on odor, noise, lighting, screening and waste: c The provisions of DCC-18.116.330 (B) (9) for lighting were met by September 8th 2016 and o continue to be met by the means of using a manual light deprivation system in the current t) ! greenhouses. the provisions of DCC-18.116.330 (B) (10), (11), (12), (16) and (17) for odor, o noise, screening, cameras, and waste were met by December Bth 2016 and continue to be met. o- IE plants present, c When farm use is in operation during the summer and are the current ct greenhouses uses carbon filters when actively flowering plants to control odor. The noise G requirements have been met by adjusting the pulley systems in the fans, please see odor and E o noise letter included in the burden of proof for this application for more details. All plants are o screened appropriately and within greenhouses. Any cameras that are active during grow (9 season on the subject property meet requirements and do not face into adjacent properties. All (o !C waste of cannabis, via composting, meets the County requirements as well. nl -9(lt More details on Cameron Yee as the registered agent for the application o € Cameron Yee is authorized to act as an agent on behalf of Julyn Andrews, David House, =g o Lunchbox Alchemy, and S20 Dynamics as the applicant for the subject property and the land (E use application. Previous public records on the Deschutes dial website provide official .g CL authorization made by David house for Cameron Yee to be the applicant for the subject TL property. $ tr o E T' o qG Irl o r! o- eo ? ? Or o N ut tr o F o IE Packet Pg.132 4.9 . Ashley Williams From: Lindsey Pate < [email protected] > Sent: Thursday, January 10,2019 12:44PM To: Jacob Ripper; Cameron Yee Subject: Re: File No. 247-18-000890-AD. Additional info Attachments: File No.247-18-000890-AD. Will Serve Power Updated 1.10.19.pdf .9 Follow Up Flag: Follow up o Flag Status: Flagged ll e a. t! tr C' Hi Jacob, G E Here is the updated will serve letter frorn CEC, please let us know if this didn't quite hit the mark on clarity and o we will ask them to get it more detailed. : (o (c' $tt Have a good end to the work week and thank you! 00 ? Lindsey Pate ? cD CEO and Co-Founder at Glass House Grown, Award Winning Craft Cannabis (3 Cannabis Business Advocacy N President at Celebrate Cannabis, Central Oregon's Group !, o G Lindsev@elasshousegrown. com !, o ot € LA 9 S at HOU S E = €ROWt{ =o out o =G' On Tue, Jan 8, 2019 at 1:59 PM Lindsey Pate CEO and Co-Founder at Glass House Grown, Award Winning Craft Cannabis (Ito President at Celebrate Cannabis, Central Oregon's Cannabis Business Advocacy Group Lindsey@ slasshousegrown. com Packet Pg. 133 ll-o -9|- otrl *,uu ztlct NJ !t! o ox .U I l| tb G'F Attachmentz 6.2019,41-10 L Pate Email re CEC Will-Serue dated 20{9{r{.08 {24f,6: Yee Marijuana Production) 4.g CENTRAL ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE, INC. www.cec.coop . P.O. Box 846, Redmond, OR 97756 r Officer 541.548.21t14 r Fax 541.548.0366 0 () tt o o. G January 8,2019 G G E a David House o 13 Lincoln Laura Rd (9 (9 Blairstown NJ 07825 r! $t 6 RE: Will Serve Letter for 25606 Alfatfa Market Rd ? ? or In response to your inquiry, please be advised that the properly located at T. 17., R. I4., \il.M., Section Q 22rTax Lot 1400 in Deschutes County, Oregon, is within the service area of Cental Electric (\l Cooperative, Inc. EIo ttGI o Central Electric Cooperative has reviewed the provided load information (400AMP, Single phase, o l20l240 volt service) associated with the submitted Canabis Grow Faeility and is willing and able to 9. serve this location in accordance with the rates and policies of Central Electric Cooperative. 3 o Sincerely, out o =G E IIJ Christy o (E Customer Service Representative a- J () I (5 I d) Q N ct o o o Packet Pg. 135 4.h Ashl ey Williams From: Ashley Williams Sent: Monday, December To: 31,201g 12:52 pM Jacob Ripper Subject: FW: WLUN #ZO1B-O722Response Attachments: to 247_18_0OOB90AD WN20 1 8-0722_Notice.pdf; WN201 8_02!Z_n"rponse.pdf Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Flagged Here you go! Ashley s Williams t Administrative Assistant o DESCHUTES 5 COUNTY COMMUNITY DEVEIOPMENT (, 117 NW Lafayette Avenue I Bend, Oregon tt Mail: PO Box 6005 | Bend, Oregon e 97708 o. | www.deschutes,orglcd t! "r07 tr frfffr E Discloimer: Please note that the informqtion in this emoil is on constitute informar statement mqde in finat countv action eYeltins a cccordance with DCC 22.20.005qnd G' ;;;;;ttotu, o7i prrro;';;;;;;;; sho, not be deemed to 'h',g; r, conferring ony righir,-iiduaing E ory retiance rights, on any person. o o From: DOWNING Andrea Sent: Monday, Decembe r 31,20Lg L2:46 pM (o; To: Ashley Williams (\lt ; cameron @ lunchboxa lch emy.com Subject: WLUN #2078_0722 Response ,o iq7_rs_O0o890AD o c o we have completed our review of the wetland E Land Use Notification that was prepared E Yee' The wLUN form was submitted for David House and o to the Department ro'. ,"ui*rresponse cameron o ..J ,l*"ihe fire number wN20r.8-0722. The results and conclusions from that o review are explained in the attached o are illegible or difficult pdf documents. rf the open' you may contact the attached documents 0t l: Departmeni and r.elyest paper I copies. otherwise, prease review ot ;?:##i?n::ffi:1jil,i:..Hff:Tg;o,:,:itffi*:r;#*:,,'"11.1;";:;rl;,or, Lvnne McA,,s,era,(s03) €I 6ta Aquatic Resource Ma nagement program F-' Oregon Department of State Lands c 775 Summer St. NE, Ste. 100 to Salem, OR 97301-1279 o Fax: (503) 37e-4944 lE www.oregon.gov/dsl 1 Packet pg. i36 z 75 sum*er J:::,lJ S,::Tl'.'iJ;H'i,H phone; fl?; This form is to be completed (503) by planning departrnent 986-5200 staff for mapped u,€'ands and \^Eien4ays. Responsible Jurisdiction * :." Munlcipatity* * r City of {l County Date of Deschutes 11/21/2018 Staff Contact* Phone * Ashley Williams Email* 541-617_47a7 ashley.williams@deschutes. Applicant org Name * Carneron yee Mailing Address* SeetAdress 63028 Layfon Ave A&k*s Line2 otv Bend S€de I Rovirre/FEgkJ"r tusldi Zp&de OR 97701 eunby USA Phone 541-788-3067 Email cameron @lunchboxalchemy. Owner com Name * David Fbuse (tf different than Appticant $il,ff firress Address) 13 Lincoln Laurel Road Adclress Une l ctv $atei Blairstoran Rovirce/ fuion fustal/Zipftde NJ 07825 OrJntry USA Parbat 4.h Phone EmaiI 406-880-2058 [email protected] Activity Location .. * * -lownsnlp Range Sectlon* Quarter-quarter Tax Lot(s)* Section 17 14 22 1400 You can ent€r nulli$e tax lot n$ters with;n this field. i.e. 100,200,3m, etc. To add additional tax rnap and lot information, please click the "add" button below. Address c o $reet Addess (J Adress Ure 2 T' e oty $ate/ Rovlnce/ kgibn B. (lt tuetdi Zpftde &wtry tr (g County* Mjacent Waterbody (lt E Deschutes o o Proposed Activity (o !ta3, (\l Local Case File #* Zonlng o 247-18-0008S0-AD EFU o tr Proposed E o f- Building Permit (new structures) l- Conditional use Permit o J l- Grading Permit I- Planned LJnit Development ch l- Site Plan Approval l- Subdivision o (please ({t F Other describe) a $t Acl::rir:ishali,.'c l)el:i5;g1i {or i.,'j;liiJi:;ina FrctJr I co o Project N I\ c o ts Requlred attachments with Tax map and plan(s). (?) s site marked: site a o 20181121 134800.pdf 48.1K8 Additional Altachments Packet Pg. 138 4.h WETTAND LAND USE NOTIFICATION RESPONSE OREGON DEPARTMENT OF STATE LANDS 775 Summer Street NE, Suite 100, Salem, OR 97301-1279 Phone (503) 986-5200 OREGON DEPARTMENT OF lv'rytv . or.eg.qlt..t1*.tg l.g mlS,U.f STATE LANDS DSL File Number: WN2018-0722 Cities and counties have a responsibility to notifu the Department of State Lands (DSL) of certain activities proposed within wetlands mapped on the Statewide Wetlands lnventory. Ashley Williams from county of Deschutes submitted a \A/l-UN pertaining to local case file #:247-1&000890-AD. Activity location: townshi 175 ra e: 14E section: 22 u r section * tax 1400 0 a street address: ! city county: Deschutes o g. latitude: 44.083677 lonqitude: -121.A43334 cGI C' M apped wetland/watenray features : X fne nationalwetlands inventory shows a wetland on the property. G' E o Oregon Removal-Fill requirement (s): o [ln state permit is required for 50 cubic yards or more of removal and/or fill in wetlands, below ordinary rl} t0 high water of streams, within other waters of the state, or below highest measqred tide where applicable" -l $l :o Your activity: o lt is unlikely that there are jurisdictional wetlands or waterways on the property based upon a review c X o of wetland maps, the county soil survey and other information. o J ocn o? q\ €I $to N oC Contacts: E () GI X fnis is a preliminary jurisdictional determination and is advisory only Response by: date: 12121'2A18 Packet Pg. 139 G, rz9 Lql-t\-Nolle - AD Frmr: lGith Adarns To: avion (Davionwater.com Cc: lEbellaliu SubJect: Avion "Willing and Able letter for Marijuana Grow" (County Fiile # 247-18-000915-AD) Date: Wednesday, January 30, 2019 8:17:59 PM Attachmentsl Avion Letter.odf To Whom it May Concern It has come to my and attention, having been served with notice of land application for a marijuana production operation next to my home, and my Sundance subdivision neighbors, (county file#247- 18-000915-AD @ 60148 Stirling Drive, Sundance Subdivision) that Avion has provided the applicant a "willing and able to provide service" letter, in which, Avion acknowledges that the water utility will be used for a marijuana production operation (See Attachment). Production of mar'rjuana is a felony crime under federal law. lt seems outrageous to me that a public utility would knowingly provide service to someone engaged in a federal crime, and acknowledge its willingness and intent to do so in writing. With all due respect, I think that Avion should rescind its willingness to provide service to the applicant. The action of knowingly providing service to marijuana.production operations, acknowledged in writing,'makes Avion complicit in enabling the applicant to commit a federal crime, and therefore, makes Avion an accessory to that crime. Neither the county, nor the state, can shield Avion from prosecution in Federal Court, this seems to me a very poor position for a public utility to put itself in. lf you would please provide me the courtesy of a reply at your earliest convenience. Best Regards, Keith Adams 60135 Stirling Drive Bend, OR 97702 Sundance Subdivision 80813 Parrell Rd ' Bend, OR 97702' Ph: 6rtt-382-5342 ' farl 541't82-5S90 " Emall: avlongrvionwrtsr'con Septembet 24,2018 Ref: Special Use Permit (Marijuana Production) for Parcel2 of Partition Plat No. 2lfi-17. Also Known as tax lot: 1813300000500. To \AJhorn lt May Concern: Avion Water Company, lnc- is willing and able to serve potable water to the above described property, provided all requirernents by Avion Water Company are rnet and all monies due are paid in accordance with Avion's approved tariff. Avion is aware that the applicant intends to construct a oannabis production facility and that the water will be used for agriculture purposes, $incerely, ,r f *ffi,/fuo f r r'*"ft+rw : Mike Hefitrnan Engineering DePartment Arrion Water ComPanY, lnc. From! Isabella Liu To: "Mark Bilton-Smith" SubJect: RE: Dechutes County file number 247-18-00915-AD Date: Thursday, January 31, 2019 9:07126 AM Attachmentsr imaqe001,ono imaoe002.pno imaoe003.nno imaoe004.ono Hi Mark, Thanks for reaching out. The petition will be included into the record DCC 22.24.O80. Sta n di ng B. Any person appearing on the record ot o hearing (including appeals) ar presenting written evidence in conjunction with on odministrative action or hedring shall hove standing and sholl be o party. Petitioners who have submitted comments into the record with a mailing address have already been included on the mailing list for notice, Property owners within l-,000 feet of the subject property's boundaries will also receive notice. Petitioners who did not include a mailing address, will not be noticed of a decision or public hearing. Thanks, lzze Liu I Associate Planner DESCHI.JTES COUNTY COMMUNTTY TEVEIOPMENT 117 NW Lafayette Avenue I Bend, Oregon 97703 PO Box 6005 | Bend, Oregon 97708 i88-6554 www.deschutes.org/cd EtrEtIq! 841) | Discloimer: Pleose note thot the information in this emoil is on informol statement mode in occordance with DCC 22.20.N5 and shall not be deemed to constitute finol County action effecting o change in the stotus of o person's property or conferring ony rights, including ony reliance rights, on any persan. From: Mark Bilton-Smith Izze, For the record could you please add this attached PDF petition that includes 1096 oflicial signaflrres as of ll30l2019 in opposition of this application for a marijuana grow in our sundance residential subdivision and bordering the Sundance meadows family camping resort Thank you, Mark Bilton-Smith change.org Recipient: Greg Walden, Gene \Mrisnant, Knute Buehler, Mike Mclane, PattiAdair, Phil Henderson, Anthony DeBone, lsabella Liu, Senator Tim Knopp Letter: Greetings, We Oppose application for lndoor Marijuana grow in Rural Subdivision The Marijuana industry is a real business opportunity that perhaps should be supported, however we believe there are plentiful and suitable locations these indoor Marijuana grows should be allowed. The upside to our economy and State tax income that it generates are positives too. The chosen location for this particular grow is not a suitable location. \Mren Deschutes County, or any County, receives an application that plans to build a Marijuana Grow facility in our Rural subdivision, Sundance subdivision, where hundreds of families raise their children with no opposition, the flaws or loopholes in the land use laws should be called out, and subsequently changed to protect the safety of residential families and their home values, generally their single largest asset. There is a further reason to deny this application in this situation. The proposed indoor grow is also right next door to a year around camping resort that supports a youth center and youth activities, www.sundancemeadows.com . Our County land use laws strictly prohibit indoor grows within 1000 feet (soon to be 1320 feet) of such a facility yet the application is under review and may now require the community to join forces and potentially contract legal representation to stand for a cause that should clearly be denied by the letter of the law with no contest or required appeal. This should not have to be the way our communities are being called upon to come together or in some cases torn apart. lf we do not stand now for what is clearly a violation to the land use laws, and should this indoor grow facility prevail, it will be used as a future example in the permitting process to override the currently written laws, We are not asking you to deny the marijuana industry of its legal rights nor do we want to prevent it from thriving. We are simply asking to support our case to keep these indoor grows within the many appropriate locations to operate their businesses. Deschutes County file number 247-18-O091s-AD www.deschutes.org Signatures Mark Bilton-Smith 2418-12-28 Micah Bilton-Smith Austin, TX 2018-12-28 Jeff & Dawn Stob Bend, OR 2018-'.12-29 Jon Wolf Renton, WA 2018-12-29 Patrick Flanagan Salem, OR 2018-12-29 Keith Adams Bend, OR r 2018-12-30 ....1... Kristie Flanagan Scappoose, OR 2018-12-30 John Crim Arlington, US 2018-12-30 katelyn clift Newport News, US 2018-12-31 emily schwarzenberger Bend, OR 2418-12-31 Allister Schwarzen berg er Bend, OR 2018-12-31 Jill Hartley Bend, OR 2018-12-31 Kathleen Mollohan Bend, OR 2018-12-31 Patrick Daniels Bend, OR 2018-12-31 LAUREN GRIGSBY Bend, OR 2018-12-31 Abigail Kochersberger Bend, OR 2018-12-31 Eric Hagan Bend, OR 2018-12-31 Jeremy Dreitlein Vancouver, WA 2018-12-31 Marci Hagan Bend, OR 2018-12-31 Jordan Lorensen Bend, OR 2018-12-31 Bend, OR 2018-12-31 Redmond, OR 2018-12-31 Bend, OR 2018-12-31 Molly Russell Redmond, OR 2A18-12-31 Kim Thurman Bend, OR 2018-12-31 Rich Brannin Bend, OR :,2018-12-31 Vance Lawrence Bend, OR 2018-12-31 Carey Brown Bend, OR 2018-12-31 Jennifer White Bend, OR 2018-12-31 Mark Burkhardt Bend, OR 2018-12-31 Wendy Burkhardt Bend, OR 2018-12-31 Denice Lewis Bend, OR 2018-12-31 William Lewis Bend, OR 2018-12-31 Heidi Brannin Bend, OR 2018-12-31 Todd Kane Bend, OR 2018-12-31 Marquita Hain Bend, OR 2018-12-31 Melissa Thompson Bend, OR 2018-12-3"1 Elizabeth Thompson Bend, OR 2018-12-31 JenniferJordan Bend, OR 2018-12-31 Ray Yancey Elkton, VA 2018-12-31 Mariya Yezhikova Bend, OR 2018-12-31 Sherri Cruickshank Saint Cloud, US 2018-12-31 Janine Richardson Bend, OR 2018-12-31 Adair Sullivan Bend, OR 2018-12-31 Shelly Wierzba Bend, OR 2018-12-31 Nadine Brannin 2A18-12-31 Sandra Martinez 2018-12-31 Blake Miller 2018-12-31 Suk Gurung Buffalo, US 2018-12-31 Brad Meltzer Bend, OR 2018-12-31 Amanda Meltzer Bend, OR 2018-12-31 Stewart Clarke Grand Terrace, US 2018-12-31 Erica Wescott Bend, OR 2018-12-31 Beth Bilton-Smith Bend, OR 2018-12-31 I I'm with you Bond Portland, OR 2018-12-31 Kristen Perna Scott Bend, OR 2018-12-31 Jon Ambjor Bend, OR 2018-12-31 Howard Miller Bend, OR 2018-12-31 Adam Brown Bend, OR 2018-12-31 Wendy schultheis Bend, OR 2018-12-31 Karen Bandy Bend, OR 2018-12-31 Kevin Donaldson Bend, OR 2018-12-31 THOMAS HAUCK La Plata, US 2018-12-31 Mathew Scott Bend, OR 2018-12-31 Stephen Weber Bend, OR :2018-12-31 Gerard Schultheis end, OR 2018-12-31 Brenda Stanton end, OR 2018-12-31 Gloira Farmer Bend, OR 2018-12-31 Laurel Hunter Bend, OR 2018-12-31 Faith Gilpin Bend, OR 2018-12-31 Rodney Kopish Bend, OR 2018-12-31 Kayle Schultheis Bend, OR 2018-12-31 JeffAllison Ashland, OR 2018-12-31 Kelly Strunk Bend, OR 2018-12-31 Eric Moyerman Bend, OR 2018-12-31 Mike Rossetto Bend, OR 2018-12-3"1 Adrianne Salmond Bend, OR 2018-12-31 Jeanette King Bend, OR 2018-12-31 I Zion Hart Washington, US 2018-12-31 Karen Morris Bend, OR 2018-12-31 Shelley Babcock Bend, OR 2018-12-31 Robert Wills Bend, OR 2018-12-31 KB Brooks Bend, OR 2018-12-31 Steve Ford Bend, OR 2018-12-31 Stacy Rex Bend, OR 18-12-31 Sally Brown Bend, OR 2019-01-01 Ryan Bend, OR 2019-01-01 Nina Ambjor Bend, OR 2019-01-01 Carla Grinuck-Wood La Vergne, TN 2019-01-01 David Williams Redmond, OR 2019-01-01 Bruce Lakin Bend, OR 2019-01-01 Richard Crabtree Bend, OR 2019-01-01 Kathy Caba Bend, OR 2019-01-01 Robert Dewitt Bend, OR 2019-01-01 Kara Richards Bend, OR 2019-01-01 Sihl Chung Bend, OR 2019-01-01 Lisa Lamberto Bend, OR 2019-01-01 CJ Rorabeck i Bend, OR 2019-01-01 "..i Martha Groeneveld Bend, OR 2019-01-01 Nancy Davis Vancouver, WA 2019-01-01 Chris Lowell Bend, OR 2019-01-01 Ron Brooks Bend, OR 2019-01-01 Valerie Kifer Bend, OR 2019-01-01 Judy Gage Scott Bend, OR 2019-01-01 Jason Hansen Sisters, OR 2019-01-01 Vanessa Hancock Culver, OR 2019-01-01 Allison Sparkman Athens, US 2019-01-01 Susan Whitley Redmond, OR 2019-01-01 Mandy Faulkner Bend, OR 2019-01-01 ew Burkhardt Bend, OR 2019-01-01 Forth Bend, OR 2019-01-01 David Jones Bend, OR 2019-01-01 Susan Jones end, OR 2019-01-01 Linda Hanson Madras, OR 2019-01-01 Marcy Kirk Bend, OR 2019-01-01 Kathie Brown Bend, OR 2019-01-01 Aeron Burkhardt Bend, OR t2019-01-01 Dennis C Long Klamath Falls, OR .) 019-01-01 Jan Jensen Bend, OR 2019-01-01 Erica Winn Bend, OR 2019-01-01 Aprille Chadwell Bend, OR 2019-01-01 Justin Winn Bend, OR 2019-01-01 Ronald Long Nine Mile Falls, WA 2019-01-01 Pat Hartley Bend, OR 2019-01-01 Cheri Detweiler Bend, OR 201 9-01-01 Cristel Stinnett Redmond, OR 2019-01-01 Sharon Burkhardt Los Angeles, CA 2019-01-01 Tiffany Hughes Bend, OR 201 9-01-01 gabrielle yusuf Washington, US 2019-01-01 Kitty Bennett Bend, OR 2019-01-01 Candice Featherston Portland, OR 2019-01-01 Krista Lauinger Bend, OR 2019-01-01 Bena Lechner Bend, OR 2019-01-01 Judson King Bend, OR 2019-01-01 myah rodriguez Hamden, US 2019-01-01 Gage Cailler Jaffrey, US :2019-01-01 Rigoberto Ferndndez Maitland, US 2019-01-01 Shelly Malkin Bend, OR 2019-01-01 Tricia Tennant Bourbonnais, NJ 2019-01-01 Colin Bu Los Angeles, AZ 2019-01-O2 *'- --""'" 1 -' ' ' Ellen Musgrove Bend, OR ' 2019-01-02 Kristin Adams Bend, OR 2019-O1-O2 KathyJensen Bend, OR 2019-01-02 Kira Cook Bend, OR 2019-01-O2 Richard Hess Johnstown, US 2019-01-O2 Cynthia Taylor Bend, OR 2019-01-O2 Sherri Holler Larkspur, US 2019-01-O2 Tyson Miner Colorado Springs, US 2019-01-O2 Susan Brunkow Portland, OR 2019-01-O2 Colton Peters Canton, US 2019-01-02 , Jay Gordon North Hollywood, US 2019-01-O2 Jean Myers Bend, OR 2019-01-O2 RYAN LIANA Bend, OR 2019-01-O2 Jim Moran Bend, OR 2019-01-O2 Rodney Cook Bend, OR 2019-01-O2 Jeff Seber i Redmond ,oR 2019-41-O2 William Rolfe Depoe Bay, OR 2019-01-O2 samantha graca Union, US 2419-01-O2 Ashley Zhaa San Francisco, US 2019-01-O2 Chris Hopkin Louisville, US 2019-01-03 Patricia Hughes Bend, OR 2019-01-03 JoelAnthony San Francisco, US ,2019-01-03 Rose McCally Detroit, MI 2019-01-03 Pradeep Gayan Baltimore, US 2019-01-03 Robert Pepiton Laveen, US 2019-01,03 Larry Scott Redmond, OR 2019-01-03 Luis Flores Van Nuys, US 2019-01-03 r Cheallsey Tapper Westland, US 2019-01-03 Ellen Hollister Bend, OR 2019-01-03 Zenaida Berlinski , San Francisco, US 201 9-01-03 Jerry Brown r Portland, OR 2019-01-03 Eliot Koehn Macomb, US 19-01-04 Jeffrey Cecchetti , North myrtle beach, US 2019-01-04 Trason Washington Hampton, US 2019-01-O4 James Mockaitis Bend, OR ; 2019-01-04 KhauhiTobias iMountVernon, US 19-01-04 :"' ' Linda Bruce Marblehead, MA 19-01-04 Alex Deluca Mount Olivet, US 1 9-01-04 Solange Dean Cincinnati, US 201 9-01-04 Brenda Levine Abbeville, US i2019-01-04 Carlos Dominguez Phoenix, US 2019-01-O4 Damon Ruel Beans Purchase, US 2019-01-04 Arielle Morris Warren, US 2019-01-04 Linda Pearson Bend, OR r 201 9-01-04 .- please god Portland, US i 2019-01-04 .1 Lorna Dumas Bend, OR :2019-01-O4 John Minor Coudersport, US 2019-01-O4 Devin Lewis Terrebonne, OR 2019-01-O4 MarquiesJasper Manorville, US 2019-01-O4 Nancy Ebbecke Mountain Top, US 201 9-01-04 Meltan Melter Cedaredge, US 2019-01-05 Dean Swindler Lyman, US 2019-01-05 jean carlos roman Peabody, US i2019-01-05 Duane Erickson Bend, OR 9-01-05 Denialz Ryu Houston, US 2019-01-05 Brianna Stewart Atlanta, US 201 9-01-05 Lilliana Martinez Tampa, US ; 2019-01-05 'i. " It's Treyway Elmhurst, US 2019-01-05 Roam Logan Greene, US 2019-01-05 David Pomeroy Jameaville, US 2019-01-05 Matthew Baccus ashville, US 2019-01-05 I Marie Kitchen Bend, OR 2019-01-0s Christina Rojas Fairfield, US 2019-01-05 Ann Lewis Terrebonne, OR 2019-01-05 Vanessa Zamora Phoenix, US 2019-01-05 Amanda Michael Vidor, US ,2019-01-05 alex williamson Chula Vista, US 2019-01-05 John Cooley Bend, OR 2019-01-05 selina lilly wilmington, US 2019-01-05 Hassan Abdulkarim Downey, US 2019-01-05 Jessie Jones Maple Shade, US 2019-01-05 William johnson Colfax, US 2019-01-05 Joey Boyne Rockville Centre, US 2019-01-05 Lance Lingelbach Bend, OR 2019-01-05 Mark Lovejoy Bend, OR 2019-01-05 Cleme Rinehart Bend, OR l2019-01-05 Ken Michaelsen Bend, OR 2019-01-05 Sally Goya Bend, OR 2019-01-0s Faris Birrou Fond Du Lac, US :2019-01-05 Deborah Lee Bend, OR 2019-01-05 fa tolbi Orlando, US 2019-01-0s Jeremia Perez Brooklyn, US 2019-01-05 Deborah Melhase rBend, OR i 2019-01-05 Giacomo Parisi Staten island, US i2019-01-05 David Mays Bend, OR 2019-01-05 Christine Michaelsen Bend, OR 2019-01-05 Dickhead Mcgee Spring, US 2019-01-05 t Sheri Mays Bend, OR 2019-01-06 Josh Lange South Bend, US 19-01-06 Ashlynn Adams Los Angeles, US 2019-01-06 Rick Arnold Bend, OR 2019-01-06 Steven Lee BEND, OR 2019-01-06 Melissa Stallcup Milwaukie, US 2019-01-06 Rheagan Minton Nowata, US 2019-01-06 Mary Sonner Hillsboro, US 2019-01-06 Lauren Harless Marcos, US 2019-01-06 Abdoulaye Sangare ison, US 201 9-01-06 Matthew Leisure an Carlos, US 201 9-01-06 Avery Bowers Lorton, US 19-01-06 Athena Sutton Sacramento, US 2019-01-05 Maxine Rivera Holland, US 2019-01-06 Gloria Courtney Onsted, US 2019-01-06 James Pawlak Redford, US 2019-01-06 Patti Petroline FLAT ROCK, US 2019-01-06 dariusz grabarczyk Ridgewood, US 201 9-01-06 Debra Minchew Ontario, US 201 9-01,06 Nona Anderson Detroit, US 201 9-01-06 Nathalie Smith Bend, OR 2019-01-06 Robert Riter Clarkston, US 2019-01-06 Joan Crenshaw Clarkston, US 2019-01-06 Dennis McDonald Westland, US 2019-01-06 JONATHAN ADAMSON Waterford, US 2019-01-06 Taci Thornton Ogden, US 2019-01-06 Thomas Smith Westland, MI 201 9-01-06 Nathan Lee Bend, OR 201 9-01-06 Dennis Dobrick Dearborn Heights, US 201 9-01-06 lucy rappette intJoseph, US 2019-01-06 Pamela Frauhiger North Vernon, IN 2019-01-06 David Yagudayev Fresh Meadows, US 2019-01-06 lynn hollister Bend, OR 2019-01-06 Sharon Najman Hialeah, US 2019-01-06 Ryan Passage Taylor, US 2019-01-06 James Berry Bend, OR 2019-01-07 Andrew Bush Knoxville, TN 2019-01-O7 David Riley Bend, OR 2019-01-O7 Tatiana Konkel nia, US 2019-01-O7 Diana Popp d, oR 2019-01-O7 Jason Martinez Sacramento, US i 201 9-01-07 Jonathen Conley torrance, US 2019-01-07 Sarah Champagne Pembroke Pines, US 2019-01-O7 Chloe Espinoza San Antonio, US '.) 01 9-01-07 Sabrina Reichert San Clemente, US 19-41-O7 Michael Chatman Fresno, US 2419-01-07 amy citron teaneck, US 2019-01-07 Tim Paden Brook Park, US 2019-01-O7 Michelle Peterson Livonia, US 2019-01-O7 Trisha Karcher Louisville, US 2019-01-07 Kaitlyn Brooks Detroit, US 2019-01-O7 Ramen Noodles inneapolis, US 2019-01-O7 Jose Orozco Roseburg, US 2019-O1-O7 John Klein Bend, OR 2019-01-O7 Robert Ortiz San Francisco, CA 2019-01-07 John Webre Portland, OR 2019-01-07 Brittany King Richmond, US 2019-01-07 NancyWebre rtland, OR 19-01-O7 -.:'....iPo shayna koran ifle, US 19-01-07 priscilla munoz Naples, US 2019-01-O7 Christina Jiang Lilburn, US 2U9-41-O7 Alex Wilson Grand Rapids, US 2419-01-07 Percy Ferguson Detroit, US 2019-01-08 Antonio Rhodes Little Rock, US 2019-01-08 Dan Young Manchester, US 2019-01-08 jana VanAmburg Bend, OR 2019-01-08 Arianna Richkarday Paso Robles, US 2019-01-08 Alwin Joseph Tirur, US 201 9-01-08 Charles Smith Redding, US 2019-01-08 timothy voelker flint, US 2019-01-08 Carlos R, PagSn-Arocho Camuy, US 2019-01-08 Patricia Crosby Hollyruood, US 2019-01-08 Dave Baca Brentwood, US 2019-01-08 Fred Fall Cherry Hill, NJ 2019-01-08 Becca Vance Hopkinsville, US 201 9-01-08 Sandrs Cole Knoxville, US 2019-01-08 jesse Loun Baltimore, US 2019-01-08 breanne ng queen creek, US 2019-01-08 jared abshire Baton Rouge, US 201 9-01-08 Matthew Pickett Chatham, US 19-01-08 brianna moses Gilbert, US 19-01-08 Kevin Trujillo Scottsdale, AZ 2019-01-08 Jaol Martin Westerly, US 2019-01-08 Dre Crawford Detroit, US 2019-01-08 Scott Finnerty Pittsford, US 2019-01-08 KAREN YOUNG CLARKSVILLE, US 2019-01-08 Danny pavlrty Portland, US 2019-01-09 Jade Truong El Monte, US 2019-01-09 Patrick Gasta Cleveland, US 2019-01-09 Will Sosa Riverview, US 2019-01-09 Victoria Dilmore- Weiler Lily, US 2019-01-09 DominickJohnson Los Angeles, US 2019-01-09 jason demas Westminster, US 2019-01-09 Robert Terepka Barberton, US 2019-01-09 Bryce Dannenberg Salt Lake City, UT 2019-01-09 Adam Kaluba Cincinnati, US 2019-01-09 Deanie Zulkoski Winfield, US 201 9-01-10 Willette Whitfield Columbia, US 2019-01-10 lJToole Lancaster, NY 201 9-01-10 Jannah Tepic Bluffton, US 2019-01-10 Cassandra Hunt Park Forest, US 2019-01-10 Jeremy Brent rochester, US 2019-01-10 crystalZimmerman winston salem, US 201 9-01-10 Nani Gurr Seattle, US 2019-01-10 Maggie Wenzel Marshfield, US 2019-01-10 Brian Brown Utica, US 2019-01-10 Allison Slaughter Minneapolis, US 2019-01-10 Big Daddy West Chester, US 201 9-01-10 Kerim A Orlando, US 201 9-01-10 Palare DeBoise Paterson, US 2019-01-10 Craig Martini Bend, OR 2019-01-10 Jodi Klein Bend, OR 2019-01-10 James Hyek Farmington Hills, US 2019-01-10 homin clorfil Salt Lake City, US 2019-01-10 Lewis Young Delaware, US 2019-01-11 Stephen Brisken Bend, OR 2019-0"1-11 Angel Siler Okc, US 2019-01-1 1 arianna hudson Rolla, US 2019-01-11 Gia A San Benito, US 2019-01-11 Julia Adams Olympia, US 2019-01-1 1 Sandy Malone Lacey, WA 2019-01-11 Michelle lewis richmond, US 2019-01-11 Ginger Rose Chicago, US 2019-01-11 Sophia Gigliotti Manchester, US 2419-01-11 ; jackJackson Lubbock, US 2U9-A1-11 will scholtz South Pomfret, US 2019-01-11 David Page I Hamburg, US 2019-01-11 DAVID SWANSON Bend, OR 2019-01-11 matthew cahoon Norfolk, VA 2019-01-1 1 John Valdez Las Vegas, US 2019-01-1 1 ashley gegenfurtner Mission Viejo, US 2019-01-11 Christian Hansen Portland, US 2019-01-11 Tyler Wrightson Mission Viejo, US 2019-01-1 1 G and M Petsch Portland, OR ,2019-01-11 Blain Albaugh SimiValley, US 2019-01-11 Christopher Doyle Dallas, US 2019-01-11 Jacob Stratton Elko, US 2019-01-11 Denyse Mendoza US 2019-01-11 JC Manas US 2019-01-11 Logan Wickline York, US 2019-01-11 Jay Hagan Stilwell, US 2019-01-11 Bree-Ann Chase Berlin, US 2019-01-1 1 Aryan Ellis North Tonawanda, US 2019-01-1 1 Brogan Maloney New York, US 2019-01-11 Daniel Placido Milwaukee, US 2019-01-11 Cameron Burridge Orem, US 2019-01-11 hareth naji amtramck, US 2019-01-11 Oscar DeHamer San Diego, US 2019-01-1"1 Roman Garcia i Beaverto N, US 2019-01-12 Aaron Deloach ochester, US i 2019-01-12 Bryan Chiravalle Newark, US 19-01-12 Bree Duncans Santa Monica, US 19-01-12 Ron McPeak Fremont, US 2019-01-12 Joshua Spice Portland, US 2019-01-12 Benjamin Ryan Polo, US 2019-01-12 Patrick othites Pittsburgh, US 2019-01-12 Mads B Nashville, US 2019-01-12 I eatASs Farmington, US 19-O1-12 Zach Laliberte Exeter, US 2019-O1-12 Anna Straud Roswell, US 2019-01-12 Kierra Webb Oklahoma City, US 2019-01-12 Brian Ok Peachtree City, US 2019-O1-12 Vinh Phat Ly San Francisco, US 2019-O1-12 KK Hillsboro, US 2019-O1-12 Kaine Bailey SOUTH BEND, US 2019-01-12 ir'*_ " the experience Eugene, US :201 9-01-12 Nathan Dodge Champaign, US 2019-O1-12 tyler burrell Portland, US | 2019-01-12 Lucas Galvez Portland, US 1-12 ner Dillard Monroe, US 2419-01-12 Daniel Moreno Macon, US 2019-01-12 Michael Goncalves Fairfax, VA 2019-4142 Seth Henderson Franklin, US 2019-01-12 Ethan Whitaker Newberg, US 19-01-12 Gabe Herstig Minneapolis, US 2019-01-12 Gabriel Morales Grand Prairie, US 2019-41-12 Angelina Gutierrez Harbor, US Justice Hillery Van Wert, US 2019-01-12 Alan G Gomez Houston, US 20"t9-01-12 Joshua Sandoval Bronx, US 2U9-A1-12 Samuel Stroschein Gillette, US 2019-01-12 Simon Mackin Traverse City, US 2019-01-12 Em Mikoloski Wilmington, US 2019-01-12 Charles Mcfadden Boiling Springs, US 2019-01-12 Carson Mccrory Salina, US 2019-01-12 Bruce Keim Crookston, US 2019-01-12 UWU UWU Portland, US 2019-01-12 Jared Brody Union, US 2019-01-12 Wyatt Garrett Rogue River, US 2019-01-12 Narendra Bedi overland park, US 20"t9-01-12 Dominic Sutton Advance, US 2019-01-13 Ashley Sanchez Houston, US 201 9-01-13 Arnecia Townsell Lilburn, US 2019-01-13 Anonymous Anonymous New York, US 201 9-01-13 Alexander Fears Olympia, US 201 9-01-13 Gabriel Indiongco Los Angeles, US 201 9-01-13 Simone Clay Detroit, US 2019-01-13 Alex Uvarov West New York, US 201 9-01-13 Tyler Glover Portsmouth, US 2019-01-13 Jeff Jefferson Puyallup, US 201 9-01-13 Keith Bowe Atlanta, US 2019-01-13 Belinda Sarabia San Antonio, US 2019-01-1 3 Shania Trujillo Pueblo Colorado, US 201 9-01-13 Brian Quisenberry Orange, US 201 9-01-13 James Ciras Whitinsville, US 2019-01-14 Silas Robbins Denver, US 2019-01-14 Bonnie Acosta Navasota, US 2019-01-14 Nick Oyler Garden city, US 2019-01-14 April Mendoza Los Angeles, US 2019-01-14 Lindsey Kardashian Neptune, US 2019-01-14 Diana Sandoval South Gate, US 2019-01-14 Bullat San Antonio, US :2019-01-14 Miriam Clune Marysville, US 19-O1-14 David Erbach Roseburg, US 19-O1-14 Connor Shane Chicago, US 19-01-14 Zubair Salim Bowie, US 1 9-01-1 5 Jaren Partman Upper Marlboro, US i2019-01-1s Sarah Chigbu Lanham, US 19-01-1 5 WilliamJohnson District Heights, US 2019-01-15 Avery Rosser Hyattsville, US 2019-01-15 Eliezer Palomino Silver Spring, US izorg-or-rs Perry Green Washington, US 2019-01-1 5 Elian Osorio Hyattsville, US 2019-01-1s Sophia Leeper Sutherlin, US 2019-01-15 Zach Carter Lanham, US 2019-01-15 Ashley Zhao Arkansas 2019-01-1 5 Marshall Anderson Corvallis, OR 2019-01-16 Brad Fraley Bend, OR 201 9-01-16 kami Fraley Bend, OR 2019-01-16 Ron Davidson 2360 High St, Reedsport, OR 2419-01-16 Kenneth Fenicle Bemd, OR 2019-01-16 Randall Fargher Portland, OR 2019-01-16 Ellison Rainier, OR 2019-01-16 Marti Fraley Bend, OR 2019-01-16 Ranae Ciccotelli Portland, OR 2019-01-1 6 JOSEPH FRANKO Independence, OR 201 9-01-1 6 I justina townsend Middletown, US 2019-01-16 i Ashley Brugger Molalla, OR 2019-01-1 6 Ellen Clark Bend, OR 2019-01-16 Robert Schuur Bend, OR 2A19-01-16 George Day Tempe, AZ 2A19-01-16 Jack Hasebe Bisbee, AZ 2019-01-16 Joseph Childrey Ossian, US 2019-41-16 Karen Hobbs Bend, OR 2019-01-16 Paulette L. Hasebe Bisbee, AZ 2019-01-16 i. Thomas Friedlein #912 Rainier, OR 2019-01-16 Carmen Kauffman Saint Helens, OR 2019-01-1 6 Deborah Helmricks Newport, OR 2019-01-16 Marion Miller Madras, OR 2019-01-1 6 LarryJohnson Redmond, OR 2019-01-16 Erin Shaffer Richmond, US 2019-01-16 Tim Hinds Independence, OR 019-01-1 6 Michael Mullin Bend, OR 2019-01-16 Edward Maldonado Salem, OR 2019-01-1 6 David Patten Salem, OR 2019-01-16 TerriWeedon Redmond, OR ; 2019-01-16 ; i!. Ta mara Ga rrett-Zi mmerma n DEPOE BAY, OR i2019-01-16 Jodi Shimanek Monmouth, OR : 2019-01-16 Edward Rubesh Portland, OR 1-16 Jessica Yozamp Bend, OR 2019-01-16 Thomas Yates Cloverdale, OR 2019-01-16 aron Hadley Salem, OR 2019-01-16 Steven Graham The Dalles, OR 2019-01-16 John Rizzo Keizer, OR 2A19-41-16 TEDJOHNSON Salem, OR 2019-01-16 Ken Hall Portland, OR 2019-01-16 Reid Glasshoff Omaha, US 2019-01-16 Kimberley Leek Puyallup, WA 2019-01-17 Robert Pearson Phoenix, OR 2019-O1-17 David McDowell Bend, OR 2019-01-17 Mike Keen Lebanon, OR 2019-01-17 Ed Lindstrom Keizer, OR 2019-01-17 Omar Reynoso West Palm Beach, US 2019-O1-17 Michael Moullet II Oregon City, OR 2019-01-17 Lynda Metzger-Teutsch Springfield, OR 2019-01-17 Nell Stevens Gig Harbor, WA 2019-01-17 Norma Metzger Eugene, OR 2019-O1-17 Joan Johansen Clackamas, OR 2019-O1-17 Joanne Stone Silverton, OR 2019-01-17 janice Castle Salem, OR 2019-01-17 Jessica McBeth Verona, US 2019-O1-17 Stuart Nelson Vancouver, WA 2019-01-17 Scott Hale Deschutes, OR 2019-41-17 Jovan Saunders Statesboro, US 2019-O1-17 inthya Salgado Hialeah, US 2019-01-17 Byron Hadley Salem, OR 2019-01-17 Denise Schill Singapore ; 2019-O1-17 Nancy (GG) Ludwig Hillssboro, OR 2019-01-17 Jim McCoy Cathlamet, WA 2419-01-17 Brenda Guisinger Clatskanie, OR 2019-01-17 Andy Pinette Redmond, OR 2019-O1-17 Raymond Beacham BEND, OR 2019-01-17 Jason Bass Salem, OR 2019-O1-17 Bobby Yousefi Miami, US 2019-O1-17 Alice Burnett US 2019-O1-17 Dan Tomlin Sandy, OR 2019-01-17 Dave Kelly Colton, OR 2019-O1-17 Maddie Kelly Colton, OR 2019-O1-17 Melissa Kelly Colton, OR 2019-O1-17 Walter Telaya ; Houston, US 2019-O1-17 Mary Elizabeth Lovering ,US 2019-01-17 Stephen Ker 2019-01-17 Kara Oliver Keizer, OR 2019-O1-17 Traci Nelson e Ground, WA 2019-O1-17 Ruth Ann Metteer/Nisbet Bend, OR 2019-01-17 Taylor Barker Salem, US 2019-O1-17 Vickie Kommer Portland, OR 2019-0'l-17 Martin Smith Portland, OR 2019-01-17 Suzanne and Rick Shoemaker Grants Pass, OR 2Arc-01-17 Phillip Trussell Portland, OR 2019-01-17 Alva Richardson Wenden, AZ 2019-O1-17 Arya Sayadi Wallingford, US 2019-01-17 Jack Auerfeld Rockville Centre, US 2019-O1-17 joseph ojeda South Gate, US 2019-01-17 Lance Adair Troutdale, OR 2019-01-17 Jan Frink Salem, OR 2019-O1-17 Shannon Waddle Lyons, OR 2019-01-17 Curtis Frink Salem, OR 2019-01-17 Howard Nielsen Salem, OR 2019-O1-17 Jan Hall Bend, OR 2019-4147 KristiWise Kansas City, MO 2019-O1-17 Wayne Low Portland, OR 19-A1-17 Ronald Schafer Forest Grove, OR 19-01-17 Judy Smith Portland, OR 2019-01-17 Shirley Platt 2019-01-17 Ekaterina Trofimova Framingham, US 2019-01-17 Arthur Finn Amity, OR 19-01-17 Glen Burnie, US 2019-01-17 The Dalles, OR 2019-01-17 Schulz Sisters, OR 2019-01-17 Chehalis, WA 2019-O1-17 Miami, US 2A19-01-17 Pauline Aylett Powell Butte, OR 2A19-01-17 Ida Johnston Tillamook, OR 2019-O1-17 Brenna Porter Angleton, US 201 9-01-18 Sherri Clemens Spring, US 2019-01-18 Leticia Garcia Dallas, US 2019-01-18 Jolee Stevens Manassas, US 2019-01-18 Khan Tortoise no, US 2019-01-18 Drew Levine Chevy Chase, US 2019-01-18 1l Ashanti Wilson Tampa, US I 201 9-01-18 'rou Yongsheng Atlanta, US 2019-01-18 )ok Long Beach, US 2019-01-18 Norm Sundholm Bend, OR :2019-01-18 Michael Moon Bend, OR 2019-01-18 Djes Shejdj Thousand Oaks, US 2019-01-18 Arthur Gregg Sun City, AZ 2019-01-18 I Ethan Berry NewYork, US 2019-01-18 deaiuhfia wndkajd Burbank, US 2019-01-18 Joyce Velzke Brooklyn Center, US 2019-01-18 Alex Kenyon Perry, US 2019-01-18 Mike Kass Fort Campbell, US 2019-01-18 Madison Snyder Annapolis, US 2019-01-18 Kate Gaseitsiwe Omaha, US 2019-01-18 Haley Spradlin Higginson, US 2019-01-1 8 Raymond Perez US 2019-01-19 Lisa Gomez Houston, US 2019-01-19 7achary Anderson Alexandria, US 2019-01-19 Lorenzo Johnson San Jose, US 2019-01-19 Shelby Nicholson Gulf Shores, US 2019-01-19 Shanedra Young Manchester, US 2019-01-19 Alina Stannard Rancho Cucamonga, US 2019-01-19 Jessyca Beehner Newport, US 2019-01-19 Marcus Ford Lilburn, US 2019-01-1 9 Nabeeha Tirmizi : Chicago, US 201 9-01-19 Habros Gaming 2019-01-19 Larry Gates Seattle, WA 2019-01-19 Leenah Ali Denver, US 2019-01-19 Alta Ray Portland, OR 2019-01-19 Michael Flores La Verne, US 2019-01-19 Juan Maldonado Brooklyn, US . 2019-01-19 Carol Gray Atwater, CA 2019 01 19 Shawn Servo Portland, OR 2019-O1-19 Ryan Snook Seaside, OR 2019-01-19 allison Lengele Portland, OR 2019-01-1 9 Vesta Smith Portland, OR 2019-01-19 Brian Elliott Molalla, OR 2019-O1-19 Oral Lounds Albany, US 2019-01-19 Susan Tracy Bend, OR 2019-01-19 John Gomes Lyman, SC 2019-01-20 Alya Torres Corpus Christi, US 2019-01-20 Judith Stanger-Taylor Canby, OR 1-20 JOELJohansen OregonCity,OR i zot g-o 1-20 : Adam Jones Corbin, US 2019-O1-20 Leah Vetsch Bend, OR 2019-01-20 Lisa Threatt Vancouver, WA 2019-01-20 Paige Beach : Colton, OR 2019-01-20 Marcy Kouadio SanJose, US 2019-01-20 '''t MichealAngulo San Diego, US 2019-01-20 Dongus Mongus Seattle, US 2019-01-20 Ace Thrasher Decatur, US 2019-01-20 yo yo ma Framingham, US 2019-O1-20 Curt Barker Salem, OR 2019-01-20 Cheyanne Robertson Portland, US 2019-01-20 eli s-k Salisbury, US 2019-01-20 Caleb gebo Grand Ronde, US 2019-01-24 Angel Espinoza Albuquerque, US 2019-01-20 Alora Otto Ferndale, US 19-01-20 Amanda Mand Fond du lac, US 2019-01-20 Kathleen Hoonhout Salem, OR 2019-01-20 Kate Flaherty Waterbury,US 2019-O1-20 Jordynn Bourgeois New Orleans, US 2019-01-20 Zoie Normans Gresham, US 2019-01-20 Maximilien Mata Chicago, US 2019-01-20 RH Bronx, US 2019-01-2"1 Internet got oofed Oof Laurel, US 2019-O1-21 Rosita Alicea Washington, US 2019-01-21 Charles Sherman Baton Rouge, US 2019-01-21 Ben Schuh Lewisville, US 2019-O1-21 Allen Boutte II New Iberia, US 2419-01-21 ') JeremyJacobson Gulfport, US 2019-01-21 Amanda Downing Destrehan, US 2019-01-21 owo owo Killeen, US 2019-01-21 Terranae'Anderson Lithonia, US 2019-O1-21 Sherron Hazel Brooklyn, US 2019-01-21 Sara Buels New Orleans, US 2019-41-21 Brenna Joiner Hammond, US 2019-01-21 l Joseph Ellender i Many, US 2019-01-21 Rebecca Hatchell West Chicago, US : 2O19-01-21 Bobby Stanley Shreveport, US i 2019-41-21 Kathy Graves Franklinton, US 2019-01-21 Mercy Mercy cepeds Morgan city, US 2019-01-21 Melvin Bates Natchitoches, US 2019-01-21 JayJayJackson Baton Rouge, US 2019-01-21 Daja Edwards Carrollton, US 2019-01-21 Cynthia Viar East Ridge, US 2019-01-21 Mary Davis Zachary, US 2019-01-21 Ashley Bergeron Pensacola, US 2019-01-21 James Rodrigue Houma, US 2019-41-21 . Jill Brown Monroe, US :20 19-01-21 : Eric Hartman Garland, US 19-01-21 :;zo Colten Matranga Denham Springs, US 2019-A1-21 Lillie Smith New Orleans, US 2A19-01-21 Courtney benoit Lafayette, US 2019-01-21 Kristen Neill Lockport, US 2019-01-21 Cortessa T Mccullurn Tulsa, US 2019-01-21 Daon Sims Baton Rouge, US 2A19-O1-21 Kendell Coleman Marrero, US 2019-01-21 Cameron Wetzel Slidell, US 2019-01-21 Chaise Choate Abbeville, US 2U9-A1-21 Makaya Peters Bogalusa, US 2019-O1-21 Mikale Houston Nashville, US 2019-01-21 WillieJones CIinton, US 2019-01-21 Alec Rodriguez Miami, US 2A19-O1-21 Jadd Collins Baton Rouge, US 20'19-01-21 James Hulsey Carriere, US 2019-01-21 cassie chesterfield Fairfield, US 2019-O1-21 Myrna Graham The Dalles, OR 2019-01-21 Gujyj Vhbguj Adrian, US 2019-01-21 Drew Day Cape Coral, US 2019-01-21 LoriAdkins US 2019-01-21 Debra Aldridge Downsville, LA 2019-01-21 Milton Danos US 2019-01-21 Kelley Patterson Roseburg, OR 2019-01-21 Ryan Segrest Mobile, US 2019-01-21 Damon Harris r Denham Springs, US 2019-01-21 Mary Fernandez Houston, TX 2019-O1-21 Quentin Bullie Marrero, US 2019-01-21 Jessica Jones Killeen, US 2019-01-21 Jarred Williams Metairie, US 2019-01-21 Gwendolyn Magee New orleans, US 2019-01-21 Oscar Tejeda Metairie, US 2019-01-21 Amandzo Williams Louisiana, US 2019-01-21 Hunter Soileau Lafayette, US 19-O1-21 Devyn Hebert Prairieville, US 2019-01-21 Abraha Strahan New Orleans, US 2019-01-21 Kamen Smith US 2019-01-21 Thomas Boulanger Victorville, CA 2A19-01-21 Florence Tems Winnie, US 2019-01-21 savannah nelson Metairie, US 20rc-a1-21 Jennifer Cain Crowley, US 19-O1-21 Michelle Verrett Baton Rouge, US 2019-01-21 Cardiz Humble New Orleans, US 2019-01-21 James Tim Hurley Lyerly, US 2019-01-21 Charity Allen Shreveport, US 2019-01-21 Trevor Marcel Houma, US ;2019-O1-21 Howard Hatten Jonesville, US 2019-01-21 Lois Eugene Stone Mountain, US 2019-01-21 Matthew Mire Lafayette, US 2019-01-21 Deon Maddox Salem, OR 2019-01-21 Billy Foster Baton Rouge, US 2019-01-21 Ashley Blackwell Warrensburg, US 2019-01-21 Addie C Pineville, US 2019-01-21 Kandi Cormier Midland, US 2019-01-21 Alex Tassin New Orleans, US 2019-01-21 Domonique Lastrapes Lake Charles, US i zot9-01-21 : Zennis Raven New Orleans, US 2019-01-21 Alexis Ordogne Haruey, US 2019-01-21 RUBEN RUBTNOS INWOOD, US 2019-01-21 Ethan Carter Belle Chasse, US 2019-01-21 Tony Matthews Hahnville, US 2019-01-21 Charlie Zito New York, US 2019-O1-21 Ronals Parquet La Place, US 2419-01-21 Horace Conde Dallas, US 2019-01-21 Barbara Davis Baton Rouge, US 2A19-01-21 brandi adams Bay Saint Louis, US 2019-01-21 Erica Evans Snellville, US 2019-41-21 Tieon OBannon Shreveport, US 19-01-21 Paul Mahfouz Woodworth, LA "19-01-21 Cheryl Recotta Hammond, US 2019-01-21 Amiia Hiritiko Colorado Springs, US 2019-01-21 Jeremy Winfield Opelousas, US 2019-01-21 Laturra Brown Houston, US 2019-01-21 Elias Rodriguez Stafford, US 2019-01-21 Frank DeMunno Caldwell, US 2019-01-21 your mom Lakeville, US 2019-01-21 :,2019-01'21 Markyjahnee Boyd Gloster, US Robin Halpin Conroe, TX 2019-01-21 Dillan Swank American fork, US 2019-01-21 Megan Varnado Zachary, US 2019-01-21 Ronald Ventress Memphis, US 2019-01-21 Wesley Schneider Kenner, US 2019-01-21 Josh Vassil Ponchatoula, US 2019-41-21 Devin Woodall ouston, US 2019-01-21 Carroll Eschete Dallas, TX 19-01-21 VincentJackson Dallas, US 2019-41-21 Drew Mitten San Jose, US 2A19-01-21 Pookie Monem New Orleans, US 2019-01-21 Allen Wulf Crowley, US 2019-01-21 Carmella Richardson Springfield, US 2019-01-21 Aidan Barrette Prairieville, US 2019-01-21 Cierra Vickers New Orleans, US 2019-O1-21 Ashley Meaux New Iberia, US 2019-01-21 Janet Wingerter US 2419-O1-21 Prentiss Marshall Beaver Falls, US 2019-01-21 Nigger Bitch New Orleans, US 2019-01-21 Manuel Ramirez Arlington, US 2019-01-21 Qujewelia Williams Ridgeland, US 2019-01-21 Tyindonesia Holden Loranger, US 2019-01-21 Jared Patterson Leesville, US 2019-01-21 Rasheid White Charlotte, US 2019-01-21 Matthew Newson Columbia, US 2U9-41-21 Shaorn Murphy Bend, OR 2419-01-21 Brittany Riggs Lake Charles, US 2019-01-21 Dustin Francis Carencro, US 2019-01-21 cameron rieger Lafayette, US 2019-01-21 Johnthon Hills Charleston, US 2019-01-21 MichaelTaylor Las Vegas, US 2019-01-21 Ben Casper SaintJoseph, US 2019-01-21 Erin Joubert Opelousas, US 2019-01-21 Robert Hudson i Vancleave, US 2019-41-21 Lemant Stewart Houston, US 2019-O1-21 Jo Ann Tillman Houma, US 2019-01-21 Kehnemah Downing New Orleans, US 20"19-01-21 Patricia Marion Orlando, US 2019-O1-21 Keyonna Braxton Dallas, US 2019-O1-21 Dayshanieka Adams Chalmette, US 2019-01-21 r Corey Caswell Kenner, US 2019-01-21 Ryan Achee Prairieville, US 2019-01-21 i Alexis Alexander Jeanerette, US 2019-01-21 i Javier Perez US 019-01-21 Kobi Hawkins Mcdonough, US 2019-01-21 RON & CAROL Houser Quartzsite, AZ 2019-01-21 Jay Gordon jr New Orleans, US 2019-O1-21 Ken Coco Marksville, US 2019-01-21 Leslie Gauthier metairie, US 2019-01-21 Steven Morvant Dallas, US 2019-01-21 Paula Turner Sugar land, US 2019-01-21 Laurel Brenton Fishers, US 2019-01-21 Maria Lena Horsham, US 2019-01-21 Kareem Awls Picayune, US 2019-01-21 Dominique Grayer Baton Rouge, US 2019-01-21 Amber Bentley US 2019-01-21 Kim Gamble iHouston, US 2019-01-21 Emerie Nessl Corpus Christi, US i 2019 -01-21 :! John McCoy Mandeville, US 2019-01-21 Rey Bear New Orleans, US 2A19-01-21 Chad Mcmillin Kansas City, US 2019-01-21 Janis Earthelemy Marrero, US 2419-01-21 1 brad nagin New Orleans, US 2A19-O1-21 Tanyah Nelson Jackson, US 2019-01-21 Nate Hebert Lousiana, US 2A19-01-21 Percy Smith Miami, US 2019-01-21 Chrissie Moore Houma, US 2019-41-21 Jonathan Jiles Decatur, US 2019-01-21 Broderick Garrette Opelousas, US 2019-01-21 sabrina queseneberry Detroit, US t 2419-01-21 Isaiah Morin Belton, US 2019-01-21 RHONDA HARRISON Delhi, US 2019-01-21 Dennis Alexander Rochester, US 24rc-O1-21 Brian Marchese Lafayette, US 2019-01-21 Trevor Harris Gonzales, US 2019-01-21 jeff pardo usa, US 2019-01-21 timothy trimbell Trimbel l new orleans, US 2019-01-21 Tonya Soileau Louisiana, US 2019-01-21 Rechel Bonilla New Orleans, US 2019-01-21 Malaina Seegers US 19-O1-21 Lexi Rivette Lafayette, US 2019-01-21 Meka Edwards Harvey, US 2019-01-21 Christian Taylor Gulfport, US 2019-01-21 Jack Aldridge Youngsville, US 2019-01-21 Maddi Schwarzer Spring, US 2019-01-21 Johnathan Bourgeois Thibodaux, US 2019-01-21 brittany corr Miami, US 2019-01-21 Chasity Necole Gallo-Revere Folsom, LA 2019-01-21 Eugene D. Lochbrunner Sr. Harahan, US 019-01-21 Thavia Johnson Longview, US 19-01-21 Blair Gross Napoleonville, US 2019-01-21 Albert Rogers Albion, US 2019-01-21 Lamacy simon Ville Platte, US 2019-01-21 Chadwick Carter Lena, US 20"19-01-21 Angela Holmes Humble, TX 2019-01-21 Alex Rogers Orlando, US 2419-O1-21 Jane Cannella Slidell, US i 2019-01-22 Celeste Loyd Houma, US 2019-01-22 Joseph Scott New Orleans, US 2019-01-22 LoriThornton Portland, OR 2019-01-22 Christopher Castillo Cut off, US :.2019-01-22 i Maddux Vitrano Houma, US 2019-01-22 Teresa Slominski Wilsonville, OR 2019-41-22 bryan mirafuentes rJ anta ana, US 2019-01-22 Chassity Jason mamou, US 2019-01-22 Kimberly Smith Jacksonville, US ) 2019-01-22 Clinton Dalrymple Parker, US 2019-01-22 Willie Wallace Hammond, US 2019-01-22 Cullen Williams Norcross, US 2019-01-22 Michael Salard Longview, US 2019-01-22 Dlaine Thomas New Orleans, US 2019-01-22 Betty Hernandez Los Angeles, US 2019-01-22 Danny Nguyen Praireville, US 2A19-O1-22 Kathy Bailea Alexandria, US 2019-01-22 Vincent Beckham Biloxi, US 2019-01-22 Ashley Baldwin Aberdeen, US 2019-41-22 Osbie Booth Sumrall, US 2019-01-22 JerrellWilliams Baton Rouge, US 2019-01-22 Mary Phosai Locust Grove, US 2019-01-22 Joey LeBlanc Galveston, US 2019-01-22 Ashley Romero Metairie, US 2019-01-22 Jason Ratcliff Fargo, US 2019-O1-22 Kaylee Giguere Blossom, US :2019-01-22 Robert Broussard Eunice, US 2A19-01-22 Derrick Moten Houston, US 2019-01-22 John Quinn Ovett, US 2019-41-22 hailey herron Ragley, US 2019-01-22 Mark Matthews Fountain Hills, AZ 2019-01-22 Danielle Malbreaux Lafayette, US 2U9-A1-22 Victor Barnes Kenner, US 2A19-O1-22 Glen Spruell Westbrook, US 2019-O1-22 Jerry Spiers Bossier City, US 2A19-O1-22 Tosheba Tatum Dallas, US 2019-01-22 joann Thompson Blue Springs, US 2019-O1-22 Leonard Taylor Stone Mountain, US 2019-01-22 Braedon Peters Broomfield, US 2AE-01-22 Brenda Laurent Hammond, US 2019-O1-22 Blake Conerly Springfield, US 2019-O1-22 Parker Boyd Hammond, US 2019-01-22 Mica Quinn Chicago, US 2019-41-22 Gabby Guss New Orleans, US 19-01-22 Dale Glanders Spring, US 2019-01-22 Colby Carlisle Petal, US 2019-01-22 Chris Rosenplanter Metairie, US 2019-01-22 Patrick Tybor : Albuquerque, US 2019-01-22 Thomas Davis Picayune, US 2019-01-22 Joey Bergeron New iberia, US 2019-01-22 Christine Carter New lberia, US 2019-01-22 Treylen Bessix Denham Springs, US 2019-01-22 Kwenn Cooley Laurel, US 2019-01-22 Brittany Taylor Millry, US 2019-01-22 Trinity Rodriguez Buffalo, US 2019-01-22 james lewis Gulfport, US 2019-01-22 Alexis Horton Logansport, US 2019-01-22 Zachary Phillips Baton Rouge, US 2019-01-22 Charles Brooks Metairie, US 1 9-0 1 -22 Troy Pernaselci Seymour, US 1 9-0 1 -22 carl chauvin jr Chauvin, US 2019-01-22 Madison Gulley Bettendorf, US 2019-01-22 Samuel Riggan New Orleans, US 2019-01-22 Russell Callahan Las Vegas, US 2019-01-22 Dawson Cruz Pensacola, US 2019-01-22 La Tessa Sweeney New Orleans, US 2019-01-22 PreciousJackson Phoenix, US 2019-01-22 Chantel Harris Casper, US 2019-01-22 Anna Kosmas Portland, US 2019-01-22 Donyelle Durbin Elizabeth, AR 2019-01-22 Barbara Tingle Commerce, US i2 019-01-22 : Douglas Harrell Batchelor, US ,2 019-01-22 i Angelina Tabora Kenner, US 2019-01-22 Richard Ngaya Omaha, NE 2019-01-22 i randy clement montegut, US 2019-01-22 Christine OShield s-Crosby Pass Christian, US 2019-01-22 Peter Cardillo Foster, US 2019-01-22 Piernas Wills Slidell, US 2019-01-22 Richard Hastings Baton Rouge, US 2019-01-22 Robert Reddell Justin, US 24rc-01-22 Cody Disanto Cincinnati, US 2019-01-22 Cristina Markell Victorville, CA 2019-01-22 Christian Payne Sugar Land, US 2019-01-22 Carl Sechrist Racine, US 2019-01-22 Fortnite Borger Saint George, US 2019-01-22 Tori solano Beaverton, US 2019-01-22 Riley Trapp Barrington, US 2019-O1-22 CherylA Bergemann Packwaukee, US 2019-01-22 Saida Brema US 2019-01-22 Justin Gibson US 2019-01-23 Nikkii Nunez San Antonio, US 2019-01-23 Jamison Melchier Libertyville, US 2019-01-23 Katy Exner Oconomowoc, US 2019-01-23 i Kel ly Groth Milwaukee, US 2019-01-23 Kim Stevens i Stratford ,US 2019-01-23 Allen Hurn ttle, US 2019-01-23 Michael Darling Portland, US 2019-01-23 Yousef Alsiraj Skokie, US 2019-01-23 David sloop Springfield, US 2019-01-23 Rodney Smallwood Quinlan, US 2A19-01-23 Tiana jackson Burlington, US 2019-01-23 Loreal McGuffey West Wego, US 2019-01-23 Rodesha Griffin New Orleans, US 2A19-01-23 Dana Hines Metairie, US 2A19-01-23 Liggin Liggin Eastman, US 2019-01-23 Wenis Tickle Spring, US 2019-01-23 sandy Bowechop Neah Bay, US 2019-O1-23 connor Dickinson Lafayette, US 2019-01-23 Sophia DelBene Waynesville, US 2019-01-23 Matthew Carmon Lansing, US 2019-01-23 i Caleb Babineaux Terrell, US 2019-01-23 Anabell Galarza Highland village, US 2019-01-23 Barbara Swann Deland, US 2019-01-23 Ana Garcia Patzcuaro michoacan, US 2019-01-23 Alicia Cronin Spokane, US 2A19-01-23 Lorraine Aldridge Portland, OR 2019-01-23 John Gallman Tampa, US 2019-01-23 janet saulsberry Flagstaff, US 2019-O1-23 Nancy Webb Portland, OR 2019-01-23 Brandon Cromwell Lawrenceville, US 2019-O1-23 Viana Henry Dayton, NV 2019-01-23 Kameron Booth Antioch, US 2019-41-23 Christopher Lara Keller, US ; 2019-O1-23 :-' ''"' Shawanna Bumpers Gulfport, MS : 2019-01-23 : Justin Young Ozark, US 2019-O1-23 Mohamed Abdrabbo Miami, US 2019-01-23 TylorJewell East Troy, US 2019-01-23 Christian Reynolds Austin, US 2019-01-23 sydney farrimond Bartlesville, US 2019-01-24 Chris Hoy Rancho Palos Verdes, US 2019-O1-24 Braeden Bourque Baton Rouge, US 2019-O1-24 Dean Anderson Kennewick, WA 2019-01-24 Eric Bewley Springdale, US 2019-01-24 Malik Vaquer Fort Worth, US 2019-01-24 Ronnie Campbell Republic, US 2019-01-24 Dee Shultz Camas Valley, OR 2019-01-24 John Intlekofer Bend, OR 20'19-01-24 Josh Maher Beatrice, US 2019-01-24 Chris Stone Bend, OR 2019-01-24 Brandon Lester Port Orchard, US 2019-A1-24 roy martin Bonduel, US 2019-01-24 Tiara Carter US 2019-41-24 Leilani Stone Bend, OR 2019-01-24 Leonardo Cascone Los Angeles, US 2019-01-24 Camille Eastin Spartanburg, US 2019-01-24 Rebecca Mcllhenny Berwick, US 2019-01-24 Todd Greenawalt Independence, US 2019-01-24 Luis Perez Chula Vista, US 2019-01-24 kenneth koonce columbus, US 2019-41-24 Evan Jones Knoxville, US 2019-01-24 Marissa Marciano North Haven, US 2A19-01-24 Leo Pellegrini Limerick, US 2019-01-24 Yihong Nie Cleveland, US :,2019-01-24 l i.... :: Earl Robicheaux Portland, US i 2019-A1-25 Bill Settle Bandon, US 19-01-25 Jake Steltenpohl Forest Grove, US 2019-01-25 iSu ssan Madsen Copenhagen, US 2019-01-25 Mer Ingleses Pompano Beach, US 2019-01-25 Don Xab Bend, US 2019-01-25 Daniel Lapz New York, US 2019-01-25 Emma Rach Kingstom, IL 2019-01-25 Robert Reinhard Bend, OR 2019-01-25 Malia Bell Richmond, US 2019-01-25 Naruto Uzumaki San Antonio, US 2019-01-25 James Corson Bend, OR 2019-01-25 Emanuel Sandoval San Antonio, US 2019-01-25 alexa whitw Lincoln, US 2019-01-26 Mary Shrauger San Francisco, CA 2019-01-26 Max Weller Hopkinton, US 2019-01-26 Gentle Onuora Indianapolis, US 2019-01-26 Michael Inyang Eugene, US 20"t9-01-26 MichaelWear Waterloo, US 2019-01-26 Kaisirys Santana Bronx, US 2019-01-26 Daniel McGill Redmond, OR 2019-41-26 Holly Royalty Morgantown, US 2019-01-26 Leo Cauley Rio Rancho, NM 2019-01-26 Denver Sparacio Hoover, US 2019-01-26 Joel Hopp Pinckneyville, US 2019-01-27 Deborah Bell CaveJunction, US 2019-01-27 Reyna Phillips Mchenry, IL 2A19-01-27 Lana Zalt Ypsilanti, US 2019-01-27 Maksim Nedvihin Libertyville, US 2A19-01-27 I Alfonso Cruz Racine, US 2019-01-27 Kassidy Monroe La Marque, US 2019-01-27 Nate Shamblin Beckley, US 2019-01-27 Dakota Swann Coos Bay, US 2019-01-27 Ebenezer Scrooge Encino, US 2019-01-27 Caleb Marsh O Fallon, IL 2019-01-27 Justin Gasparas Westville, US 2019-01-27 Isabella Siroky East Lansing, US 2019-41-27 Hugsover 9000 San Antonio, US 2019-01-27 nou Portland, US 2019-O1-27 Larry Wayne Norcross, US 2019-01-28 Gabe Cruz Platteville, US 2019-01-28 Hugh Mungus Baltimore, US 2019-01-28 Beverly Traugh Berwick, US 2019-01-28 Rodolfo Gutierrez Hayruard, US 2019-01-28 Renn Adsir Shelby, US 2019-01-28 Damien Quihuis San Diego, US 2019-01-28 Logan Barker-Bigos Schenectady, US 2019-01-28 jacob hand Queen Creek, US 2019-01-28 Patricia Jones Hayward, US 2019-01-28 t. Sergio Duarte Hayward, US 2019-01-28 Terrell Gilmore US 2019-01-28 janetta barber US 2019-01-28 Caleb Rabold S 2019-A1-28 Joel Williams Seattle, US 2019-01-28 Sandy Fares Dedham, US 2U9-A1-28 Trisha Culley Scott Air Force Base, US 2019-A1-28 Brionna Finney Mullens, US 2A19-O1-28 SAUVE sauve Syracuse, US ;2019-01-28 shaley vore Decatur, US 2A19-O1-28 Justyn Shuman Post Falls, US 2019-O1-28 John Nicholson Ann Arbor, US 2019-01-28 Shawn Bowman Dallas City, US 2019-01-28 Juan Contreras Euless, US 2019-01-28 Misha Entin Chicago, US 2019-A1-28 Danny Rodriguez Southfield, US 2019-01-28 Bodhi Layer-Carlson Denver, US 20"t9-01-28 Ella Lombardo Point Pleasant Beach, US 2019-O1-28 Linda Corson Bend, OR 2019-O1-28 Claire Gillette Brookings, US 2019-01-28 Blake Hagan i Longmont, US 2019-01-28 alyssa bonfiglio Mequon, US 2019-01-28 lisa huo columbus, US 20',9-01-28 ,\ Jichang Geng Columbus, US 2019-01-28 Josiah Cruikshank Bend, US 2019-01-28 Jeffery Harris Mannsville, US 2019-01-28 kexin ye Bloomington, US 2019-01-28 Chenxi Thaa Urbana, US 2019-01-28 Yifan Zhou columbus, US 2019-01-28 Zelun He Urbana, US 2019-01-28 Noemy Gutierrez Bloomington, US 2019-41-28 Zane Zhu Urbana, US 2019-01-28 John Cassidy Wanryick, US 2019-01-28 Lingling Tan Bloomington, US 2019-01-28 Yuting Tan Lafayette, US 2019-01-28 Kailey Stanworth Delta, US 2019-01-28 Ran Tao Chicago, US 2019-A1-28 Adrielle pomeranz Champaign, US 2A19-01-28 Jiaying Zhang Columbus, US 2019-01-28 Xerin Kersh Florence, US 2A19-01-28 Brandon Suarez Carolina, US 2019-01-29 RobertJames Houston, US 2019-01-29 Sara Brescia New Milford, US 2019-01-29 ohn Balleweg Vermillion, US 2A19-01-29 QiweiWang Urbana, US 2019-01-29 Cole Rodriguez Mission Viejo, US 2019-01-29 Ruijun Liu Champaign, US 2019-01-29 Filip Niewinski Bloomington, US 2019-01-29 Jacky Tan Bloomington, US 2019-01-29 Hayden Snyder Aberdeen, US 2A19-01-29 Sheyla Aguirre Chicago, US ', 2o1g-01-zg Arya Amuzgar West Lafayette, US ,2019-01-29 Derrick Cotton Dallas, US 2019-O1-29 jeremiah S Powhatan, US 2A19-01,29 Ashikur Rahman Watertown, US 2019-01-29 Joscelyn Brown Terre Haute, US 2019-01-29 Donya Harris Terre Haute, US 2019-01-29 Ankit Vij Madison, US 2019-01-29 Xinyun li Minneapolis, US 2019-01-29 Xiaoxiao Ge Madison, US 2019-O1-29 Tyler Bushhorm Bloomington, IN 2U9-A1-29 Jackson Sills West Lafayette, US 2A19-01-29 Jonathan Rhue Boring, OR , 2A19-01-30 From: Ron Youno To: Isabella Liu SubJect: Notice of Application for Marijuana Production Dater Tuesday, January 15, 2019 9:46:35 AM To whom it may concern: Although this e-mail is being sent late in the process, I'd like it to be known that I am VERY much against the proposed land use near the northeast corner of the'oSundance neighborhood." I have NO issue with people needing medical marijuana; if anyone wants to use it ('recreationallyrot thatts their business, not mine, However, in my life experience, the production of this product brings problems with transient workers, persons of questionable lawfulness, environmental issues, and a host of other problems. Thank you, R. E. Young LtCol USAR Ret. Begin forwarded message: From: Ron Young Subject: 21 Cats Who Have a Love/Hate Relationship With Printers I Cuteness Date: January 15,2019 at 9:39:06 AM PST To: Catman4u From bemused curiosity to outright hostility and everything in between: In the long war between technology and cats, there's an uneasy peace when it comes to printers. Check it out: httls://www.cuteness.com/1371 6054/21 -cats-who-have-a-lovehate- rel ati onshi f -with-f ri nters?utm:source:f)esktofEmaj l Share&utm:m edirrm:emai l From: Kellb-adans To: Isabella Liu Subject: File 247-18-00091s-AD Date: Monday, January 28, 2019 ztlTtzl PM To Whom it May Concern l've come to understand that the Community Development Department has rejected the assertion that the facilities and activities at Sundance Meadows constitute a "Youth Activity Center". I vehemently disagree with this conclusion, and I fail to understand the basis for this conclusion. The code provides no definition or guidance as to what constitutes a "Youth Activity Cente/', and therefore, the broadest possible definition should be applied until such time as the code is changed and it provides objective criteria for such a determination, Sun Dance Meadows property is Zoned as Destination Resort (DR), they operate with permits that allow the destination camping and other activities they have related to this destination camping, including Youth Activities throughout their property, which includes the indoor pool and pickle ball courts directly adjacent to, and well within, the 1325 ft setback. Sundance Meadows operations pre-date the applicant's application for a grow operation and should take precedence over a grow facility not yet installed. The applicant clearly knew these facilities existed and purchased the property for a grow operation knowing their approval was "at risk". They assumed that pro-grow elements within the county government would rule in their favor regardless of a Youth Activity Center argument that they clearly should have researched before purchasing the property. lt is clear to see from the county zoning map, the adjacent property is zoned DR, and that there are recreational facilities that might constitute Youth Activity Center within easy sight of the property line, Reviewing previous rulings and appeals indicate that both the Community Development Department, and past Commissioner rulings, have been arbitrary and capricious. The idea that a permit is required for Youth Activity Center to rneet the definition, a permit that doesn't exist, and examples of which cannot even be cited by the Community Development Department, is proof of the arbitrary and capricious nature of the approval process, as it relates to Youth Activity Centers, by the Community Development Department and past County Commissioners. The subject application should be rejected on the basis that there is a Youth Activity Center at Sundance Meadows within the 1350 ft setback for such facilities' Regards, Keith Adams 60135 Stirling Drive Sundance Subdivision From: Craio Martini To: Isabella Liu Subject: marijuana production operation (247-18-000915-AD) in the Sundance neighborhood Date! Thursday, January 10, 2019 3:18145 PM Ms. Liu My name is Craig Martini,a resident in the Sundance area. We have been part time Bend residents since 1996. As of June 2077 we have become full time residents Of Bend / Oregon. We moved into our dream home /property August 2017. Our property,like all the others in Sundance, is peaceful, quiet, and private ,as the small acreage affords us this bit of luxury. Neighbors are friendly and look out for each other. Now with this (MPO) proposal,l/we hope this will never get past the application stage. Calgary, Sweetgrass, Sterling and all the other small residential streets in our area are not the Bend parkway. ln and out traffic to a facility like this would be a nuisance at best, What about the product itself ?? According to one source, we (Oregon) have such a glut of product (medical and recreation),that the profits are going down the toilet (excessive competition). There are those in the business that are suggesting that they export to other Marijuana LEGAL states in order to recover their losses. This is a lose lose situation. Another source has estimated that it would take eight (8)years, based on present consumption, to smoke all this stuff (glut), if all production is stopped immediately. Law enforcement issues will continue to grow for already overtaxed agencies. Undesirables will be migrating in and out of the area. Who Knows ? One more comment about exporting product to other legal marijuana states. l,m not an attorney,BUT,l believe the U.S. has not legalized marijuana as yet and therefore, the shipping and/or transporting across state borders, an illegal product, may have issues in itself ?. I ask you. Do we really need any more MPOs ? Respectfully, Craig Martini (Sundance resident) From! lack Intlekofer To: Isabella Liu Subject: MPO - Sundance Meadows Subdivision Datel Tuesday, January 08, 2019 12:32:54 PM I am in opposition to the placement of a marijuana production operation in the Sundance Meadows Subdivision. I live on F{orse Butte Rd. which is the only road into the subdivision. The road is two lanes with no shoulders and dangerous if traveled at high speeds or under the influence. Adding a commercial business, such as a MPO and, eventually a processing facility, would open this rural community up to other commercial businesss and destroy the neighborhoods as they are today. The way it looks on the map, the facility is in a far corner of the subdivision. The roads in the subdivision can't handle the traffrc. They have many bends, no sidewalks. I believe there will be increased traffrc, unsafe speeds, an influx of night faffic by those who will attempt to raid the facility at night. The placement of a MPO makes the neighborhood UNSAFE for the many children who live and play there and creates the possibility of increased crime such as home invasions. One question is: How many MPO's are there in Central Oregon? Is there a surplus of grown marijuana that will contribute to the illegal sale and distribution? The State of Oregon can't keep up with the proper control of quality and distribution if we keep approving these growing operations; aren't we just adding more problems. Hope you and the county decision makers understand the ramifications of this decision. Thank You Iack Intlekofer s4t-389-r745 From: Steve Weber To: Isabella Liu Subject: Re; File 247-18-000915AD; Marijuana Production Operation Date: Tueday, January 08, 2019 12:04:38 PM This email is to voice our concerns and opposition to the proposed MPO. Our address is 22230 Quebec Drive, which is near the proposed operation. My wife and I have lived in Bend for 40 years, and as homeowners in the Sundance community for the past27 years. We decided on Sundance as it was somewhat out of town, much less traffrc, quiet and it provided an opporhrnity to have some additional land making it such that our houses would not need to be constructed closely to each other. The zoning is RR ( Residential Rural) with the parcels being 2 to 5 acres in size. The applicant states the parcels are predominately 10 acre farms that are located near the proposed site. This is inaccurate as all of the parcels near the site are residential in nature with residential dwellings and some with detached out-buildings. These are not farms. Sundance is a residential community with the road system meant for residential taffic. The primary winding road (Sweetgrass) in and out of the community could not have been constructed with the intent of being a main aftery to a commercial operation. To allow commercial traffic to travel though our residential community would be wrong. My wife and I are mostly retired and our intent is to downsize. Our house is cunently listed for sale, so our number one concern now is there could be some devaluation of our properby because of this new proposed operation. Even though zoning would appear to allow this, a marijuana grow operation that is located so closely to residences and that is only accessible though a residential community would be a bad decision. Other concerns having a potential negative impact would include: strong stench in the air of maturing cannabis plants at harvest time, increased water usage for inigation purposes could put more strain on the Avion domestic water system that already has issues with low water pressure and the potential for increased crime. Again, we oppose the approval of a marijuana production facility in our Sundance community Regards, Steve and Barbara Weber 22230 Quebec Dr. Bend, OR977O2 From: Gretchen Blocker To: Isabellal.iu SubJect: File#247-1 8-000915-AD Date! Monday, January 07, 2019 2:26:16 PM lzze, I am contacting you regarding the marijuana grow application here in Sundance. I am definitely opposed to this request. I have attempted to sign the petition online. However, I can't seem to access the site. My husband and I live on Calgary Loop in Sundance. I have read all the concerns regarding the marijuana grow in our area. I agree with the objections and want you to know that we want this request rejected. Thank you, Gretchen Blocker 59784 Calgary Loop Bend, OR 97702 Fronr! qlld€[email protected] To: Isabella Liu SubJect: Flle #247-18-00091s-AD Date: Saturday, January 05, 2019 4:15:15 PM Dear Ms, Liu, lam emailing you aboutthe Notice of ApplicationFile#247-18-00091s-AD.lhave lived in the Sundance subdivision for over 30 years and as a longtime resident ! am highly opposed to this application for a marijuana grow in our neighborhood! This is a quiet neighborhood with small acre plots that is not designed for the lraffic, smell or increased awareness of our homes that this marijuana operation will bring. lf this were a neighborhood in Bend I do not believe this application would even get consideration zoning specs or not. I know our zoning specifications make the application possible, but I am pretty sure when those specifications were put in to place a marijuana grow was beyond belief as a farm crop. I am hoping that the opposing voices of myself and my neighbors will make a difference in this decision. There is not any way that this application is a justified fit in Sundance. Thank you for your consideration, Deborah Melhase Froflr! Toni & Kim Wolfe To: Isabella Liu SubJect: Pot grow in Sundance suMivision #247-18-000915AD Date; Tuesdat December 18, 2018 3158:32 PM I am concerned that a pot opexatiou is being planned in our neighborhood. I was surprised to see that a lot in here is zoned agriculture. lVe are on Avion water and can't imagine tlre amount of water needed for that. We wsrc told that our roads will be used for access to and from tlis operation. We have had concems that there is only one wary in and out in case of fire . Extra traffic is not going to trclp that. We have very few hydrants and our insurance is very high because of that. Everyone I know who lives out her are very against this operation. Please register my complaint to the DCCDD. io* too. KimWolfe Froflr: Mark Loveiov To: Isabella Liu Subject: File number 247-18-000915AD Date: Satuday, December 22,2OLB 10;10:48 AM To whom it may concern, My wife and I our family of three kids (soon to be four) live at 59785 Calgary Loop in Sundance. We are very opposed to the Marijuana Production Operation (MPO) that is proposed adjacent to the Sundance neighborhood. Our biggest concerns have to do with the safety and wellbeing our kids and the kids in the neighborhood. We chose to live in Sundance to so our kids would be able to grow up in a low traffic, low crime, rural environment. When we heard how this property was zoned we were shocked that it could be zoned as anything other than Rural Residential. There are several families near the proposed MPO development that our kids interact with and this will be directly impact the safety and wellbeing of every person in the subdivision. Our subdivision has one entrance/exit and ls clearly designed to handle the traffic of a subdivision not commercial operation such as the proposed MPO. ln addition, MPO have an inherent risk of increased crime associated with these operations that we do not want our kids or the kids of the neighborhood exposed to as a result. Finally, we are concerned about the light, odor, and noise and how allthese factors and the others mentioned above with affect the quality of life here and our propriety values. We are strongly opposed to the to the proposed MPO adjacent to Sundance neighborhood This application should be denied. Mark and Alicia Lovejoy 59785 Calgary Loop Bend, OR 97702 Mark Lovejoy 801.574.6804 r::ad*av:ejcyidnr$-stg From! DDD I03 Isabella Liu Subject: 247-18-00091sAD Dater Wednesday, December 26,20L8 11119:17 A|Vl Good Morning, I am a concerned citizen who owns a home in the Sundance subdivision and am aware of the application for a Marijuana production operation. I am opposed to such a operation that is in a subdivision where 95% of the homes are all on 3 to 5 acre lots. I understand the business opportunity for individuals but this should be in an area zoned for farming not residential. If you have any questions please contact me Respectfully, Daniel D, Dumas 541-610-4240 RE: Notice of Application, Marijuana Production Adjacent to Sundance File Number 247 -!8-0009 15AD I am opposed to this application for a number of reasons, Even though it is a separate parcel from Sundance it is a commercial operation and the Sundance CCR's do not permit commercial operations, yet it appears they would be accessing this property utilizing Sundance roadways, First; it is not acceptable for this operation to utilize Sundance roadways for access to this parcel. These roadways were paid for by Sundance homeowners with and LID a number of years ago, This commercial operation should not be allowed to utilize the Sundance entrance and egress poinl Second; this also applies to other Sundance infrastructure to include CEC power, Avion water, and Bendbroadband service. These utilities are designed for the confines of Sundance, not to support an adjacent parcel with a commercial operation that is not a part of the subdivision. If this application is approved, then it is my belief that the applicants should be required to access a roadway and utilities for their parcel from a point that is not adjacent to Sundance. Sincerely, Dennis Laird 22415 Calgary Drive Fronr: DIANE KOOK To: isabella Liu Subject: application 247-18-00091sAD Date! Friday, December 21, 2018 8;25:05 AM To:lzzyLiu in regards to MPO application 247-18{00915AD December 21,2018 My name is Jeantte Kook. I live at 22089 Sweetgrass Drive, Bend Oregoq in the Sundance zubdivision. I have lived here since 1985. This email is in objection to tlre current application for a MPO in the NE conrcr of my Sundarrce neighborhood, 60148 Stirling Drive. I believe tlat since the original going for the proposed marijruma grow was established prior to a:ry idea of this happening so close to small acreage with families in a residential neighborhood, it should not be granted or allowed to move forward. The purpose of the original going would ttot be in keeping with the land use which the new owners are proposing. I feel it is the County's responsibility to preserve the integrity of our tranquil community be re-evaluating this zoning to eliminate any unhtended loopholes, and to prevent this from happening to other residential communities in the future. I am appalled to leam that an operation zuch as this could be approved in a residential neighborhood, especially since the use of the roads located in our neighborhood will be used for any operation activity for this production with the access through our neighborhood the only access. The main road is located direcfly in front of my property and already sses a grcat deal of trafiic in and out of this RESIDENTIAL neighbodtood. This subdivision was built witl access to tle forest land which this neighborhood borders with" MA}IY irdividuals, including KIDS, ride bikes, others ride horses down our streets, or walk their dogs...this increase in traffic not ONLY in our neighborhood but ALSO on HORSE BUTTE ROAD, is a HUGE safety issue and concern MANY times driving to and from my home I pass by bikers, aad horse back riders on Horse Butte road, ad this is again is a huge public safety issue. Besides the above, it is my undentrnding this tand is zoned differently for farm use, but unfortunately, the access again is rvithin OIJR neighborhood, and this type of " farm use" should not be allowed so close to a residential . neighborhood. PLEASE do not only look at this zoning, but also zoning throughout deschutes county so this type of situation does not happeu to others as well. Also, tlrere would be use in pesticides, and Sundance is located within a winter deer range. OFTEN not just during the winter deer roan freely here, ard I can only imagine the impact this will place on our wildlife as well, not just from the pesticide usage, but also again due to increase in traffic. I bought this land n I97 6 . Have seen margr changes over the years from dirt roads, to increased use in our forest Iands, especially around Horse Butte, and NOW I see a change which I totally object to. I do not want to see a MPO in my neigtrborhood.. .for safety concems for those of us who live, drive, walk, bike, ride horses, etc. The granting of this application can only have negative outcomes for ALL OF US who live here in Sundarrco. Please do not approve this MPO in MY/OUR NEIGHBORIIOOD. Thank you for your consideration in denying this application regards, J. Diane Kook 22089 Sweetgrass Drive Bend, Oregon 97702 do iseau@bendbro adband. com 541-382-6728 From: DWLee To: Isabella Liu Subject: 2 marijuana prote$s Date: Friday, December 2l,2OtB 9:14125 AM To: lzzie Liu Community Development Department, Deschutes County Subject: Marijuana Grow Land Use Application: 247-L8-000915-AD Located at 60148 Stirling Drive Dear Ms. Liu, As homeowners in the Sundance East subdivision, we strongly object to the Land Use Application to grow marijuana in Sundance for the following reasons: 1") Sundance is a residential subdivision; it is not zoned for commercial farming. 2) A pot growing operation will adversely impact the traffic, by increasing the volume of commercial delivery trucks and transient workers commuting through the residential neighborhood on Sweetgrass, the only road into and out of Sundance. All this additional traffic will make it even worse. 3) Pot growing smells! The quality of like will suffer because the smell will not be adequately contained by fans or other promises of filtration willflOf stop odors from drifting into the neighbori ng properties, 4) The proposed site is right next to a youth facility for volleyball and other sports, the area will be unhealthy for youth if there is pot growing immediately nearby. 5) At a time when the county, the city and the Soil and Water Conservation district are carefully rationing water, how can new people arrive from Texas and immediately get large quantities of water so easily? 6) We live in the Wildlife/Urban interface. The Skeleton fire destroyed homes and buildings in this area in 1996. We have only 1 entrance/exit on Sweetgrass drive. There used to be an Easement either 1) at the end of Stirling drive out to McArdle and Arnold Market Road, 2)Thru the property in dispute in this land use application and overto Sundance Meadows youth facility. Now Sundance has many additional homes added since 1996. lf there is an emergency, how will 200 residences with a minimum of 400 vehicles exit this subdivision, let alone with increased traffic from a Marijuana grow? We need these 2 emergency exits available and the historic easements must be preserved! 712/3 of pot production in Oregon goes out to the black market. How can Deschutes County knowingly contribute to this problem in other states? Deborah was travelling to pickup a family member out of state that was helping another family member having end-stage cancer, She was stopped by law enforcement in this other state because of an informant's tip of a drug runner from Oregon. Law Enforcement officers lied that they smelled marijuana on our vehicle and the drug dog lied and said we had pot when we did not. Deborah's car and possessions were searched for an hour at the side of the road in 35 degree weather and then let go when it was indeed proven there was no marijuana. So innocent residents from Oregon are now treated as suspects in other states just because we live in a state that has legalized marijuana. 8) The price of marijuana has significantly dropped and many pot grows are no longer profitable. Why should the county approve this application when it will have a negative environmental impact by disrupting the land and adding to pollution by manufacturing the building materials, allfor growing marijuana that needlessly adds to the huge surplus of marijuana already grown in Oregon? Please carefully consider our deeply held concerns that growing pot will destroy the residential way of life that the residents cherish here in Sundance. Sincerely, Steven & Deborah Lee 59622 Okanagan Ln. Bend, OR 97702 Dear Ms. Liu, Mrs. Marian Frostenson of 59649 Okanagan Lane also protests the marijuana grow. Her husband passed away on Dec. 8 and she has too much on her plate to write her own letter, but she wanted us to add her name to our letter. Steven & Deborah Lee Froflt: LJ To: Isabella Liu SubJectr Marijuana grow operation in Sundancd24T'18-00091s-AD Date! Thursday, December 27,2078 1:24;18 PM Dear lsabella, Concerning the marijuana grow application for 60148 Stirling Drive in Sundance. Please refuse this application. lndustrial grow operations do not belong in neighborhoods. I don't know for sure, but most distilleries are rural, and l'm not aware of any in rural residential neighborhoods. Many of us here in Sundance are here for the peace and quiet and dark skies filled with stars at night. A grow operation brings traffic, noise, and excessive light. Please refuse this application. The OLCC seems to have lost control of this whole legalization idea, We now have way more pot stores in Bend than liquor stores, and apparently a glut of marijuana that is finding it's way into the black market. The supply has outpaced the demand, yet the OLCC keeps rubber stamping more grow operations. Why? This would be one rnore operation adding to the oversupply, which only adds to the black market. Please refuse this application" lf I'm looking at the property description on dial correctly, it appears the owners of this property don't even live there, they live in Texas, and they've only owned the property for two years. My guess is they bought this property (after legalization) with a grow operation in mind, and not actually living there. Please refuse this application" Thanks, Randy Jones .RFCEIY,trD Dic 2 CI 2018 P / z -ao '' r I Deschutes ^t"r/ "-o Lbunry L-Dn nH$fl H {"ITH$. flSUNTY FLAS, {N ING :*IVISISN #olmments in *ppositlon to the proposed land u$e applicatisn descnlbed belou$: File Nurnber: 247-1S-00CI915-AD 0wner: Gary and L.ori Gore Applicant; Tommy Nehmeow Fraposah The appti+ant requests npproval sf an Adrulnistrative oeterrnination to establish a marijuana production facility in the exclusive Farm U*e Zone. l-ocation: The subjeet property has an aesigned address of GOt4S $tirlinE Drive, Bend; and is further identlfied cn County Assesssr J'ax ,ffiap tS-13-30, as tax lot S00. l$fe ar* property $srner$ in the vicinity CIf this proposeel-**cility.'tffe have owned our pr*perty,,fer over 3S years. ttlle enjoy visiting the ar*a and have enjcyed skiing at Maunt Bachelor. We love the outdoors and all that it offers in the way of fresh air and family friendly activities" lffe planned to retirs to tlrie beautiful place to be closer to famlly and build cur drenm horne. Cirrrently welr*'living in Ool*rqdo in an area facing vtsry sirnilar challenges" We have seen our snrall ruffil location become inundatsd with an inordinately high number nf rnarijuana shops for our population. The growth in this industry brings a crirninal element to small towns and the pracessing smells have caused home values to drop and quality of life ta dr*p right along with them. Address I City. $t Zip Cr:de tt's iffiter**ting t* m*te theqt tlaie n*ttc,* w*s*s t{*te* *erse*mbsr ti, H#tS a$ci Yde wer* *,trt$y gfv*ru ten e$aps fr"scn thut r{ate t* r**porud, sn ilesember fr{, HS"*S. tf$e rec*ived t$'t$s l*f.ier t*dn3r, Secenrhsr 2*, *$'tS, plr*hat:ly dr"** tel *n Fn*re**e ir"l ri'lall ve$umre fsr the {3ft*"istrnms *nd rytt"eer h*{idng s*ss*$T$" ffic*e tm th* shs}r8, r*$F}se}s* tEr*e snst t$ie f*ct that sre l$ve En fiflslths{"state and haire m*t hesn ahle tc ts*ste nl"ay dc*urt.l*nts p:r*r"rBdfng qi*{:*iis fc}r $?f*tssfilrltx ein qulmB{'iy, *{ust and *e**r rflefisxfrSs$tlsttt, wuat*r su5:pi3r, sts" ws be*i*v* ft [* prsanature fnr this pr*pers*! tc hs s*nsid*r*d f*r apprnval. ie'r .$ur$nrslnfy, wrs *re ntrrlngfg erpp*swc* tc the ilse tlf t$ris Farml LJse ffe'ne Em this ffiT&l"$ffi&r, and ws*!S urge t*'t* F[a*n$mg ffEviEii*rn tt* di*al$*w tfire xpp{6**tien" $te*pc*ltfu$$y $u tumittt*d ffi LE*yd end.ie*t.lif*r ffi.$qh*r'ds**r, Fr*p*r*y Swmsrs en $tirlilrg fr}riv*, H**S $$ ffi*en *re*k ffirive, F*r*cFgute, #S. $tS3$ -:..:r -r-: r,;:iii,;;;";,*,.--..:=, . i;+f--ir'r ' r:_.i* *:r;i+t::*r....1ij1*jrYjl:ii*_:'- - - :, ;+..:i* :ri. -::lr;;;..'f :::1, ::...,.;i..- ::. :..14/ ,?ij, €4 ? [ :Un/g / f- tJ f -t q -+lf-:s:: fjr-: :::f: :j*eiie '-,ii*-, ",.;-,*:.*.--;; ;.. urc 31 2018 Deschnes County CTD Fronr: Erica Winn To: Isabella Liu Subject: file# 247-18-000915-AD Date: Tuesday, January 01, 2019 10:40:23 AM Hi Isabella, My name is Erica Winn, and I am a resident in the Sundance neighborhood, which currently has a notice of application for a marijuana grow facility posted. File # 247-I8-000915-AD. My husband and I moved into this neighborhood with the hopes of starting our family here, primarily because it felt like a great neighborhood for kids to grow up in. We are deeply saddened to think that we might end up having a marijuana grow facility right along our daily walk and what essentially feels like our backyard. Our home is our single largest asset, and we are concerned about our home value should this grow facility be allowed. We are also concerned with the safety for ourselves, children, pets, and wildlife in our area from the grow operations" In addition, we worry about an increase in theft, break-ins and overall safety issues that these types of facilities atlract. We hope you and the County will take into consideration the potential negative impacts of this grow facility on our neighborhood and surrounding areas. Please let me know what else I can do to properly oppose this application. Thank you, Erica Winn (e7t)23s-1203 From: lan Jensen To: Isabella Liu Subject: County Planning Division regarding File 247-18-00091s'AD Date: Tuesday, January 01, 2019 9:10:46 PM To Whom it may concern, I am writing to express concern about the proposed marijuana grow operation proposed on the edge of the Sundance neighborhood. Sundance is composed of mainly 2tacre lots to 4 acre lots. There are some larger lots that border the subdivision. This area is known for smaller lots that are cable of handling horses and small animals. This area is quiet and peaceful, except for periodically hearing the shooting range. Horse Butte Rd and the roads of Sundance are often used by bicyclists from the neighborhood and from the city of Bend. Since the neighborhood borders the forest land we get quite a bit of recreational activity. In addition we use our roads for exercise such as walking, dog walking, and running. This is easy to do since we do not have a lot of traffic. The proposed marijuana grow operation is directly across the street from small lots which are inhabited by private residences. Some of these households contain ohildren. We are seeing more young families moving into the area. Although I voted to allow the legalization of marijuana, I feel this growth operation site is inappropriate for marijuana. If I knew that the county was going to allow growth facilities next to neighborhoods I would not have supported it. Marijuana use is a choice, not a necessity, and should not be forced on people. This facility would have an adverse impact on the whole neighborhood with those closest taking the biggest impact. These facilities produce a smell that forces people to keep their windows closed. There would be increased traffic for the business and their employees. We have already recently seen homeless people going through our garbage. A facility like this may increase crime in our neighborhood. Overall, it will make it harder to sell our homes. Why should someone profit at the expense of others. Wildlife is also very prevalent in this area. Many deer pass through the area and some also winter in this area. They are often in the road. We also have coyotes, owls, many birds, and an occasional cougar or bob cat. As I said before this is a very quiet neighborhood. We are already trying to improve the shooting range activity so that neighbors don't find bullet holes in the side of their gara5e, please don't allow an additional adverse impact on our neighborhood. Jan Jensen 60196 Vancouver Ln Bend, OR977OT [email protected] Froml f.indiSaryie To! Isabella Liu Cc: Cindi-Gasie Subject: Notice of Proposed l-and Use in Sundance Date: Friday, December 28,2018 2;21:55 PM Hello, my name is Cindi Garvie and I live at 60585 Billadeau Rd. in Bend on the direct route to Sundance where Application 247-I8-0Q0915AD is being issued. I am extremely worried about taffic to and from this proposed operation. There are already too many cars on the road Most of them drive extremely fast due to no traffrc speed signs. The danger for horses, bike riders and walkers is already huge. We do not need any more production areas in this particular area or someone is going to get hurt. Please reconsider. We moved to this side of Bend to be private and away from the bustle of downtown. More cars, workers and buyers is exactly the wrong thing for this area. Although I am not against legalized pot, I am very against a business being set up in this area where there is no major access other than our small country roads. Please do NOT advance this Land Use Action. Cindi and Rob Garvie, 60585 Billadeau Rd. Bend, Oregon Cindi Garvie Access Bend Concierge ci n di @.accesshen dcon ci erge. com www. accessben dcon ci erge. com (s41) 4le-s306 From! DEIla To: Isabella Liu SubJect: Application file number 247-18-000915AD Date! Friday, Decemb€r 2l,2OL8 12:05:21 PM Please cousider baving acffiss to the farm from outside the zubdivision if approved. There is only one way in and out of the zubdivision and this increase traffic will cause negative impact to the people who live here. Tlrank you, Debbie Poplin Sent from rry iPad ZZ96.ZOL\6 uo'puetl rgflP"8le)9grZZ /ilunoc 6smqc6€o a4nr{ts u alqqog 8t0u I u 130 ?ry Qtftl$I$E.H ' Osl u4 ryfZ , *f, "-+"w-W. e rru ,: A ,Tfrn Zf '[email protected] - 'rtca eTry"P7vry, y , Y T,vrtttf/?,F' A,.d lel ,9, 4 F,'*PP;:^ .w 4"e.# *-vfWI I ry,.ff ,.rwn wv.?Ld:w ryryrt-r 4-7,-?',(7ryn*ry '€t *T 7w ffi;f:t od LU 4\7,:T '+'W,WE' *wryf '77y9*2 "ry 7*?// -'41'ry) /'Tt-uoy-r w +ryw.u,//. 4/-t2 / 4Vf -aT *r'#rw *y,w CTz U od LU V *'|,rt O A 'J;/ booz -.,8t f, n,O .Vft ' nl7'7zz{ *-nffi ff'6****w*J W;P Frofit! Doug Forth To: Isabella Liu Subject: Application file # 247-18-00@15AD Date: Friday, December 2L,20L8 9125:42 Alvl Hello Izze My name is Doug Forth. i reside at22040 Quebec Ct, Bend 97702 nthe Surdance zubdivision I was recently made aware of a proposed MPO application for 60148 Sterling Dr. nry wife and I are opposed to this application. I don't believe a commercial operation is appropriate for this residential atea Also, such a business is in conflict with Sundance CC&R's. Section l-Each lot in the zubdivision shell be used for residential purposes only. Section 9-No commercial or professional or noxious or offensive trade or activity shall be carried on upon any lot rnr shall anything be done thereon which may be or nay become an annoyance or nuisance to the neighborhood. While I support aventrrc of this nature in principal, it sbould be undertaken in a mral commercial area not residential, Regards DougForth From! wendv Tol Isabella Liu Subjectr File # 247-18-000915AD Date! Friday, December 2l,ZOLB 3:57:31 PM Ms. Liu We are residents of Sundarce and rvould like to exprcss our concems about the proposed marijuaaa production operation in our neighborhood. According to tlle plot map, the only access to the facility is through a residential neighborhood. There is no access to water, which nreans large water tenders will be coming tluough our residential streets quite often Tlre site's employees will also add much traffrc to residential sfteets. We don't have sidewalks, so re sidents walk in tlrc road, children rvait for tlre school busses at the edge of the roa4 and people ride their horses in the road. We are concerned Utat the extra traffic will make the area unsafe for anyone on the roads in tle neighborhood. We are also concemed about the plrysical conditions of ttre roads. They arc poorly maintained at best, and e)rtra traffic (especially large trucks) will likely make them worse, We often don't see snowplows until long aflrr other roads are plowed meaning conditions will be poor hbad weather. We are concerned about the types of people tlfs business will bring to tlrc neighborhood. We believe having this in our normally quiet neighborhood will bring increased crime. What about pollution? Chenicals like pesticides will end up in the water table. What happens withtlre wildlife that lives inthe area.? They will be affected by chemicals. [f razor wire is used to surround the lan{ animals will get caught and die. Do we have adequate fire protection? We are sweral miles fromthe nearcst statiorL and the business will only have water that is tnrcked in? How can that be enough to stop a fire fiom ravaging the neighborhood? This land is located berween a residential nual neighborhood and a private campground firll of children There is an equestrian center frequented by children on the other end. Our property values will fall because people don't want to live by a marijuana fann This a losing siuration for wery person inour neighborhood. Thank you for your time. Gerard and Wendy Schultheis From: Eric Haoan To: Isabella Liu Cc: [email protected]; Keilb-n0.Ada!0siDbgmalcAn Subject: 247-18-000915-AD Dater Friday, December 21,ZOLB 1:47135 PM IzzyLiu, I am opposed to the proposed marijuana production facility at: 60148 Stirting Drive Bend Or, 977O2 File Number 247-18{009 I 5-AD You find an article from Forensic Applications Conzulting Technologies, INC. attached this e-unil. I ask that you please review ttre document in your consideration of denying the proposed land use application. This neigtrborhood seems to have been flawed when zoning was established as I don't believe the zoning intended on having a commercial marijrrana operation next to a rural residential zoning area. My biggest concen$ in the matter is the increased commercial tmffic and the criminal element that is associafed with grows. Information listed on Deschutes Counry Dial indicates the commercial marijuana grow is being funded by money from Texas, with a hircd tnnd from Oregon. This quickly leads an individual to objectively believe there is an associated criminal connection. Thank you for your time in reviewing my e-mail and attached document. Eric Hagan ** *'|Attached ardcle'* *'1. :r Forensic Applications Consulting Technologies, Inc. CaoimhinP. Cornell Forensic Industrial Hygienist Commercial Operations Structural facilities that were never designed to handle the chemical exposures, waste streams, and humidity levels typical of zuch grows. Neighbon of the grows did not occupy their residences with the notion that they would be living next to an uncontrolled chemical processing plant devoid of regulatory overview. Chemicals are usually stored in an haphazard ard cavalier marure4 stockpiled without regard for proper chemical storage practices. Personnel have processed marijuana grows large and small, and one of the most hazardous situations common ia each of tlre grcws was the presence of ultrafine particles OfPs) and excessive levels of carbon dioxide (CO2) and carbon monoxide. The growers typically will use industrial grade propane powered burners to purposely produce elwated lwels of CO2 to promote plant gpowttu The propane burners also inadvertently produce huge quantities of ultrafine particles, watervapor and carton monoxide. As a result, nonnal residential ventilation is incapable of handtng these contamfuBnts. The concentration of tlrcse contamfuunts can be so high tttat tttey ca:r kill a person. Ancillary Hazards Chemical tuzards are rpt the only problem" A residential structure was not desigrrcd to accommodate ttre electrical reeds of a grow. The electrical wiring situation in the grow ops are reminiscent of a plate of spagheni. Very extensive and elaborate wiring is present inside these hous€s, and the wiring virtually nen/er meets electrical code (obviously), and treacherous exposed arxl convoluted wiring atrangements are almost always found. Another hazard not discussed by the proponents of marijuana grows is the overt criminal element associated with the operation For although a very, very, small minority of "medical marijuam" users are legitimately using marijlrann as a therapeutic treatment, the overwhelming vast majority of "medical rnarijuana" is dispensed to casual users who have gone to specialized MDs who ils \a'illing to prescribe marijuana without so much as a medical conzultatisn or even seeing the "patient"As a rezulg the customer showing up at the grorv next door (at 2:00 a.m.) is probab$ already hig[ frequently in need of castr" and almost certainly has, or soou will have a crirninal record. Where there is marijuana there are guns. The growers, typically alrcady heavily invested in ttre crimirul world, recognize that their crop is highly prized by other criminals who have managed to get what they need in the past without the need to obey existing laws or get prescriptions. As zuc\ they frequently don't see much of a need to comply nor.v. Growers are keen to protect their crop and are willing to use deadly force to that end. Altlough one could legitirnately argue that every citizen has the right to use deadly force to protect their home, we need to remember that in this case, tlre business owner (the home's occupant) is erposed to apsychoactive zubstance 24 houn per day, seven days per rveek, may very rvell be hig[ probably has an history of other controlled substance abuse and is about to unload live rourds to protect his stash. Where there are dnrgs, there are more drugs. The root of the medical marijuara grower and user lies deeply in the soil of the criminal world. Typically, but not always, the medical marijuana customers, if not the growers, are also involved in other illegal drug activity. It is common to find medical marijuana grow homes that are now also contaminated with methamphetamine, cocaine, and avariety of other drugs. Conclusion In conclusiorL just because a grow op may be legal does not automatically confer a guaralfee of prudence or safety. The legality ofthe operation does not affect the i:rherent hazards ofconducting an industrial process in a residential setting. The legality of the operatiou does not separate the grower orthe user from the da* criminal wodd from which the industry grew. Most grow ops remain an untested toxic tort proving ground for landlords, lenders and insurance companies. RECETVED Lynn and Ellen Hollister Dic s ! 2018 60020 Edmonton Dr. Bend, OR97702 Deschrtes County CDD December 19,2018 Deschutes County Community Development Plaruring Division, Izze Liv P.O, Box 6005 Bend, OR 97708-6005 Re: Land use file number 247-18-000915-AD address 60148 Stirling Drive Bend, OR 97702 To Whom It May Conc.ern: Please do not approve the above reference property to be used as a marijuana production operation. To the North of the property is Sundance Meadows which is a recreation facility and can have 30 or more camper trailers and campers at the facility. To the East is Federal BLM property and to the West and South is the Sundance subdivision. That the reference property is classified as Exclusive Farm Use is unbelievable. It appears to be the only property with this classification in the area. I do believe the property should be classified as Rural Residentiai. Other objections for the MPO classification is the smell associated with growing and production of marijuana. A MPO also requires a lot of water and the Sundance Sub division has water issues presently. During irigation season we have been asked to water lawns on even days of the month if our street address is even and on odd days of the month if our street number is odd. To have a MPO in a predominantly residential area just does not make sense. There are a lot of children in the Sundance Subdivision and at the Sundance Meadows facility. Another issue is what will be the health consequences for the children and adults of living in an area so close to a MPO ? So Please do not approve this property for a MPO. Sincerely, frr't*, 44rl/';'h' fl,,{,0;g^- Lynn and Ellen Hollister From: isellegl8z@aal"csm Tol Isabellaliu SubJect: MarUuana Production Mjacent to Sundance Derdopment Application File No.:247'18-00091sAD Date! Friday, December 21, 2018 4:L3t32 PM This email is wriften to notify you of our concems and opposition to the MPO adjacent.to our property in Sundance. My wife and I have lived in Sundance as home owners for over 40 years and are extremely concerned aboutthe location of this proposed operation and the potentialimpactitwould have on our neighborhood. Following are our concerns: 1. We have tived in this development for over 40 years. We originally paid a steep assessment years ago to have our gravel roads paved. lf this MPO is not officially within the Sundance development, why will they be allowed to use our roads? lt is our understanding these operations result in increased and frequent truck traffic. We are a residential neighborhood that will be affected by this increase in traffic resulting from a "business" operation. 2. Our property is located approximately 114 mL from this site. lt is our understanding from other operations in Deschutes county, no matterwhat kind of venting system is utilized, there is still an odor emitted. We feel the county should consider air quality for residents, which includes odors. 3. ls there not a conflict of interest since Jan \Mck owned this property and is also the owner of Avion Water who has agreed to supply water for the operation? 4. The application indicates there will be one building. Based upon other grow operations, willthey be allowed to build additional buildings? We would appreciate your consideration of the above concems. From: Scott Linden To: Isabella Liu Cc: keith.m.adamsOhotmail.com Subjectr Application 247-18-000915AD Dater Thursday, December 20, 2018 8:47tt4PM Re: Application 247-!8-000915AD, 60148 Stirling Dr., Bend 97702 This application for a Marijuana Production Operation is wrong on so many levels it would take a week to list them all. Let's count just some of the ways: 1. The Avion water system serving the Sundance subdivision is woefully inadequate now, failing on a regular basis and often with too little pressure. lronically, the owner of that water system subdivided the property, sold to new owners, and then left his former neighbors to cope with the current situation. A commercial growing operation will strain the already failing water system, accelerate the system's failure rate, will affect fire protection and put residents at risk. 2. The itinerant, seasonal workers who will visit the neighborhood are motivated by a fast buck, being paid by the piece for "trimming." Without ties to the area, they have no concern for neighbors, and every reason to explore opportunities to break the law while passing through, 3. The fact tha't there is Exclusive Farm Use land surrounded by'Rural Residential zoning'is a failing of the cou nty zoning protocol. lt is up to the county to rectify this oversight. 4. The skunk smell of an MPO in a residential neighborhood will be overpowering and affect quality of life and property values. 5. Large amounts of cannabis and cash are a magnet for criminals. 6. There is only one entrance/exit for the neighborhood - a fire danger at present and likely to get worse with commercial traffic using the single road in and out, 7. There is no need for additional cannabis in the Oregon market. As the senior federal law enforcement officer for our state has noted, most production is already going into the illegal market. That will bring its own unsavory elernent into the neighborhood. 8. The property is surrounded by a camping/recreation facility with a large number of youth. Crime, failing water system, fire danger, and a lack of market are just some of the reasons this application should be summarily denied. Should any of these take place, it will be in part due to your decision should you approve this application. Sincerely, Scott Linden 22037 Sweetgrass Dr Bend OR 97702 From: Ron Brooks To: Isabella Liu Subject: Application File Number 247-18-00091sAD Datel Thursday, December 20,20L8 5:01:01 PM I recently became aware of the Marijuana Growing Operation that is being proposed in our neighborhood and I am expressing my disgust in the permitting process as follows. o There will be an increase in construction truck traffic on our roads due to the construction of this new facility which is predominately residential. There will also be an increase in traffic due to the construction workers that are working on this new site. r They will be using pesticides as well as herbicides on its crop that will effect all of the properties that are close by its site. With the prevailing winds normally coming from the west to the east it will affect any livestock or wildlife and the Sundance Meadows area that has an outside swimming poolthat is used by many vacationers as well as children r And the strong odors from the crops that will permeate entire Sundance area. o Also an increase in traffic for those looking for a freebie or to burglarize many of the homes in this entire neighborhood which is approximately 200 houses. o An increase in water consumption and the affects if any runoff that could be detrimental to the wild life that is all around this proposed area, there are too many to list here but if you live here you would know what I am refening too. This is their home too and we have to live together... r This is an area that we all moved to because of the country lifestyle and openness. We have horses and donkeys that can live a good and healthy life without the possibility of being subjected to the nasty unhealthy odor or the possibility of wildlife being poisoned by the runotf of this unnecessary crop... o Those that live close by this facility will see a decrease in their property values. We currently have a neighbor that is in the process of selling their home. The prospective buyer found out about the MPO and has put a hold on the sale pending the outcome of this permit request. o The Sundance area has no street lights and a facility like this would require large amounts of grow lights as well as security lights which would hinder the normal cycle of the nocturnal wildlife that live here. o Can the existing utilities handle the large increase in demand? These are just some of my comments that I feel this permit should not be approved Regards, Ron Brooks Calgary Dr. Deschutes County Attn: lzze Liu RE: Notice of Application File Number247-L8-O00915-AD December 20,20LB This letter is in response to your notice regarding the Notice of Application and File number referenced above, which has a mailing date of December LL,2OI8 and which we received in the mail yesterday. The Notice of Application references a potential Administrative Determination to establish a marijuana production facility in an Exclusive Farm Use Zone at 60148 Stirling Drive, Bend, Oregon. We are submitting this letter to request that the Administrative Determination be denied. Our primary reason for requesting this denial is that while the subject property and others in the area are zoned for Exclusive Farm Use, the subject property is adjacent to a residential area. ln this residential area are a number of properties with young children. We also have young grandchildren and great grandchildren who spend time visiting us. (Note that our property is close to the subject property.) We believe that with the significant amount of farmland in Deschutes County that it is irresponsible to locate a marijuana facility in an area with young children for potential safety issues. We are also against the zoning variance for several other reasons, including potential noise and smell issues. We also are concerned that construction of the proposed facility could have a negative impact on our property values. Thank you. Mike Morgan and Elise Foster 50337 Arnold Market Road Bend, OR Fromr Elizabeth Lrwrence To; Isabella Liu Subject: 60148 Stirling Date! Friday, December 28,ZOIB 11:44:21 AM Ms. Lou, As a current law enf,orcement officer and a neighbor to the proposed marijuana grow in my neighborhood, I am sending you a quick note regarding my conrcrns. Our residentjal zubdivision has one access in and out of our neighborhood. The increased traffic flow alone for a commercial grow operation would affect all of us not to mention tlre ovenvlrelming odor. More than 3,100 applications for marijuarla production licenses flooded into OLCC last year (for our state) and of those 1,600 were approved, more than half were for recreational grows. As it stands now there are only 18 marijuana inspecton in the state of Oregon I know from my training and experience that there is a glut of marijuana production in our stafe, more tlat can zupply any of the retail or medical outlcts and that it is being shipped illegally out of state. The U.S. Attomey General Billy Willianrs said, "The state has a formidable problem rvith pot over production and rnarijuana being sold into the black matket." Knowing the quality of life issues that will affect rry community, my family's peace of mind, I am strongly opposed to any production facility in nry neighborhood. Especially knowing there isn't any ovenigttt with the over production of this product in our state. Tharkyou - Sent from Lils iPhone Fronr: ElenJrlsclq4e To: Isabella Liu Subject: Marfluana Grow in Sundance Dat€! Wednesday, January 02, 2019 7:48:04 AM DearMs. Liu, I am not against marijuana. In my practice as an RN, I hear daily of people being belped, both emotionally ard physically by its' use. I am $ateful that it is available to all. Having said that, I do not believe that allowing a Grow in a residential area is a good idea. There are numerous families, some with children, on small acreage across the street. It is also bordered by Sundance Meadows, which hosts many families and childrentirough out tle year. When the 26ning was establislred, this issue did not exist. However, now tlrat it does, it needs to be addressed. I appreciate your consideration in this matter. Thank you, Ellen Musglove From: ]EANIE MYERS To: Isabella Liu Subject: RE : File Number: 247-18-000915-AD Datel Wednesday, December 26,zotg l2:46:t7 PM RE; File Number: 247-18{00915-AD Opposition to Applicationfor (MPO) at 60148 Stirling Drive Bend, OR GoodMoming Izzy, This letter is being seut to you in opposition of the above referenced application. My husband, Larry Myers and I have owned our home at 60070 Stirling Drive for 13 years. This application is approx. 1000 feet from our front gate. As neighbors of a potential cannabis operatio4 we are ertremely opposed to the approval of such an application. First and foremost, we stongly believe that this application is in direct violation of the rcquired 1000' set back required for any youth activity center. Ths Sundance Meadows Youtl Center has beeu an active facility at tlis location for at least the 13 years that we have lived here, and is encompassed by this propeny named in the application. The applicant refers to our community as a farming are4 being 10 or more acres in size. This is incorrect. Most of the near 200 homes aro between 3 and 5 acres and are residential in nature, not famts. This zubject property was previously part of a 54 acre site that is adjacent to the NE comer of our property. The 54 acres was ALWAYS left in a natural stafe, no farming, and accompanied a residential home. The water supply / source for this MPO is a mncem. We live in an area of Deschutes County that is extremely close to the national forest, and in years past experienced a devastating wildfire tlat took many of our homes. We have a private rvater supplier (Avion Water) which has agreed to supply water to this applied for MPO. This is in direct conflict with how Avion has regulated our water supply for the past 13 plus years, particularly in the hot summer months. We have always received written notice to reduce water consumption There appears to be a conflict of interest with Avion Water being the water source for this MPO, as the owner of Avion was the previous owner and seller of this property to the applicant of ttre MPO. Our ptrysical safety and increased criminal activity is a concem. Cannabis rnaybe classified as an agricultural crop, but the security concerns attached to i! produce an atrrosphere with drones, security cameras, and maly times armed guards with high powered weapons. The national forest is less than a mile away aud many transier$ type people currently five out ttrere. Our transient problem has been relatively low, but none the less, we still have a problem and it will only increase if this application is approved. Increased traffic and roise will affect all of our re sidents who use our currenfly safe roads to take daily walks either by themselves or with their pets and children. Noise from increased vehicular and truck traffic as well as generators, fans and machinery utilized in the ope rations would not only affect those of us that live in a very close proximity, but also many that live miles away. I say this because the nearest train is approximately 6 miles from ury house and I can hear it every moming while in my house. The stenctr, an intense skunk like, eye watering stenc\ as well as any involuntary exposure to corrcentrated chemicals emitted by the cannabis operation can trigger severe headaches, nause4 asthma and other health related problems, preventing many of us from opening our windows and doors as we have boen known to do during the sunmer's heat. Many of us like to sunply enjoy our personal outdoor surroundings rvhich will be constantly compromised with zuch noxious and potential hazardous odors. Our wildlife habitat is a concem. We live in an area that allows the wildlife to gracefirlly roam. With added noise, traffic, noxious odors, potentialy life threatening clremicals, insecticides, herbicides and rodent bait for mice and rat control; our beautifully abundant wildlife is definitely at a high risk of being struck by a vehicle, shot, poisoned by scavengiag a dead rodent or perhaps saiting a "laced" mound of peanut butter. We bave conceu6 about any "over-zupply" issues, should this become our new reality. Across the state, weed production bas sk]'rocketed as demand has stayed steady - which has left "neiv growe$"'with thousands of pounds of useless product. Oregon uses a seed to sale tracking system to log recreational cannabis as it's grown, processed and sold. State code instructs growers to dispose of any cannabis tley can't sell by composting it, buming it, or dumping in a landfill. Any product that can't be sold has to be ma*ed for disposal in the online tracking system and then stored on tlre premises for at least three days before it's discarded, so inspectors can stop by and verif . As cannabis has piled up, disposal ofusable marijuana has increased. lvlarch of 2017, gtorvers destroyed 3,367 pounds of usable marijuana and in March of 2018, growers destroyed 13,976 pounds. With this proposed new operation, we are corperned about the potential for an over-supply being left on the premises for inspection. We are also concerned that the methods of disposal are extremely detrinental to our surroundings. Being long-time residents in this very family oriented neighborhood we have seen this community grow into the very place where many have chosen to either retire or bring their young families to raise. Our wildlife roams free . Our roads are safe. Our air is clean and fresh. We ask that you take ours and all the other letters of opposition into consideration when making this life changing decision for our precious community, Tlrank you for your time. Jean and Larry Myers 60070 Stirling Drive Bend, OR 97702 Phl 54I-317-9613 From: Daiell43lsso To: Isabella Liu SubJect: Fwd: File 247-18-000915AD Date! Tuesday, January 01, 2019 2:40t00 AM Forwarded message From : Dave Swanson Hello, I'm writing to announce by disproval of a marijuana production operation in the northeast comer of Sundance. It will disturb our subdivision here and has nothing but trouble attached to the concept. I'm at 59728 Calguy Loop. Thanks for your time. David Swanson Jeff& Dawn Stob 60075 Stirling Drive Bend, Oregon 97702 20t8/t2/26 Deschutes County Community Planning Division -IzzeLiu Associate Planner Division, Izze Liu (Isabella. liu@deschutesd. org) 117 NW Lafayette Avenue Bend, Or 97703 Re: File Number 247-18-000915-AD comments & appeal Deschutes County Community Planning Division -IzzeLiu: The proposal for an industrially commercial facility (i.e.; Marijuana Production Facility) in an established residential neighborhood is in direct contradiction of the fundamental purpose of zoning laws. There are places for these types of industries - Industrial parks. This is not farming (EFU) This is a proposal for a production facility. The residential neighborhood of Sundance is not a farm zoned community nor is it an industrially zoned neighborhood. One can only imagine that this oversite is due to the infancy of reasonable zoning laws catching up with the state's recent legalization of marijuana" Sundance is a community of 140+ residential homes accessed only by a single 2lane road. In order to access the proposed MPF build site a truck must drive thru the entirety of Sundance phase 1 neighborhood. Watch out for a homeowner walking their dogs....Ot! careful, there's children playing on the comer. Really? How is this happening? We think the proposal process is lacking basic practicality here. Has anyone on the review staffvisited the neighborhood to see this glaring error? I think we understand the intent of the county's mission. But, at what cost? " Our mission is to facilitate orderly growth and development in the Deschutes County community thrugh coordinated prqrams d Land Use Planning.,.". Ask my Neighbor whose buyer just stalled upon disclosure of this pending grow facility. The property owners of the proposed MPF aren't Bend residents or even Oregon residents. This is not how we support community. Aside from our plea for sensibility, please consider these items below as reasons to deny this application. Deschutes County Community Planning Division -IzzeLiu 2ABIW26 Page2 Objections 1. Youth Activity Center (YAC) & minimum separation distance, as defined in Section 18.116.330 - Marijuana Production, Processing, and Retailing, part 6. a. Separation Distances. "Minintum separation distances shall apply asfollows: a. The applicant property line shall be located aminimum of I,320feetfrom ": iv. { youth activitv center Appeal justification: Proposed location of marijuana production facility violates the YAC separation distance because of existing location of Sundance Meadows YAC*. * ref: http : //sundancemeadows. com/activitie s. php 2. Odor, as defined in Section 18.116.330, Marijuana Production, Processing, and Retailing, part 9. .." Ihe building must be equipped with an effecfive odor control systent...." Appeal justification: Proposed charcoal filter odor control is not an effective solution per expert testimony in Dodd case, as recorded on the December 21,2018 during Deschutes County Board of Commissioners PUBLIC F$ARING: Appeal of Marijuana Production at2435Q124360 Dodds Road, Bend, video recording, minutes 1:32:46 thru 1:40:50. and 1:56:10 thru 1:57:16, "... Charcoal filter just don't work'.." ref: http://deschutescountvor.iqn2. com/CitizenslDefault. aqpx 3. Depreciation of property values within proximity of a Marijuana Production Facility (NPF) Appeal justification: a. As reported by Realtor.com: "...homes within a half-mile of a marijuana business often have lower property value than homes in the same county ..." and "neighborhoods with grow houses are the least desirable, with an 8.4 percent price discount." b. Homeowners & Real Estate agents may be required to disclose would-be-buyers the presence of cannabis cultivation sites in their neighborhoods because marijuana cultivation still violates federal law. c. In the month of December 2018, a home property sale within the Sundance residential community was deferred based on the disclosure of 247-18-000915- AD. Deschutes County Community Planning Division -IzzeLiu 20I8lt2/26 Page 3 4. Improper zoning of residential properties being used for Rural Industrial (RI) Chapter 18.100 Appeal justification: a. Sundance residential community is accessed by a single entrance. The road system is a Functional Class of "Local Interest" serving residential community and not intended for Commercial use b. The ODOT Local Road Class & Ranking, as defined in table 2.I.T2 of the Deschutes County Transportation System Plan 2010-20l30,is: Function as local streets or arterials and serve little or no purpose for through traffic or mobility. ref, https://www.deschutes.org/sites/default/files/fileattachments/community_develop ment/page/ 1 1 797ltransportation_svstemJlan. pdf c. Grow facilities are classified under the International Building Code (IBC) as an F- 1 Occupancy, E4g1!9gJ41!gg!Ii4l, Moderate Hazard. 5. Overproduction, black market & crime is a documented problem. The Sundance neighborhood safety is at risk and both the county and state admit the lack of resources to address this growing concern" Appeal justification o Deschutes County Sheriff Shane Nelson is on record stating the sheriff s offrce has seen an increase in calls and online reports about marijuana grow operations ref: https://www.ktvz.com/news/new-dcso-deputy-to-focus-on-mariiuana-grow- complaintsl746287676 o Oregon state's Health Authority, which oversees the Oregon Medical Marijuana Progranq admitted it has not provided effective oversight of growers and others in the industry. ref: https://lrval.com/news/local/state-admits-problems-with-oregon-medical- marijuana-program o Secure Waste Disposal is required of a Marijuana Grow Facility as defined in part 16 of 18.1 16.330. Marijuana Productioq Processing, and Retailing, a. Marijuana waste shall be stored in a secured waste receptacle in the possession of and under the control of the OLCC licensee or OFIA Person Responsible for the Grow Site (PRMG), as defined in part 16 of 18.116.330, Marijuana Production, Processing, and Retailing Sincerely, /e4( & lzze Liu Associate Planner Deschutes County Date: December 28, 2018 Subject: Response to Land Use File Number 247-18-000915-AD Applicant: Tommy Nehmzow Dear lzze, We are writing to express our concerns about the land use proposal for a Marijuana Production Facility located on 60148 Stirling Road in the Sundance neighborhood, in close proximity to our property. Our main concerns are: 1. Having a marijuana production facility located in a small acreage residential development. 2. Access to this property is through the Sundance neighborhood. 3. The potential for a significant loss in property value and market appeal due to the close proximity of a marijuana production facility. We are in strong opposition to this proposed land use. Thank you David and Susan Jones 2Z3tO Sweetgrass Drive Bend, Oregon 97702 Froml Mark Bilton-Smith To: Isabella Liu; Beth Btton-Smith; leff;, Shea Pinnick;3dAS$ Kevin Donaldson; lomve6(Obendbroadband.com; ci BgaheCk; [email protected]; Steve Weber; flgg3gl$illg6 vhavton@bendbroadband.com; Keith Adams; Thomas Hauck Subject: Re: Proposed Marijuana Production Facility Date: Wednesday, December 26,2018 11:30137 AM Iz.zy, I will keep my reply short and to the point regarding File No. 247-18-000915-AD My address is 60177 Stirling Drive Bend Oregon97702 I am a new resident to Bend Oregon and was very fortunate to have bought my home in the Sundance subdivision July of 2017 at 60177 Stirling drive. We bought here because we have 2 young kids (11 and 14) and l, with hopes to many, grandchildren who could enjoy the surrounding this subdivision provides for them. We did not move into Sundance knowing that a marijuana growing facility / business could be built. , I understand that this lot was previously part of another lot and a recent subdivision was done. Can you please share why this new tax lot of record was subject to its new zoning designation of EFU zone? Why the county approved this as an ESF lot? This lot is clearly in a rural residential subdivision named "Sundance" and is not a farming area in any way shape or form. - For the record the applicant states E. SurroundingZoning and Land lJses: "The subject property is surrounded by EFU land to the east and rural residentials properties to the west. These properties are in a mix of farm dwellings and pastures with most parcels being 10 acres or larger in size." This is clearly not the case, the far majority of the parcels (Like mine across the street) are under 5 acres, they are not designated EFU and are residential properties, many with children under the age of 18. - For the record Avion Water is the water source for the marijuana grow. Please share documentation showing that public water can be the approved source to provide "water rights" to a marijuana grow in this particular use and area. Also please note that the seller of the property was a key executive of Avion, I would call this a conflict of interest and would like the county to show me other approved grows/permitted using Avion and a public water sources as an approved "water rights" source. - For the record, section 7. iv. A youth activity center; and v. National monuments and state parks - ofthe application states that a 1000' setback is required from youth centers, the applicant does not inform the county of the Youth Center that this properly literally wraps around, it may even be in violation of section 6. Please see the Sundance Meadows web site that clearly states the following Youth center and associated activities. For this reason only, and the direct violation to the letter of this legal description of setbacks, this application should be denied with no further consideration for approval. http ://sundancemeadows. com/actjvi ti es.frhp htfp' //sundancemeadows eom/ Sundance Meadows will confirm that the majority of these activities are performed at or near the youth center less than 300' away from the proposed grow building. Direct cut and paste from the web site. Things To Do At The Ranch & Youth Center We're so excited for you to come and enjoy all of the wonderful activities Sundance Meadows offers for families and kids of all ages. Our Family & Youth Center offers a wide range of things to do in every season, so stop by and give us a visit! Summer Youth Center Activity Schedule Coming Soon! r Archery o Horseback Riding r Pickleball & Basketball a Swimmlng (indoor pool & dry sauna which are open from May 15 through the end of September) a Mini Golf (nine holes) o Fishing (owners &guests can fish in our pond (catch and release), which is stocked with blue gill, perch, crappie, trout & Florida Bass- there are also a few catfish in the pond. We also have a couple of row boats for use on the pond and, of course, there are several lakes & rivers nearby for fishing) o Disc Golf (eighteen holes) a ATV Riding (we are adjacent to BLM land with extensive off-road trails) o Remote Control Car Track a Recreatlon Hall (Pot Luck Dinners and Entertainment) a Golf Drivlng Range a Horseshoes a Tent Camplng (Multiple tent camping sites with showers, restrooms, and laundry facilities at the Lodge) Holidays (Fun and Games) a Relax - Lastly for the record, the Section 20.b. response does not address yet another clear violation. The property does provide an easement to 8 of the 9 mentioned uses below and sundance meadows had planned to use this easement in the future. Applicant CANNOT restrict access to this right away used for these resfricted purposes. b. In the EFU, MUA-10, and Rural Industrial zones, the following uses are prohibited on the same property is marijuana production i. GuestLodge ii. GuestRanch iii. DudeRanch iv. Destination Resort v. Publio Parks vi. Private Parks vii. Events, Mass Gatherings and Outdoor Mass Gatherings viii. Bed and Brealdast ix. Room and Board Arrangements RESPONSE:None of the above identified uses are currently authorized on the subject property and Applicant does not propose to engage in any of the above described uses. Applicant will restrict all public access to the entire property for security and proprietary reasons. I"ry, I look forward to your reply or a proposed time to meet and address my email Thank you, Mark On Tue, Dec 18, 2018 at 5:06 PM Isabella Liu Hi Mark, Below is a link to your properly on Dial, the County's property information website Here's the link to the neighbor's property. httFs : //di al . deschutes. org/Real nevel qpm entDocs/2757 I 3 Atl of the related documents are listed with the file number 247-I8-000915-AD Another way to view the record is to use the State's epermitting system. The directions are attached. I've also attached a copy of the marijuana code section. There are two versions because the code was amended recently but appealed to the Land Use Board of Appeals. The new rules are in effect today but if the appeal is successful, we revert back to the old code. The new code is the word version. As mentioned over the phone, feel free to email me your comments directly and please make sure to include your mailing address. Let me know if you have any questions. Thanks, Associate Planner ESCI{U ES COUNTY COMMTINITY I}EVELOPMANT lrTNw Box I)iselaimer: Piease note that the information in this entail is an informal statenrent made in aceordance with DCC 22.20.0A5 and shall not be deemed to constitute frnal Coun.ttt acti To: Dechutes County Community Development Subj ect: Co mments on File number 247- I 8-0009 1 5-AD Proposal for nr:arijuana farm al Sundance neighborhood. I am appalled that Deschutes county would in arry way even consider allowing a marijuana fann smack in the middle of my rnighborhood. I want to make clear tlat as a homeowner in Sundance and a proud citizen of Dechutes County I am protesting the application for the marijuana farrn The presence on an openfion like this will immediately change the character of our neighborhood. This is a neighborhood of hard wo*ing people that live here because of the rural and quiet way of life. The marijuana farm will destroy the very nature of this neighborhood. The problems with the marijuana farm are as follows: Crime-bow can tle county not realize that this crop will create a long lasting surge in crime both for the farm and the neighborhood? How is this going to be addrressed? Will the county provide the increased police presence both on the farm and in the neighborhood? We don't want an increase in crime. Traffic+he farm will have to use the roads in our neighborhood. This neighborhood is not zoned commercial orfam use. We don't want trucks and farm equipment using our streets. This is not safe for our residents. And results in a decline i:r value. Property value-Any argument one can make about this farm results in ourproperly values going down Why would we accept this? I cannot let the people who want to profit by taking advantage of our neighborhood cause the hard earned value we invested into our propertie s to decrease , We already know of at least sne house sale put on hold because of the possibility of lle farm. Zoning-there must be a mistake. How can this property that is being proposed for the farm be zoned farm use but still be in our family neigliborhoodl I want tbe county to properly change the zoning to nrral residential like tle rcst of the properties. Please contact me by email if you want to discuss. Bruce Murdock From: adam-!{fahov To: Isabella Liu Subject: MPO 247-18-000915AD Dater Friday, December 28, 2018 9;44;04 AM Hi Isabella, My name is Adam McAboy and I live on Horse Butte Trail. It has come to my attention that Gary and Lori Gore, along with Tommy Nehmzow have applied for a MPO permit in Sundance. We live in a rural residential area. I regularly walk my dogs and or horses along Horse Butte Road to access the forest road 1815. I also ride my bike along Horse Butte, Billadeau and Arnold Market roads. I am comfortable doing this even though there is no shoulder because it is a quiet road where neighbors know one another and treat each other with respect. I am concerned that a MPO in our neighborhood will drastically change the overall feel that my family and so many of our neighbors cherish. I am wondering what protections can be offered to the neighborhood. Will the county build wider roads with safe shoulders? Will there be a limit on how much taffic can come in related to the MPO? Whatwill happen to the owner/operator of the MPO if traffic rules are not followed. If this lowers property values in the area, will the county subsidize the affected families? I am also wondering what kind of people this may bring into our neighborhood. It seems that there is a potential for criminal activity as people with bad intentions may show up knowing that there is a high value cash crop. Also, what about increased traffrc as it relates to people coming to harvest the crop? How many people and how often would we expect increased transient traffic? Do you feel that this is an appropriate use of the land on Sterling Lane or anywhere in a residential neighborhood such as this? Please let me know if you have any questions. Take care, Adam Adam McAboy President & Co-Founder, The Athletes Village' Inc Wort: 650-255-9602 Web : www.TheAthletesVillage.com E: [email protected] Linkedln Profile Fromr l(aren Brooks To: Isabella Liu Subject: MPO application file # 247-18-00@15-AD Dater Thursday, December 20, 2018 5:57:00 PM I recently was informed by neighbors and a personal friend of the possibility of a marfuana grow project within walking distance of my home. I was not notified by the county as it seems I am beyond their T50footlimitof who isconsidered necessaryto be notified of such an operation, whieh is blatantly reprehensible treatment as far as I am concerned. Anyone who knows anything about this type of operation should know that the problems that come with it are not acceptable in an established rural neighborhood. As a Certified Master Herbalist and Holistic Health Advisor I am well aware of the health benefits to be gleaned from marijuana plants, but I am not in support of a grow in a clean established neighborhood. I understand from people in other areas who have had to deal with the very unpleasanl situation we are now faced with have stated the innumerable problems. I am vehemently against this and respectfully request the county not approve this marijuana grow. I cannot imagine for the life of me why anyone would want to move into such a clean and established neighborhood with an operation of this sort. This is ruralresidentialarea forthe most part and I understand the county has made that proposed MPO area zoned as farming. As far as I am concerned a grow of this type ...while legal..,..can certainly be'established on property elsewhere in Oregon. The traffic in and out of the area would be greatly increased with the groundwork and would certainly carry on thereafter. The crops would require considerable groundwork, tending, harvesting and preparation for sale. The lighting that would be necessary for a grow along with security which would certainly be necessary to prevent as much as possible any unsavory activity that generally comes along with a marijuana grow. With increased traffic up and down our now quiet streets would definitely increase the mortality of much of the wildlife we all enjoy here . There is an annual migration of deer from about May through November and residents here are aware of that and use extra caution when driving. The crews required for construction as well as tending this grow would not have a vested interest in our wildlife population which also includes, but not limited to foxes...quail, which are basically ground dwelling birds, chipmunks, squirrels, rabbits, many birds of prey, mice, raccoons, coyotes, badgers.... I AM STRONGLY AGAINST THIS PROPOSAL.. A grow of this type uses an inordinate amount of waterwhich could deplete ourwatertable and wells. I would also imagine the crops would require regular treatment of herbicides and pesticides which would definitely have an impact on the so called pests who would be killed regularly by the use of these products and then consumed by other animals and birds of prey who would be killed as collateral damage. THIS IS UNACCEPTABLE" We have no fire hydrants in this area and it is certainly within a fire prone area as is most of the Oregon countryside.... The transient population would increase dramatically and impact our way of life as it would bring in crime. PLEASE DO NOT APPROVE THIS APPLICATION, NO ONE \/\/l-IO LIVES HERE IN BEAUTIFUL SUNDANCE WANTS THIS NOW PRISTINE AREA CHANGED IN SUCH A DETRIMENTAL WAY Wth kindest regards.... KB Anspach-Brooks, Certified Master Herbalist, Holistic Health Advisor Calgary Drive RECETVED DEC 2 4 2018 Deschtes Counry CDI) December I7,2018 To: Deschutes County 117 N,W. Lafayette Ave, Bend, OR 97701 Att.lzzeLiu From: Ellen Hollister 60020 Edmonton Dr. Bend, OR97702 541 330-9080 r':;ilii i.'"r'' ' i'l:ri'i This is about the Marijuana growing at 60148 Stirling Dr. Bend OF.97702, This address is in Sundance Subdivision. We do not wonnt this in our Subdivision. 1. (Noise) We have a nice quiet Subdivision in Bend OR. We won't to keep it quiet. We will have all the traffic from this Marljuana growing. 2. (Odor) We do not need to smell an unpleasant odor in Sundance, We have lived here for 24 years. Do not make living here become not a nice place to live. Take Marijuana growing out away from homes. 3. (Water) We have a problem with water pressure in Sundance Subdivision. In the summer we have to water ever other day because we do not have good water pressure. Marijuana growing takes a LOT of water. C49"""- H"{Ue- Ellen Hollister Regarding: Notice of Application for Marijuana Production File Nurn ber : 247 -L84OO915-AD ''r Whom lt May Concern: Our names are Keith & Kristin Adams, our address is at 60135 Stirling Drive, a rural residential home with properry directly adjacent to the West of the proposed land use application for a marijuana production operation (MPO). My wife and I are adamantly opposed to approval of the application, for numerous reasons. To be clear, our opposition is not only for our own interests, but for all residential families that may in the future be faced with similar circumstances. Frankly, we are dumbfounded and angry, that it is even possible for a MPO to be located directly adjacent to residential propertywith minimal setback, and further, that such operations can use residential roadway as their pr:imary and in this case, only ingress and egress from the property. This is an obvious failure of the codes to adequately protect families, their home values and marketability in Deschutes County from MPO's. Following is an outline of our concernq for the subject application for an MPO. j Misleading Application Response ln the lntroduction Section ll.E Surrounding Zoning & Land Use, the applicant states "most properties are farm dwellings and pasture with most parcels being 10 acres or large/' in fact, most properties are not farmed, and are at or less than 10 acres. Those that are EFU largely have residences and are not farmed, one very large property is. in fact, a privately owned Dude Ranch, Sundance Meadows LLC. The EFU properties that are directly adjacent to Stirling Drive {East) and Quebec (Nonh) have the character of a Rural Residential zoning not EFU, and most people I have spoke with were quite surprised that these properties were zoned EFU, and also shocked that an MPO could be located there. Residential families bordering EFU do not understand their exposure to the risk of these opbrations being built next io their homes. The applicant's propefi was recently created from a subdivided propefi which had, and still has, the address of 50100 stirling Drive. Just before selling their newly subdivided residence property, and subsequently offered the undeveloped .econd property,60148 Stirling Drive (applicant's property) for sale in a way that was clearly marketed and intended to be a :sidential properry. ln fact, if I recall correctly, the propefi was limited by the previous owners CCR requirement to one stick-built home, with no mobile homes or trailers homes. lf the close residential neighbors, and probabllr the previous owners, had known of the EFU zoning exposure to MPO, 1) the residents would have petitioned for the properties to be re- zoned to RR, and 2) the previous owners would likely have been open to this re-zoning as a condition of approval for subdividing their property to protect their residential neighbors, and/or would have include specific CCR language to prohibit an MPO. Setbacks There appears to be direct violation of the codes as it relates to Sundance Meadows "Family/Youth Activity Centerr', and a violation of the spirit of the code as it relates to the Sundance Meadows 'Guest Lodge", "Guest Ranch", "Dude Ranch", properfy being de-facto located within the property of the applicant. While the code says the applicant cannot build these facilities on their property, you'll note that portion of the Sundance Meadows property, the portion that is the "FamilyAouth Activi{ Centef a part of the "Dude Ranch" is essentially enveloped by the applicanf s property. For these reasons the 1325 ft setback should be applied, and on this basis alone THE APPUCATION SHOULD BE DENIED as there is no site on the property for the MPO building. lf the Deschutes County Community Development Department (DCCDD) is not sufficiently convinced, then at a minimum, given all the Sundance Subdivision concern, opposition, and outcry, the subject application should be referred to the hearing process, where all concerns can be fully voiced and considered with appropriate level of detail by the Commissioners in a more appropriate time frame. ln addition, by general inspection, the applicant should have known of the facilities at Sundance Meadoq and by application of the setbacks that they were working with property that does not {might not) meet the code setbacks, and is not suitable for their MPO. oss of Propefi Value ,he close neighbors directly adjacent to the applicants MPO, including us, will suffer substantial financial loss from reduced property value and marketability, the codes should be written to protect residential customers from this kind of exposure" This applies to other nearby properties, but to a lesser degree by distance from an MPO. We have already had one real estate transaction in Sundance, near to the MPO propefi, were the buyer backed out on finding out the news that an MPO might go in nearby. This has real impact to families, it will be financially very painful for all, and devastating to some who rse sufficient value that they know longer have any equity and are trapped to their homes" At a minimum, the DCCDD and '\e Commissioners should change the code to, at a minimum, apply the 1325 ft set backto EFU zoned property bordering any residentiat zoned property for the purpose of protecting the real value of property owned by residential residents that can ill afford to take this kind of financial hit, all for the benefit and profits of MPO's and the State Coffers. Even in this case, the residential properties will lose value, but not as much. A cursory inspection of the zoning map reveals numerous areas in the county, in particular, close to Bend, where EFU abuts to Rural Residential and Residential property, if the code is not change, and more of these MPO's are allowed to apply and/or are approved in these EFU/Residential situations, the County can expect a very significant outcry that they are not prepared for, Sundance is only the beginning. lncreased Rlsk of Crlme The potential for criminal activity related to people who believe there may be cash, or crop of value to steal, or transient workers that harvest the crop multiple times per year, will bring an unsavory element into the Sundance neighborhood A RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD, and they will not just be interested in the MPO, they will prey on neighborhood homes, property, and families. Once again, the codes should protect residential customers from this kind of.e1p.psure to crime. lt is broadly reported by law enforcernent in general, but more specifically, the County Sherriff and Bend Police that crime is increased in the areas around MPO's and other mar'rjuana retail, etc. This is a public safety issue and residential properties should be protected from it. Light/Odor/Noise Control While these issues seem to be largely addressed within the current codes, the codes are in their infancy, and compliance and enforcement is not yet proven. lt is better to be cautious until this is pioven to protect residential interests. ln addition, the applicant is not applying the best available technology, the applicant proposes carbon filter, it is in open record from the Dodd Rd. appeal hearing, the MPO applicants expert in that case testified that carbon filter does not work, 'onization is the best technology and is near absolutely effective. Applicant should be required to apply this technology. raffic Traffic within an organized rural residential subdivision, specifically constructed by the developer for use by the subdivision, even after having been handed over to the county, should be for exclusive subdivision use and the services that serve those interests, not commercial or agricultural interests, this would include other traditional commercial agriculture, not just MPO's, the MPO simply creates more negative impact. The applicant proposes to have water delivered by Avion, this type of routine heavy truck traffic, in addition to shipment traffic, will increase the deterioration of road way, all of which was recently repaired, and chip sealed by the County. Tapping the water from the residential water supply would further exacerbate the already voluntary restrictions on water use we are subject to each Summer by Avion. Conclusion Approval of this MPO would be is direct conflict, and conflict of the spirit of the current code regarding setbacks as described above. THE APPUCATION SHOULD BE DECUNED ON THIS BASIS ALONE, if not it should be referred to public hearing without determination by DCCDD for final determination by the Commissioners. The approval of this application would have significant detrimental impact to the Sundance Neighborhood, a rural residential subdivision, (in particular on the close neighbors), and to the character and safety of the neighborhood in general. lt is astonishing that this application can even be consldered at all, and points deficiencies in the current codes, which are in their infancy, and fails to protect residential families of Deschutes County. ln Absolute Opposition, Keith and Kristin rzfzt lrt \L J\ Irv Fronr! Bridoet To: Isabella Liu SuHect: Regarding File number 247-18-000915-AD Date! Thursday, December 20, 2018 8:08:45 PM Deschutes County Community Developmenf I am writing to express my disagreement with the proposal of a marijuana farm in the Sundance Neigtborhood. We in Sundance enjoy a wonderfrrl life style where we can ride bikes, run and walk our dogs. I feel that a marijuana farm has no place in our neighborhood. The incre ased fiaffic that will be caused by this facility will be detrimental to our life style and our property values. The necessary lights go against our momenhlm to being a dark sky community. I understand that marijuanafamring is a legal enterprise in our state but I feel that it should not happen in a neighborhood that is zoned rural residential. At fhis point, tle only access to the property is tlrough our neighborhood. Our neighborhood is not set up to handl€ the kind oftraffic thar a farmitrg operation of any type would bring. For these r€asons, I hope you will deuy this pemdt. Thank you, BridgetMurdock From: Rich Crabtree To: Isabella Liu SubJect: Application File # 247-18-000915A0 Datel Thursday, December 20, 2018 11:54:21 AM Dear Ms. Liu, It has come to rny attention that an application for a Marijuana grow operation in the Sundance Neighborhood is currently under consideration by the county. I was surprised to learn that the parcel of land in question is a t7 acre parcel and that it is zoned differently than all the parcels near it. Considering that the majority of neighboring properties are zoned single family residential, most are under 5 acres in size and the only access the parcel in the application has is via the Sundance Neighborhood, I am hoping the county will use common sense and see that a commercial operation of any kind is counter to the Sundance Neighborhood's livability. Please keep Sundance the "family neighborhood in the country''that originally drew us to living here. I urge the county to deny this specific application and any future applications that propose a commercial endeavor of any kind in our neighborhood. Thank you for keeping the reality of the neighborhood in mind Richard Crabtree 59806 Medicine Hat Lane Bend, OR. 977A2 richc@scrosb,com Fronri st€ve To: Isabella Uu SubJect: Comrnents to 2471 800091 5AD Date! Thursday, Dec€mber 20,20tA 9:31:53 AM I am strongly opposed to the proposed caffrabis growing facility in our residential rcigborhood. This is is a residential community and the proposed facility is inconsistent with our community values. Thankyou, Steve Kirk 60105 Stirting Drive ') From: 3dacs To: Isabella Liu Subject: Re: File# 247-18-00091s-AD Date! Thursday, December 20, 2018 8:30:43 AM Thank you Isabella! I would like to comment on this application for a marijuana growing operation. Although the land in question is zoned for farm use, the land around it is residential This does not seem a compatible use for the land at 60148 Stirling Drive. The presence of a marijuana growing operation will have a very negative affect on the people that live in our neighborhood due to the high potential for odors, noise, and increased traffrc. Access to the property is via residential streets. When the property was subdivided tvyo years ago, we thought it was for a residential dwelling. Not farm use. There really aren't any farms out here. So, please give this application serious thought and DENY it. Thankyou. Marcy Kirk 60105 Stirling Drive Bend, Oregon 97702 On Dec 18, 2018, at4:20 PM, Isabella Liu Hi Marcy, To view the record for this application, please follow the link to Dial below https://dial.desch utes.org/Rea I /DevelopmentDocs/275713 Let me know if you have any questions. Thanks, lzze Liu I Associate Planner DESCHUTES COUNTY COMMUNITY DEVETOPMENT ree on e 7 70 3 < i m a 0 0 2, p n > ti$".,"|:.J!! se s lyJ:yrSS J.t "ii6ro Tel: (541) 388-6554 I www.deschutes.orglcd ---Origina I Message---- From: 3dogs <3dogs@bendbroadb > Sent: Friday, December 14,2O!81:21 PM To: lsabella Liu Hi, I received notice of a marijuana production facility being proposed for 60148 Stirling Drive. I am unable to access any further information online at the websites provided in the Notice of Application. Please assist me, Thank you, Marry Kirk 541-388-4849 <18-915-AD_NOA.pdf> Fromr Nina Ambior To: Isabella Liu ; [email protected] Subject: Opposing Marijuana Grow Date! Thursday, December 20, 2018 10:01115 AM Dear lzze Liu, My husband and I reside at 59837 Calgary Loop in the Sundance Estates Neighborhood. lt has been brought to our attention that a marijuana production facility has applied for approval in a Farm Use Zone in our neighborhood (file application number 247 -18-00091 sAD) We are opposed to this for the following reasons "Traffic and noise: The roads are set up for residential use, the transportation from product harvest is not supported by our infrastructure. "The stench: Marijuana releases a skunk like odor that can be smelled for 1500 yards or more *lnvoluntary exposure to the concentrated chemicals: Residents in Lane County Califomia reported symptoms such as, severe headaches, asthma episodes and other respiratory problems.. ln addition, chemicals leaching into the ground will get into our wellwater. *Water Usage: Our area is facing drought issues with the lack of snow pack and rising temperatures. The Mendocino Cannabis Policy Council, along with the Emerald Growers Associafio n, has polled numerous cannabis cultivators about their water usage. From fhese resu/fs, with great help from Casey O'Neil, we derived a formula which is: one gallon per day to produce one pound of cured cannabis flower buds (1:1:1) "Physical safety: Cannabis may be classified as an agricultural crop, but there are security concems attached to it with a cash only crop. The drones and security measures needed, put our families at risk. Thank you, Nina and Jon Ambjor 541-389-6389 Please send a response so we know you have received this e-mail..Thank you. Fromr Todd Kane To: Isabella Liu Cc: Todd l(ane SubJectr File Reference 247-1 8-00091sAD Dats: Ttursday, December 20, 2018 1:35:36 PM Ms. Liu, Please consider this email as our offrcial disagreement with the proposed marijuana grow facility located in/near the Sundance neighborhood. As has been proven time and time again, these types of facilities can have a material negative impact on properly values and the quality of life of the residents forever impacted when such facilities are approved. The close proximity to residents including children and animals is of great concern. The smell from such facilities is problematic as is the unsavory elements these facilities tend to afrtact. As a homeovrner in Sundance, we strongly object to this facility being approved to move forward. We will, of course, contact our elected officials to raise our conoerns but please consider this email as our notiee that we strongly disagree with this facility being licensed in our neighborhood. Thank you for your consideration. Please keep us notified as this moves through official channels. Sincerely, Todd Kane and Nathan Braun 22060 Quebec Drive Bend, OR977A2 Todd Kane Want to schedule an appointment with me? Ifs easy! Click the link below! M.B,A., M.Ed., M.S.I.T. httns ://toddkane.youcanbook. me/ [email protected] 505.908,9540 Office 505.908.1979 Mobile Fronr: Steohen Brisken To: Isabella Liu Subject: file #247-18-000915AD Proposed Marijuana Grow 50148 Sterling Dr, Bend, OR97702 Date! Thursday, December 20,20Lg 3t29:53 PM Hello Ms. Liu, I am writing in regard to a proposed N4arijuana grow facility in the Sundarrce Community inBend, OR. file #247-18-000915AD I live on Quebec Dr. in tlre Sundance development. Quebec is one of only two roads that access Stirling Dr., the location of ttre proposed marijuana grow facility. Increased traffic will certainly use oru stre€t for their cars and bucks. I am opposed to this use of that propedy as it will negatively inpact us and the surrounding neighborhood. This neighborhood is primalily single family home properties from two to four acres with no commercial use. Oun is n "valking neighborhood" with marql people using the strcets to exercise, walk tbeir dogs, ride bikes and use electric wheelchairs to move around. With the grow in ptace there will be a considerable increase in auto and fiuck traffic. Also, this grow and the product it would produce bas a significant potential to attract crime to fhis very low crime area A commercial marijuana grow is incompatible with this neighborhood. StephenBrisken 22175 Quebec Dr. Bend, OR 541447-1035 From: Larrv Huod To: Isabella Liu SubJect: Ref fi le #247-18-00091s-AD Dater Thursday, Decernber 20, 2018 l:16:10 PM My name is Larrv Huget and I own about 28 acres with a street address of: 22270 Ouebec ltrive. Bend. My property is located at the intersection of Quebec and Stirling, just two lots west of the proposed 'marij ua na prod uction facility.' I purchased the property in 2008 and have made considerable investments in fencing, a pole barn, pond upgrades, decks/porches, painting, etc. While not part of, my property it is adjacent to the Sundance Development which is a neighborhood of family homes, many with children. There is plenty of other land in Deschutes county that would not put a grow farm in a family neighborhood. ln addition to the inconsistent land use, marijuana grow farms emit noxious odors (stench) that neighbors wou ld find objectionable. Such a facility would negatively affect (reduce) the value of my home and property - who wants to live next door to a marijuana grow farm that stinks? And once the location became known, it would certainly begin to attract transient individuals looking for access to the production operation. The proposed site for a 'marUuana oroduction facilitt' is not consistent. nor compatible with the nelghborhood of homes, and I strenuously object to the proposed land use application. My contact phone number is: 503-708-8087 From: Howard Miller To; Isabella Liu Cc: Qg{f .ludv Miller Subject: Application File # 247 -I8-000915-AD Date: Thursday, Decernber 20, 2018 12:43:01 PM Mrs Liu, Our names are Howard Miller and Judy Miller and we live at 2226I Quebec Drive, Bend Oregon 97702 in the Sundance Subdivision. We received a copy of the application for a nurijuana production operation at the properly directly north of our property. My wife and I strongly oppose such a proposal that is so close to a residential neighborhood with families and small children. We are both surprised and angry that the county would even consider approving such a operation like this near our neighborhood. This appears to be a loop hole in Deschutes county codes and zoning requirements to let this happen and we demand that this application for approval be denied for numerous reasons : 1. fNCREASED TRAFFIC: The only access to this property is thru our neighborhood on residential streets. These streets are quiet and not traveled on a lot with traffic other than homeowners, visitors, and various delivery trucks and mail deliveries . If such an operation is allowed there will be large semi-trucks and other commercial vehicles that will ruin our roads that are already in need of maintenance that the county owns and maintains. These roads are not designed for heavy trucks and commercial loads like a county road or highway and will cause further failures on our streets with pot holes, cracking and such. The only access to this properly is on Quebec Drive which happens to be in front of my house and then off Stirling Road onto a very small gravel driveway that will be by no means support large trucks for deliveries and other traffrc. This road will also not support emergency vehicles if needed, like fire trucks. 2. WATER USAGE: Such an operation I assume will require a lot of water to grow the plants and maintain the crops. Currently the water that serves us is AMON water and currently already has low water pressure and there is not enough fire hydrants in Sundance let alone to protect this property at 60148 Stirling Drive. The current house is hundreds of feet offthe road and access is only a nalrow gravel road with minimal gravel on it to support heavy trucks. 3. NOISr'./AIR POLLUTION OR ODOR & SF.CURITY T.IGHTING: With the increased traffic there will be more noise and pollution, not to mention safety for children playing or riding bikes on the neighborhood streets. We also fearful of the smell from this production operations and structures and transfer of the product to the markets. I read that they have this carbon filtering system proposed by there mechanical engineer, however this in in theory and not a proven fact that it will work. We don't wish to have this experiential system tested in our neighborhood. We also have concerns with contamination from pesticides and other chemicals from this operation. It can't all be contained in a proposed buildings, since the will have to have supplies delivered with possible spills from manure, pesticides or other pollutes" I might add that their application does not mention under Section 18.16.080 stream setbacks, that there is a canal that runs thru the properties. We all enjoy the wildlife (deer, eagles, quail and other animals) in our neighbor hood and fear that fencing, lighting and noise will alter or disturb their natural habitat. 4. LOWER PROPERTY VALUES: with a Marijuana growing operation in our back yards (or near by) it will reduce our values of our land and homes. Several homes in the area are for sale or are pending sales and one recently lost a buyer who backed out do the concem of this Production Operation being approved. This is only "gossip" or local discussions of neighbors yet it already effecting some parties in selling or buying homes in the area. This is a real concern to myself and my wife as we are planning to retire in a few years and wish to downsize and move into town. We will need all the equity or cash sale we can get out of our home in order to make this retirement a reality. 5. SAFETY & INCREASED CRIME POTENTIAL: With this type of commercial business near by it raises the concems of increased crime and less desirable individuals hanging around our homes and property. We all have chosen to buy and live out in the country for the peace and quiet and low crime. We wish to keep it this way. 6. NON FACTUAL INFORMATION IN THE APPLICATION: The " Certificate of Mailing" in the application is not true as my wife and i never received a letter as it states on March l0,2QI7 . Also, Sundance Meadows which is East and next door to this properlry is a Family youth Activity center, with a pool and game courts that our own children have used in the past. It clearing states in the county code that this is NOT ALLOWED next door or close proximity to such an operation. As stated in the above email and list of 6 key items, we strongly oppose such an approval for this Marijuana Production Operation. Sincerely, Howard & Judy Miller 22261Quebec Drive Bend, Oregon 97702 From: Shdlv Wiezba To: Isbelliliu SubJect: Marijuana operation Date! Saturday, December 15, 2018 3:40:35 PM Hi Isabella My name is Shelly Wierzba and I live in the Sundance Neighborhood in south Bend. We have heard that thre is a proposal for a marijuana gowing operation on an 18 acre parcel on Stirling Dr. My husband and I are sfrongly opposed to this. This isn't apprcpriate for a rural neighborhood for all the reasons I am sure you hear fronq folks like us, in tlte same situafion, every day! Please include us in tlre group of neighbors who are opposed to this verture, and please keep us updated on it's progress if possible. Also please let me know of anything else we can do to block this action Thankyousovsry much, Shelly and Joe Wiezba 22235 Sweetgrass Dr. Beud, Or 97702 From: Brad Meltzer To: Isabella Liu Subject: Feedback about File #247-18-00091s-AD Date: Monday, December 17,aOLB 11127:12 AM Ms. Liu I have recently become aware of a petition to Deschutes County to allow for the property at 60148 Stirling Drive to be used for an OLCC approved cannabis production site. I want to take time to voice my deepest opposition to this proposal. I am a resident of the Sundance community which is directly adjacent to the property of the proposed cannabis grow site. My family and I have many concerns about this proposal as listed below. 1. The main access for this property is through the Sundance community. The roads were designed for a rural living community and not for the increased traffic that accompanies such a commercial grow site, especially during times of planting, harvesting, and processing. 2. The commercial use of the adjacent property as a grow site will also have a considerable and negative impact on the desirability of the homes in the Sundance community, thus reducing property values and eventually the tax revenue.to the county from these adjacent homes and properties. 3. The only water available to the proposed property is through Avion. Avion water is primarily designed for domestic water service and their infrastructure lacks sufficient capacity to adequately meet the needs of the Sundance community and a commercial grow site nearby, especially when considering the substantial water consumption needs of a commercial cannabis grow operation. We routinely experience power failures which are accompanied by a loss of water and also at times reduce water pressure. I am concerned that this grow site, if approved, will further strain the water resources that we all depend on for daily use. 4. I am concerned that the frequent loss of power that we seem to experience will also lead to unwanted standby generators to maintain power to the commercial grow site for light, heat, and irrigation. This would produce a noise pollution problem that is currently non-existent in the area and unwanted. 5. The lighting requirements needed to sustain a commercial grow operation are significant. They will undoubtedly have a negative effect on the serenity of the adjacent community. lt will be another unwanted form of pollution, if approved. 6. The smellthat accompanies such a commercial cannabis grow operation is offensive and unwanted. There is no way for the county to adequately control or regulate that problem and there is no reason for the grower to care about their impact on the adjacent property owners. There is no shortage of research articles and personal accounts, even from within Deschutes County, that attest to the air pollution caused by a commercial cannabis grow operation in terms of smell and residual residue from the terpenes emitted by the crop. At a minimum, Deschutes County should require carbon filtration of all emissions from any commercial grow site even though this will only reduce and not fully eliminate the negative impacts to local air quality. Of course, that requirement is less than effective without routine monitoring of the operation and it's emissions. 7. Finally, albeit a stereotype there is no denying that the persons involved in this industry are often times not the must upright and dignified from within our community. Furthermore, the personnel that they hire for planting, harvesting, and processing are often quite unscrupulous and not at all the kind of people I want driving though our community on their way to and from work or hanging out near my home or around my kids. This element is not welcome in our community and will undoubtedly lead to conflict that is unnecessary and avoidable by keeping such commercial grow operations well away from any existing residentialareas. Please give serious consideration to the vast opposition that exists to this proposed commercial cannabis grow operation adjacent to our homes. I know that many other residents of the Sundance community have and will also voice their heartfelt opposition to this proposal. I trust that Deschutes County Planning Department will also conclude that this is not an appropriate site for such a commercial grow operation and honor the request of the adjacent residents by denying this land use request. Sincerely, Brad Meltzer 59654 Calgary Loop Bend, OR 97702 From: Terd Scott To: Isiellaliu Subject: Rt E NUMBER 247-18-000915-AD Date! Wednesday, December 19, 2018 12:45:34 PM We are responding to an application with a file numbe( of 247-I8-0009L5-AD, which is an application to establish a marijuana production facility in and near our residential subdivision, Sundance. We are strongly opposed to this application and do NOT want this facility to go forward. We have lived in Sundance for 31 yrs and want our neighborhood not to change to criminal activity that these situations promote. lt brings unwanted people into our neighborhood that prey on our homes, property and families. We understand that the roadway into this parcel is through our neighborhood which invites this criminal activity. Please treat this letter as a very strong NO for this application. We appreciate your strong defeat in this action Thank you Larry And Terri Scott 22324 Calgary dr Bend, Oregon97702 547-389-1252 Sent from Mail for Windows 10 From: Elizshth To: Isabella Liu Subject: Proposal bo Build Marijuana Facility in Sundance Date: Saturday, December 15, 2018 2:29:20 PM Hello Ms. Liu. I live on Quebec Dr. rrar tle properly on Stirling Dr. where the new owne$ have applied to put in a marijuana facility. Like most residents of Sundance I am opposed this as it will certainly alter ths character of our rural residential neighborhood. While I understand that the property in question has a dtfferent zoning than the Sundance properties it can only be accessed by Surdance roads and is next to residential properties. The facility will rezult in a significant increase in traffic on our now quiet streets and has the great potential to atiact criminal activity, something we rarely have to deal with here now. There is also the concern about pesticide use right next residences, heavy water use, and the noise of fans used i:r the grow houses as well as the bright lights that yill impair our currently dark and staned filled nights. Property values will certainly decrease for anyone nearby. Sundarrce is a wonderfirl and safe place where children are able to walk or ride their bikes on the streets without fear, where residents respect their neigtrbors aud try not to do anything that will negatively affect therq and where we all eqjoy the peace and quiet of the countryside while still being in what is essentially a suburban neietiborhood. A marijuala production facility is incompatible with everything that we value here. Elizabeth Thompson 22175 Quebec Dr. Sent from my iPad Fronr: Cheri Detweiler To: Isabella Liu Subject: APPLICATION FITE NUMBER 247.18.000915.AD Date: Wednesday, December 19,2018 3l@:36 PM ATTENTION: ISSY UU RE: APPUCATION FILE NUMBER 247-18{0091s-AD Marliuana Productlon Opention in Sundance neighborhood,60148 Stirling Dr, Bend, OR 97702 V1/e live in Sundance in Bend, OR and have been made aware of an application for an MPO in the NE comer of our neighborhood. We have lived here for 29 years and have appreciated the safe rural setting. We have grave concerns should lhis application be approved. The potential for criminal activity relaled to people who believe lhere may be cash, or crop of value to steal, or transient wofters lhat harvest the crop multiple times per year, will bring an disreputable element to our neighborfiood. Not only will their interest be in the MPO but will expand to neighborhood homes, properties, and families. The probability of this increases also because the MPO Plans to use Sundance residential roadways for it's access. To enrich one indivldual at the probabl€ jeopady of hundreds is inesponsible on the County's part. Also, to have this parcel of land be zoned as Exclusive Farm Use is incorrec{ based on its location within Rural Residential and the county needs to adjust its codes accordlngly" please notify us of any decision or public hearing related to this application. Your response may be mailed to us at the address listed below. Respectfully submitted, Don & Cheri Detweiler 59873 Calgary Loop Bend, OR 97702 From: Ann K. Bond Toi Isabella Liu Subject: Marajuana grow Date! Saturday, December 15, 2018 121,14:03 PM I am a resident of Sundance subdivision and totally oppose the nrarajuana grow application off Sterling Road. Our roads are not mention to accommodate beavy truck traffic. There has already been a deatl on Horse Butte Road which is ruurow and winding and leads to Sundarrce. We moved out here to be free of noise, light, and heavy traffic pollution . Wbat about excessive water use? We have restrictions in the summer months aheady. Tlrere is an existing dirt access road for emergency use which exits on Amold Market road. Please give tlese points due consideration. Thankyou. AnnK. bond 22052 BanffDrive Bend, OR 97702 Sent from my iPad From: Patrick Daniels To: Isabella Liu Subject: @position to proposed MPO in Sundance Ranch Date: Wednesday, December 19, 2018 8:55;38 AM Good day Isabell4 We are writing to you to voice our mncem and opposition to the marijuana production operation (MPO) in the Sundarrce Ranch community of Bend. There is a laundry list of reasons why we are opposed as I'm ntre mauy others have told you. I've seen the impacts of what an MPO can do to a neighborhood as my childhood friend had one pop up next door to his property on Cole Road in Bend. The OLCC has a well documented history of lack of enforcement sf marijuara grorv facilities and it was evident wery tine I weDt over to his house. The smell was a constant nuisance. There were 55 gallon drums of fertilizer scattered about the prop€rly. Tbsy diverted his water from his property to tltefus multiple times to water their crcps. Their grow lights created light pollution from the translucent grow houses and the fans seem to run constantly. The scariest part was the people who maiutained th€ MPO, They carried weapons to guard their facility and were suspicious of everyone and hostile towards auyone, including rny friend" to the point they'd grve him the bird when tre'd drive by on his way home from work rvhen found out he called the sheriff about the noise ald smell. They lived in campers on the prcperty and were the type of people you don't want in your neighborhood. The MPO shut down for reasons I don't know and it seemed over night tley were gone leaving rvhat looks like a hazardous waste site as the greenhouse'plastic has been ripped offby the wind, the 55 gallon barrels arc still there and the propeny is ia sbambles. This is what we fear coming into our neighborhood and you would as well if you lived here. This is a residential area not a EFU. The fact this properly is an EFU is an ovsrsight by the zoning department and slipped through a loop hole but it's apparent and the fact remains this MPO is going to be built in an area that has children and a youth gemp nearty. It's going to decimate home value prices in the area because of all the issues I outlined earlier, everyorc knows rvhat MPO's bring to a neigtiborbood which is why we are ail fighting this as there is no "feel good" story that ever come from having aMPO inyour neighborhood. Patrick and Susan Daniels 59633 JasperPlace Bend Oregon 97702 Fronr: Kelliqlanaldsoo To: Isabella Liu Subject: 247-18-000915AD - MPO in Sundance Neighborhood Date! Monday, December 17, 2018 2:58:29 PM Dear lsabella, I am contacting you with respect to the application file number 247-18-000915AD - MPO in Sundance Neighborhood. I received a notice in the mailand I live directly across the street from the proposed site. I am vehemently opnosed to this application. While this land may be zoned as farm use. this particular proposal will not only have an impact on the street that its located on hut all of those in the neighborhood due to access requirements. Farm use with a couple horses and chickens is one thing - A marijuana production operation is comoletely another and need to be looked at differentlv. Aooroval of this application would be an approval of a commercial business operation. and will brine with it traffic in the form of workers. security. and commercialvehicles that I don not believe was intended for this particular tvpe of zoning. Also due to the nature of the crop, it has a high likelihood of attracting the wrong type of people into our neighborhood. making other houses subject to break and enter. Furthermore the owner of thi,s property doesn't even live in the state and has no veste_.d interest in the commulity or its residents. I haye 4 young kids and feellhat allowing this type of operation in a residential neishborhood is unsafe on many levels an inapF,ropriate use of the intended zoning and a failure of the county code to not f'revent this :nnliratinn frnm heins qrr miftod in thp firct nl:rc Sincerely. Kevin Donaldson +I541"-247-A067 $unilanoe lleaflows lno. 60335 lrnolil llarftel Ril. Benil,0[ 97702 Phone: (54t) 389,7003 lax: (541) 889 -2922 December 15,2018 Re: Planning Division response To whom it may concern, Regarding the recent 'Notice of Application', file # 247-18-000915-AD; it has been made known to us the applicant requested to establish a marijuana production facility. The location of this requested facility butts up against our property line and lies directly behind our swirnming pool where we have a high volume of children and families enjoying the pool and pickle ball court throughout the summer months. As Sundance Meadows Ranch is a family owned vacation destination. Children a.re constantly present and exploring various coflrers of ranch property. We do not feel that a facility which produces marijuana would be suitable to construct directly next to our land and in such a popular area of the ranch. We would not appreciate any smells that marijuana produces to drift down into the hole that our pool sits in. Also, our ranch owns an easelnent through their property and should we choose to use it, do not wish to be concerned with possible harm for being near that facility. Should this request be approved in spite of our opposition, we hereby want to make it understood that our easelnent is not to be elirninated or constructed upon in any way. Please refer all questions to Dee Shultz, President of SMR. Sincerely, Sundance Meadows Board of Directors sundancemeadows.com email: [email protected] From: B-ts To: Isabella Liu Sublect: 247-18-000915-AD Date: Sunday, Decernber 15' 2018 l:22;39 PM I strongly object to the proposed marijuana production facility under consideration in Sundance. I request to be notified of any and all meetings, hearings etc conrerning the proposed land use' This proposed marijuana farm would be immediately adjacent to numerous small acreage, {5 acre, ruml residential properties. The roads in tbe small comrnunity of Sundance cannot maintain any of the proposed farming operations. TI1g allowance of this proposed marijuana farm would likely bave a regative impact on home values throughout Sundance and lvould likely result in litigafionfor the properly owners and Deschutes County. Rich Brarurin 59689 Calgary Lp Bend, OR 97702 From: 83 Tol Isahella Uu SubJect: Sterling Dr MariJuana Grow Date: Saturday, December 15, 2018 1:28144 PM I am a homeowner in Sundance and I strongly object to the proposed land use on Sterling Drive in Bend, Oregon. This is a rural residential neigtrborhood that willbe gfavely irnpacted by the allowance of a marijuana growing facility. Please contact me. fuchBrannin 541-598-6r7',1 Sent from my iPhone From: Denice Huohes Lewis To! Isabella Liu Subject: RE:247-18-00915AD Dater Monday, Decetnber L7,aOLB 5:05127 PM Dear Isabelle Liu This email is iu reference to the proposed nrariiuana prcduction operatiorl MPO, on my strcet. My husbard and I live at 60020 Stirling Drive, Bend, OP'97702. While we don't have any reason to be against growing marijuan4 lve are opposed to it being glown on ourroad in this residential area Here arc a few ofthe reasons: l. There is no farming i:r this area of Sundance. Mr. Wick owned 50 acres. He divided it and sold the home. The property tlnt was left is the largest acreage here. Most of us bave lots of approximately nvo to five or six acres. 2. This is a diverse area with retired and young couples" Parents with kids are almost across the street from tlrc proposed MPO. 3. We specifically moved to this area over tlirteenyears ago to be where it was safe, quiet, and unpolluted with noise, lights, pesticides, traffic, or smells. 4. The proposed production of marijuana would not only stop tlis, but could also increase Faffic, crime, noise levels, and ground and air pollution with the poisons used for growing. Since we use no kind of pesticides for weeds, etc, on our properly, wc are very concemed. 5. A lot of the residents of this easily accessible area walk tleir dogs, ride their horses, or bicycle. What kind of traffic and pollutionwould be contributing to our health? Others who don't live here also use our roads for running. 6. We also feel tlut afarm of this kind would negatively affect the properly values of everyone in Sundance. At the moment, this area is one of the most popular places to live with ffieen to thirty minute access to an1'place in Bend. 6, t ask you. Would you like a facility like this to be running down the street fromyour home? It belongs in a place farther removed from childreru animals, and people. Thank you for your time. Sincerely, William and Denice Lewis From! Ron Deems To: Isabella Liu SubJect: Application file 247-18-00915AD for MPO operation in Sundance Date: Monday, December L7,2OLB 9:27:06 PM To whom it may concern > I send this email in response to an application for a marijuana Production Operation application for 60148 Sterling Drive. My objections are as follows: > I. This operation does not seem appropriate for a residential neighborlrood regardless of what that propetty is zoned. > 2. Assuming tlre owners of this busi:ress would maintain a seque facility the features of tbe security, large lights, tall fencing with razor wire, and most likely guard dogs, would not be appropriate in a residential ueighborhood. > 3. Wbat happens to the property when the business closes? Not really a plan for a business owner as they hope to be in business for years, however, businesses fail all the time and currently Oregon has a multiple year supply of marijuana products, a glut as they say and there is no slow down in production. Given these facts, There would be a good chance the business fails after a few years. Therl what happeDs with the propeny? The owners are goi:rg to build a custom facility that would not be easy to resell for other ventures so flre properly would most likely go into foreclosure etc or sit vacant for a long period oftime, > I brought up this same concern wheu two properties in the neighborhood were e>tpanded to become senior care homes (Leisure Club Lodge - Adult Foster Home). That corpem was who is going to purchase a house configured as a senior care home when they want to sell. Well, not 5 years now and they both are empty and for sale. I doubt at the price they need they will find a buyer, even in this market. The current price for the 8 bedroom 5 bath rom 6,000 sq foot "home" is $1,200,000" It will not sell. > These are my concems, thank you for xwiewing tlis email and feel free to contact me with any questions. > Thanks > Ron Deems > 22438 VictorialN > Sundance > Sent from nry iPad From: NIA Tor Isabella Liu Cc: autorotS@bendbroadba nd.com Subject: reference file number 247-18-000915-AD 50148 Surling Dr Date: Sunday, Decernber 16, 2018 1;31:01 PM Itdy fanily is vehernently opposed to this grow site. Here are the reasons forour opposition. l) The proposed site is surrounded and very close proximity to a RESIDENTIAL neighborhood that has been existence since the 1970s. The residential neighborhood is a very quiet, dark, clean air neighborhood. For the county commissioners to even consider allowing this site is ertremely irresponsible. 2) It is known that marijuana grow sites use excessive anounts of rvater, produce liglrt pollution and a lingering odor. This rvould affect approximately 200 residential households. Residents are reqpectfr.rl of the night time sky and limit outdoor lighting so as not to invade the da* slsy. This type of industrial grow operation rvould GREATTY impact our established way of life. 3) By allowing this operatiorq the county commissioners would be exposing alarge number of children (close to 100) tbat live in the residential neighborhood to marijuana and honible odor. There are nearby school bus stops from the proposed location Even tlough the propeay is Dot a part of the Sundance Neighborhood, it is located within the residential neighborhood 4)The Sundance neighborhood has only one small county road in/out ofthe ueighborhood. The grow site, while not annexed in Sundance, uses all the roads in the neighborhood. This grow site would increase traffrc flow and extrreme safety issues with kids riding bikes and people walking along the streets (no sidewalks). 5)There is increased crime associated rvith grow sites. Since tlis is a remote residential location, there is a potential for crime to come into our peacefirl neighborhood. 6)The application ir itself has false or misleading information It stated that the zurrounding properties were famrhomes and pastures on greater than 10 acrcs. This is absolutely false. The immediate and surrounding properties are RESIDENTIAL homss on less than 5 acres" This was a gross inaccuracy which I feel borders on being deceiffitl Please refer to the county plans and the CCR's of Sundance that states eachproperty is less tian 5 acr9s. Mark Budchardt 22209 Quebec Dr Bend OR 97702 Fronr: vhayton (oBend Broadba nd.com To: Isabella Liu SubJect: Re: Marijuana grow operation @60148 Steding Drire Date! Tueday, Decernber 18, 2018 9:49:47 PM Hi Izzy just one more thing rnaybe two ttre I will be done for the night. It is very interesting that the person that once orvned the land tbat said pot farm is going once owned Avion water and now is still pan owner I am sure tumed it over to his son. Pretty interesfing I thfuk tbat is conflict of infest but it is all about dollars and they stard to nake alot on this deal.They are going to transf,sr the rvater invia tankers ard our roads rvill not support tlrat kind of weight load. Are they going to pay forthe road repair not a chance Please lets take a look at tlis before we give them everything they want because of the big dollars. Thx Victor -*- Original Message --- From: "[email protected]" HiIzz:e Thanks for the reflrm letter. Yes I just read what you sent and yes please place my letter into the record for application. I am not some radicle idiot but Avion gets there water from trvo places the Deschutes River via Wickiup Reservoir or tlre wells they have drilled" Both lower the rvater level here in this area. The properly values will and have taken a huge hit who wants to live near a pot famr Our place was worth in the area of 740,000 dollars after this we will be doing good to get 500,000 all because of greed for the big dollars tley can make from growing pot. Ouce again all the county is looking at is the tax dollars they can make from property tax. The thought tbat some one can say we are having the water delivered by avion and all is good what ajoke. To bad avion is looking at how much they can make 1pp fhis deal not where is this water coming from. Like I said before tlere arc two places and when that source is gone what are we going to do. This pot faun wiJl say by by ald we will be shaking our heads wondering what happened. There is no endless supply of water out there like alot of people thixk there is. Please lets look at this again before we do something that there is no fixing later on wtren it is to late. Thank you for your time in reading this and all the help you have given this. V Hayton @Bendbroadband.com Tbanks VictorHayton --... Original Message ---- From: "Isabella Liu" Hello, Thank you for reaching out. Would you like to submit your email into tlre record for this application? To answer your question, the applicant has stated in their burden of proof that they are proposing to use potable water delivered by Avion Water Compauy, Inc. The applicant has provided a "will serye" letter from Avion stating that they are able and willing to serve the zubject property for the marijuana production use. Please let me know if you would like me to irrclude your email below into tle record and if so, please email me your mailiag addrcss as well so I can iaclude you on our 6siling list. Let me know if you have any other questions" Tbanks, lzznLiu I Associate Planner DESCHU]ES COUNTY COMMTJNITY DEVELOPMENT 117 NW Lafayette Avenue I Bend, Oregon 97703 PO Box 6005 | Bend, Oregon 97708 Tel: (541) 388{554 | www.deschutes.orglcd Disclaimer: Please note tbat the information in this email is an informal statement made in accordance with DCC 22.20.005 and shall not be deemed to constitute final Counff action effecting a change in the status of a penon's prop€rty or conferring any rights, including any reliance rigtrts, on ary person. ---Original Message--- From: [email protected] Hi I got this notice in the maii for the grow operation file number 247 18000915 AD. The answer to tle question is where are you planning on getting the water for such a grorv operation. Mal'be we could drain Wickiup Lake a little earlier. There are over 30 grow operatiors in the area already how many more do we need. The sad thing is you are looking at lhe income from properly taxses you will claim If you can tell me where the water is coming from for lhe grow operation with out some dumb answer like out of tle lakes or out of the ground. Then go for it all you are doing is looking at the dollars from tax revenue.There isnt this endless flow of rvater for all the growth that is going on here. Pot farm come on big dollars for the county is tlre bottom line. The sheriff can not keep up with tlre crime in the county now ard you want to add a pot farm. Just say no for a change. where is tlre water to support this. Thx for your time please let me krcw if I can help in any way. [email protected] From! Diane Weller Tor Isabella Liu Subject: MPO in NE corner of Sundance neighborhood Date: Wednesday, December 19,2018 11:27:50 AM Hello, This is a note to express our concerns regarding proposed MPO in our Sundance neighborhood. Our concerns are as follows: l. Will there be a separate water source? We have been encouraged by our water stewards to decrease our water use each summer due to shortages. 2. Road maintenanee related to increases use. 3. Zoning. Thank you. Sincerely, Wes and Diane Weller Sent fr:om Yahno Mail on Android From: Dawn Stob To: Isabella Liu Subject: File # 247-18-000915-AD response Date: Monday, December L7,2OLe 11:47:42 AM Re: Deschutes County Notice of Application, File # 247-I8-OOO915-AD From: leff & Dawn Stob 60075 Stirling Dr Bend, or 97702 To: Deschutes county Community Development Planning Division We are providing written comment & raise issue/opposition to the proposed marijuana production facility described in the above document. Please provide detailed information on the appropriate appeal process to Land Use Board of Appeals (LUBA) so that we can follow protocol to deny and stop this proposal. Regards, Jeff & Dawn Stob Frorn: Eric D. Moverman To! Isabella Liu Subject: File Number 247-18-00091sAD - Objection from Sundance Neighbor Date: wednesday, December 19,2018 12;17:31 AM Dear Ms. Liu, My wife and I are the residents/owners of 22070 Quebec Drive in the Sundance subdivision. We have recently been made aware of the above-captioned application for a Marijuana Production Operation at 60148 Sterling Drive in the Sundance subdivision. I am writing to lodge my objection to this land use action and request at a minimum that a public hearing be scheduled in this matter. From what I've read, the following are my objections, but upon learning more, there may be more objections as well: 1) The current zoning for this parcel as Exclusive Farm Use is already inappropriate. That this was allowed when the original subdivision was platted is an egregious oversight by the zoning board and should be corrected now, not made worse by approval of this requested land use action. The parcel's only access is through the residential streets of Sundance. Had it ever been used as a workingfarm/runch, it is at odds with the rest of the neighborhood. 2) A Marijuana Production Operation is better characteized as industrial than as farming. The trafhc of employees, suppliers, deliveries, etc. will be a burden on the residential streets of the subdivision" There is only one entrance road, Sweetgrass, serving over 200 families. As I walk parts of that street daily with my dogs, I can attest to a high traffic level with many substantially exceeding the speed limit. Added industrial traffic will exacerbate that significantly. 3) Odors created by the operation will no doubt permeate the neighborhood. We are already subjected to the sound of an informal gun range on nearly National Forest land reverberating throughout the area; we don't need another sense attacked. 4) The entire purpose of zoning is to separate the different types of activities to designated areas. Putting a Marijuana Production Facility in a residential neighborhood makes as much sense as locating a hog farm in the center of downtown Bend. Please move to put an end to this asap. Thank you, Eric & Diane Moyerman Eric D. Moyerman ericmoyerman@gmail com 541-640-0100 Lynn and Ellen Hollister 60020 Edmonton Dr" Bend, OR97702 December 18, 2018 Deschutes County Community Development Planning Division, Isse liu P.O. Box 6005 Bend, OR 97708-6005 Re: Land use file number 247-I8-000915-AD address 60148 Stirling Drive Bend, OF-977O? To Whom ItMay Concern: Please do not approve the above reference property to be used as a marijuana production operation. To the North of the property is Sundance Meadows which is a recreation facility and can have 30 or more camper traiiers and campers at the facility. To the East is Federal BLM property and to the West and South is the Sundance subdivision. That the reference property is classified as Exclusive Farm Use is unbelievable. It appears to be the only property with this classification in the area. I do believe the property should be classified as Rural Residential. Other objections for the MPO classification is the smell associated with growing and production of marijuana. A MPO also requires a lot of water and the Sundance Sub division has water issues presently. During irrigation season we have been asked to irrigate on even days of the month if our street address is even and on odd days of the month if our street number is odd. To have a MPO in a predominantly residential area just does not make sense. There are a lot of children in the Sundance Subdivision and at the Sundance Meadows facility. Another issue is what will be the health consequences for the children and adults of living in an area so close to a MPO ? So Please do not approve this property for a MPO Sincerely, Lynn and Ellen Hollister Fronr: lvnn tOmennscaf Foldino,com To: Isabella Liu SubJect: MPG€pplication file number 247-18-0091sAD Dater Tuesday, December 18, 2018 4:49120 PM Attachments: Letter.docx Stirli.ns mt site.docx Isabella, please read the attached letter requesting that the MPO application at address 60148 Stirling Drive, Bend not be approved. Also attached is a map of the area showing the MPO property and the surrounding area. Thanks, Lynn and Ellen Hollister 60020 Edmonton Drive Bend, OR 97702 at Sundance Subdivision Frofit: Marquita Hain To: Isabella Liu SubJect: Marijuana grow operatjon/5undance Date: Wednesday, December 19,2018 2il4:51 PM Dear lze, Thank you for sending me the apptication and requirements for the marijuana grow operation proposed in my area. I atso appreciate your time in answering my questions. I definitety disapprove of having a marijuana grow near my home. Even if it is shown to be legal and atl rules fotlowed, I stitt think it woutd have a negative impact on a residentiat neighborhood like Sundance. I have tived in this neighborhCIod for 25 years, and I moved here for the peace and quite; the nature, and the star gazing. I have seen more crimeand petty theft increase here over the past severat years and I am concerned that having marijuana grown nearby woutd add to this situation. How can we know if this product is being grown, or not, for the btack market? And what character of peopte woutd be inhabiting the grow operation, or scoping it out for nefarious activities? Are rules and regulations strictty enforced? . I betieve it has a negative effect on real estate vatue and raises many safety questions for the residents. I am opposed to having such an operation adjacent to Sunda nce. Thank you for hearing my comments Sincerely, Marquita Hain 22255 Catgary Drive Bend, OR 97702 l-aughter i,r the thoftefi disfance betuteen huo peopk. l:driilI Fronr ROBERT DEWTTT To: Isabella Liu Cc: keith.m.adams(ahotmail.com SubJect: Notice of application 247-18-00091sAD Date; Tuesday, Decernber 18, 2018 9:30:59 Alvl Rob Dewitt 22230 Calgary Drive. Bend Or. 97702 I'm writing in "opposition" of application #247-18400915AD to allow a marijuana production facility at the 60148 Stirling drive address based on the following reasons. As a long time resident in Sundance I vote "No" for the application. I have worked many yea$ to inrprove and upgrade uiy home in hopes that one day we can sell at a fair nlarket rate. I thfuk the addition of ihe marijuana facility will erode our property values, and make my dream a disappoin0nent. Who warrts to live nert door to a marijuana grow?? There are marD' small children an families irr our area Tlre constant smell of marijuana is a very strong, and an "untested" issue with Deschutes County grows. The fresh air of the high desed will be replaced with the smell of pot and THC. Its not something we look forward to. Would you want your kids and family forced to live next door to this? Many families have saved and purcbased houses iu Sundance overthe years. They have invested theirhard eamed money into a house that they will likely not be able to sell with zuch a facility next door. The farm zening was not meant for such a proposal and needs to be addressed! ! ! This is an area of small and large horse ranches and some very nice homes. The addition of such a facility would be a disaster at best for the home owners of Sundalrce and zurrounding area As a retired Bend Police Officer it has been rny experience that the grow will bring unwanted attention to our neiglborhood along with socudty issues, and an increase in crime to the home owne$ in Sundance. I don't zupport this, and I don't thhk the Deschutes County Sheriff will either. The fact that they arc using oru roads disappoints me as well. The grow in alfalfa bas a large open area witl a high fence around it to aid in most security issues although marry of the neighboring houses complain of the unwanted smell. They can soe fora long distances for aly security threat. Tlre propeay along Stirling is rolling hills, sanysns, and "residential", the differerre being for most wood-be criminals, its going to be pretty easy to sneak into for that midnight raid, and attract more problems that ia rvorth. This area offers one of the best winter deer range habitat acreages around with all the traffic around horse butte. In short our Sundance neighborhood has been through a lot over the years and thisjust adds to tbe issues. I hope that you will not pass tbe proposal based on the issues I and others have listed. The residents of Surdarce are counting on The County Dwelopment Board to protect us from this mizuse of prcperty and vote down the proposed tvlarijuana grow application Sincerely, Rob Dewitt Fronu Janine Richardson To: Isabella Liu Subject: File # 247-18-00091s-AD Date: Tuesday, December 18, 2018 12:18:31 PM To \Mrom it May Concern, We believe that since the original zoning for the proposed maruuana grcw was established before any idea of this happening this close to small acreage with families, it should not be allowed to move forward. The intent of the original zoning would not be in keeping with the land use that the new owners are proposing. We feel it is the County's responsibility to preserve the integrity of our tranquil community by re-evaluating the zoning to eliminate any unintended loopholes. Respectfully, Robert and Janine Richardson Frorn: C-!!4U To: Isabella Uu Subject: Application for MPO 247-18-00091s-AD Date: Wednesday, December 19.2018 4:20:05 PM To whom it may concern; As residents of the Sundance neighborhood, we arc !OO% ogdinst the application (247-18- 000915-AD) for a proposed marijuana production operation planned for 60148 Stirling Drive, Bend, Oregon. The existing subdivision roads are narrow and winding with no center stripe or shoulders. Should this operation be approved, the increased number and size of vehicles would endanger the many folks who daily walk their dogs, jog, or ride their bicycles on them. A residential neighborhood is definitely /VOf the place for a marijuana grow for myriad reasons among which are; an unsafe increase in traffic, the potentialfor increased criminal activity associated with this type of cash crop, not to mention the very unpleasant smell. Sundance is a lovely place to live for both young families and more mature adults, and we urge you to DECLTNE this application. Please keep our neighborhood livable!! Greg and Mary Petsch 22140 Quebec Drive Bend OR From: Kathie Mollohan To: tsabella Liu SubJect: frle #247-L8-000915AD Date! wednesday, December 19,2018 12149:54 PM Dear Ms. Liu, I am writing to you today to convey my concerns regarding the above file number and the proposed MPO in the Sundance area in Deschutes County. As a resident of Sundance Subdivision my concerns are many, but not limited to the following: increased traffic in the area since it is my understanding the plan is to use our roads for some access, the smell (especially for my neighbors close to the location) the use and run-off from use of any herbicides/pesticides, the number and types of people coming into the area multiple times a year for harvest/trimming, and what happens to the property and the facility if/when it fails since the market is now so saturated with growing operations. lt has also come to my attention that one neighbor had an offer on their home that was for sale, and when the prospective buyers found out about the possibility of this growing operation, they are considering backing out of the sale. I would ask that you please consider not granting this application for this operation to preserve our neighborhood. Please know I am not against a growing operation per-say, however, I feel that the proximity to and the impact on the Sundance neighborhood and neighboring Sundance Meadows would be too much. Thank you for your time, Kathleen Mollohan 22483 Calgary Dr, Bend, Or 97702 s41-382-2414(H) s41-410-8383 (C) Sent from Mail for Windows 10 Frofir: Rodnev Kopish To: Laurel Hunter Cc: Isabella Liu Subject: Rei ComrEnB on lpplicttion 247-18-00915-AD Date: Wednesday, December 19, 2018 8:51:00 AM IIi,Izze, I just wanted to add to my wife's letter by including our address. Hopefully, having people most closely impacted by this farm speak up will carry more weight. We live at 59985 Edmonton Dr. Just a block or two over from where the farm would be located. Good luck and thank you for taking the lead in this effort. Rodney Kopish On Dec 19,2018, at7:34 AM, Laurel Hunter Hello lzze, My husband and I have recently learned of an application for a marijuana farm near our home in the Sundance neighborhood of Bend. We are very concerned about the impact this would have on the neighborhood, our quality of life, and the overall positive qualities of the neighborhood. While Sundance is in a rural part of Bend, it is a neighborhood with pedestrians, pets and children. We are incredibly lucky to live in a quiet and friendly place that is unique in its setting. Close to the national forest and BLM, as well as the larger horse and agricultural properties of south east Bend, we have the benefits of being close to the open spaces while still maintaining a sense of safety and friendliness that comes from being in a community. It is'hard to see how a commercial marijuana farm would enhance or be compatible with neighborhood life. Additionally, because of the nature of marijuana being a controlled substance, the fencing and security required will be an inherent threat to the wildlife that roams the neighborhood. Sundance is a very open, with minimal fencing, and the deer are seen daily moving from the forest to our yards. Perhaps the greatest concern is that the farm would be using our residential streets. Again, we must stress that Sundance is a NEIGIIBORHOOD, and while there are horses and greenhouses, and it is undeniably rural in flavor, this is not in anyway an agricultural area. Any farm in this area that would impact wildlife and the vitality of the neighborhood feels grossly inappropriate. The fact that it is a controlled substance requiring additional security measures seems downright irresponsible for the county to even consider. We formally object to the approval of this application. Thank you, Laurel Hunter & Rodney Kopish Fromr emilvOcascadecandids.com To: Isabella Liu Subject: Sundance grow facility Dater Tuesday, December 18, 2018 11:24:03 PM Hello, First I should staft by saying I am not against legal marijuana I actually think it has anazing benefits, ard I see it trelping a close friend of mine. However- t don't feel a grow facility will have auy positive impact on our neighborhood. ['m most conceived about the Eaffic. Do we know if the entrance would be into Sundance or out funold mad(et? We have a really quiet neigliborhood lhat feels safe. t know Bend is growing out of control and we can't stop it, that why we moved out here.. to get away from the crazhess of "torvn" I spoke with a friend who works for our water comparry. They said tbat it most likely will effect our water presswe. We already have touble with this during tlre warmer months that usage is higher' I worry about tbe light. My brother has one of these facilities near him now and he said thaf they hardly see wildlife ary morc due to tle constant light. I love our deer out here, and we all love our amazing star views!l Please consider tlre neighbors when you make this decision, I dou't know much about this but it sounds like the application said that we all bave l0 acres +" Thal is not the case. I think it's closer to betweeir 3-5 acres. Thank you foryourtime! Emily Schwarzenberger Owner/photographer Cascade Candids Photognphy (54r) 71r4rr2 Nru& Lq1-lg'booErAQ Jacob Ripper From: td tammy Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Flagged BOCC Members and County Planner, I attended this appeal and the BOCC work session on this appeal. BOCC members requested to have some specific clarity on what a "Youth Activity Center" definition was, Well I have tumed in hard copies of Definitions I found and information on 4-H Youth Activity Centers,Centre also called Clubs to iacob Ripper. i tried to get a definition of " Youth Activity Center" by State of Oregon, but was unsuccessful. Also unsuccessful by U.S. Government, however you will find by any definition I found that it clearly states Activity "youth Center" or Club. A group of youth, activities, gathering. I am requesting that you review the hard copy information specifically referring to 4-H also. it is clear that Land grants liave been grven for 4-H as Oregon State University is highly involved. Also USDA ,NIFA ( National lnstitute of Food and Agriculture) .The youth surrounding this proposed pot grow are the future stewerds just of not our "Life Sustaining Food and Agriculture, but of ouiland and Witanfr for future innovation of our Human Race. The applicant states they will not be useing the irrigation or the earth for the growing ofthis " "Recreational Crop" Which means this "Recreational Crop" coulJbe set up and grown uIN A PARKING LOT", instead of this land. The Youth in this area deserve the right to feel Safe at theiihome and while doing their YOUTH ACTIVITIES, as you heard yourselves, that is nJt ho* they are going to feel if you allow this Pot Grow to be placed by their homes. I am absolutely opposed to this pot Grow. It is Clearly noi Compatible to the neighborhood and area, It is like "Putting a Bull in a China Shop". It does appear applicant does not have a totally complete application. why are these applications being approved when they are Nor complete? Respectfully, Tammy Threlkeld / Ken Clouse 23344 Alfalfa market rd. Bend, OR 97701 s41-961-5986 Jacob, I will be dropping the hard copies offat your office Tuesday Morning. Please make sure all BOCC members receive them. 1 1t \j a0 l8 RECEIVED ii0V 1 S ZotB Deschres County CDD -).^*d- &q$f \ E\ zSpqvr I -lro { *o.r {?u *$ RAWG[ dk afr - \(- ccoas\{D PA t cr\ ZOI \r,{AQ--},-, 0-4J\ k"^ o)eurq- ?33Ltq Pdea{q N nnL \ oR- ql70\ o 'So0C fn\0-tn\ S fr ?W We-nAi-q-aen + -f**t \ t TBTI\ orsQ- j Youth center - Wikipedia Page 1 of2 WirrpnDrA Youth center A youth center or youth centre, often called youth club, is a place where young people can meet and participate in a variety of activities, for example g!lg_ footbal!, association fg,g[b?S (US soccer, IIK football), bgg!-elhgll, Fblg Je{rgu*s, vi_dco g3.mes, and f{ggUg activities. Youth Clubs or Centres vary in their activities across the globe, and have diverse histories based on shifting cultural, political and social contexts and relative levels of state firnding or voluntary action.ll I Millennium Powerhouse youth centre in Moss Side, Manchester, Contents UK Young social groups ProJects and activities See also References Young social grorryrs Many yorl$_r clubs are set up to provide young people with activities designed to keep them off the streets and out of trouble, and to give them a job and an interest in activity. Some youth clubs can have a particular compelling force, such as music, qpiglgxl/Iglslggs guidance and advice or characteristics such as determination.tzl In the United Kingdom, there are a number of national youth club networks, including: r UKYouth . 4rtrliliel ' Neti-eml"Apggqie"ttor ol-?,o-vr-il9-q!+ 9lHP-q-(h$P-.ft4ry-nab^g--c.-qtg.9u-) Bo_y_s popular (or In the United $J-qt_ep, the $G;$q-g$s gf$fp_rycg is one of the most well known) youth clubs. Projects and activities Many youth clubs and projects are open to all people aged r5-er, although some clubs may still accept )loung people as old as 25, There are places where young people can meet with friends and practice new activities. Many youth clubs offer various activities, such as table tenais. https : /1en. wikipedia" org/wiki/Youth_center lUt2l20l8 Youth center - Wikipedia Page2 of 2 Youth clubs are there to help young people understand the world around them. They are there to advise )'oung people with their future, to talk about the past and even help them with the present. Many clubs hold different sessions to educate yollt:g people about different topics regarding their health and worries, e.g. contraception. Youth clubs normally have a leader youth worker who normally organizes trips or workshops for the ]roung people to contribute in, e.g. Show Racism the Red Card. Ttrey can also hold charity events and even volunteer to do many different things. Youth clubs will sometimes help young people to gain qualifications for their life ahead, e.g. The Dr:ke of Edinbureh'sAward. See also . gJ gtion g l=!$- "y-o:!h,"_oJga{z- r Salford Lads Club r Essex Boys and Girls Clubs r Teen center References 1. Mills, Sarah; Kraftl, Peter (2014| lnformal Education, Childhood & Youth: Geographies,Histories, Practices. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. z. 'lffi:!-9fletit-q:d-o-(lds,s-p!-lrer"-Y*qv!n*qlgqpsS'i"httrJ{gmu:ygv"rlbgiggpt-gpeesfgJHrylr!:F-_e_ndls:dq: higggg!{pllf :ygUIhgLg1JF:llqD y o ut h s rou p sames. 22 Aprit 20 1 5. Retrieved from "[]pgilr4glq$r!p:9ie".ggry/!9_qx,p_trp]!!fS:I9g!!t:q-e-t!ej*el$9:9"99q-F-,152" This page was last edited on 11 September 2018, at 13:52 (UTC). additionalterms may apply. By is a registered trademark of the https : //en. wikipedia. org/wiki/Youth_center tI/1212018 Y0uth centre definition and meaning I Collins English Dictionary Page 1 of4 liirslislt-nic.tioriln I V4l9a I Thesaurus I Sclrool lTranslator I Gmmmar I Scrabblc lBlog . Englistr . Thispage in American Itnliano Deutsrrll Esnlfiol Portuqu&s Gfr ldi{tr.Ft I Sien.Up lLoe In ThesaurusEnglish Wond ListsAmerican Thesaurus GrarnmarGrammar PatlernsEasy Learning EnglishEasy Leaming SpanisbEasy Leaming FrenohEasy Leaming GermariEasy Leaming Italian FrenohEnglish . Frenchlrench - English GermanEnglish - GermanGerman - Englislt SpanishEnglish - SpanishSpanish - English ItalianEnglish - Italianltalian - English ChineseEnglish - ChineseChinese - English PortugueseEnglish - PortuguesePortuguese - Englistr HindiEnglistr - HindiHindi - English Menu linrlish DictigEBIyV-ir,l.tlcrlllhesnrrnrnSclronl'lrunsltto$rsrnrrrnrScr*hltleBltrg . English . This page in 4,merican Italiano DeLrtsch Esoafrol Por[uguds GA i?l.ff rF v We ship. FAST and FREE Shipping Starl Shopping Fodl,,cye/,. You sip. on Winesl Definition of 'youth centTer English: youth centreExample sentencesTrends Word Frequency youth centre in British (u:0 'smtc) British oryou0r center US noun mother nanre for l,{rtttli slltl} Collins English Dictionary. Copyright @ HarperCollins Publishers Example sentences containing 'youth centrer These examples bave been automatically selected and may contain sensitive content. Ilead morc.,* Andy's goup, the Decadents, had played a gig in e l.isburn vouth cente.David Cavanagh MUSIC FOR BOYS (2003) https : //www. collinsdictionary. com/dicti onary/engli sh/youth-oentre tut2/2018 Youth cente definition and meaning I Collins English Dictionary Page2 of 4 ffi. x lrlli( II L\\l; tllr Iri ijIu.,. {r}:I TI IIi 0T I.f I,IiT :il l( ,I f.J1-)w ' .ri* Trends of tyouth centret Used Rarely. youth cenhe is in the lower 50/o of commonly used words in the Collins diotionary View usage for: b0 G tE o qo l699 1521 r94| 1 985 1967 Yean Nearby words of ryouth centrel 'Yousafzai . vouse ' Youth . youthcenfue . vou0r clut: '@ . vouth crime All ENGl,lSl"l rronls thnt hs$in rr'ith 'Y' Related Terms of ryouth centrer . r'(rtrlh cu.rt{xlv cenll3 Source Definition of youth centrc from the (gl!!ns lln ulislr l)ictisirury F English: youth centreExample sentencesTrends Numbers https : //www. collinsdictionary. com/dictionary/english/youth- centre tU12/2018 Youth centre definition and meaning I Collins English Dictionary Page 3 of4 !n Llonqlnd rrnrtrrds ordinll. urunbcrs ... Read mqre about 'NuFbersl Word of the d-av: ikebana llis Jannncnrc dcrxrrnt i$c nrtl}l' tlnrr r{- arfi ns, grE$fil See full dcfinition Nogl2.2Ql8 Read more Latest Word Submissions orangequit Nov 09,2018 Wenglislr Nov 09, 2018 il-scri*eDe,lnlf:d eo..& Nov 09, 2018 coin toss Nov 09, 2018 Mvhre wudrone Nov 09, 2018 Submit Vierv More Create s!. account and sign in to access thisFREE contcnt REistrr norv or login in to access Browse tbe English Diotionary -{ .A .E .a .D .E .E .g .I'H .J ri( rJ, .M .N .o .B rI'Q .i .url rV .w .X .Y https : 1/www. collinsdictionary. com/dictionary/englislt/youth-centre 11,/r2/20t8 Youth cenfie definition and meaning I Collins English Dictionary Page 4 of4 Srnugllug Share the LOVE with your stunning photo site. ./-fr\\ t- your browsing experience. For more infonnation see our privaoy uolicv. https : //www. collinsdictionary. com/dictionary/english/youth-cente tllt2l20t8 Extension I National Institute of Food and Agriculture Page I of7 trEffi All universities engage in research and teaching, but the nation's more than 100 land-grant colleges and universities have a third, critical misslon - extension. Through extension, land-grant colleges and universities bring vital, practical information to agricultural producers, small business owners, consumers, families, and young people. NIFA supports both universities and local offices of the Cooperative Exten s i on System (C ES) https : //nifa. us da govlExtension/ l1,lt2/20L8 Extension I National Institrrte of Food and Agriculture Page2 of 7 partner, NIFA plays a key role in the mission by distributing annual congressionally appropriated formula grants to supplement state and county funds. IMPROVING LIVES IN RURAL AND URBAN AREAS The hallmarks of the extension program - openness, accessibility, and service - illuminate how cooperative extension brings evidence-based science and modern technologies to farmers, consumers, and families. Through extension, land-grant institutions reach out to offer their resources to address public needs. By educating farmers on business operations and on modern agriculturalscience and technologies, extension contributes to the success of countless farms, ranches, and rural business, Fufther, these services improve the lives of consumers and families through nutrition education, food safety training, and youth leadership development. PAST, PRESENT, AND FUTURE ln 2014, NIFA and our land-grant university partners cerebrated 100 years of Cooperative Extension in the United States. The Smith-Lever Act formalized extension in1914,but its roots go back to agricultural clubs and societies of the early 1 900s. The act expanded usDA's partnership with land-grant universities to apply research and provide education in agriculture. Over the last century, extension has adapted to changing times and landscapes, and it continues to address a wide range of human, plant, and animal needs in both urban and rurat areas. Today, extension works to: https : //nifa- usda. gov/Extension/ LLt12/20t8 Extension I National Institute of Food and Agricultrue Page 3 of7 . Translate science for practical application . ldentify emerging research questions, find answers and encourage application of science and technology to improve agricultura l, economic, and social conditions . Prepare people to break the cycle of poverty, encourage healthful lifestyles, and prepare youth for responsible adulthood . Provide rapid response regarding disasters and emergencies . Connect people to information and assistance available on I in e th rou g h eXten sio n.o rg The nation's transformation from a manufacturing to an information society raises questions as to how to best reach an intended audience. Extension educators use modern technology to disseminate knowledge and tools but also rely on traditional human values and relationships to gain the attention and trust from the people they serve. As residents of the communities in which they wor( local extension agents bring credibility to their roles as educators. HIGH-IMPACT OUTCOME TOMORROW'S AGRICULTURAL AND NATURAL RESOURCE WORKFORCE Experiential learning is a great way to promote youth interest in adopting science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) in their future careers. NIFA-supported 4-H programs touch over 6 million children across the country every year. Several projects supported by NIFA Smith-Lever funds and special funding from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service taught youth to learn and apply Geographic lnformation Systems mapping skills that support wildlife refuge systems from the Caribbean to the Pacific, Maine to Alaska. For example, youth in lowa tested the effectiveness of mapping using iPhones compared with Global Positioning System units. This learning experience allowed them to map features such as fences, invasive species, oak stands, and areas that need attention to conserve wildlife. Similarly, a project in Minnesota engaged https : //nifa. usda. gov/Extens ion/ |Ut2/2018 Extension I National Instittrte of Food and Agriculture Page 4 of7 teens on the White Earth lndian Reseruation to conduct golden- winged warbler habitat and nesting cover mapping atthe Tamarac Refuge. Such experlences help youth develop science skills and learn skills necessary for future employment. https : //nifa" usda. gov/Extension/ rt/t2/2018 4-H - Wikipedia Page I of8 WrxrpnprA 4-r{ 4-H is a global network of whose mission is 'tengaging youtl to reach their 4-H fullest potentlal while advancing'XI$J1ggIi?s!&UlC the field of youth derrelopment'.til Itg name is a reference to the occuxrence of the initial lefter H four times in the organization's origlnal motto 'head, heart, hands, aail health' whic,h was later lncorporated into tte fuller pledge officiaUy adopteil tn tgz7. In the United Ststes, the organization is administered by tbe Natiolall$lste-Af"Foodjgd Asriculture of the Utileil"[trlg-"_D9B*gl9!!..plAgl.igll!S$ @sDA). 4-H Canaila is an iudependeut non-profit organization overseeing the operotion ofbranches throughout Canada,t2l Throughout the world, 4-H organizations exist in over So countries;Fl tle organization and administration varies from c$unty to coutrtry, Each ofthese prograns operates independently but cooperatively through international exchanges, global eilucatiou programg aud communications. The 4-H name rcpresents bur perconal development areas of bcw for tbe orgauizatioa: bead, !s uEc to? heart, hauds, and health. As ofeor6, tle organization had nearly 6 million active participauts Offcial 4-H emblem ancl more than z5 milliou alumnllal Motto 'To make the best betler." The goal of 4-H is to clevelop citiaenship, leailership, responsibility anil life skills of youth Formation Circa 1902 tlrough Epgip_Xtid_lgqm_i$ prcgrams and a mpjtve yq!$4--dgfslep.ppe! approach. Though typically thought ofas an agriculturally focused organization as a result ofits history, 4-H today Type Youth organization focuses on citizenship, healthy livilg science, engineering, and technologr programs, Clubs in Legal status Non-profit toda/s 4-H world consist of a wide range of options each allowing for personal growth and organizetion career success. The 4-H motto is "To make the best better', while its slogan is "karn by Purpose "Engaging youth to doing" (sometirnes written as nkam to do by iloing"). reach lheir fullest potentisl while advancing the field Contents of youth development." History Headquafters MD Pledge CheW Chase, Emblem Region Worldwide served Youth development regearch Membership 6.5 mlllion members Volunteers in the United Stales, Addltional programg ages 5 to 21 After-school camplng Maln organ Nation€l lnstitute of Five- to eight-year-old youth Food and Collegiate Agrlculture (NIFA) All Stare Parent Untted Sletes Con$erence6 organization Department of Clvll Rights lssuea Agriculture (USDA) Alumni Website 4-H.org See alco Ottp:/ ffwv/.4-H.org/) Referencec Bibliography External llnke History https : //en. wikipedia. org/wiki/4-H tUt2/20t8 4-H - Wikipedia Page 2 of8 The foundations of4-H began in rgoz with the work ofseveral people in different parts ofthe United States. The focd point of 4-H has been the idea of practical and hands-ou leaming, which came from the desire to make public school education more connected to rural lifie. Early programs incorporated both public aud private resources, {-H was founiled with the purpose of instructing rural youth in improved fanning and fann-homemaking practices. By the t97os, it was broadening its goals to cover a full rauge of youth, including minorities, and a wide range of life experiences,l5l During this time researchers at experiment stations of the lqrd-glapt.Iqtqlqi$qf and USDA saw 4-H boys shoWng prize heifers at a that adults in the fanning community did not readily accept new agricultural discoveries, but 4-H Fair in Charleston, West educators found that youth would experiment with these new ideas and then shale their Virginia, 1921 experiences and successes with the adults. So rural youth prognrms became a way to inboduce new qggg g_!!g1e_ tectuology to the adults. Club work began wherever a public-spirited person dicl something to give rural children respect for themselves and their ways of life and it is very difFcult to credit one sole individual.lol Instances ofwork with rural boys and girls can be found all thmughout the rgth century. In the spring of r88a, P-e_hyge"Q.o-ltpge annouuced a statewidle corn coutest for boys, in whieh each boy was to plant a quarter of an acre, according to insFuctiors sent out from the college, and cash prizes, certifieates, and subscriptions to theAmarrcanAgricultwalfof were rewarded.Fl In 1892, iu an effort to improve the Kewaunee County Fair, Ransom Asa Moore, President of the 4-H Home demonstration agenis in Florida in 1933 Kewaunee Fair, the Agricultural Society, and Superintendent of ttre Keyqgne3_Qggngr Schools in HiSgo-IlSiI, organized a "youth movement", which he calleil 'Young People's contest Clubs", in which he solicited the support of 6,ooo young farm folks to produce ancl exhibit fi'uitg vegetables, and livestock.lsl The fairs were very successfirl.t{ In 1go4, while working for the ll-n:l'erslty-Ef W_rspSSCrn:l\&(i!S! ard trying to repeat what he had successfully accomplished in Kewaunee County over a decade before but with different inteutions, "Daddy" R.4,, Moore couvineed R,H. Burns, then Superintendent of Schools of Richland CoSlty-!{ggp*i}, to have the Richland County Boys and Girls organize aud assist in a cora-project activity to help market and distribute impmved seeds to the farrners in the state of Wisconsiu (and beyond).pl A. E,*c:C!lDl started one of the youth programs in Cla;k _C-oun_Jy, .9-h!9, h t9oz, which is also 4-H Club member storing she considereil one of the births of the 4-H program in the Uniteil States. The first club was called food nDad" canned from her garden, "The Tomato Club" or the "Cont Growing Club". T-A., Erickson of Douglas County, Rockbridge County, Virginia, ca. and fairs also r9oe, Minuasota, started local agricultural after-school clubs in Jglsle Flslq 1942 El4qtbC..ugb developed the clover pin with an H on each leaf in t9ro, and, by t9rz, they were calleil 4-H clubs,llol Early 4-H programs iu Colorado began with youth iustruction offere The first 4-H canp was held ia Randolph West Egbl1. OriginaUy, these camps were for wbat was referred to as "Corn Clubs" Campers slept in corn fielclg in tents, only to wake up aad work almost the entirety of each day, Superintendent of schools G. C. Adans began a bo5n'corn club in &ydgg-9ggttgr.ceslgig, in 1904. 4-H membership hit an all-time high in r9Z+ as a result of its popular educational program about nutrition, !{gltbg4 Steur, shown in schools and on television. across the country, Today, 4-H clubs and activities are no longer focused primarily on agricultural activities, instead emphasizing personal growtb and preparation for lifelong learning. Participation is greatest during the elementary school years, with enmllment in programs and actMties peaking in the 4tb grade. https : //en.wikipedia. org/wiki/4-H tt/12/2018 4-H - Wikipedia Page 3 of8 In the southern United States, in the mid-rg6os 4-H began to broaden its programning to cover life experiences unrelateil to agriculture. It merged its segregated A.frican Americau aud white programs, but full-fledged integration proved elusive" 4-H was successful in renoving gender-basecl rrstrictions on participation,tl 81 Past Honorary Chairmen of Council have iucluded U.S, Prsidents !_alviq Coolidg., tler.!g4.Hggve!, Franklin D- Roosevelg tiCl$"mlg4g, Pffiebt Erq9"sbpty-ef, {_olp-I."[Sssg!r, LruCep B: J,ohlqgp, nicha4!i199, Jirgmy_carter, Eo.llcld Bggc"-, qsg.{cc_g..W nfsh, anil Bill Clinton.llslt20l Pledge The4-H pledgeis: I pledge my heail to clearer thinking, my heart to greater loyaltY, my hands to larger servicg and my health to better living, for myclu\ mycommunity, mycountry, arrd myworld.Fll nAs The original pledge was written by Otis E. tlall of Kansas in r9r8. Some Califomla 4-H clubs add either a true 4-H member" or "As a loya.l nfor 4-H member" at the beginning of the pledge. M-innesota and Maine 4-H clubs adil my familyn to the last line of the pleclge. Originally, the pledge eniled in 'and my country'. In 1973, "and my world' was adcled. It is a commou practice to involve hand motions to accompany these spoken words. While reciting the first line of the pledge, the speaker will polnt to their head with both of their hands, As the speaker recites the secoud line, they will place their right hand over their heart, much like during the Plqdge of-'ljlg6iqgqg. For the third line, the speaker will present their hands, palm side up, before tbem. For the four-t! line, the speaker will motion to their body ilown their sicles, And for the final line, the speaker will usually place their right hand out for club, Ieft haud for eommunity, briag them together for couutry and then bring their hands upwards in a circle for world. Emblem The of6cial 4-H emblem is a green &:f:lggfSlS.:g with a white.Elon each leaf standing for Head, Heart, Hands, and EIeaIth. The sterr ofthe clover always points to the right. The idea of using the four-leaf clover as an emblem for the 4-H progtrm is creclited to Oscar Herman Benson (r87g-r9sr) of Wright County lowa. He awarded three-leqf and four-leaf clover petrnants and pins for students' agricultural aud domestic sciencp e;rhibits at school fairs.P2l The 4-Il n"ne aud emblem have U.S, federal protection, underfederal code 18 U.s.c. 7o7'14 This federal protection makes it a mark unto and of itself with protection that supersedes the limited authorities of both a !311pg$l and a copyrfuht The $-qg9h51- 9-f -SC$g{t-tt-E is given 4-H emblem in Oldham County in responsibility and stewardship for tbe 4-H name and emblen, at the ilirect requ€st of tle U.S. Vega west of Amarillo, Texas Congress. These protections place tbe 4-H enblem in a uaique category of pmtected emblems, along with the U,S...l.:g;ltgtiqtF5g!, Red Cross, Smokey-Bear and the Q-lyngplq $gg'Pal Youth development research Through tlre program's tie to laud-grant institutions of higber education, 4-H acad€mic staff are respousible for advancing the field of yputh &IgloplCgglJ'l Prcfessional academic staff are committed to innovation, the creation of new knowledge, and the dissemination of new forns of program practice and research on topics like p-n-;-v-g4ffpL$Lif,q,ni*'" stucly of thriving in young people. Youth development research is undertaken in a nriety offorms iacluding program evaluation, applied researth, and introduction ofnew programs. Volurrteers Volunteeriug has deep roots in American society. Over half of the American people will volunteer in some capacity during a year's time. [t is estimated that 44% of adults (over 89.9 million people) will volunteer within a year. This volunteerism is valued at over $zg9 billion per year, These volunteers come from all different age grcupg educational levels, backgrounds and socioeconomic statuses.FsJ https://en. wikipedia. org/wikil 4-}J tl/l2120t8 4-H - Wikipedia Page 4 of8 Volunteer leaders playa tnajor role in 4-H programs aud are the heart and soul of 4-H. 'lhey perform a variety of roles, firnctions and tasks to coordinate the 4-H Prcgraru at the coutrty level and come from all walks of life, brfuging varied and ricb experieuces to the 4-H program. With over 54o,ooo volunteers nationally, these leaders play an essential role ln the delivery of 4-H programs and provlile Iearning opportunities to pronote positive youth development Every year, volunteer leaders work to carry out 4-H youth development programs, project groups, camps, conferences, animal shows anal many mone 4-H related activities and events. 4-H volutrteer Ieaders help youth to achieve greater self'confidence and self-responsibility, leara aew skills anil build relationships wit[ others that will last a lifetine,Pq Volunteers sewe in many diverse roles. Some arE project leaders who teach youth skills aud howledge iu an area of interest. Others are unit or comnunity club leaders who orgauize clubs meetings and other pr€grams" Resource leaders are available to provide infomoation and expertise' 4-H volutrteers work under the ilirection of professional staff to plan and conduct activities anil events, develop aud maintain educational programs, and secure resources in support of the program. Additional programs After-school 4-H Afterschool helps 4-H and other youth-serving organizations create and inprove programs for students il communities across the U.S, 4-H Afterschool is an extension-enhanced program that: r Offers youth a saf6, healthy, carlng and enriching envlronment, r Engages youth in long-term, struc{ured learning in partnership with adults. r Addresses the interests ofyouth and their physical, cognitive, social and emotional needs. 4-H Afterschool programs utilize experimeutal and cooperative learning activities and provide interaction with competent adults. Results of retrospective pre/post-suweys indicate that children enrolled in the program showed life skill gain over time, and that gains on specific life skills ditbred as a function ofage, gender, and ethnicity. The life skills gaineil through 4-H A.fterschool glve children the tools they need for perceiviug and responding to diverse life situatioae and achieving their personal goals. Participation in these quality programs rryhich use experiential and cooperative learning have all been found to contribute to children's social development and academic success.H Girl presenting her rabbit at the Calaveras County Fair in California Gamping 2016 Each state runs its owu camping progran. The first stafe 4-H camp was beld at {qgllgslMill outside of Weston in Le.::lS tgunty-\AleslllCl3lS. 4-H campiug progmms in most states are run through land-graqt,hg$$SpE such as Ulqqlil€Ag-€t4g-gliygSgi*ty, which runs the Washington program, and P-gn*!y_lvlqig_S!g!e-"!r--ni.yg19ity runs Pennsylvania's. The ceorgjq +-4 Aqpptggp5gggn has the largest youth center in the world, called Rock-Eagle. The first 4-H camp was held at Camp Good Luck in Randolph County, West Virginia,EEl Five. to eight-year.old youth Some states offer programs fior youth in grailes K-3 called Cloverbuds, Cloverkids, 4H Adventurers, Primary Membens, or Mini 4-H. Most states prohibit this age group from competition due to research in child development demonshatiug tlat conpetition ls unhealthy for puth ages five to eight,Psl Gollegiate Many colleges and universities have collegiate 4-H clubs, Usually members are stuilents who are 4-H ahrmni and waut to continue a connection to 4-H, but any interested studetrts are welcorne, Clubs provide service anil support to their local and state 4-H prograrDs, such as serving asjuilges and conilucting training workshops, They are also a service and social group for campus students, The very first collegiate 4-H club started iu 1916 on the Ofttahona Statc Unry.e.rs!_ty_:Eti@9l campus. https : i/en. wikipedia. org/wiki/4-H It/12/2018 4-H - Wikipedia Page 5 of8 AllStars Finding its roots in the early 4-H movement in !V-gs-!-YtfgU!a, tle 4-H All-Star program strives to recognize and !r challenge 4-H members and volunteers. State 4-H Club trader William H. "Teepi" Kendrick sought to develop youth €8i to "be yourself at your best" and to "make the best bettern tlrough a fourfold personal development pattern involving the head, hands, heart, and, at tlat time, hustle. It was with this philosophy, in collaboration with others, that the 4-H etF emblem was born" ID an attempt to harbor further individual growth, Kendrick recognized excellence with pins Naiional beariag ooe, two, thlee, and four H's. Recognition for outstanding participation was rewardecl from rgr7 to rgzr with Collegfate 4-H trips to a Prize Winner's Course at lv_ent EryiS_ig lJ_rjv_g1s!ty. Members who demonsbated outstanding qualities at club embtem these courses were awarded five-pointed red pins with five H's, with this additional .EI to s nbolize honor. The recipients of these pins were referrcd to by Kendrick as "All Starsn, It was following the pin consecration ceremony il 1919 that the official West Virginia 4-H All Stars organization was charterecl, becoming the Alpha Chapter of the nationwide 4-H honorary. Fol Many states have All Star programs, although All Star programs vary from state to state. Selection as a 4-H All Star is a recognition of achievement. In !4!!fqln-ig, for example, it is the highe,st achievement awarcl at the county level and is a positiou awarded anuually.Fll Siruilarly, the capstoDe award iu Texas 4-H is the Gold Star Award, which is given to Seniors who have shown outstandiug leadersbip aud proficiency in theh project areas.t3a In EfEniI, on the other hand, All-Stars are not simply those who have achieved an AII-Star award, but are those who have gained membership into theVirginia All-Stars organization, Upon reaching the age of r5,4-H members are eligible to apply for menbership iuto the All-Stars organization, which promotes the contiuuation of 4-H principles.Pl Conferences levels the progmm youth The :f.?F:---'' ' Many conferences nre held at various of 4-H for and adults, - I fir.i;.r, C,onference "r*i ]i ' National 4-H Conference, held at National 4-H Youth Center is the 9!-QA Secretar/s premier youth development opportunity to engage youth in developing recommendations for the l1 'l {l.,tr 4-H Youth Development Program, ,i:t. r'! " I.}1{ ttl {'ltt r.t nt The National 4-H Congress is an annual educational conference that brings together 4-H National 4-H youth Conference delegates between the ages of r4 and 19 fronl across America to share culfural experiences and Center in Chevy Chase, Maryland discuss important issues facing youth. This five-day event is gpically held during the weekend of Thanksgiving aud has been hosted i" Allglt4, 9*.gtei-$ siuce 1998. Throughout the conference, 4-H delegates attend numerous workshops, participate in community service activities, and listen to speakers in an effort to develop compassion and increase social awareness'B4ll35l Citizenship Washington Focus is a week-long conference offered for high school-aged students.t36lAt tie mnferencg students have tle opporhrnity to leam how to be citizen leaders in their communities. Throughout the week in Washington, D.C., participants visit monuments, meet witJr members of Congress, and develop communication, leadership and citizenship skills. The following national conferences are held yearly ard are focusedl on specific activities inside of4-H: r National 4-HDairy ConferenceFl . Eastern National 4-H Horse Roundupt3st . Western National 4-H Horse RoundupFst r National 4-H Shooting Sports lnvitational Matchlaol Other conferences are held by regional and state entities for youth, for volunteer developmen! or for professional development for staff. Civil Riehts issues For many years, use of Ng!!v9*{gr-ggggp5 uames and certain themed activities was part of the surnmer camping programs of some eastem states. However, this practice was deemed offensive aud protests were raised. A complaint to the U.S. Depadureut of Agricultule's Office of Civil Rights in aooe and on ensuing investigation that threatened to cut off funds to the state's programtarl pronpted the lv-gs'lElghg !l*if":pjq Extensiou Service to abandon offensive and stereotypic practices such as face-painting, ard use of imagery not a part of the culture of local Native people, such as tepees aud totem poles,tlll They also eliminated ttre practice of having children wear featler https : //en. wikipedia. org/wiki/4-H lt/12/2018 4-H - Wikipedia Page 6 of8 nstereotypical headdresses, and stopped having campers engage in motions and dances," including chauting "Ugh! Ught Ugh!". However, the state program deemed the ilividing of campers into groups, called "tribes" named after actual Indiau Nations, to be rcspectful and acceptable. t42l That same )€al', the Virginia Exteusion Service removed all references to symbols or camp "traditioDs" related to Native Americans, iucluding the decades-long practice of diviiling campen into "tribes" using Domes of nations considered native to Ylqgisb, replacing the group nanes witb animal names.lasl Alumni Participatiou in 4-H events and activities, the value of projects completed and the challenges and responsibilities experienced in 4-H have contributed to the personal and leadership d.evelopment of some 4-H alumni- A majority of 168 alumni surveyed iu Pennsylvania feel that 4-H experieuces have also significantly conhibuted to ttreir success in the worKorce aud that the knowledge and skills gained through 4-H continue to benefit them in their adult lives.laal See also ' Nall9ldffA-o-p-elEillott (rormerly Future Farmers of Amerlca) ' [oJ. sgg_gF datlgice : eirl_Sco*utg.-gf the U€A ' 4-H q[E*1.[s*glcgqPlgsrams . lntelnelgn"?U9gr:H Ygslb- Erslerse 'Nationq!F-99*q!':t!oloJYg!-!S.f qn9ls*".qlgtr r RuralYouth Europe References 1. 'l!9*qd'Fn!1f;[ Y*guttr9"9gil9pj9!!_tgs-FlI':.Prteclte!:'9 Flllg*DJ$99_l|'ejl{(l[tpj/4{fllf:c3_4 qil.qq2.Nll (PDF). winter 2003. Retrieved 201 0-06-07. 2. '4-H-$rusl{F:ll[S!.s-/-A[eF*glg[iysgre$/l&89-ts99tia997-a$$p'truu&*tFseteucfile.hsut*-:!&0^e:v-eers4-h*t_c.9lt{rs).q-H canada. Archived from !hggilS!!3l_(h$p*it{!tffu{-"b:-emS-aqd3!"0_t{L{:b41t*!E.ltl94tfl4:lc!gf9) on 15 May 2015. Retrieved I May 2015. g. l'4-H Arpund*1lie.w.gtl9*(t'!tf.l4n$-.-l$..e--Ble!9ggCl_oq*:n9!reL!4. 4-H (usA). Retrieved I May 201s. 4!tFg(.{::h,efqil,tktrI!epg1;Plo3g9pj16_{0.!lqq19:4[g1'{fsgo4.edJ 5. Rosenberg,2Ol5 6. The Father of Wisconsin 4-H. The Ransorn Asa Moore Story, Author: Gleason, Marjorie and William, Publication: 1989 Accurate Publishing & Printing lnc., pg. 9 7. The Father of Wisconsin 4-H. The Ransom Asa Moore Story, Author: Gleason, Marjorie and William, Publication: 1989 Accurate Publlshing & Pilnting lnc., pg. 10 8. Kewaunee Enterprise, February 26, 1941, "Death Takos Prof. Moore" 9. The Father of Wisconsin 4-H. The Ransom Asa Moore Story, Author: Gleason, Marjorie and William, Publication: 1989 Accurate Publishing & Printing lnc. 10. Lonsden, rom, f3gggglgflClq;les$q FJ-Elg thaq]Qg_ltsllj1880liylgf(3rchge Ir.ole13ll2q999qAgggq8$tMppnip_hssslersFjef3lp3.9.9.9"99"q99m!tgu_e|gw.-\NstrJ*1919 aep yot3gq !-eg.,qte1 11.b$F.{l!!.*!9$*Le9U/.,3r$jver0[$!r.sei9g{sr#"sereadukd tz. 'lcg$pilgllg0pLe.asy gorrqqpgndensg-eCIgpugll$.9l-c-Jg?le*d-1999.v.*id*Girls|c.lub work f9gu9"eg.py-lh9-L{ritjd.Flqtes"qepartment gl g[qu[uF'.$-tt.Rl$c]*er-chiys,erslrc--b/-?q"!9"qfl319319!ht!pi4'Iddr,$lssg*sg{U*Lwg4cregLl!nKr-sr? ncceeslgn-T94T999911?i-1. National Agricultural Library Digital Repository. Archived from fhgg-bin{ gtJ${!plqr:]|l€lgq93c_o-y.{!4-1.!-V-qh/iS.J!g9l"Luh,9Fp$eSS_sJ9j!:9jT!Qeqt].49} on 14 June 2010. Retrleved 7 June 2010. 13. Journal of Research In Childhood Education. "Cooperative and Competltive Orientations in 4-H and Non4-H .cltlgren"-OEp,;btUU*lcjgd,s"qv{F8!QW9-b-P_o1fi [,9s9$Vi98"ihhl,FP? ntr!3rye$-qE8lcllts*eeEh-S-aqF*V.else--0: -6j2-9gE8lgEs9essb-9s?r9!Ilrp"e-l:{!pgeepBe-*Jrefa9}, Rekieved 2012-03-28. 14 Reck, Franklin A. (1951), The 4-H Stort, A Hlslry of osci(ddhFgryplese m/eugql*}"F"o,-el$fihe.{:!i-sleIy_.nds (PDF). chicago, IL: National 4-H service committee. pp. 166 -168,210ocLc9500i7s21"(SS-:/AmT/.yy"q#H,9rS&Sl_{e_9-039?rt:-i}. https : //en. wikipedia. orglwilci/4-H tL/t2/20t8 4-H - Wikipedia Page 7 of8 15. Benson, oscar Herman;Warren, Gertrude L (February 1920), otg_anizatbrt3lgFg*d:gljgnlg?q.ga{-9lujltg4@&g,r!_glg !t€$gn"_fl91C;l-!.!0-{f!tp3ft.r-du-e:orS1-__deJglF/ggPlEq!!91regFQqe_1q). Washinston, DC: U.s. Department of Agricutture. Retrieved 21 August 2018. te. ?ll*oSjejElHE!9di"tb$m$ggb.etchive-9rghrvem0lgqQ.lg0Fqf4:4ltp.l&Edr.Fatq,edu/aes/_trac/gg- ygI!"qS.J_*H-dg-hilSq|!iqFS,[!B} College of Agriculture and Life Sciences, University of Arizona. Archlved from the.origj4g! (llt.Pr{'{S!t.q*9la.q4f/a*€nn$ge:-v-e-nJ-uc{4t|-qeqhS-l!*9fy.!lD on 2010-06-'ls. Retrieved 2010-06-07, tz, tg![q*wlgllgl*9 vrr" t[-q9*_G--e.s!rgsg3rpr:l!fiPJM@9'!9103]_1lo!Ks:!v!e:!arp_9q:n_q!9:f"11- g$gt€eftyE*F:$ewen!). National 4-H History Preservatlon Program. S March 2016. Retrieved I August 2018. 18. Thompson, "The Changing Needs of Our Youth Today" (2012) 1e. "u9: Pregj{enlg qH_1-ltll$p.j/+trhlgl_olypJ'9q9ltqt'9!.99!1!li9lo_ryru-9_Pl-e-slg-e.n!S4, 4-H History Preservation, Retrieved 1feb2017 20. ':g.9.Ereglqej!:Ag.Hpnpqry_gheifne!_(h{p.;if+lfisSryp.resqryeqon.cpn/Hlslory"/ {Frq glt&$lp"ty_?*0-qQg$0_). 4-H History Preservation. Rekieved 1 leb 2017 z t 4-H. R etr j eved 6 N ove m b e r 20 1 8 .'lt! -f tedesljh[M:P-lggs*e/). - 22."'F.f s-i-e*klp:I99Jp9!iof iglEffi ^e"r,Jrg &E_0!pe:lA[9be:s-hue.erss/elau-qg41+3331-?+rhtp;&ilev-.lE[g$aseu/rr3!-{le&vjhge!ip[p? tnP-ffi!ptg!-o*!9-tq:€9?grqyeF!q:94:!-99lqy:|*J{:1"999Q{evd9-iq*9fl1c-s$-e-nJ-defq!rl!:lQatesr). National Asricultural Llbrary. Archived from the oris_lCgl-0$<ftFv-,ml qFd*S-SV1r'gLgitEhyJNg*plP? lnfq_*c90!9tr-€&l*f.qy9l:l$bI*rsbj.ge-815-9itoptq=iel_99?-S!sy.et-g-ia=q1199leye!_4*!_q1u-899q!9y95_. 1!rs$*d39-eJt!e-0!_{r-f_+It=0gFst#} on 20'1 0-04-14. Retrieved 2010-06-07. 23. ]U*9-H9!F 9l&epH9!te_Usi,l-9 U9*c" s:9, 7-o-7,1:H qlgF emple'lllrl3gggllllly ceed:_$s$4f3b.?tsluhers&FHaqi?9Egp3$95q&Hl.sqsqge.lprEsss!4tesed*s[f"?csp],er_e_? ggl4ggiJg5jgg$I..F9#$g:q:fl. office of the Law Revision counsel, Archived from !ng.9iigl1fli.Utp.4gsgo!e.&ggg.C_oy!!gg_{-q: $!-&S!reh.9{e?.Sg!{gSfusfylgf_.+l:llgp:_{993,p-1t) on 2012-03-03. Rekieved 2010-06-07. 24. '*Whg$elLt!Nen9_Atg-F!1b!9fl(!|!pc/ geo.Arjbiv"*e:9Is/y9u?9199_5__2*8_0-15-91flh!tp,[qnu[!e!!9m13: ffEegquCrterqgty3lb.lary"/_{tS{deliqes:v{*g*aEQ (PDF), Arohived from the orisinal(Dtp./4ly0lltgi"1"C['"qlt 28 [h,q_adg-qg"{ep.Cg /.1&Bryl{SSCgg!I9!:g-2qp4.P9! (PDF)on May 2010. Retrieved 7 June 2010. 25. rhe Journal of Extension (JoE). 'lYglH!9:tMngggngt'LNgggg]9"Sglll"nt-9Lllp^lellg:9s€.tt1 Ptegggfrl'J!!trrfuflryJ99,SrS49eEg1&9tUely.ftlE pnp). The Journal ol Extension Retrieved 2012-03-28. 26 The Journal of Extension (lor). Ltd{enshiFCBS{eeg*H.yqlglkglLead-g Cotrpelgncles gnd.Q$fts-l9gth !?arn in 4-H Fl9.9fa_Eg$!Ei{milf,lo9,9r9if99&!L1gg9CFl[I!g,p!pl. The Journal of Extension" Retrieved 2012-03-28, 27. child study Journal. "A$lgtnSlsg€$htrusl&qehggfied!9!ffilt-gPgdge3lL3CIlpq9gelgfr9 Leernrns*CItE{eilLes!i9rle*99!9e!.qer1]/9h[i9!9s{1s_0q51!p/ i il g"[:[ejs9l99hg$eteg!kllgXp9"$]e$A!: 999p98tr9:!.e-ililn9). Retrieved 2012-03-28. 28'Betler,Bruce..lQampQ99LL"uIr:(bt'WestVirginiaEncyclopedia.WestVirginiaHumanities Council. Retrieved March 20, 2017. 29. lhe Journal of Extension (JoE). 'Procramming Pararneters for 5-to-8-Year-Old Children in tE:{h$pj{m$Io*e.:gfg$g-eflWaUSlg?jAhlu!). ft'e Journal of Extension. Rehieved 2010-06-07. 30. 'wes,! yllstmt-ll Ail slqlHi,6!98_Oqp:ifte_{*9-!!-v9.g1s$efp-099-0$z*fl!fe,sef$p;1yury.yrytln!!:gF.org/History.html). west Virglnia 4-H All Star Website. Archived from ![9. qdglq?lJ!!S.;/lUm[.Undlfa!l"q!ffi"etCt"lig!9ly,hfi.l]. on 2009-06-24. Retrieved 2010-06-07. 31. *llt]\|Ls_FtAg!i!9M:,{l$p*4$euasshEe.osA{_eh89ggFi?919181?I!!p:4e?4h.0(y'leeqe . university of california 4-H Youth Development Program, Archived from llgcdglnq!l!gpJ"/"S31!!.olg,4g"?{-e"r-s.!lj.p&lh!flI{g|s}rasp) on June 20, 200e" Retrieved 2010-06-07. sz. :-ejs,c-9pl.d.StefAu€rdApllljglrp1f (httpg/1w.eb.arc$ive.9-E&F!&9999!?5938-439&$puhffdriq.b![il|edcfruHe#ASSAQge&!O ?q*ffi.?qA:q]|AF-lnt*'oa3l23FgS!FttrJ (PDF). Archived rrom the otigM-Oltp,{ner&ggmU,9gq/SU4tlpdi0lta0qdd$S-oS-lef,& 2Olnformation%2OPacket.pdD (PDF) on March 25, 2009. Retrieved 2010-06-07. 33. Mroinla 4-H "All-Star Brochure" (http:/A|ww. ext. vt. edu/resourceBl4h/allsiarbrochure. odf I Archived tt[pg:6tp],sst'^ty99le&9"bBgqnqgnfl9:9,&.[p4ffiy"-qriy!qdultg:ggteeg_+I/,?.|!:jePn9!*"ej[d1.2007-02-07 at the waybaok I,leehhs, uv tne yi.lgllF cocpe"!-i"$ve ESers!g*(tt$p_l4iltg.j&$d!t"/1. 34. iLl-l-Nalierql.llga{q$#sr**H cqnrere-i's: an9.pe"lsleeg:tsnsi{4r-e.ledliyF.ejslrelPqL99Fllqll699 $pi1{ummlemlt !!93dq$Lers.,Cgy/_Qg4n4!_"g9.nts.htm). Naiional4-hheadquarters.gov.22 July 2009. Archived from the. ofuin{1!!p.{4{ln&E!g[a,!9 lh${SUfdgtr_qoy193mgllLmlEsg} on 7 June 2010. Retrieved 7 June 2010. gs. 4!9g!N*ig!g!l-H_Q!gt9gg*(l$p?./4/veb.at9$.yJ.qtrA9!40119111ss239{ISpl&anry..nattorrql4-he . National 4-H congress, Archived from the_p[gil?L(h$9.fir$Sr.ng&netthS9,_nSfq-s:.pg_ryye!-o-qvJ on July 14, 2011. Retrieved 2010-06-07. 36.f$pe.ilr.*ll.erdpilerHcilEerslrlkypEf if sht-&g https ://en, wikipedia. org/wiki/4-H tltr2/24r8 4-H - Wikipedia Page 8 of8 sz. 'l!)!s!-9H--afl99F. q9!Ar€!:cg:Jh$p*tjg*,er9|'iy-F.9rs1ry99/291-1]91q12?gggl'$p:{/1uy/ex.e9lysJ9llF,/dgjrycof/). wisconsin 4-H Youth Development. Archived from tttg erlglnal ftittp://4h.1{ryg1€g{gYg!!!I*!rygonf./) on 2011-10-10. Retrieved 2012-03-01. 3s. ':Eg.Flg[tlf,{g$9,nel*HljgRgRau!!d$|(i$p.j]hlmf.{hl9g.sl-Up.com/). Eastern National 4-H Roundup. Retrieved 2012-03-01. gs. 1WH!e_m]yS!ere!_*H-ttgFeBqC!qUp:1ilttpl{8Uil.UpS!9lnICIlSUElISIL*p-,ergl Western National 4-H Roundup. Retrieved 2012-03-01. Rekieved 2012-03-01. 4'1. washington, rhe (2002-06-25)._39!1ill9!fll91"Pl9"9-9s_"1_-W!19g.!yl9 ?!.,, &-0_?*tl$pJlt4fl^/v.v'r.r.sjf16$p1llgee.e9!ilLey9fgp!4"Un[S8.P9-ag$?-qg€{gg|p$r/1. washinstontimes.com. Retrieved 2013-11-28. 42. 'UH!"Yigin!gl*lslg!x-9s,[d-gnltp-g{90:llle*!ngieu.Pi?9!i*n*!S]u[L-E99p,"tlle! nerlgsjll[tH{?"iSnilg$il!n'e,-cp,!T{!g!S{19!euilligl-e_1€93]S.4f4 :EgS".9effiq?Jp$9.99l.t'lm,l) Bismarck rribune, December 17, 2002 droo terms offensive io ln{?!9-1'-lhl-tp_j(yuty.S9!!$n by Jon ward, 43, "Viroinia 4-H Yields: -i*o__!g 99CS*1. !o-_1:U9?9.1q9.Ffn!) Ihe_We:[StJS*:i!@* June 28, 2002 44. Radhakrishna, Rama B.: sinasky, Mesan (December 2005). ll*"l{Heengl9€9-99!g!F9!iftstg |egdete*[leen{fgl€9"ndp-eJ9!ep."{119nl-_oJ a-H Atumdl{trgF/r\&mhe.oEdSe8g95.{Egenqp:fj:!?.ghpj" Ihe Joum at of Extension (JOEJ. Retrieved 2012-03-28.; of 1,254 members in Penn State alumni database, 289 were sampled for a survey and 168 provided useful data; 99% of these said they received some benefit from their padioipation Biblioeraphy ' Buc[! Holly (2004). "'Amusemenls and Reoreation ... Mal(es Ourworking Hours Prolitabte: Utah 4- H, 1940-1960'. Utah Historical Quarterty,ti (1): 6e-64. d.ot10,18e. 9lr[s&5-3*199--$rlhg_!JdsJ.gg4-qJ093%?rrvt'qr3Eg.qp3). r Holt, Marilyn lrvin (1992). "From Better Babies to 4-H: A Look at Rural America", Prologue: The Joumal of fhe National Archlves. 24 (3): 241-255. r Holt, Marityn lNin. Linoleum, Better Babies, and the Modern Farm Woman, 18961930 (U of Netv Mexico Press, 1995). . Keathley, Clarence R; Ham, Donna M. (1979). "4-H Club Work in Missouri". Missourl Historical Review.51 (1):209-220. I Rosenberg, Gabriel N. The 4H Harvest: Sexuallty and the State in Rural America (University of Pennsylvania Press, 2015) I Thompson, Ellen Natasha. " The Changing to Social and Eoonomic Transformations in Twentieth-century North Carolina." online r Wegsel, Thomag R. and Marllyn We*e[ tl-H: An Ameriaan ldaa, 19061980: A Hktory of +H (Chevy Ghase, MD: 4-H National Council, 1e82). External linls . fllWe_P-:i!g0!p-i1fi!w.-a-:l!,gg|) Official website for more information about 4-H on all levels of the 4-H system . 4:L!._-c"gCI39_e (f ttE4fl U{_,4:!:e?rtB*.S) Retri€ved from "hftpo://en,$.kjpgllg.9rg" &{-ex,phpSit!$1fll9!{ld:Q9l-S"!?S" This page was last edited on 7 Novembet 2018, at 02:04 (UTC). Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike Lioense; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privdc!"PollCi.Wlkip6tiib'B is-s regisi$&'fiaijemtiliE tne wlkfmedig.F,oundqligl. !19,, a non-proiit organization. https : //en. wikipedia, org/wiki/4'H tt/12/2018 4-H &, Positive Youth Development ] National Institute of Food and Agriculture Page I of3 National lnsthute of Food and Agriculture I-ANGUAGE EFSf,.nttp://www.printfriendly.com/print?url=httpso/o3allnifa.usda.gov/program/4h-positive-youth.development> Share 4-H & Positive Youth Development ositive youth development programs engage P youth within their communities, schools, organizations, peer groups, and families in a manner that is productive and constructive; recognizes, utilizes, and enhances youth's strengths; and promotes positive outcomes for young people by providing oppoftunities, fostering positive relationships and furnishing the support needed to build on their leadership strengths. GENERAL INFORMATION POSITIVE YOUTH D EVELOPMENT Positive youth development expertise and resources are available in research and evaluation, professional development, and learnlng and engagement. Positive youth development tools are available for various subject matter, audiences (youth, adult vuinerable populations' rural, at-ris( military, etc.) and all delivery methods (school-based, afterschool, clubs, camps, etc.). t 4.H AS THE PROGMM MODEL FOR POSITIVE YOUTH DEVELOPMENT https : i/nifa, usda. gov/pro gram/4 -h-po s itive-youth-devel opment nl12/2078 4-H &, Positive Youth Development I National Institute of Food and Agriculture Page2 of3 The 4-H Youth Development Program is the youth outreach program 4-H & Positive from the land-grant institutions' cooperative extension services and Youth Development Resources htps : //nifa. usda. gov/pro graml4-h-positive-youth-development tt/12/2018 4-H &Positive Youth Dovelopment I National Institute of Food and Agrioulture Page 3 of3 . Science of Positive Youth Development . Youth Develo pment I nfo g raph lcs REIATED INFORMATION Topic Human Sciences Nationallnstitute of Food and AgrlculturE < https://wffi f defl rery.com/accounts/u sdan ifalsu https : //nifa. usda. govip r o gr alrl,l 4 -h-positive -youth- development tt/t212018 Caroline E. Crocoll I National Instihrte of Food and Agriculture Page I of2 [email protected]://www.printfriendly.com/print?url=https%3al/nifa.usda.gov/staffcontact/caroline-e-crocoll> Sharc Caroline E. Crocoll Position/Title: Division Director Office: Division of Family & Consumer Sciences < http://nifa. usda.gov/off ice/division-fami ly- consumer-sciences> Email: ccroco I l@n ifa.usda. gov Location: 4328 Waterfront Centre Phone Number: (202)720-8857 Dr. Caroline E. Crocoll has served as the Director of the United States Department of AgricultureNational lnstitute of Food and Agriculture's Division of Family & Consumer Sciences since 2010, and Acting Director of the Division of Youth & 4-H since July 2018. She is responsible for strategic leadership of both Divisions in their respective research, education, and extension portfolios in partnership with the Land-Grant University system across the nation. Dr. Crocoll and her staff oversee hundreds of actlve studies and provide leadership for federal capacity and competitive funds. Prior to moving into her current roles at NIFA, Dr. Crocoll served as the Director of the Nutrition and Family Sciences Section USDA/ Cooperative State Research, Education and Extension Service. She also served as the National Program Leader for Family and Human Development and Consumer Sclences at USDA/CSREES. Topic Expertise: Health Additional Expertise: Policy and Guidelines See a I I N I FA staff https ;//nifa. usda" gov/staff-contacVcaroline-e-crocoll ll/t212018 Caroline E. Crocoll I National lnstitute of Food and Agriculture Page2 of 2 Natlonallnstitute of Foodand Agricullure < https://f I ishftpll/uod{ffitiffiA€eslbsdq*gmt€oso} https : //nifa" usda gov/staff-contact/caroline-e-crocoll tln2l2018 4-H - Wikipedia Page I of8 \iftntpBorA 4-r{ 4-H is a global network of Xg*bS$$USto-lS whose mission is "engaging puth to reach their 4.H fullest potential while advancing the field ofyouth developmentn.tll lts name i,g a reference to the occurerce of the initial letter H four fimes in the organization's original motto 'head, hear! hantls, and bealth' which was later incorporated into the fuller pledge officially adopted n tgz7. In the United States. tle organization is administered by the llrdgngljgqd!$A gf-[Agd.Cpd Agriculture of the g*itgd _$_g!gC_p90C!gS!CS!*_o"l_SSftpSltW GSDA). 4-H Cauada is an independent uon-profit urganization overceeing ttre operatiou ofbranches throughout Caaada,Fl Throughout the world, 4-H organizations exist in over 5o countries;Fl the orgauization and administration varies from country to coutrtry. Eaph of these programs operates indepeudently but cooperatively tbrrough interuatioual excbanges, global etlucatiou programs, and communlcations, The 4-H name rEpresetrts four personal development arcas of focus for tbe organizatiou: head, ggc ?07 heart, hands, anil health. As of zot6, the organization had nearly 6 million active participants Official 4-H emblem and more than z5 milliou alumni.H Motto To make lhe best better.n The goal of 4-H is to develop citizenship, leadership, responsibiligr and life skills of youth Circa throush STnedgligl!9*;glSg prosrams and a pas"iS€Jputh.dggleprgqf approach. Thougb Fomation 1902 gpically thought ofas an agriculturally focused organization as a result ofits history, 4-H today TYpe Youth organization focuses on citizenship, healthy livilg, science, engineerlng, and technolory programs, Clubs tn Legalstatus Non-proflt toda/s 4-H world consist of a wide ra.nge of options each allowing for personal growth and oryanization nTo @reer success. The 4-H motto is make the best better", while its slqgan is 'Leanr by Purpose "Engaging youth to doingn (sometimes written as "lrara to do by doing). reach their fullest potential while advanclng the field Contents ofyoulh development." History Pl€dge Headquerters Chevy Chase, MD Emblem Region Worldwide 30rved Youth development reeearch Membership 6.5 million membeni Volunteers ' in ihe Uniled States, Addltional programs ages 5 to 21 Afrer€chool Camplng Main organ National lnstftute of FVe- to eight-year-old youth Food and Collegiate Agriculture (NIFA) All Stars Parent United Slates Conferencee organization Deparlmenl of Civll Rights issues Agrlcuhure (USDA) Alumnl Website 4-H.org See also (http://urww.4-H. org/) Referenceg Blbllography Extornal tink6 History https://en" wikipedia. org/wiki/4-H rl/12/2018 4-H - Wikipedia Page 2 of 8 The foundations of4-H began in rgoz with the work ofseveral people in different parts ofthe United States. The focal poilt of4-H has been the idea ofpractical and hands-on learning, which came from the desire to make public school education more connected to rural life. Early prograns incorporated both public and private resources. 4-H was founded with the purpose of instructiug rural youth iu improved farming and farrn-homemaking practices, By the 197os, it was broadeniug its goals to cover a full range of youth, including minorities, and a wide range of life experiences.l5l During this time researchers at experinent stations of the land-gpnt uniygsi$gf and USDA saw 4-H boys showlng prize heifers at a that adults in the farming community did not readily accept new agricultural diseoveries, but 4-H Fair in Charleston, Wesi educators fouarl that youth would experimeut with these uew ideas and then share their Vi€inia,'1921 experiences and successes with the adults. So rural youth programs became a. way to introduce new gg1ig-qltr4e_technology to the adults. Club work began wherwer a public-spirited person did sometbing to give rural chilclren respect for thernselves and their ways of life and it is very difficult to credit one sole individual.F) Instances of work with rural bo;a and girls can be found all throughout the rgth century. In tbe spring of 1882, D"9|p*n$_c!Uegg announced a statewiile corn contest for boys, in which each boy was to plant a quarter of a.n acre, aecordiug to insFuctions sent out fiom the college, and cash prizes, certificates, and subscriptions to the dm erican Agriculturc&lst were rewarded.Fl 4-H Home demonstration agents in In 1892, in au effort to improve the Kewaunee County Fair', Ransom Asa Moorg Presicleut of the Florida in 1933 Kewaunee Fair, the Agricultural Society, and Superintendent of the Kclvbln-e-g,gSS_q Schools in W_nngqb, organized a "youth movement", which he called 'Young People's contest Clubs", in which he solicited the support of6,ooo young farm folla to proiluce and exhibit fruits, vegetables, and livestock.tsl The fairs were very successful.lq In r9o4, while working for the lrglv-9fq-ity- of l{hglgin_MCdlggS and trying to repeat what he had successtully accomplished in Kewaunee nDadily" Courty over a decade before but with differeat intentious, R.A, Moore couvincecl R.H. Burns, then Superintendent of Schools of S-i1*_tlg!yrjg!!99Sq1& to have the Richland CouDty Boys and Girls orgatir,e and assist in a corn-project activity to help market and distribute improved seeds to the farmers iu the state of Wiscorrsin (and beyonil).pl A.r.4.*cta_\1p1 started one of the youth programs in 9!gr.!-Qg!OY, QSg, in r9oz, which is also 4-H Club member storing food she considered one of the births of the 4-H program in the United States. The first club was callecl canned from her garden, "The Tomato Club" or the "Corn Growing Club". T'A' "Dad" Erickson of Douglas Couuty, Rockbridge County, Virginia, ca. elubs fairs also Minnesota, started locat agricultural after-school and in r9oz. -l-g-""i" .$"ld 1942 S"tg"ph*qgb developed the clover pin with an H on each leaf in tgto, and, by 1912, they werc called 4-H clubs,[o] Early 4-H programs in Colorado began witb youth instructiou offered by college agricriltural agents as early as 1910, as part of tle outreach mission of the Colorado land grant institutions,tltl The national 4-H organization was formed in r9r4, when the Unite4_9lCtq&gCl$e createcl the 9ogngC$C.EftsqCig*-$e_ryic9 of the USDA by passage of the Smith-I*ver Act of 1914, it included within the CES charter the work of various boys' and girls' clubs involved with agriculture, home ecouomics and related subjec6.tl2) The Srnith-trver Act formalized the 4-H programs and clubs that began in the midwestern region of the United States. Although diflerent activities were emphasized for boys and girls, 4-H was one of the first youth organizations to give equal attentiou to both genders (cf., erstwhile Boys Clubs of America).t'l3l the first appearance of the term "4-H Club' in a federal document was in (r875-r95r) gt "Organization and Results of Boys' and Girls' CIub Work,n by oscar Herman Benson and -Qggrg!.e*!.I{a-rygn, in r9zo.l1{1t18 1924, these clubs became organized as 4-H clubs, aud the clover emblem was adopted.ll6l Warren expanded the scope ofgirls' activities under the program (promotiag garment making, room decorating, and hot lunches), anil wmte oitensive training mslsilsls.ttlttal The first 4-H camp was held in 8a-Sdglp!_@_ungr_lgggl$S;nJq. Originally, these camps were fot what was referred to as "Corn Clubso. Campers slept in corn fields, in tents, only to wake up and work almost the entiretyof each day. Superintendent of schools G. C, Adams began a boys' corn club iu Newton Cou4g.Gggfgig, in r9o4. 4-H membership hit an all-time high in r9Z4 as a result of its popular educational program about nutrition , AilIiSan S_teu., shown in schools and on television across the country. Today, 4-H clubs and activities are no longer focused prinarily on agricultural activities, instead emphFsizitrg personal growth and preparation for lifeloug learning, Participation is grcatest during the elementary school years, with enrollment in programs and activities peaking in the 4th grade' https ://en. wikipedia. org/wiki/4 -H tUt2l20r8 4-H - Wikipedia Page 3 of8 In tbe southeru Uuitetl States, in the mid-rg6os 4-H begau to brrcaden its programming to cover life experiences unrclated to agriculture. It merged its segregated African American aqd white prograrns, but full-fledged integration proved elusive. 4-H was successful in removing gencler-baseil restrictions on participatiol.trsl Past Honorary Chairmen of Council have included U.S. Presidents C_gly.lU$0ldre, Herbert H.oover, Ig4t!!g-p. BoogeveE, Il!11y-,Trqqg.!, ow!g!-t-*Eisep!orpr,lq!g_E=_K"nnqdy, !yngq!!_E. Johusoq, $Sb$LNi4gg, l-!!q_my_cg$el, KeU_e.U'Bg4Sg!, g_eSIgg_UJ{.EUS!, and Bill glioloo.llsltzol Pledge The 4-H pledge is: I pleilge my heacl to clearer thinking, ny heart to greater loyalty, my hands to larger selvice, and my health to better living, formyclub, mycommunity, my country, and myworld.Pll Tbe original pledge was written by Otis E. Hall of Ka+Sqs in r9r8. Some California 4-H clubs add either "As a tue 4-H member" or'As a loyal 4-H membet'' at the begianing of the pledge. Minnesota and Mliine 4-H clubs add "for my family'' to the last line of the pledge. Originally, the pledge eniled in "and my muntg/,lrtg7g, "and my world" was added. It is a common practice to involve hand motious to accompany these spoken words. While reciting the first line of the pledge, the speaker will point to thelr head with both of their hands, As the speaker recites the second line, they will place theil right hanil over their heart, much like during the Pledgg-pf4!-tegt**9. For the third line, the speaker will present their hands, palm side up, before theu. For the fourtl line, the speaker will motion to their body down tleir sides. And for the final line, the speaker will usually place theh dght hanal out for club, left hand for comrnunity, bring them together for country and then briag their hauils upwards in a circle for world, Emblem The official 4-H emblem is a green four-leaf c_lover with a white .EIon each leaf staodingfor Head, Heart, Hands, and. Heakh, The stem of the clover always points to the right. The idea of using the four-leaf clover aa an emblem for the 4-H prcgram is crcdited to Oscar Hermaa Benson (r879-r95r) of Wright coutrty Iowa. He awarded ttrreeleaf and four-Ieaf clover pennants and pins for students' agricultural and clomestic science exhibits at school fairs,F2l The 4-H name and ernblem have U,S, federal protection, under federal code r8 U.S.C. Zo7'tnl This federal protection makes it a nark unto atrd of itsef with protection ttrat supersedes the llrnited authorities of both a lragem3l\ and a copjtright. The Secretary -.of AgricultuTg is given 4-H emblem in Oldham County in responsibility and stewardship for ttre 4-H name and emblem, at the direct request of the U.S. Vega west of Amarillo, Texas Cougress. These protections place the 4-H emblem in a unique cat€gory of protected emblems, along with the U,s, P-feS{p1fql SSgl, 894-gI9qS, -spg[?y EgS anrl the Qlpnplg r!4ggJ2al Youth research Thmugh the program's tie to land-grant instihrtions of higler educatio& 4-H acadenic staffare responsible for advancing the field of y.Sgth development.lll Professional academic staff are conmitted to innovation, the creatiou of new knowledge, and the dissemination of new forms of program practice and research on topics like Uqyqvg-qlSdlforlb's study of ttrriviat in young people. Youth development research is undertaken in a rnarlety offorms iacluding program evaluatiou, applled research, and introduction ofnew prcgrams. Volurrteers Voluuteering has deep roots in American society. Over half of the American people will volunteer in some capacity during a 5rear's time. It is estimated that 44% ofadults (over 83.9 million people) will volunteer within a year, This volunteerism is raluetl at over $239 billiou peryear. These volunteers come from all difrerent age groups, educational leve\ backgrounds and socioeconomic statuses.t2f, https: //en. wikipedia. org/wiki/4-H 1,1t1212018 4-H - Wikipedia Page 4 of 8 Volunteer leaders play a major role in 4-H programs and are tbe heaft. and soul of 4-H. They perform a variety of roles, functions and tasks to coordinate the 4-H program at the county level and come fi:om all walks of lift, bringing varied and rich experiences to the 4-H prcgram. With over S4o,ooo volunteers nationally, tlese leaders play an essential role in the delivery of 4-H programs and provide leanring opportunities to promote positive youth development Every year, wlunteer leaders work to carry out 4-H youth development programs, project groups, camps, oonferenees, animal shows and many mone 4-H related activities and events. 4-H volunteer leailers belp yout! to achieve greater self-confidence and self-responsibility, learn new skills anil bujld relationships with ot}ers tbat will Iast a lifetime,P6l Volunteers serve in many iliverse roles. Some are project leadets who teach youth skills and knowledge in an area ofinterest" Others are unit or commuuity club leaders who organize clubs meetilgs and other programs, Resource leaders are available to provide information and orpertise. 4-H volunteers work under ttre direction of professional staff to plan and conduct activities and events, develop ald maintain educational prograrns, and secul'e resource,s in support ofthe program, Additional progranrs After-school 4-H Aftersc.hool helps 4-H and other youth-serving organizations create and improve programs for students in communities across the U.S. 4-H Afterschool is an extension-enhanced progrem that: r Offers youth a safe, healthy, caring and enriching environment, I Engages youth in long-term, structured learning in partnership with adults. r Addresses the interests of youth and their physical, cognitive, social and emotional needs. 4-H Afterschool progra'.^" utilize experimeutal aud cooperative learning activitles aud provide interactiol wittr competent adults. Results of retrospective pre/post-surveys indicate that children enrolled in the progrrm showed life skill gain over time, and that gains ou specific life skills differed as a function ofage, gender, and ethnicity. The life skills gained through 4-H Afterschool give children the tools they need for perceiving and responding to diverse life situations and achieving their personal goals. Participation in these quality programs which use experiential and cooperative learning have all been found to conhibute to cbildren's social development and academic sucaess.rl Girl presenting her rabbit at the Calaveras County Fair in California Gamping 2016 Each state runs its own camping program. The first state 4-IJ camp was held at {g$gg!s ![ill outside of Weston in l.s**ftUq.ty.rlr1ftlltrCF S. 4-H camping prograns in most states are run through hg*glgg|iUlS![iSn_1, such as wjrhbc,gfBgqR$g.s"''g,whichrunstheWashingtonprogIam'[email protected]'s.Theg99s4jg g3gp;IAp:gg;:g has the largest youth cetrter ir the world, called Rock E-agl.e. The first 4-H camp was helil at Camp Goocl Luck in Raudolph Couaty, We,st Virgrnia.Eol Five- to eight-year-old youth Some states offer programs fur youth in grades K-3 caled Cloverbuds, Cloverkids, 4H Adventuiers, Primary Members, or Mini 4-H, Most states prohibit tLis age group from competition due to research io Sjld_4gv"lSp_gq! demoushating tlat competitiou is unhealthy for youth ages five to eight.Psl Collegiate Many colleges and uuiversities have collegiate 4-H clubs" Usually members are students who are 4-FI alumni and want to continue a connection to 4-H, but atry interested students are welcome- Clubs provide service aad support to their local and state 4-H programs, such as seruing osjudges aud conducting traiaing workshops, They are also a service and social group for campus students. The very first collegiate 4-H club started in 1916 on the Oklahomri_9-t!! -U-!tygrsity-:E!!.q!T c'mPus. https : //en.wikipedia. org/wiki/4-H rt/12/2At8 4-H - Wikipedia Page 5 of8 All Stars Findiug its roots in the early 4-H movement iu S-g{lirg!ri3, 8re 4-H All-Star progranr strives to recoguize and tr challenge 4-H members and volunteers. State 4-H Club kader William H. "Teepi" Kendrick sought to develop youth 08, to "be yourself at lour best" and to "make the best bettey' through a fourfold personal development pattern involving the bead, hands, heart, and, at that time, hustle. It was with this philosophy, in collaboration with others, that the 4-H s[s, emblem was born. In an attempt to harbor further intlividual growth, Kendrick recognized excellenee with pins Nalional bearing one, two, three, and four H's. Recognition for outstaniling participation was rewarded from r9t7 to 1921 with Collegiate 4+l trips to a Prize Winner's Course at WSSI Y.ifgiqi* Il_piVgfSjly. Merubers who demonsbated outstaniling qualities at olub €rnblem these courses were awarded five-pointed red pins with five H's, with this additiolal .FI to s).mbolize honor. The recipients ofthase pins were referred to by Kendrick as "All Starsn, It was following the pin consecration ceremony in 1919 that the ofEcial West Virginia +-H AII Stars organization was chartered, becoming the Alpba Chapter of the nationwide 4-H honorary.tsol Mauy states have AII Star programs, although AII Star prpgums vary from state to state. Selection as a 4-H AII Star is a recognitiou of achievement. In Califoruia, for example, it is tLe highest achievemeut award at tlre couuty level and is a position awarcle{ annually.Fll Sim0arly, tlre capstone award in Texas 4-H is the Gold Stal Award, which is given to Seuiors who have shown outstatding leailelship and proficiency in their project areas.[321 tu VgSlUg, on the other hand, All-Stars are not simply those who have achieved an AII-Star award, but are those who have gaiued membership into the Virginia All-Stars organization. Upon reaching the age of r5, 4-H members are eligible to apply for membersffp iuto the AII-Stars orgauization, which promotes tle continuation of 4-H principles.t$l Conferences Many conferenoes are held at yarious levels of the 4-H program for youth and adults. The National 4-H Conference, held at National 4-H Youth Confereuce Center is the lllpA Secretary's preruier youth development opportunity to engage youth in dweloping recommendations for the 4-H Youth Development Program. ':!'l ! {r q}l ianlrrn'i:t' The Natioual 4-H Congress is an anlual educational conference that briugs together 4-H Natlonal 4-H Youth Conference delegates between the ages of r4 and 19 from across America to share cultural experienees and Center in Chevy Chase, Maryland discuss im;rortant issues facing youth. This fi.ve'day event is tlpically held during the weekend of Thanksgiving aud lras been hosted iu A-!_l*_n_te, gg"e1gig, silce 1998. Throughout ttre conference, 4-H delegates attend numerous workshops, participate in communip service activities, and Iisten to speakers in an effort to develop compassion and increase social awareness.[341135) Citizenship Washington Focus is a week-long confetence offered for high school-aged students.l3ol At the conference, students have the opportunity to learn how to be citizen leaders iu their communities. Throughout the week in Washington, D.C., participants visit monum€nts, meetwith members of Congress, and develop communication, leadership and citizenship skills. The following natioual mnferences are held yearly, and are focused on specific activities inside of 4-H: r National 4-H Dairy ConferenceFl . Eastern National 4-H Horse Rounduplae) r Western National 4-H Horse RoundupFel r National 4-H Shooting Sports lnvitational Matchtao) Other confereaces are held by regional and state entities for youth, for volunteer development, or for professional developmeDt for staff, Civil Rishts issues For many years, use of !q.$y9.A4qxgl. nsmes and certain themed activities was part of the summer camping progroms of some eastern states. However, this practice was ileemed offensive and protests were raiseil. A courplaint to the U.S, Department of Agricultule's Office of Civil Rights in aooz and an ensuing iavestigation that ttrreatened to cut offfirnds to the state'e programlarl prompted the }lle:tvifdUjg \hi_n:Stg Extension Service to abandon ofifensive aDd stereotypic practices such as face-painting, and use of imagery Dot a port of the culture of local Native people, such as !p!tg and totem poles,t4ll They also eliminated the practice of having children wear feather https : //en. wikipedia. org/wiki/4-H 11/12/2018 4-H - Wikipedia Page 6 of 8 nstereotypical headdresses, and stopped having campers eugage iu uotions and danoes," includiug chanting 'Ugh! Ugh! Ughl", However, the state program deemed the dividing of campers into groups, called "tribesn named after actual Indian Nations, to be respectfrrl aud acceptable. lazl 'Ihat same year, the \4rginia Extension Service temoved all references to qrorbols or camp "traditionsn relateal to Native Americans, including the decades-long practice of dividing campers into "tribes' using uames of nations considered native to SICiSb, replacing the group names witl animal names.ta3l Alulnni Participation in 4-H eveuts and activities, the value ofprojects completed and the challenges and respousibilities experienced in 4-H have contributed to tbe personal and leailership development of some 4-H alumni" A majority of 168 alumni surveyed in Pennsylvania feel that 4-H experiences havo also significantly contibuted to their success in the worKorce and that the luowledge and skills gained through 4-H continue to benefit them in their adult lives.taal See also . ltqtig_Ld_fF"Aprgg_!-E-{lon (formerly Future Farmerc of Amerioa) . Foy s-"9919_!q,oI Allfgtl€ I Girl Scouts of the USA . tl|9lrep. tlrrsSpel$.Flgglgmg . lnleqrsleneL F.p-gr-H !s$h-E&!anee r National Federation of Young Farmers'Clubs ' Ruq!Yq!4hEqspl References 1. "The California 4-H Youth Development for the Decade Ahead" (PDF). Winter 2003. Retrieved 2010-06-07. q-x z" 'l*{"$&otruel(,Se:Jiuc!,ptc&Farslvs-Wq:!"ggs.:-ggQFjUh$ ). canada. Archived from the orisina!(lt$p:stq4f.+.hgq3d19.a/qb.9$*lSryhe,g{+Cl.e/_*i"strygt!:{e) on 15 May 2015. Retrieved I May 2015. 3, "4-H Around the World" oro/abouUolobal-nefimrld. 4-H (USA} Retrieved 8 May 2015. a[!!pe,t4:[,919-0e9,o49l:Ygp.lgqdsaqq.Sr?jt*ntsLBgport..p*9r 5. Rosenberg,2015 6, The Father of Wisconsin 4-H. The Ransom Asa Moore Story, Author: Gleason, Marjorie and William, Publication: 1989 Accurate Publishing & Printing lnc., pg. 9 7. The Fatherof Wsconsin 4-H.TheRansomAsa MooreStory, Author: Gleason, Marjorie andWilliam, Publication: 1989Accurate Publishing & Printing Inc., pg. 10 8. Kewaunee Enterprise, February 26, 1941, "Death Takes Prof. Moore" 9. The Father of Wisconsin 4-H. The Ransom Asa Moore Story, Author: Gleason, Marjorie and William, Publication: 1989 Accurate Publishing & Pilnting lno. 10, Lonsden, rom, FalLo*{t!9I/qtqJ9!9'e:Elggslgn_b-aJS.!*ftS?_:49-aykgklguyg: 015) Des Moines Regisfer 11'llst4lbr9s!-qsts"Q:*gktphUsgl$r4lns-erEg,-qslrulffi AmJ$] gferec!@:0$ssjn0sE?.r.0!hie.-o.lslfgqBgrpli9.U19*1gjftSp-/lm!guc[usge,gsdNALweM$"qs.E-t!n!-!,?epl Acc-eSSioJr:94J30984f281, National Agrioultural Library Digital Repository. Archived from r,he orlglle! (h$9,/na!Q1nal.usda.0oviS!Al-Web/Asd9olil!k.€e?A999ss-i9n:q.$999${.r:q) on 14 June 2010, Retrieved 7 June 2010. 13, Journal of Research in Childhood Education. _cgopgqtiYg_il-d-'c_g"np:Ii!iW".9.r:9$3!!-glls*]ll-"4lLg!gl[o!l{:ll Ih!!. 39It' (http3(111l1/.81!g$,c9-v€Slgl!jl|-o-{efgg31eryqe$llmiqi.JsP? *m*fuj$_q€FlcExtsea[r!_9enr'glFlge-0=E{2642e&ERlCEr!99qqh:segrg[ypS=9=S$3t€lg:FJrc*). Retrieved 2012-03-28. 14. Reck, Franklin A. (1951). The 4-H Story: A Histoty of +H club WorR (PDF). Chicago, lL: National 4-H Service Comrnittee. pp. 166 -168, 210. OCLC https ://en. wikipedia. org/wiki/4-H ll/t2/2a18 4-H - Wikipedia Page 7 of8 15 Benson,oscarHerman:Warren,GertrudeL.(February1e20]LorganlzatoS_ql9-Rejqlf_"oJPgn'e4{.9J|19:.c""/l/a.Vpft(I:frp"p""ptF_ lvesfem 9taqsL.191-8_llttH{&l9lllv"-e.-grgl{.Ct3.[{.o-tg?!ggggl-r$916!9l9], Washington, DC: U.s, Department of Asriculture. Retrieved 21 August2018. 16. "4:H"Pe!alled_Il9!9r/*h$p914rc._b,-qitrle,Srgagepao"l999:"99-5-91lz!!!pz93l9€i?ot3j3.d9/39grn3g?S: y:$U$S&H**!gil-g{*Ugg$,ffi. College of Agriculture and Life Sciences, University of Arizona. Archived from tle q!gl€! {h$i{$F$ggt+"ejq&9$negfaS-ve$!!e{4-H-g9lal!#_hlstoly.htn) on 2010-06-'1s. Rekieved 2010-06-07. 17. "FolksWho Make 4-H Great: Gertrude Warren" 1610311 ke-4-h- S{ggt€96ru9*3411,en{}. National 4-H History Preservation Program. S March 2016. Retrieved 8 August 2018- 18" Thompson, "The Changing Needs ofOurYouth Today" (2012) 1e. "U-.S..Presld.e{1ls'e!q 4H" (!Sp-/1J:hl!lF,!9ryp-reF9"rv€Uon.ggntlflfteryl!i-Q_pr9f!{en$1), 4-H History Preservation. Retrieved 1ieb2017 20. "u.s. Presidents4s_l!9nora.*ry--9!eju"el: ftyfi{t[hi*gry.pt!9.etyeq9l99dHi*glylttl?I{gjrgnffgt_og-9999Q{9p), a-H History Preservatlon. Reirieved 1 leb 2o17 6 21. 14:h Pl9!tsg*[h$F.{t+919/@h&eug{-!ia-hP1999s0. 4-H. Retrieved November 2018. 22. "Elsie Collection on on Home and 4-H" p!P3 National AsriculturalLibrary. Archivea tom the.orilinal ttSp.dt&v-n3tllsd-a9.S&ileEplevjlggepltr hto_9-elqEsg!g1:!9v9|A=-&t4q=p.uljg1$tlgLo-pjgid:1e'{?*!_€yep-lo5${tp$l9v9l{id=10803&leve!P--!q=oephgpme!!-d9ro'.lFg$9!t#) on 2010-04-14, Retrieved 2010-06-07. gs-r UgC Sec. 4-H club e 23. " U. s-:U9tse9[B9p!9s"S=[ta.!!y ]_8 Ofiice of the Law Revision counsel. Archived from the olqll?ll!!pj/!- gg!qll9q*-qgv,/qqg$g on 20'12-03-03. Retrieved 201 0-06-07 24. "Usino the 4-H Name and Emblem" (https:/&veb.archive. oro/weU201 0052805531 7/hft D://www. nationa l4- (PDF)" Archived from lhe original.(,l4p:{ltttOt.l}ello" l* (PDF) on 28 May 20'10. Retrieved 7 June 2010. 25. The Journal of Extension (JOE). "Volunteer Management Needs Assessment ofthe Tennessee 4H EqSEE_6pl U[4joe.org1j9el20l!l9p$qry.4m.php].The Journal of Extension. Retrieved 2012-03-28. 26. rhe Journal of Extension (JoE). lBel4le0-s'hh*F$Uee!-tkl !$Cd:e1-le-aqgl-ggmP*9n9l-e5"-allq*qrullJeClble-en1l:!.-{:-u HgfenlS_OtlpflmryJgq,glsllgg&g:legSlE!{lne,P!d. The Journal of Extension, Retrieved 2012-03-28. 27. child study Journal. _Pg[gtts*Lllejllll9llegg.l4$9rslh99!-F-sggrellqlrn -E:Pgrg!9d9!**9*qgspglC!yg ooopqq!iv"9=l9gg1ipg). Retri eved 20 1?-c3-2a. 28. Betler, Bruce. 'icqnpeood Lucl(' (httpglrynry*tYy"gngyjlSpgg!*gfg_?Bldg.i/Q9?). West Virginia Enoyclopedia, West Virginia Humanities Council. Retrieved Marcn 20, 2017. jn 2e. rhe Journalof Extension (JoE). frgO,gmnhe "P":HI9!9I9 tSt_Q**9Jg{Pgchlldren 1-H-(Bp-:14|{!U[Jgggpj_qglj9,9i*f_-S!9ya2.h!il. The Journal of Extension. Reirieved 2010-06-07. west 30. iw_-a"!_Yi*,s-ln!9 tu-A!_.9hr!E!sry*$!pgiry*ePFrc-!:!ye.otsiy-9q49gryeflgqqgb$pJuu*gltla]!:!?F.9lsfj,r_s!9ry.Nm[. Mrginia 4-H All Star Website. Archived from the g*ginal.$ttp.:{fifl{!F-.!ry{!!g!"sJ3.J.s.9"rgtthqry".lt$!) on 2009-06-24. Retrieved 2010-06-07. 31. "tlJ A!!_9.1eI*qe![9mE:'(lI!pelM9]-91--s.t$p.;1|.ea1!,p-d"hade|!hrgeUsB{hg,e*3sP). universitv or Catifornia 4-H Youth Development Program, Archived from the qrig_hdj!i$p-:49?-1h,gr*q/Fade on June 20,2409, Retrieved 2010-06-07. 32. "Texs9_9dd-9tgrAucF-Appllga$sL0tpsl$€b.sl9htue,orgAre*9,0"[email protected]{t 2g$gdq?ghfoql3q9CI:#gPe95etp{q (PDF). Archived from the orlgina!..jh$P/t|erjb--t(&n9.999_9tu{updfl-o-.?.?P_0_qSlgh?--0st?.r?f 2Q!Jormqti-on'Dzt!!!39!19!pdt) (PDF) on March 25' 200e, Retrieved 2010-0&07. 33. 4-H Brochure" vt. Archived 2007-02-07 at the W-ayb-aok il-lchine. by the 34. ' +H llationil t!9e99!a49E: tI ,qe0ler.eoqe ?qq*g. us9[9/y9"b/-2-91qglQffZ199-9/!$q-l$sry*a!i9l.alA !li*g.S.uS,lloS-'.S"9{99@h_9SlEJ$10 National4-hheadquarters.gov. 22 July 2009. Archived from the grlgl{gl(IIp:/Wew'{.natiol?14- b!U:*q$$9F.ggy/-q-o'nEf.t!*PIF.UB)on 7 June 2010' Retrleved 7 June 2010- ss. .A!o$ tt"llggl*tggttg.pCgl.1f$eg4g**Igttive,org/weu/2911o114lqsz3slt!ttPJ{!m{,1gtipla!-l-:b9gnel99-s.99llll3!9ug} National 4-H congress, Archived rrom t!e,CfjSltC!.t$pJ&lU{,llgllgg*bg'Jgl99g$|Ir1?-Fjrg) on July 14, 2011. Retrieved 2010-06-07. 36.https:/@h;Stslp..qtrltF/_cjlFp!:un:mSil-r\*|!-n4tg https://en. wikipedia, org/wiki/4-H tllr2l20t8 4-H - Wikipedia Page 8 of 8 37. "Naliorlal &!:l P,gi1y.cpqs_e-!e{:I|SP:/199!;"$!ye.gl_slr_9.b1p|!1_0,19112_99glt!p/{1!:qyp}€gygygg!:l!9[Lcg11r, wisconsin 4-H Youth Development. Archived from the ofiglBal$l$pi41l,gy%gdu/eve$g/-qq]rygglll) on2o11-1o-10. Retrieved 2012-03-01. 38. :Ee{er.n Uqtgg?l+ill!9fsr$9lpdgp:ftSp"i|rlg0fl_-lfuSqpdgp€9m4. Eastern National 4-H Roundup. Retrieved 2012-03-01. 3e. llleslen-NeliSnql*4:HJ9$gg6.-ujdCilh[eJfoUf[!/€Cklnj]et!.9{lelfSg0*ttp-9lS4 Western National 4-H Roundup. Rekieved 2A12-03-41. Retrleved 2012-03-01, 41. washinston, rhe (2002-06-25) :]A9flry9!etjg"!'J"r.gP9-9,4:H lryi Wgs.!i!qto!_Iilng_{!9-?5, 42. U9s!Yiglr!3_Su,9l--ulE-ep?.ngodrsjft[sj/e-t!g!3r.pn$ics,!cls!LFpsttrr.o:"1 qteme{U$p,tJ$rTrar"ffi!*UiS9d!S!E/!9cq!/el!!g9-1g999Z[kp3t{:s*s9j5j*td:"690:199'3989l"htm!). Bismarck rribune, December 17, 2002 43. 'J[eJtE-*jil!9!g:L9lfi_%h_qep lerns offebslyg !o_-?"gqle_ h_qi-ans_l.0$p/.ftmr-.Iic-h!9.ern:99dg9g19!gzg?97jg j!n!) by Jon ward, &*!t/eCt&dm limes, June 28, 2402 44. Radhakrishna, Rama B.; sinasky, Mesan (December 2005). :{#_*te1jp.rr_q9-i.gS$h$hS"!e!C$e$!p*a.r}$ &tCSr1slpeyslgpnFjf of 4-H Alumli:jh$pl$lUy-jSeplg{99€0.!*ggq3lgr/rlapjtpl , The Journat ot Extension fJoE). Retrieve d 2o12-03-28"i ot I ,254 mem bers ln Penn State alumni database, 289 were sampled for a survey and 168 provided useful data; 99% of these said they received some benefit from their Participation Bibliograpky Buck, Holly (2004). "'Am usements and Recreations... Makes out Hours Profitable': Utah 4- H, 1940-1960'. Utah Historioal Qu arlarl y. 7 2 (1 ): 6944. doi:10. Holt, Marilyn lrvin (1992). "From Better Babies to 4-H: A Look at Rural America". Prologue: The Joumal of the National Archlves. 24 (3): 245-255. Holt, Marilyn lwin. Llnoleum, Bafter Babies, and the Modern Farm Woman, 18901930 (U of New Mexico Press, 1995). Keathley, Clarence R; Ham, Donna M. (1979). "4-H Club Work in Missourl". Missoui Historical Review.51 (1):209'220. Rosenberg, Gabriel N" The 4-H Harvest: Sexuality and tDe Sfale rn Rural America (University of Pennsylvania Press, 20'15) Thompson, Ellen Natasha. " The Changing Needs of our Youth Today: Economic Transformations in Twentieth-century North Carolina." (PhD Diss. University of North Ca r Wessel, Thomas R. and Marllyn We*el. *H: An Amertcan ldea, l9W198C A Htstory of 4H (Chevy Chase, MD: 4-H National Council, 1982). External links ' *tl W_e"p"_sle^l!$Elq{ry,*t1.9"r9/} Offlcial website for more inlormation about 4-H on all levels of the 4-H system r {H*.Q-qgg9l-a-(!r!p.4snf:1" h--s-ne{r,g} Retrieved from "http://en.wlklpedl3:glSf4!l!*9IphP?ti!e=.4":H!p_t_{i*:S]-S"9"299" This page was last edited on 7 November 2018, at 02:04 (UTC)' Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms of Use and P,rivacyTolicy.-Wiffpedia@'d b-regiitEibE-iAd6ffiiftjlthe Wikim-gdia Foundation, lno., a non-profit organization. https://en.wikipedia. org/wiki/4-H t111212018 4-H History | 4-H Page I of4 The Bir"th of 4-H Programs 4-H opened the door for young people to leam leadership skills and revolutionized how youth e,onnected to practlcal, hands-on learning experiences outside the classroom. https: / I 4 -h. or glabouVhistory/ tl/1212018 4-H History | 4-H PageZ of 4 Late 1800's: Making Connections ln the late 1800's, researchers discovered adults in the farming community did not readily accept new agricultural developments on university campuses, but found that young people were open to new thinking and would experiment with new ideas and share their experiences with adults. ln this way, rural youth programs introduced new agriculture technology to communities. The idea of Practical and "hands-on' learning came from the desire to conned public school education to country life. Building community clubs to help solve agricultural challenges was a first step toward youth leaming more about the industries in their community. 1902: Youth Glubs are Formed A. B. Graham started a youth program in Clark County, Ohio, in 1902, which is considered the birth of 4-H in the United States. The flrst club was called "The Tomato Club" or the "Corn Growing Club". T.A. Erickson of Douglas County, Minnesota, started local agricultural after-school clubs and fairs that same year. Jessie Field Shambaugh developed the clover pin with an H on each leaf in 1910, and by 1912 they were called 4-H clubs. 1914: Gooperative Extension System is Created The passage of the Smith-Lever Act in 1914 created the Cooperative Extension System at USDA and nationalized 4-H. By 1924, 4-H clubs were formed and the clover emblem was adopted. The Cooperative Extension System is a partnership of the National tnstitute of Food and Agriculture (NIFA) within the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), more than 100 land-grant universities and more than 3,000 county offices across the nation, Cooperative Extension combines the expertise and resources of federal, state, and local govemments and is designed to meet the need for research, knowledge and educational programs. https : //4 - h, org/about/history/ tll12/2018 4-H History | 4-H Page 3 of4 4-H Today Today, 4-H serves youth in rural, urban, and suburban communities in every state across the nation. 4-H'ers are tackling the nation's top lssues, from globalfood security, climate change and sustainabte energy to childhooct obesity and food safety. 4-H out-of-school prograrnming, in-school enrichment progrems, clubs and camps also offer a wide variety of STEM opportunities - from agricultural and animat sciences to rocketry, robotics, environmental protection and computer science - to improve the nation's ability to compete in key scientific fields and take on the leading ohallenges of the 21st century, Vlsit the 4-H Hietory Preservation Program Help Us lnspire More Kids to Do For a limited time, every dollar you give to 4-H youth will be matched up to $100K1 Help us reach more kicts with the hands-on leaming experiences they deserve in life and career. https://4-h. org/abouVhistory/ tlll2l20t8 4-H History | 4-H Page 4 of 4 4-H.org is maintained by National 4-H Council. 4-H is the youth development program of our nalion's Cooperative Extension Sysiem and USDA. https : //4-h. org/about/history/ lt/t212018 Jacob Riooer From: S Bell Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Flagged My name is Rose Bell, a member of the Bell Family here to share my feelings and thoughts against why having a marijuana grow on Byram Rd. shouldn't happen. I have been an active member of swine 4-H since 20tS and my family has hosted and will continue to be hosting my 4-H groups, Unified Tenders, meetings at our house. With two divisions, swine and goa! our house can fill quickly. While our house isn't very large, we have a sizable living space, and at every meeting it is packed full of kids, teenagers, and adults, eager to learn about the community that is 4-H, striving to see how they can further expand their knowledge on their project and thinking over the information that could further expand their likeliness of success at fair. I have been a 4-H member for four years now, and I'm just now going into the FFA. All four of those years have been spent showing swine, which has shown me what it means to have a great deal of responsibility and what it means to have livestock depending on you to keep them alive. My family and I decided to move to our 16 acre home so that my brother and I could learn what it means to have responsibilities and to be able to have opportunities such as being a member of 4- H and showing livestock that we couldn't get in our city home. We have a quarter-mile driveway that twists and turns and and leads to a decent sized yellow house that sits in front of a fairly large sized pond with an island in the middle. If you go past the house you'll see our barn and to the left of that is the pig pen and the chicken coop and our arena. We have had our entire circle driveway and expanding to the barn and in the side yard full of cars and full of 4-H members and their families. We routinely host meetings where we bring the livestock to our house and shown them so that we can further expand our knowledge on how to show them properly. What kind of message would it be sending our young members if we hosted 4-H meetings right next-door to a large grow operation? Our young members should be engaged and focused on the lessons our 4- H leader Nancy Hermans should be teaching, not focused on the big greenhouses filled with security and surrounded by walls, plugging their noses and wondering what the skunk like smell is. If we were to put a grow operation in right next door to my house, the location of so many different activities, it would turn it into a place full of strict rules as to where we could go, when we could be out, and who do we need to be with. It would turn Byram Rd into a place full of questions and statements such as, "Do you have your phone on you?" "Be back before dark." "Make sure you stay with them the whole time ok?" And "Do not talk to strangers." While those are already commonly said and asked, it's not something that needs to be constantly listed every time someone leaves the house. With this new proposed operation, we wouldn't know what to expect. We've heard the stories of kids waiting to be picked up by the bus, being harassed by a bunch of high pickers during harvest season. We've seen the evidence of what marijuana can do to a kid if they accidentally or intentionally consume it. Byram Rd. even has a first responder who has seen first hand what it's like to suffer the repercussions of driving under the influence of the I drug. We do not need to impress upon the younger kids, or even on someone of my age, that approving a pot farm is ok, Because it wouldn't be. I have a 4 lz year old little brother who means - the world to me, I do not want him to go to school one day and say, "Hey teacher, I live next to a pot farm!" I want him to grow up and say, "Hey teacher! My house is awesome. I can explore all over the place and I learned how to read tracks and I found a feather from an owl out by the pond." I want him to know that he grew up in a really cool place because that is what my house is. I want him to be able to have birthday parties and not have to have parents cancel plans because we live next to a grow. I want all of this for him, me, and all of my neighbors. I do not want us to suffer the consequences of us having a grow because there was a little 10 acre lot available on Byram Rd that seemed almost perfect to put a700 sq ft grow on it, even though it's not. Byram Road is only a single mile long, It is a cut off road between Bear Creek road and Alfalfa market, two always busy highway-resembling streets. Byram Road is not only a road, but a community. A community full of hard-working, driven and dedicated people that range from hay growers, to barrel racers, to performers, to 4-H and FFA members, to construction workers, to firefighters and police officers, and to nurses and veterinarian technicians. Our community, my neighborhood, is going to be exposed to something that doesn't work in our community chemistry. For all seven years that I've known my dad, he's explained to me how morally wrong and how physically and mentally unhealthy drugs are for you. Aside from his perspective, I can honestly tell you that this is true. Marijuana impacts the brain in such a way that it has serious repercussions. Last year there were 70 cases of teens between the ages of 13 and 19 that were diagnosed with marijuana poisoning. While this doesn't seem like a whole lo! it's 30 more that the year before that, What would this year be? 100? LLD? 115? Our neighborhood is full of young adults and preteens between the ages of 13 and 19. There is a family down the road from my house, across from the potential grow, that has 3 children. One middle schooler and two elementary schoolers. All three of those kids have a bus stop that is right across from the grow. They would go outside, ready for school every morning and see the big greenhouses, maybe even smell the plants. I used to walk down to that bus stop every morning in elementary and middle school, sometimes in the dark. If I had to do that with a grow operation right next door, I stilt wouldn't feel as safe, and I'm in high school now. I couldn't imagine being in second or third grade and having to walk outside, in the dark, to wait for my school bus as I stared at a couple of greenhouses laden with security, illuminated by lights, and shielded by walls. Imagination goes a long way, and it wouldn't take much imagination to scare a third grader. To conclude, we should nothave a marijuana grow on Byram Rd. as it goes against our beliefs in the ways of keeping everyone safe, and how damaging it would be on our community overall. Please consider my perspective in making your final decision. Thank you. 2 Jacob From: Laura Skundrick Sent: Thursday, November 8, 2018 10:29 AM To: Jacob Ripper Subject: Letter Attachments: Jacob Ripper letter,pdf Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Flagged HiJacob, Please see the attached letter I received in today's mail. l'll put the original in IOM for you unless you,d rather come pick it up. Thanks! lES Laura Skundrick I Admlnistrative Assistant DESCHUTES COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS P,O, Box 6005 | Bend, Oregon 97708-6005 1300 NW Wall St., Suite 206 | Bend, Oregon 97703 Tel; (541) 388-6571 | Fax (541) 38s-3202 tr EIEI Enhancing the lives of cltizens by dellvering quallty services in a cost-effectlve monner 1 November t,20Lg Deschutes County Board of Commissioners To whom it concerns, I am a2?year leader of a Deschutes County 4-H Club. We have the maJority of our meetings at 62266 Byrum Rd east of Bend. We have held training sesslons and our club scales are on that property. Our kids are on that property several times a month, sharing information, working their animals, weighing and tracking the weights of their animals. ln no way does the creation of a marijuana farm to the north, make this a property these kids would be comfortable spending time there with the activity next door. When you have a club with over 20 kids, in 13 families, it is hard to find places to fit our needs. I am not against pot farms, I have many people in my circle that benefit from its medicinal properties. This is just not a property I feel would fit with current uses of the adjoining property. I hope you will consider not putting this property into marijuana production. lt seems the state is saturated with grow farms...maybe one less would be warranted. Thank you, -^: ttt&1r1lTt$a--"o, Unlfied Teilders 4-H CLub qy {5oaoc "3 l'Lhe W,T'"'k? 4q7?- 1 /.-rsrCI'? qwY tMl+# a "$ *#ffi"E;uq,t'Gd >afpv1?saQ' f..t-nc< 1f;grr.r.rar": h" 17 RECETVED November 5,2018 o 5 Board of County Commissioners and Jacob Ripper. Re:247-18-ooo7e2_d{ov ZotE Recommend Denial of marijuana production application at Deschutes Gounty" Since May 2017 Fichard and Debbie Caruso have worked toward acquiring taxlot 902 when they were applicants to 17-000404-CU for a non farm dwelling. At the appeal public hearing applicant stated that a condition of approvalfor buying the property was the non farm CU dwelling permit. Applicant also stated in oral testirnony that she and her family were looking for a marijuana production propefty and settled on buying this taxlot 902" The County's planner for the CU is the same County planner as for the mj production application 18-000051-AD. So I think it's important to vet how Deschutes County will implement the CU in the context of the now applied for mj production application. THIS lS QUITE A TANGLE especially as the applicant identified that she hopes to raise her children on the property one day. ln the non farm dwelling I suppose - right? On the same taxlot as the business ol marijuana production - right? On July 7,2017 Richard and Debbie Caruso purchase taxlot 902. Clerk Recording 2017-026461. On July 17,2017 High Desert Nectar LLC is formed and renewed 7-18-2018 with principal place of business at 62266 Byram Road, Deschutes County On August 17,2017 Deschutes County issued approval o1247-17-0OO4O4-CU with several conditions of approval which today have not been met: including condition 1 Use " Any substantial change to the approved plan will require a new application"; condition 2 Farm & Forest Management Easement deed recording not been filed;3 Driveway Access Permit is not in place; condition 4 Septic is not in place; condition 5 Building Envelope Plot Plan is not in place and the non farm dwelling is also not shown on the subsequently applied for marijuana production application; condition 6 Farm Ta:< Deferral Disqualification criteria; condition 8 minimum structural setbacks are not shown for this CU on the mj production site plan. On January 8, 2018 High Desert Nectat LLC applies for the 18-000051-AD marijuana production land use for 5000 square feet canopy on just over 10 acres. Applicant reduces the size of the canopy and continues to amend it's application up to September 8, 2018 with reports from Pioneer Contracting lnc, a member owned business out of Delray Beach, FL.: this is more than 9 months after the mj application. The Board heard at the public hearing that applicant hopes to raise children on the property. \rvhere is the CU home going to be located in relation to the mapped marijuana production building? The plot plan lor the CU dwelling is not shown on the mj production plot plan to measure setbacks from residential area to the marijuana production building. ...Gould page 1 of 3 The Colebreit report shows a 2500 gallon water tank on page Why such a large water tank if Bend Water Hauling is providing only 1500 gallons per week. 500 gallons of water per day that won't fit in the 1000 gallon water tank shown next to the production site in the Pioneer drawing submitted on 9-8-2018? The Board was quick to answer with Code Enforcement when a neighbor asked the BOCC what happens if the odor is not controlled onsite? Yet the Board is not respectful of it's own Code Enforcement Rules and this is why several residents in Deschutes County such as Bishop, Kuhn and Bill Mafiin Road et all are in Civil Litigation to press Deschtues County to cause violators of our code enforcement to change. We have examples today where the County itsell is in violation of it's Code Enforcement rules. So there is no assurance that there is any recourse for the public other than personal expenditure of monies and quality of life degradation from skunk permeating odor. Even Commissioner DeBone's wife went on record that she doesn't want her property negatively impacted by marijuana production odor in our Deschutes County. With the County already having approved the CU for the non farm dwelling on ta,xlot 902, the County should not approve this mj production application because mere conditions of approval willcause voiding of the CU. The BOCC should deny the marijuana production land use permit because the marijuana application does not meet code and if the County does approve the mj land use permit, the County has no control that the lesser square footage canopy is allthat will be grown on this greater than 10 acre parcel. The septic feasibility permit for the CU dwelling is not allowed for marijuana;COID does not allow a building to be constructed over lands mapped where COID water rights are still mapped even where the mj production is shown to be located on the site plan; applicant does not have a water storage permit; no Nursery Use water permit or certificate is in the record. Finally:, applicant has not shown where the CU home will be located on taxlot 902 such that the mj production meets setbacks from the CU home approved for the same lot or that the HVAC proposed on several sides of the mj production building don't get amplified by the siting of the home. Regarding the revised odor and hvac Colebreit engineering report dated Aug 29, 2018 please read this: Remember High Desert Nectar LLC is a commercial business venture; it's member manager sat before you and could not answer simple questions related to her proposed business. Ceftainly applicant can grow their own 4 plants and applicant has the right to use marijuana on their property for personal use today, but today applicant has not met the County Code Burden of Prool for marijuana production and the County must honor the previously issued non farm dwelling land use approval CU for taxlot 902. This TANGLE is easy to resolve . do not approve the marijuana production land use for the very obvious reasons that the burden of proof is not met. Thank you for considering my views. Nunzie Gould nrfU^'A Attachments: Exhibit 1 17-00O404-CU application Exhibit 2 Findings and Decision 17-000404-ClU Exhibit 3 2017-026461 Exhibit 4 application 1 8-000051 -AD Exhibits 5-7 SOS Business name search, articles of organization, amended annual report Exhibit 8 is in the AD and A records and linked here: \ttps:/Auebl ink.desch utes.org/cdd/DoeView: aspx?id=78592 1 > Gould page 3 of 3 Jacob Ripper From: Jacob Ripper Sent: Thursday, November 1,2018 4:14 PM lo: 'mo ni ka@ rescueresponse.com' Subject: RE: Appeal of 247-18-000051-AD Hello Monika, l'll include your email in the record. lf you'd like notice of the decision, please respond with a mailing address Thanks, 1ES Jacob Ripper I Senior Planner Deschutes County Community Developrnent 117 NWLafayetteAve I Bend, Oregon 97708 Tel:BtrE (541) 385'1759 | Mail: PO Box 6005, Bend. OR 97708 Let us know how we're doing: Customer Feedback Survey Dlscloimer: Pledse note that the informmlon in this email is an inlormal stotement mode in accordance with DCC 22.20.005 and shalt not be deemed to constitute linal County action effecting a change in the stotus of o person's property or conferring any righ6 including any relionce rights, on qny person. From: monika @ rescueresponse.com Dear Commissioners and Jacob Ripper: I was able to attend only a portion of the hearing for Appeal of 247-t8-000051-AD and also hear the testimony of Rose Bell, as well as her Dad Sean. As a 4H leader of the "Junior Hardy Plant 4H Garden Club" for the past two years, l've had the honor of teaching Rose Bell about gardening in our challenging high desert climate. Carol, Tina and I are members of the Hardy plant Garden Club in Bend and started the Junior Version to teach Central Oregon Kids some of what we have learned throughout the years. Rose has been a Junior Leader and amazing example to the younger members of our club. She assisted the various speakers and experts that have shared of their knowledge with the kids too. We have a Facebook page you can visit to see Rose and our other members in action, while learning 4H "hands on" style and being a wonderful example to the younger students. l'm sorry I missed the testimonies of the other kids and neighbors in the Byram neighborhood, but applaud them for coming together to try to help protect their livability, safety and quality of life in rural Deschutes County. Families that have lived as a neighborhood for decades together, while someone from Florida moves in to set up a business, in the midst of their homes, drawing in crime and everything else that comes along with the drug marijuana, near their homes. Please consider the testimony of Rose and the other kids who are genuinely concerned for the safety of their families! fou have the authority to determine what is a Youth Activity Center and help preserve 4H and FFA in Deschutes Countyl L Thank you for listening and for your consideration! Appreciate youl Monika Piatt 2 24 October 2018 Dot[a^ Kfi"Xr- ....:.. I O:7f QtvtA From: Dorlee Kingen ti:o 229s5 Alfalfa Mkt Rd [xc lre Bend, OR 9770L To: Deschutes County Board of Commissioners 117 NW Lafayette Ave Bend, OR 97703 Subj: File numb er 247 -t8-000792-A Appeal of an Administrative Determination File No. 247-L8-0O0051- AD to allow marijuana Production. Hearing date: 29 October 2018 1) Marijuana should be limited to EFU properties, and not adjacent to small acreage properties, zoned MUA lt should be a minimum of 20A. The larger size of parcels limits the direct and potentially negative effect on neighbors. 2) MUA density places a direct effect on large numbers of residents in close proximity This effect could be negative. 3) Marijuana should not be grown where families with children live in close proximity 4) A direct effect on property depreciation is highly likely. The majority of people do not want to live near marijuana growing. Dorlee Kingen, 21 February 2018 RHCEIVHffi FEB 21 2OI8 *ns*it*l*s {Jc*nly f; I}D From: Dorlee Kingen Resident of Community where property located POB 7997 Bend, OR 97708 pacddfdu€:f*++ao ' c-o t4 To: Community Development Depa rtment Deschutes County, Bend, OR Nicole Mardell, Associate Planner File # 247 -L8-4000s 1-AD Subject: Applicant: High Desert Nectar, LLC Owners: Richard and Debbie Caruso 62266 Byram Rd Bend, OR 97701 Assesso/s Map: t7-!3-32 Lot # 9092 Bullet Format: This is a residential community with EFU or MUA zoning; therefore it does not seem that a commercial business fits within the guidelines of those regulations lf this party was refused a similar application less then 2-4 miles further East, why is another application being reconsidered? Do not want or need this kind of non-conforming use in our neighborhood Not a beneficial use of irrigation rights, Avion needs to cap the amount of water usage.. Well water usage, which affects the water table, should be prohibited Too close to other farm/residences with children. lf not allowed close to schools, why close to homes where children reside? Pot farms need to be regulated properties away from population areas. and only in EFU zoned property with large distances between properties. High Desert Nectar, LLC Deschutes Co File # 247-L8-00005L-AD ( &,*1**- e;,.frf** Dorlee Kingen 21 February 2O18 . Nicole Mardell From: Tracey Burnside Importance: High HiNicole: I am following up from my voicemail message, and sending you this email regarding File Number 247-18-000051-AD, for the Applicant High Desert Nectar, LLC (Richard and Debbie Caruso from Florida) to establish a Marijuana Production facility. Our Neighborhood has retained an attorney to drive this process, but I also wanted to reach out directly a restate my and my families individual concerns for our 7 and 10 year old young children, and their safety and normal development. Besides the overall concern for my children noted above, there are additionalfundemental concerns with such a facility being put in place next to the adjoining 60 acres, in which I own: 1. Security: There are various homes, children and families that will be impacted and exposed the various number of workers that will come and go everyday, literally their backyard. Having unknown, changing people entering and leaving will introduce higher security and safety risks, Z. Safety: This area is extremely populated with young children all all sides of adjoining property. Young children that can be hurt, exposed to addictive drugs next door, and potential impacted by the secondary effects ofthe plant and what is produces. 3. Drug Smell/Effect of Lifestyle on Families & Children: A plant of this nature will undoubtedly produce terrible fumes and odors, that will affect the lifestyle, comfort and quality of life for those nearby and in some cases even farther beyond due to winds carrying the odors. Additionally, it may effect the health, or trigger unknown health issues for young, developing children. 4. Negative lmpact on Property Values: This is an obvious concern -- who would want to have this in their backyard? This property has very few trees, and stands out in the middle of all the surrounding properties, This will become my primary view from rny home, that sits on the hilljust above the proposed facility. This rnay destroy property values for allthe hard working families affected, and may make it nearly impossible for any of us to sell our homes in the futu re. 5. Effected euality of Life by the Presence of the Facility (ie. Extreme Lighting, Fences, Security Gates, Potential 24' hourTraffic): The ongoing activity at the facility, the intense lighting, potential 24-hour operations, etc. will have an extremely negative impacts on overall quality of life by those surrounding the property. G. potential Home Schooling Effects: There are extremely close/nearby families that home school their children, that would be effected by all of the above items, 7. Unclear Water Managementt lt is unclear how the rights and waste management would be managed. Our overall quality of Life, distruption of our normal daily outdoor activities, and our enjoyment of our properties will be destroyed, with so many families and children affected. I have owned my property since 1976, and have loved, taken care and valued the beauty and serenity of my property and what it has brought to my daughters, and now my grandkids that live in town and spend a great deal of time playing and running around my property. lf this were to be approved, it would impact their abitity to enjoy what I have worked so hard over the years to share with them. Many other families will be effected similarly. Thanl< you very much for your consideration and concern for the children in our community. Best Regards, 1 Dr, Robert E. Burnside & Family 541-480-7048 ffih;;;;;'.ntsmaycontainproprietaryandconfidentialinformationthatis intended for the addressEe(s) only. lf you are not the ihtended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copylng, distribution, retentlon or use of the contents of this information is prohibited. When addressed to our clients or vendors, any information contained in this e-mail or any attachments is subject to the terms and conditions ln any governlng contract. lf you have received this e-mail in error, please immedlately contact the sender and delete the e-mail. 2 From: Kevin Mccormack To: Nicole Mardell Subject: Neighborhood Maruuana Growing Complo< - 62266 Byram Rd. Date: Tuesday, February 06, 2018 L2:06:24PM I am writing in opposition of proposed land use grant at address 62266 Byram Rd for a Commercial Marijuana Factory. On behalf of my children and family, and many more who live in the Wallace Acres neighborhood abutting Byram Rd. in Deschutes County, OR. Our home is located at22585 Martee Ln in the Wallace Acres neighborhood directly across the street from 62266 Byram. We have just recently been informed of the proposed land use request by the Out of State owner(s) of 62266 Byram Rd. Richard and Debbie Caruso whom reside in Boca Raton, FL, for a grantto build and operate a commercial marijuana growing operation in our neighborhood. As tax payers and residents of this county and community we vehemently oppose the idea of a Commercial Marijuana operation in our neighborhood. As voters we realize the use and sale of Marijuana has been legalized in our state and understand there is little we can do oppose that... and the rights of prospective growers are valid. We also rcalize there has been very poor planning on the part of the elected powers that be to regulate and provide answers to the many issues involved in the onslaught of this growing entity in our state and specifically Deschutes County. That being said our voice as homeowners, residence, and tax payers is equally as valid and hope we can be heard and considered as well. This proposed commercial marijuana grow operation will be less than 50' from my property line and beyond all else the safety and security of my 2 daughters and wife are what I am most concerned about. I understand marijuana is now legal in our state but that has not, and will not, take out the criminal element associated with it. One of the most glaring issues thus far in the realm of legalized marijuana, is that criminal element, against legal operations. To have that potential threat located 50'from my wife and daughters, my neighbors children and families... is more than concerning to me! Especially when said owners of property address 62266live and reside in Boca Raton, FL. Can I expect them to respect and be concerned with the day to day safety of my family and my neighbor's families? Clearly not if they already have proposed to set up a commercial marijuana operation across the street from a community of families with children. I do respect and firmly believe in our social responsibility to abide by the laws voted in to our state by the people of our state, as well as those enacted by our elected representatives. However, I do hope the safety and security of our children are at the forefront of our elected officials decision making process'! In my opinion to allow a Marijauna growing operation and the potential criminal activity it would elicit to an out of state resident, or any resident, less than 50' from a community of children and families, would very much bring their responsibilities to the well being and safety of their community in question. I hope beyond the monetary, the confusion of litigating the new marijuana entity in our state, and all that it encompasses. The safety of the children of our community is still taken into consideration, And that the proposed grant for a Commercial Marijuana Operation at62266 Byram Rd. in Deschutes County, is DENIED! Thank you for your time and consideration on this... Most Sincerely, Jordan Kevin McCormack Oregon Resident Kevin McCormack Armstrong Transport GrouP Logistics Manager Local - 541.604-1974 Fax - 541.550.2213 email - kmackl ogi stic@gmail. com MC#-55s609 SCAC-ATIE February 4,ZO1.B Steve Hannas 62328 Byram Road Bend, OR 9770X (s41) 38e-632e Deschutes County Community Development Depa rtment Attn.: Nicole Mardell, Associate Planner P.O. Box 6005 La7 NW Lafayette Ave. Bend, OR 97708-6005 Proposed Land Use Aclion 247-18-000051-AD Ms. Mardell, Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the application for Administrative Determination to establish a Marijuana Production Facilitv on Byram Road (Fite No. 247-18-000051-AD). Your thorough review and consideration of how this proposed commercial type use is not compatible with the existing ru ra I neighbo r.hood is respectf u I ly re q uested. I offer the fotlowing arguments why a Marijuana Production Facility is not compatible with the existing residences within the Byram Road area: Use: The properties on both sides of Byram Road, including Wallace Acres and properties to the east are currently developed as single-family dwellings on properties of various sizes. The diverse property sizes allow for a mix of rural residential uses, including the r.aising and keeping of live5tock, hay fields, and open spaces. Many of the homes currently have families with children. Many have elected to home-schosl, including our,household. We ar:e raising our three daughters on our property, and have enjoyed the quiet, safe neighborhood. Although permitted in the EFI.J and MUA-1-0 zones, the proposed Marijuana Production Facility appears to be a commercial use. Section 18.16,010 of the Deschutes County Code (DCC) states: 'The purpose of the Exclusive Farm Use zones is to preserue and maintain agricultural lands and to serve as a sanctuary for farm uses." DCC 18.1L6.330 provides Supplementary Provisions for the requested use. These provisions are directed towards typical commercial usage - Clear Vision Areas, Parking/Loading, Lighting, Odor, Screening/Fencing, etc- The provided Site plan and burden of proof statement document this facility will comply with thesecommercial type provisions. Agricultural Land: The subject property appears to have been developed as pasture or a hay field in the past, due to the lack of surface rock, trees, and irrigation main shown on the site plan. The submittal documents include a statement'from Central Oregon lrrigation District (COID) that the property has L0 acres of irrigation water rights. ln the past, the property directly to the north has raised two cuttings of grass hay per year. Our neighbor to the north has also r:aised hay and,grain crops. We have been harvesting two to three cuttings of hav on € field roughly two miles south (on Gosney Road) for the past five years. I believe the,subject is well srrited for similar use. It does not appear the proposed use will use either the soil or the water right for this production. The submitted letterfrom COID states: 'Structures built on top of a mapped water right:for any purpose other than starting/growing plants during the irr:igation season is not atlowed," The COID letter further states: "Water rights are subject to the laws and rules of the State of Oregon, thefede ral goverpment, and the policies of the District." Since marijuana is still illegal under federat law, the last statement in the COID lettel infers; in this case, use of COID irr:igation water will not be considered a beneficial use of the water right. lf this application is deemed acceptable, a condition of approval should be provided allowing COID annual access and evaluation of the water right, including the right to remove water rights were not appropriate. Safety: The Byram Road area is overwhelmingly a residential neighborhood, with famllies and children, An established school bus stop on Byram Road is just south of the Martee Lane intersection. This is roughly 365 feet from the subject property; The driveway shown on the submitted site plan is in a dangerous location. This is just north of a crest in the road. A condition of approval is recommended requiring adequate sight distance be verified and a proper driveway permit be obtained from the Deschutes County Road Department. We have concerns with the activities that may occur with the product that is proposed in this operation Marijuana continues as a "cash only''transaction product and as a high value crop. This commercial type production, and the necessary security measures, do not belong in a residential neighborhood. Dwelling: The neighborhood was notified of the application for a Non-farm dwelling on the property (247-L7-AAi040rt-CU). This application appeqred to be for a similar use of the neighborhood and no written public comme,nts were received, According to DCC 18.116.330,B.20.a.i, a new dwelling used in conjunction with,the marijuano crop is prohibited. How can a home on the same property as a grow facility not be consider:ed part of the marijuana crop? How is this provision enforced? The simple answer is to deny one use - either the conditional use for a non-farm dwelling of the marijuana production facility. We recommend the later. Odor: Effective odor control measurss, and the measurEment of odor, seems very subjective. The submitted materials provide no quantifiable,measurements of odor reduction. We are concerned with the effectiveness and will be willing to report noticeable odors. Again, the by-product of this commercial use is not compatible with the existing neighborhood. ln conclusion, the proposed marijuana production facility is not compatible with the surrounding neighborhood uses. Denialof the application is recommended. Sincerely,ffu,j'* Steve Hannas . Nicole Mardell From: Kristen Torkelson < kristen.torkelson @gmai l.com > Sent: Saturday, February 03, 2018 7:24 AM To: Nicole Mardell Subject: Marijuana Grow Facility: 62266 Byram Rd File Number 247-18-000051-AD RE: 62266 Byram Rd, File Number 247-18-000051-AD I am writing concerning the marijuana grow facility being proposed on Byram Rd. I urge you to reconsider this decision. I live in a small acreage neighborhood across the street from the proposed facility. This decision would have a large impact on the quality of life that I enjoy. I am concerned about the water, irrigation use, and my quality of life, How is this planned facility getting their water? We are on a shared well in our neighborhood and I worry about the amount of water that will be used to sustain 5,000 square feet of plants. I have recently heard of other areas in Deschutes County that have their wells drying up when a marijuana grow is established in their neighborhood. Will they be using our irrigation for their facility? lf so, how will the amount of water be measured that is being removed from the canal. Last year we were running short of water for our farms and gardens. I am very concerned about the amount of water that will be used, especially with the warm winter we have had. \Mtat will be the impact on the people that are further down the canal? Many of these people raise livestock and grow hay for their livelihood. We already have one medicalgrow facility in our neighborhood and it smells horrible. This larger facility is going to make that much more intolerable" lt is hard to be outside in our front yard when the plants are being harvested. This is a quiet area and the sound of the equipment is also going to be a nuisance. I am also very concerned about my property value. This is impact has been seen in several areas close by that have had a grow facility move in. The home values have plummeted and they can not sell. The impact of this facility is far reaching. On the news I saw where Oregon has over produced marijuana and there is now a large element of drug cartels moving into the area, (http://www.foxbusines summit.html) I do not understand why the county would allow permit new facilities, it does not make sense. Please reconsider this application. Kristen Torkelson 62316 Wallace Rd Bend, OR 1 Nicole Mardell From: Kayla Nagelhout < [email protected] > Sent: Thursday, February 01, 2018 1:57 PM To: Nicole Mardell Cc: Tammy Baney Subject: Fwd: File number 247-L8-OOOO51-AD Dear Nicole Mardell and whomever else it may concern, Please consider this our letter AGAINST the pot grow farm application located at the address 62266 Byram Rd in Bend (file number referenced in subject line). My husband I were both born and raised here in Bend, we have young active children, and they love to play outside. We bought this property six years ago to raise our family in prior to cannabis being legalized in the State of Oregon. There are SO rnany reasons we ask that you please reject this application and consider the families and community that will be poorly affected by this "grow farm". I will try to focus on how it will change my family and our lives on Byram Road. I know that we have many neighbors against this application, so I will let them tell you their own story. We beg you to please help us to keep the small neighborhood feel that Byram Rd and the subdivisions surrounding the subject property have had for many years. If this farm is allowed to exist, we will no longer feel safe letting our kids run and play outside. IJs, our children & pets will be forced to breathe in the terrible smells that accompany such a place, The traffrc on our street will greatly increase and the wrong crowd will be drawn to this currently quiet and quaint area of town. Please don't let the owners who don't even live in this state of Oregon(they live in FL) and have no intention of living near their own "grow farm" ruin this neighborhood & community that we currently have & love. Our home in this area of Bend is where we hoped to raise our family. Having a cannabis farm down the road depreciates the value of our home and reduces the quality of life we have here. Please don't let these very large buildings with fans & night lights (against the Deschutes county lighting ordinance), meant to house drugs, go up next to our families and our animals, this is not the place for it. We ask (again) that this application be denied. We also ask you to consider the families next to it that home school their children and the families that participate in 4-H. We thank you for taking the time to read this and consider our request & we really hope that our voices are heard. Thank you again, Tyler and Kayla Nagelhout (62015 Byram Rd) 2 January 30, 2018 RE: File # 247-LS-QOOO51-AD The area in which Richard and Debbie Caruso, of Florida, have applied to put a marijuana growing operation is a relatively densely populated rural area with many children. Such an operation should be restricted to the most remote area$. In applying for this, the Caruso's demonstrate complete disregard for the livability of their neighbors and community. All members are deeply offended. While growing recreational marijuana is now legal, many remain adamantly opposed (some on a moral basis and others fear increased crime with no local resources to combat r0. We need a moratorium on these permits until we clearly understand the results of our decisions. rdrtt- ec Fromi Susan McAdam To: Nicole Mardell Subject: Marijuana Grow Operations on Byram Datel Wednesday, January 31, 2018 6:44:57 PM January 31,2018 Dear Nicole, We would like to submit this letter as opposition to the proposed marijuana grow operation at 62266 Byram Rd, Bend, OR. This neighborhood is zoned EFU for farm use, but many of the surrounding properties are2-5 acre single family home properties. Most of Wallace Acres properties across the road are2 acres, have families with school age children and enjoy the "rural experience", some having a couple horses, cattle, goats, etc. Our road, just to the west, Deer Trail subdivision, has just smaller than 5 acre lots. We also have many families with small and school age children. While we understand that the Caruso application does meet the Deschutes Zoning Code for property size, water availability, etc. It is our belief that this application process needs to take into account and take a serious look at the residential nature ofthe surrounding properties. We don't feel that the required fans, noise from fans, lighting, smells, and increased traffic for the grow operation (both for employees, deliveries, shipments, etc) are what the road or neighborhood can handle or support. Nor will it stop the smell, lighting and noise that will affect the homes so close around the marijuana operation. It is our opinion that these grow operations need to be approved for properties that are truly in and surrounded by true EFU 10 acre or above parcels not rural residential properties. Please consider our letter in opposition as well as all others in your decision making process. Respectfully submitted, LG and Susan McAdam 62285 Deer Trail Rd Bend, OR 97701 Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android ,s# Kirstein Hannas tqnr* 62328 Bl.tanr Rd, Ber:cl, Oregon 54r-4ro-r984 [email protected] January 28,2078 Dear Nicole Mardell, As a neighbor to the proposed marijuana production at 62266 Byram Rd, I am very disappointed that our neighborhood will be feeling the decline in Deschutes County standards that are being carefully crafted to protect the quality of life for a highly lugative business. Allowing the marijuana production does not protect the quality of life for the existing residents. Please do not approve application file no. 247-18-000051AD. The current application for a marijuana production facility in an EFU zone, which neither requires the propertv's water or soil, and the previous application for a dwelling on EFU reflect the talented effort of a very carefully planned effort to work the system. As neighbors we were blind-sided by the previous application for a dwelling on land zoned as EFU for 62266 Byram Rd., assuming we would be getting a new family residing in the neighborhood, Our families thought the new neighbor would build a house, maybe have kids to play with, participate in 4H and FFA, go to Mount Bachelor, do homeschool activities, help roundup loose livestock and find a lost pet. Butthe proposed neighbor is a big business with industrial roots, with full time security guards living there to protect a valuable product that attracts undesirable attention, This new neighbor is smack in the middle of our community, across the street from a school district bus stop, and between families who homeschool, Our neighborhood's safety is compromised by placing a facility that reguires full time security from unsavory and substance driven individuals next door. The application for the proposed marijuana production appears to show due diligence by the applicant's representative per Deschutes County to show compliance with Deschutes County standards regarding noise and odor. Such words as "reasonable" have no quantitative value offering no assulance to cUrrent residents use and enjoyment of our property. I am not a marijuana user and have a keen sense of smell and suffer from allergies and environmental sensitivities. When I smell that a skunk has sprayed nearby, it is reasonable to say that the ability to enjoy our property is removed. When there is a forest fire and the air is filled with smoke, the ability to use and enjoy our property is crippled. The smell of marijuana is as unpleasant to me as smelling a skunk spray or trying to work outside in the smoke from a forest fire, It is assumed that I will not be able use and enjoy our property with friends and family who are allergic or sensitive to rnarijuana, since the "reasonable" standard offers no assurance that they will not have a reaction to marijuana production in our neighborhood. Warm regards, oocusioffid byr K:^4ftb. D H****+ Kirstein D Hannas 541-410-1984 Page oz Rgtan/F.r$ JAN ? 0 2018 Di: :;c!ti:ir.t Ctrili$ C'il$ Com mu nity Developrnent' Department P.O. Box 6005 Bend, Or 97708-6005 ATTN: Nicole Mardell, Associate Planner We are writing this letter in opposition to Proposed Land Use, Action File Number 247 -18-000051 -AD. Ourfamily has lived on Byram Road forthe past 45 years (1973). We raised our kids here and have retired here. Our community is made up of young people with children and older retired folks. The school bus stop is at the corner of Martee Lane and Byram Road which is right across the street from the Proposed Marijuana Production, Processing and Retailing Site. We have serious concerns as to the character and motives of the applicants. Why come to an established community for this enterprise? Why not go to a more rural part of the county? What impact will this enterprise have on our community? How about the air quality, ground water contamination and noise? What type of lighting will this place have - grow lights, security lights? Will they illuminate the whole area? How about security? Will they have armed personnel? Could our neighborhood be at risk of confrontation between the growers and the buyers? These are just some of the reasons we are opposing this land use application. Thank you, \t^-t.."^}\ ,Q*rrt;ra-,.#""*-,-*t- "M icnael and Judltlfllunny 62320 Byram Road Bend, OR 97701 541 -389-4587 tt { tugsoay, Jallualy zo, zurl) Gommunity Development Bepartment prrnnins-Eiltltlonj g;iHing $rtetv F-isjlibn Englrodmentai sallr div'isioft .:.{:-. .:ijj: j:.. . . i;: q770S:.6005 11-?,NI{I Bend; l ri :385:'1764 NOTIGE OF APPLICATION pranning the proposed rand use application(s) The Deschutes county Division has received described below: ON,, PROPOSED LAN.D U SE- ACTI .: FILE NUMBERS: 247-18-000051-AD LLC APPLICANT: High Desert Nectar, Debbie Caruso OWNER: Richard and The appticant is requesting of an Administrative PROPOSAL: .approval Facility with up Determination to establish a triar'rjuana Production to 5,000 square feet of total mature canopy area' Byram subject property has qn assigned address of 62266 LOCATION: The Map n""0, airJ and'is iientified on Deichutes County Assessor's 17-13-32 as Tax Lot 902' Planner, (541) 317-3157 STAFF GONTACT: Nicole Mardell, Associate Nicole.Mardell@deschutes'orq' STANDARDS AND APPLIGABLE CRITERIA Zone n, Processing, and Retailing res Ordinance submitted bY or on behalf of the aPPlicant at no cost. CoPies can be Purchased for the GommunitY Development DePartment ,BeitdiOregon. Pridtr Qrrn fity,$sruf ccs Pcr! onn*rtttri'fft " !1d!\ i.- r-.is *;,-*r--{ P()RTTANDCIR 9}B ii: E -lAlr zsla FHa L n.# t|Ui?fr+,4{t:1&^ ? ? a 8"9, 6oo{ {L,^A) oR l Zzo8* t" o o{ e=;*$-e;t::i=i€ 'iiihlt,;niitfuijli;i5i'ij,\111iiiiiriit;iii,i'iis'si';lilr:t Nicole Mardell From: Diane Franklin Dear Ms. Mardell. It was brought to my attention by sorne neighbors that there is an application for a 5,000 sq foot marijuana production at62266 Byram Rd. I would like it known that I am very much against this! If a formal letter is needed then I'd be happy to send you one. We have a very small greenhouse right next door that is growing marijuana and it is such an eye sore. At night, the grow lamps light up the entire neighborhood. Taking away from the "country" feel that is why we moved out here. Not to mention the terrible smell if the wind switches directions and heads towards our house. I feel there is enough of these grow operations around that one more isn't needed....or desired in our area. Thank you for your time, Have a wonderful day, Sincerely, -Diane Franklin I bvqooQ -81 -LnL \4qry) Matt Martin From: Elizabeth A. Dickson < eadickson @dicksonhatfield.com > Sent: Friday, August 03, 20L8 4:57 PM lo: Matt Martin Subject: Bertotti Ap plication L8-000379-AD Attachments: Des Co LU Submittal 8,3.18.docx; Exhibit A, Water Rights.pdf; Exhibit B, TSID.pdf; Exhibit C, Private Road.pdf Maft, We see that the applicant has submitted fufther information in an attempt to complete the application. Attached are comments from neighbors, the Di Paolos, considering these additional submittals. Liz Dickson ,l'l j,', 1ar ,lrrJ-i1,'l r l" irt rjl,, 400 SW Bluff Drive, Suite 240 Bend, OR97702 O:541 .585.2229 C: 541.410.4900 F: 54',l.330.5540 eadickson@d icksonhatfield.com Confidentiality Noiice: This e-mail message, including any attachments, is for the sole use of the intended reclpient(s) and may contain confidential and privileged information. Any unauthorized review, use, discourse or distribution is prohibited. lf you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message, Thank you' TAX ADVICE NOTICE: IRS Circular 230 requires us to advise you that, if this communication or any attachment conlains any tax advice, the advice is not intended to be used, and cannot be used, for the purpose of avoiding federal tax penallies. A taxpayer may rely on professional advice to avoid federal tax penaltles only lf the advlce ls reflected in a comprehenslve tax oplnlon that conforms to stringent requirements. Please contact us if you would like to discuss our preparation of an opinion that conforms to these IRS rules' iI ': , i ';,i.'' l. j1:rlri ,:ili, I:::J .I l.-{-j,.il--111.',1:: rlil : ,;j i.. - 'l :lt rl ii I i 400 SW Bluff Drive, Suite 240 Bend, OR 977A2 54t-585-2224 August 3,2018 Matt Martin, AICP Associate Planner Deschutes County Community Development 114 NW Lafayette Ave. Bend, OR 97703 RE: Comments on Application No. 247-1 8-000379-AD; Proposed Marijuana Production Facility at 70355 McKenzie Canyon Rd.; Applicant Ted Price/Authorized Representative David Mullan/McKenzie Canyon Properties LLC Property Owner Marian L. Bertottiof Piney Flats Tennessee Dear Matt, Our offices represent Tim and Wendy DiPaolo living at 7O4t3 McKenzie Canyon Road, Terrebonne, OR 9776A" This is the property adjacent and northeast of the property that is the subject ofthe instant application. Tim and Wendy have met with the applicant and considered whether they support this application. They have determined that its impacts would be detrimental to their home and neighborhood, and they oppose it. The specific reasons for their decision are many. Those that pertain to the applicable criteria, the issues that Vou are legally allowed to consider, are included in this letter. We ask that you consider these concerRs before deciding whether to approve or deny the application. We realize this letter comes late to you, but have recently learned the full nature and details of the proposed use. Please accept this letter and attachments into the Record for this matter. 1. The Pr.ouosal lqgXf ,q-leeal Water source for the intended..use. The Subject Property has limited use of a shared well that serves 4 farms as a supplemental water right to Three Sisters lrrigation District irrigation water. See Exhibit A, Page 1. A Supplemental lrrigation Right may only be used when the underlying right is not available from surface water sources, which often does not occur at all in some irrigation seasons. Furthermore, the right is to be shared by 4 farms, including the Ludi farm now owned by Ms. Bertottl. Exhibit A, Page 2 is the Water Well Report for the subject well. Note that it is a 1981 well, so not of particularly high date priority. This is affirmed by the Certificate attached as Page 1. A 1981 seniority date is very late, and likely one of the first to be called in the event of a water basin shortage. Finally, the character of use specific in the permit is irrigation, meaning that the water must be used on the ground. The proposal offered for approval to the county proposes to use containers, which is construed as nursery use indoors. Exhibit A, Page 3 specifically Bertotti Application DiPaolo Comments in OPPosition Page 2 calls out the requirement that the character of use may not be changed without OWRD permission in the form of a Change of Use, which is a lengthy approval process. Applicant has not made such application. The Applicant offers a letter from the irrigation district to prove that sufficient water is both sufficient andfeasibletoprovide. TheDecember26,ZOLT letterfromTSlD,LindaThompson,Office Administrator, called out the Squaw Creek lrrigation District Certificate No, 74135. She noted that the right is for 8 acres of water for Tax Lot 100. That right is for irrigation purposes only. The proposed use is not application of water to the soils of Tax Lot 100, but rather to hydroponically cultivated plants within container structures with floors, walls, and ceilings. The letter from Ms. Thompson does not specify the use to which Applicant proposes to put the water, and so does not specify that the water on TSID's certificate may be used for the planned purpose. See Exhibit B, Letter from TSID, attached for ease of reference. ln summary, the TSID letter offered as evidence of a sufficient and feasible water source by the Applicant is, in reality, neither sufficient nor feasible. Furthermore, the supplemental water right does not satisfy the County's requirements either. This criterion is not satisfied. 2. The Prooosal is not served bv adequate raadaqeess. ' The Subject Property is located on McKenzie Canyon Road. This road is private except for a small segment approximately % of a mile long in Section l-3. See Exhibit C, Pages 1 and 2. McKenzie Canyon Road Research, obtained from Deschutes County Road Department archives. This road is one lane wide, and maintained privately. lt is graded as a result of a collection taken up among the neighbors as needed byJackie Gibbs and Amanda Clark. Plowing is performed by neighbors as possible. The neighbors are opposed to this application in general, and are particularly opposed to paying for the added impacts of employees, vendors, and delivery trucks needed for a commercial enterprise on the road. Easements granted to use the roadway do not specify this use as allowable, Approval of the application will result in significant negative impacts to the other users of this road Current facilities are not adequate to accommodate this use. lt is properly denied" 3. The .ProFeSALii not'ser.ved ,bv adeQuate',electricel,,se.rviee or'a,means to provide samq- CEC currently provides 200 amp, 3 phase service to the Subject Property to power the well shared by 4 farms as supplement to the TSID surface rights appurtenant to the Subject Property as noted above. This amount of power is not sufficient to serve the proposed use. CEC testified in a recent Alfalfa marijuana grow application that a 20,000 s.f. grow would require 4,000 amps. lt is reasonable to conclude that a grow % that size, of 5,000 s.f., would require % of the power, or 1,000 amps. The existing line would need to be upgraded by a multiple of 5 times to serve the proposed use. The existing CEC seruice was installed prior to land division of the Subject Property to 4 separate farms It does not have a legal easement to run the existing line over the other divided lands, in particular the Calavan/Foster property. The neighbors who would be required to provide approval to grant an Bertotti Application DiPaolo Comments in OPPosition Page 3 easement to accommodate the larger line have decided not to grant such easement. Thus, the applicant does not have the ability to obtain the necessary power required to run the proposed grow operation. ,,Will CEC,s Serue" letter does not address this issue. Service representatives on site refused to address the problem with neighbors when requested to do so. Since CEC cannot legally upgrade the service as needed to serve the proposed use, it is not feasible to find that adequate electrical service will be available for the proposed use. 4. The Proposaldoes not complv With Wildlife Manaeemqnl Qveflglzone Requirements. The Subject Property is located in a Wildlife Area Combining Zone. Neighbors are concerned that the fencing needed to secure the secluded operation will be extensive. However, restrictions in this zone preclude such fencing, making the application an unsuitable use in the area of the Subject Property. Applicant must prove that such use will be secure, despite the fact that no one will live on site and the operators live 45 minutes - t hour away in Bend, and the owner lives in Tennessee. S. T.he PJoposal lnsa-tign is.within orohibited_pro.ximitv of,'a Youth Activitv-Center" Neighbors Calavan/Foster are particularly concerned about the proposed application. These neighbors are 4H leaders" They hold regular meetings with children at their farm, particularly during the months of April - September when programs are active and preparations for competition at County and State Fairs are active. These are the same months when marijuana grows are most intense, capitalizing on the natural warmth of the spring and summer months. This use is not allowed so close to activities such as 4H, and should be denied on these grounds alone' The submitted land use application is part of a larger package of documents. These include 4 building permit applications for Ag Exempt uses. Those applications incorrectly list the zoning as "EFU" without specifying the Flood Plain and Wildlife Management Overlay Zones" Applicant does not accurately depict the Subject Property in its applications, as is its legal obligation, Overlay zones are critical to correct analysis of compatibility. Thank you, in advance, for your consideration of these comments' Sincerely, /sl Elizabeth A. Dickson EAD/hoh Cc: Client .Y .:'. :: t ;1: I. ri,, lt i- 'd ::'ri .* srAtl oF cRl{loN tf J courtTt or DBscrlltlBg ,*: ?j, ..BAIER,. Rr @{ ,ii,tgEB!.l',1,,,.q-AIE lor r t ".,.i .T CERTT?TCITE ISSUEE :::. T'II8 .{. :::::: 'r.3 'O i: ": ,', STEVE{ A,;iUOEl :: ',:,. ITINIIA il. UOER""'" '' i{ 724 XI'3 BEIIIE RI1IE8 DR. 1 :i BoIlIllAEi CA 94924 BACrEIDA I{EI@rE, eA 917{5 :!, KEtnrEf,H R. i. ti.l$F.'..i.i :r" DAvrD,iidiir:i:;i ' .!. finn i"1flffir,i DEFORAS A. TTEXEE .a .i. gE NE TBENTION .f 19595 t'lAnflN RD. . 2O{i[ EA}rDyr OR 97055 sEtrD. oR 97701 :it l: i; :i. .t + ,;l t' il: .pt #,f; ri" thc 8QUtrT CREEK BA8IN fof t. :.t b, t" :!i. :'.. ,prl orlty la::,lw* ,1311,5;g.L .1ca cqulvalenE ln crct of, -tifltf;Vs;" ji' ;it' rhe g aq . . rrarr lgdrttd, J:: ::l ":, M r/l lrs 1/(, EgqtroN 23 , TOi{NSHTP 11.,b88T,1{,t{,1 600 FEBT sOUfH AND !20 trEET }IEsT FROT.I II'IIE HE coRNilR"ot t:J a' Gt-10c{{.oc CertificqEe Nur$er 82185 &4"&r A, P./ RE,CEIVE'H* vAiiER.wEI^r REPoRT APR 81981 srarnsdr oRscoN . ji:,1;i,! iii'.r.rrilirii.n*r:.it*';e: e-r WATER RgSOURCES NEF{ SALEM. OnE€ON l: . (TO) INCATION H9!EAN I ! i (cbeck): D Tt?E OFWORI( trl r. O lrloarln well. L' Wull (X, Dcrp (4} (oheok): |) TYFE;OI' PROPOSEDUSE l.- Vurl'.iFl o ..O sw Orb.d o t t, t: ti i dougc' l Oaugr t: i;. J l,iri{di.n!d? SrIt*, i + 1.t :.. :! .1. L t. a t: :!. l: 1 I ir.str lutrttd tur \fDLL TE$TSI { I Cerlltlcatiour \Ynrrr Wrill Ooslioolbr'e (.nlc end thls raltri b ta w&9 undor. 1,.trun^,..,. Nttln., tSltptdJ le..Bl 'Cotrtroctor'dUc{D|e ", UUtt Utlirt!j,ttl', a9{r1gl1Ynt.t. guJ\t, otl"L'CON l]:'10 t tlx clsbd ad fFLa?t !t thil t?F nrlun 30 &Yr lM rtr AF u' hil whtluor b L. irlel *l!h Uh &tf h,f A, /. z- Water Regources Departnrent I n North Moll Ot'flcc Building 715 Summer Shce ! NE, Sulto A Thacdsrc IL Kulongotkl, Gul'unrrrr 9alcnr, OIt 97301-Un s03486-0900 I|AX 503-986-0904 ; ti'! Dnte Mailecl June 2Lr20A6 itl .I NOTI CE O F' CERTIF'I CATE ISSUANCE i+. {t .t The attached certificate confinns the water right established under the terms of a pemrit issued by this i' departrnent. The water right is now appudenant to the specific placc wtrere the uss wns established as j1 .4 described lry the certificate, The water right is limited to a specifio Brnount of $'ater, but more than cfln not ] be benefieiaily used for the purposes stated rvithin the certi{icate, I This is a final order in other than a contested case. Tlris order [s subject to judicial rcvierv under ORS 183.484, Anypctitionforjudicialreviervmustbefiledwithin60dnysofthcnrnilingdntc$t,.rtcdnbovc l t as specified by OR$ 183.484(2), i .t This statement ofjudicial review rigbts is rcquired uuder ORS 536,0?5; it does nct ultcr or add to existiug l; review rights or create review rights that are not otherwise provided by larv, fn Under ORS 537.260 and 537.270, a water right certificate lnay be sontested before the Water Rssources trl: t. Departnent within tliree (3) rnottlrs of the date it is issued. If a certifictrtc is contested, thr: qrrulilying .:, cortcslant shall be offered m adrninistrative heering. {.: :. Orcgou law doe$ not allow the Director to reissue a certifibate because of a chnrrge iu the ownership of tlre f.: appurtenzurt place of use, The water must be contro lled and not wasted. To chauge the location of the point I ': of diversion, tljs .horn"t*fS.lggg, or tlrc locatiotr of use reguires tlte advarree approvnl of thc lvutcr l: Rcsources Director. i, If any portion of this rvater right is not used for five or nlore consecutive years, that portiort of the riglrt rnay be subject to forfeiture according to ORS 540,610, Lnnd enrolled in n Federal Reservc Prograrn is uot subject to forfeiture diuing the pcriocl of cnrollrncnt, Other exceptions to forfciture nre cxplained irt ORS 540.610, If you have any questious please corrtast Cerry Clalk at 503"986-0811. ' - a1 tt4 ( kt F;rn crl/6 ?# '4'd EtqhhrA, 13 i ; ,| i December 26, 2017 .il: :.1 1:i Marian Bertottl 70355 McKenzle Canyon Rd. Slsters, OR 97759 l 1. Re: lrrlgation Water :t, :1 Dear Marlanr As requested by Doug Spencer, thls ls a letter concernlng the avallablllty of water for 70355 i Road, Sisters, OR 97759. McKenzie Canyon i lnLg97, Certlflcate of Water Rlght 74135 was lssued to Squaw Creek lrrigatlon Dlstrlct, now ti known as Three Sisters lrrigation District. This right includes 8,O acres of 1895 priorlty water (..| appurtenant to land located at Twn 14S, Rng ltE, Sec 23, Tax.Lot 100. As such, water dellvery to this I property wlll be sublect to Three Sisters lrrlgatlon District's Rules & Regulatlons. ..1 Section 5 Water Distrlbutlon: i be any t A. The lrrlgatlon season shall normally run from April 1to October 31, These dates may altered in : given year by actlon ofthe Board of Dlrectors for good and sufflclent reason. i B. All water recelved by the Three Slsters lrrigatlon Dlstrlct at the polnt of dlverslon on Whychus Creek : shall be dlstrlbuted to the mernbers of the Distrlct in accordance with their respective dates of priorlty 1 ': and in an amount ln accordance wlth thelr respectlve water rights of record, + j C, Tha week for dellvery of water ls defined as Sunday through Saturday. D. lt shall be the duty of the manager and the employees of the District to malntain an even flow of water i to the users of the Dlstrict system, and ln the event of uneven fluctuatlon or a shortage of water, the '.i users. ri employea in charge of dlstributlon will, if possible, make up such shortage to the affected ''1 1 E. ln the event the Whychus Creek Water ls dellvered to users havlng a priority date after 1895, at a time or ln perlods when the 1895 and prlor rights of the District are not recelvirtg their full adjudlcated correct the situatlon and report amount of water, lt shall be the duty of the manager to lmmedlately ': this occurrence to the Board of Directors' F. The manager at such tlmes as there is a shortage of water shalJ institute a rotatlon system whqreby the water shall be rotated between the various rights and the varlous users entitled to lts use so that each ' water user may recelve a sufflcient head of water for economical irrigatlon, Such rotation plans shall just be placed lnto effect so that each water user shall receive his and equitable proportlon of the i ,water available accordlng to hls adjudlcated rlght; provided, however, that no system of rotatlon shall .t be placed lnto effect which dentes any water user the use of water for lrrlgatlon for a perlod of more than seven (7) consecuUve days during any irrigation season. except by consent of the manager and water user thls may be extended to fourteen (141 days. No rotatlon plan shall be placed lnto effect whlch does not provide that each user recelves hts lust and equitable allotment of water. Sincerely, /-hJz.TEtarp.ep' Linda Thomp/on Offlce Admlnlstrator PO Box 223Q Slsters, OR 97759 Phone 541-549-8815 Fax 541-549-8070 www.tsidweb.orB office@tsidweb,orq &["ie,6 '.h'. J- lj I 4 Matt Martin From: Steve Calavan Matt, My name is Steve Calavan. I am the neighboring property owrrer to which this proposed Pot Farm is to receive electricity. I have spoken to Central Electric. They own the lines (not right of way) that provide power to a pump at 70355 Mckenzie Canyon. There at this time is not other source of electricity that we can see for this property. I was told by CEC that an upgrade to the existing line across ow property cannot be done without my consent.; an upgrade meaning anything other than powering the inigation pump' A meeting was held Sunday 6/rc/2}18 by the potential growers. At which tirne they were told they had done due diligence and could use the existing line for power . Knowing that power will be needed for security, fans, grow lights etc. this concerned me. I will not allow unyrnor. r1re of this line. In fact it really needs to be removed because CEC has not right of way' We have left it up out of consideration. I have no agreement with the new owners.A new line will need to be run for this Pot Farrn to upgrade power. Steve Calavan l Matt Martin From: wendy dipaolo June 8,2018 Matt Martin , AICP Associate Planner. Deschutes County Planner 6ood morning Matt. One final letter for your consideration, Ye!e& AppiiJants state they have a domestic well. They do not. The well on the property is a supplementat inigation well only, Sbared by four farms, per state certificate #82 I 85 State of Oregon Counly ofDeschutes Certificate of Water Right (see attached ) Electric Denrand: i rpfi. that-t1ere is no easement for CEC to upgrade tlre power supply tlrat an operation of this size would require' jrigation The ixisting power to the property is dedicated to the irrigation well (it is only enough power to run the well pump). .iwill CEC sent q serve" littei to the applicants. lt states tlrat they will continue to provide theur with existing power. Nothing about a major upgrade' Youth Activitv Center: Owners ofadjacent property, Calvin and Antanda Foster, Steve Calavan. Calvin and Amanda are 4 h leaders attd havc meetings rvitlr children on their fann' The law states that there must be at teast 1000 feet between Mari.iauna operations and youth activity c€nters. There would not be. (chapter 18'1 16, 18. I I 6.330, B#7) Please see attached: ln couclusion: We feel that uirtil water and electric issues are resolved tbe application should be deented incomplete. Tlrank you, Wendy and Tim DiPaolo 2 c -a- i'.: . 4 F Matt Martin From: STEVE MOHR < [email protected]> Sent: Tuesday, May 22,2018 l-0:15 AM To: Matt Martin Subject: Fw: response to letter received Matt, my name is Steve Mohr and I just received a letter from you regarding the application submitted by Ted price on behalf of owner Marian Bertotti for growing marijuana across the street from my property' I am not in favor of having the application approved. I live in TX and just got this notice. One of my neighbors informed me that the applicant needs to access power. How do they plan to get power if the neighbors will not grant an easement? | have no plans to grant an easement on my property. However, if they are interested lwould be willing to sell my property to them. lf you have any questions I can be reached at 432-425^4022. Steve Mohr 1 Matt Martin From: Steve Calavan < [email protected] > Sent: Monday, May 21,2018 9;49 AM To: Matt Martin Subject: 247-18-00379-AD Dear Matthew, For nearly a decade or even more I have seen Mackenzie canyon evolve from a sleepy farm area to a place where people come to find a home. We have large homes small fatms, mobile homes and cabins. The feel in the Canyon is that you take care to mind your business and when others get out of line you talk to thern. This proposal is worth noting because it changes a basic farm community to a drug distribution center, It is considered a schedule i highly addictive drug by our federal government. This is disturbing due to the fact that the farm I own with Mandy Foster is adjacent. Mandy's children have raised 4-H animals from their middle school to high school years. Her husband Calvin has led archery shoots for others at the property following the safety guidelines 4-H requires of their volunteer leaders. is exposing children to a class I drug something Deschutes county wishes to be involved in ? I personally have already seen how the business side of this has worked, The realtor representing the new owners wanted to use the power lines across my property to bring power to their property. He was less than transparent with his intentions. When I denied his request he swore at me over the phone and made veiled threats only those with things to hide make. The clandestine way that this transpired was just what you stereo typically think those who deal in Drugs act like. They have yet to run their own power to the property. I will remove mine if they try to force me to allow access. Even the power company CEC does not want to get involved and were led to believe even before I had a say that I was OK with them gaining access. The power company denied usage because the do not have a deeded right to allow others to use power that crosses my property and would need my written pennission to change this. We also have wildlife issues: this is a major wintering ground for Rocky Mt. EIk, Mule deer and even Golden Eagles have nested in nearby thickets. To have this foisted upon the people of Mackenzie Canyon you may wish to consider how drugs change and ruin peoples lives. Not just users but those who produce and distribute adding to the chaos of this lifestyle to a rather placid community. Steve Calavan ,1 Matt Martin From: Tim Dipaolo 1 Wendy and Tim DiPaolo 70413 McKenzie Canyon Road Terrebonne, OR 97760 May 1 1,2018 Deschutes Gounty Community Development PO Box 6005 Bend, OR 97708-6005 RE: Notice of Application, File Number 247-18-000379-AD To whom it may concern: Please consider this our written testimony regarding the referenced application, Our property is located adjacent to 70355 McKenzie Canyon Road, Terrebonne, Oregon. We purchased our property in 2005. We moved here, as did our neighbors, because of the quiet place this canyon is. With very few exceptions we help each other; all get along well and live a nice quiet "country" life in the canyon. We knew we would eventually have neighbors on the empty property on either side of us but at the time we bought our farm the only possibilities were houses and barns. Not an industrial marij uana processing facilitY, According to the County Code, our property and the referenced property are both located in an Exclusive Farm Use Area. 1. Deschutes County Code, Chapter 18.16.020 Number D allows for accessory buildings customarily provided in conjunction with farm use. According to FEMA, "An accessory structure is a structure which is on the same parcel of property as a principal structure and the use of which is incidental to the use of the principal structure. a. lt is our contention that by placing 5 greenhouses, 2 storage structures, a trim building, and other associated site improvements, the referenced application is in violation of this code. b. According to their application they've made plans for an even bigger operation, around 25,000 sq ft. This is something we will be looking at from our front door and yard. No matter what they do it will impact us. Even if they have to have their lights off by 7:00 PM the industrial buildings will still be there, where there used to be nothing. 2. Oregon Water Resources Department states irrigation water can only be used on farm land, not within a greenhouse. A nursey water right would be needed for a greenhouse. A review of the Oregon Water Resources Department Water Rights Information Query for this property (,'!ILt.p pps.wrO.state ,shows the rights are under Certificate 74135. The document states the ceftificate is for 151,35 cfs for lrrigation; 1.57 cfs for pond maintenance; and, 0,10 cfs for industrial use. a. lt is our concern that the applicants will have to have water brought in by truck. A pound of processed flower takes 100-150 gallons per season. lt takes approximately 6 plants to produce a pound of processed flowers. A canopy of 5,000 sq. ft. would hold about 1,000 plants. This means that during the growing season, the applicants would need to truck in 250,000 gallons of water. 3. Reporting on the effects of pot legalization on Colorado home prices, Realtor,com said, "homes within a half-mile of a marijuana business often have lower property value than homes in the same county that are farther out" and that "neighborhoods with grow houses are the least desirable, with an 8.4 percent price discount." 4. According to Central Electric Cooperative they will continue to provide the applicants with the existing 200 amp, three phase, 480 volt system. lf this is not sufficient to run the operation, the applicants may need to use generators. This brings in concerns regarding diesel spills and pollution. 5, McKenzie Canyon Road is a private road with traffic limitations. With the installation of growing and processing facilities, as well as the need to have water delivered by truck, it is our concern that the road will not handle the traffic load. 6. We're in an "elk migratory zone" and a "wildlife conservation area". According to Statute 88.0101 A "wildlife area combining zone" 75-100 Elk use the existing pond every fall for water and pasture here until hunting season. 7. As with any introduction of a regulated product, there are concerns about the potentialfor an introduction of crime. As the nearest neighbor to the application, we would be at risk. Conclusion: An industrial grow in a rural area has a multitude of impacts on the residents and farmers in an exclusive farm use zone. Please take into consideration our concerns about safety, traffic flow, property values, the elk migration, lack of water, and inadequate electricity. Matt Martin From: William Vejrostek Matt, We, Nancy and William Vejrostek at 7O48L McKenzie Canyon Road / Terrebonne, OR 97760, do NOT believe it is in the best interest of this neighborhood to have this CUP approved. We would like to add this information to the hearing on a CUP for a "Pot Farm" on McKenzie Canyon Road' 1. This road is a private with public access road. lt ls in terrible shape since there is no maintenance from the county and this will impact the road tremendously. With ALL the increased traffic passing along our land, which I pay taxes on, including half of the roadway. 2. This special animal area (Deer/Elk) will be negatively impacted by the facilities planned if this CUP is approved. 3. The electrical power provided for this area is strained to the max and this will cause additional power outages. 4. Although theoretically a farming activity, it appears to be more of a business activity and thus should not have the privilege associated with farming per'se. 5. The high volume of traffic associated with this new business is harmful to our AqHA and other livestock activities. 6. The threat of a forest fire is very high due to the amount of grow lights and the wattage that will be used. Such a fire woutd take out our (and many others here) livelihood in minutes. There has been such a fire close and barely able to contain in time. 7. The additional irrigation water required for this activity is going to be above the allotted amount for this parcel and as such will affect my water right from the TSI lrrigation District. Additionally, if pumped from a well, this will affect my state registered irrigation wells, and also allthe domestic water in this small valley. 8. I betieve that the federal lands adjoining property lines on the back side of the McKenzie Canyon Road (West) is designated with a special environmental strip, and this should be researched with the US Forest Service. lf so, this activity will affect what has been created there. lf a petition is circulated against this CUP, we are certainly going to sign itl Talking with neighbors, there are additional items they explained which also distracts from any approval' Thanks. Nancy/Bill Vejrostek WERT Ranch, LLC 1 Matt Martin From: Kelly Telfer Hi Mathew, Please see the attached objection to file number 247-18-000379-AD I appreciate your consideration and encourage you to come explore our beautifrrl quiet rural community that this gtow operation would significantly impact!!! Thanks, Kelly Telfer 1 May 17 ,2008 David & Kelly Telfer 70120 McKenzie Canyon Rd Sisters, OR 97759 541-644-5777 te lfe lfam i ly20 08@ g m ai l. com Matthew Martin, AICP, Associate Planner 117 NW Lafayette Ave Bend, OR 97703 File N umb er: 247 -18-000379-AD Dear Matthew, I am writing in response to the proposed land use application for 70355 McKenzie Canyon Road in Sisters, Oregon. I am profoundly concerned upon reading the proposal and believe that the stated operation is not suitable for the selected location. A marijuana production operation including the existing shop building plus the addition, five greenhouses, two storage structures, trim building and "other assbciated site improvements" constitutes a commercialscale production, processing and distribution center which would heavily impact the quality of life of the people living on this road. McKenzie Canyon Road is a 6 mile single lane dirt road that runs between Holmes Rd and Lower Bridge Rd to the north. lt is a Privately maintained road. The situs address is over 1.5 miles from Lower Bridge Rd down our private dirt road. The increased traffic that this operation will sustain will significantly impact the quality and maintenance of our road and our community. The owners of this property and proposed grow operation do not reside here in our community. They are out of state and have no vested interest to protect our quality of life here in our quiet rural community, They have no plans to be permanent residents and therefore will not know the impact that there grow operation and employees and traffic, lights and fans will have on our area. The proposal is very short on specific details which would seem to be a necessary part of such a proposal. lt does not specify size of any structures or include the number of employees that will be required to operate a facility of this size, There are also no specifications regarding lighting, odor and security measures. lt is the assumption that an operation of the proposed size will result in the presence of all three based on the county codes for a mar'rjuana production facility. I also find it troublingly ironic that the proposal states that the mature plant canopy size will be 4,960 square feet in area. This just so happens to be a mere 40 square feet less than the 5,000 sq ft canopy totalwhich would REQUIRE them to obtain written consent from all land owners on our private road. As there is no residence on the property or in the proposal one must conclude that all employees would be commuting daily, exponentially increasing daily road traffic. Our road is a private single lane dirt road which is maintained by the residents who use it. lncreased traffic due to commuting employees and transportation of product poses a threat to safety of residents and the integrity of the road itself. lf this commercial size operation were being placed within city limits they would be required to do traffic studies and state how the impact of a facility of this size will affect traffic flows. But because of the operation being proposed in a rural county setting and the strategic choice of the parties involved in the proposal for the grow operation they can come in just 40 sq ft under the restriction of 5000 sq ft and now they don't have to get permission from any other neighboring land holders to access the production facility on our private road. So how many times a year will there operation be surveyed by the State or OLCC to make sure they haven't snuck in an additional 40 sq t of plants somewhere setting them over the restricted grow size!! I also have concerns about the greenhouses occupying what is now a hay field and impacting the animals in the area. There is a herd of elk that migrate through this area as well as the deer population. I know this specific property does not have a wildlife overlay in its zoning but nonetheless it is currently an irrigated pasture land that doesn't prohibit the migration of deer, elk and other wildlife. By building 5 2000 sq ft greenhouses and other outbuildings that will significantly affect animals in the area. Not to mention the fencing that will prevent them from crossing through this area to get to the other side of the canyon that they migrate through. My final point of cclntention is the fact that this 21 acre piece of property is not a comptete parcel on one side of the road, The 21 acres encompasses land on both sides of McKenzie Canyon Rd. Therefore forcing them to use the most usable section of flat land on the western aspect of the road. And therefore condensing the buildings even more in to a smaller section of land than if the whole parcel was on one side of the road. Large scale industrial development, such as that proposed, will also have a detrimental effect on surrounding property values, as secluded nature is the appeal of the properties and residences in our location. My husband, three young children and I moved to our property on McKenzie Canyon Road 2 years ago. We cherish the natural beauty, minimal noise and traffic and rural community that we've found here. These things make it worth it for us to face the inherent adversity of living in such a remote location. The intrusion of this operation would greatly impact our quality of life. I have no personal objection to marijuana use or production. The scope of the proposed operation is simply unfit for the prospective location and I request that you deny the application. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, David and Kelly Telfer Matt Martin Frorn: Amanda Clark <[email protected]> Sent: Thursday, May L7, 2018 4:37 PM to: Matt Martin SubJect: Written Comment lor File#247-L8-000379-AD Attachments: County Plan ni ng Input.pdf; ATT0000l-.txt Hello Matt, We spoke the other day and, again, I really appreciate you taking the time to answer my questions. Please confirm that you received this when convenient. Best, Amanda Clark t May 17,2018 Amanda Clark 70090 Mckenzie Canyon Rd. Sisters, OR 97759-9316 Phone: 541 -771 -0946 [email protected] Matthew Martin, AICB Associate Planner 117 NW LafayetteAve. Bend, OR 97703 File Number: 247 -1 8-0Q0379-AD Dear Matthew, I am writing in response to the proposed land use application for 70355 Mckenzie Canyon Road in Sisters, Oregon. I am profoundly concerned upon reading the proposal and believe that the stated operation is not sustainable for the selected location. A marijuana production operation including the existing shop building plus an addition, five greenhouses, two storage structures, trim building and "other associated site improvements" constitutes an industrial scale production, processing and distribution center which would heavily impact the safety and quality of life of the people living on this road. The proposal is very short on specifics which would seem to be a necessary part of such a decision. lt does nofspecify size of any structures or include an assessment of how many personnel would be required to run the facilities. There are also no specifications regarding lighting, odor and security measures. lt is the assumption that an operation of the proposed size will result in the presence of allthree. The proposal states that the mature plant canopy size will be 4,960 square feet in area. This just so happens to be a mere 40 square feet less than The 5,000 total which would require them to obtain written consent from all land owners on our private road. As there is no residence on the property or in the proposal one must conclude that all employees would be commuting daily, exponentially increasing daily road traffic. Our road is a private single lane dirt road which is maintained by the residents who use it. lncreased traffic due to commuting employees and transportation of product poses a threat to safety of residents and the integrity of the road itself. Large scale industrial development, such as that proposed, will also have a detrimental effect on iurrounding property values, as secluded nature is the appeal of the properties and residences in our location. My husband, two young children and I moved to our property on Mckenzie Canyon Road almost seven years ago. We cherish the natural beauty, minimal noise and traffic and rural community that we've found here. These things make it worth it for us to face the inherent adversity of living in such a remote location. The intrusion of this operation would greatly impact our quality of life. I have no personal objection to marijuana use or production. The scope of the proposed operation is simply unfit for the prospective location and I request that you deny the application. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, Amanda Clark Matt Martin From: CALVIN FOSTER ---:------Forwarded message From: thank you calvin I also spoke do David Leal At the US. fish & Wildlife He said if it causes issue with the nesting habits of the eagle there may need to be something done as well Thank you Calvin t Martin Planning Division t.0OO37g'ad wE6'five theiC; liko They thc.canyon' ''- : .' rieigJrbor .Lhere complaius of the sruell of Lhe operation constrihtl$i he infoiacd nre thal the growing .operatibns.dtre emit a vcry slron!, qualitY stroiiger .odor lvher: heing lrarvested' This *ill glcatly affect thc ait area,not forjust nle btt the neighbors as lvell' piped our cangl thc wildlife has decreased is also the issue of the rvildlife, Sincc ihey have the area. 'l'he area tbat is being area, and adding all of the green houses attd activity in is a crossing for deer and elk, .r"1,:. as weli this operaiion inlo effcct ,:: Matt Martin From: Tim Dipaolo Good morning Matthew, I guess I would call this comment general information that pertains to The grow application file no. 247-18-000379-AD , 70355 McKenzie Canyon Rd. Terrebonne .,.. sorry for any confusion, I'm new to this kind of stuff Sent from rny iPhone On May 17,2018, at9:44 AM, Matt Martin Good Morning Tim- What is the purpose of sending this message? ls if for general information or related to an application? lf related to an application please provide application and/or address information so it can be included in the file record. Thank You, Matthew Martin, AICP I Associate Planner DESCHUTES COUNTY COMMUN'TY DEV[tOPMFNT 117 NW LafayetteAvenue I Bend, Oregon 97703 From: Tim Dipaolo htul:#r1,iy*T1t,-li_enclbplletiir;eoin/l:sqalst, tel,6332 L32- I 5 1/tle$0lrutps-,sa,unny,.*l'.oolc.*ttrl-salif'arnia-for- cannabi s- guidance?referrer:home Deschutes County looks to California for cannabis guidance 1 California cities and counties could provide framework for production cap Stepten-HilruyaI: The Bulletin After looking to a variety of Oregon agencies for guidance on Deschutes County's approach to recreational marijuana, county planners could look south for a solution. Last weelc, the Deschutes County Commission discussed approaches to limit the density of marijuana growing operations in certain rural parts of the county that z have seen the lion's share of land use applications, including Tumalo and Alfalfa. Nick Lelack, community development director for Deschutes County, said this has been a priority for the commission since it began reaching out to rural residents last year. "There are a couple of areas that are experiencing more issues than others, and the board wants to address those issues," Lelack said. One of the suggested approaches, which will be explored in greater depth during a work session Wednesday, is to ernulate approaches being considered in certain cities and counties in California to limit the newly legal industry there. Before the commission meeting May 7, Deschutes County planning staff provided a list of four cities and counties in California that had enacted or has proposed rules to restrict marijuana cultivation: Humboldt County, Sacramento, Santa Barbara County and Monterey County. The approaches vary in each community, from proposed limitations on the number of cultivation licenses in Humboldt County, to mandating that cannabis cultivation must occur within an existing warehouse or greenhouse in Monterey County. Lelack noted that looking at California's restrictions is just one method among many when exploring ways to limit the marijuana industry in rural parts of the county. There aren't examples of these types of limitations in Oregon counties, so looking outside the state could help the counfy identifii a legally defensible approach, he said. "We're going to need a solid justification for any caps," Lelack said. "The bar will be very high." Deschutes County finalized rules for recreational marijuana growing operations outside urban growth boundaries in fall 2016. The regulations were always intended to be revisited, and Deschutes County commissioners and staff have been looking at changing their approach to marijuana regulations since last September. The commission has focused on refining land use restrictions around marijuana ranging from properfy set backs to smell mitigation - and requesting -additional information from state agencies like the Oregon Liquor Control Commission and the Oregon Water Resources Department. 3 At the request of Commissioner Phil Henderson, the counfy has looked at how other communities are managing the newly legal industry. "They just don't seem to have the same problems," Henderson said of communities in Califomia and Washington. Recreational marijuana became legal in California at the beginning of this year, after the state passed Proposition 64 in2A16. The law provides leeway for cities and counties to enforce their own laws around cannabis production, and a majority of local governments in California currently don't allow recreational cannabis. And several that do are looking at ways to limit density to avoid being inundated with applications, according to Lelack. As a potential model for Deschutes County, Henderson pointed to Hurnboldt County in far Northern California, which is considering capping the total number of cannabis cultivation permits at 5,000. However, he was quick to point out that any cap in Deschutes County would likely be set far lower than the California county, which is one of three counties - Mendocino and Trinity being the others that have long been called the "Emerald Triangle" because of the large amount- of cannabis grown there. "That's kind of the epicenter of outdoor growing in Califomia," Henderson said. "I don't think we'd necessarily try to be that." One key difference between marijuana laws in Oregon and California is Oregon's protection of the industry under right-to-farm laws. For that reason, Lelack said the county faces a significant legal hurdle when trying to place lirnits on cannabis cultivation. The County Comrnission will discuss density caps and other potential changes to the county's marijuana rules in more detail at 1:30 p.m. Wednesday in the Deschutes Services Building at 1300 NW Wall St. Reporter: shAmway,@bendlrri lletin,:qont - I 54i:6U-:Z-8_l-8.,*4,-.riryf 20281310 - on Sent from my iPhone 4 ... Matt Martin Sfont consumerinsu rance@ consu meri nsuranceor.com $effli Wednesday, May 16,2018 5:14 PM Toi Matt Martin g- $utilectr File N u mbe r:247 -L8-N037 AD Att*efirnents;, LETTER.pdf Please see the attached letter. Thank you Mandy Foster 1 letter o5-r4'zor8 To vrhom thi.o rnay conc€rnt File numbet: a+7-r8-ooo379'AD to I ha'e tecieved a letter inthe rnsil Thm*day o5'ro-eor8 tegardiflg the property next miree esking for a permit to be a Meriiuatra grow ope.retiotr' qrarrt I ju*t w*nted to let you know this is sornething I do NOT nerct to rny horne' tirne I have childem thet I dc not wstrt them *round thia, we also have in the surnmer gver. +H kids come ovrr ptur our childern have friendg that corne abovs and below McLengie Canyon Withthat We aheeily have two Srour operatione 'We we have L*d peopt* gJtlu,ooih our llroperty and uteal tLings, livestock taken. heve to li*to*,-to *r*lri"*-ill thingih*i i* a rnile away that is to keep the frosc from the plants, it is loud *nd w"kes tls tlp' The sthet qucsrion I hnve is with the wildlrfe, Has * EPA smdy'r been done on what ,t * *p."r LiU be on rhe nrst!*g Golden Eagles and the Elk that rnigrate though the fields? Sincerely, Foster Zol4r McKen*ie Canyon Rd Terrebonne, 0R 9776t Pege r l1t! LIC Monday, May 07. 201S "I C C}MMU NI'TY D EVEI..OP MEN NOTTCE OFAPPLICATION descrlbed below: The Deschutes county plannlng Division has received the proposed land use applicationls| FILE NUMBER: 247-18-O00379-AD APPLIf,ANT: Ted Prlcc *' OWNEfi; Marian Eertotti AGTNT: Adam Stephen. Steele Associates Architects (growingl in the Excluslve PROPO$AL: Adrninistrative Determlnation for Marijuana Production canopY size is Farm Use {EFU) rone, Tho proposed maximum mature plant 4960 square feet in area. The proposed development ls tlustered in the $testern portion of the property and includes the existlng shop building with a new additiOn, 5 greenhOUscs, 2 storage structures, a trim buildlng, and ather associated sitc imProvefi eilts. 'The Canyon Road, LOf,ATION: subject property has an assigned address of ?0355 McKenrlc Terrebonne,, and is identified on Assessgr's Map 14-11-23 as tax lot 1O0. STAFF CONTACT: Mstthew Marttn. AICP, Associate Planner Emall : rnatt.ma r!|n @ desch u!q$.g!E; Telephonc: 54 1-330-4620 DOCUMENT9: Can be viewed and downloaded from: a i q! utes. org t rww.b qi l din eo e rm its=ore eo n.e oll rd htto://d rdesch STAND Title 18 of the Deschutes County Code, County Zoning Chapter 18.04, Title, Purpose and Definitions ' chapter L8.16, Excluslve Farm Use Chaptet 18,88. Wildlife Area Combining Chapter 18.95, Flood Pleln chapter lB.TL6,Supplomentary Provisions Title 22 of the Deschutes county codc, the Development Procedures ordinance Coples of the application, all documents and cvidence subntitted by or on behatf of the applicant and appllcable 'i,l 7 l{!'V L;}t3i-{.ire i;.,+rrrie. *er,r'1, Oragi;:-. 97703 I e(}. ti}.{ i;frnq. $r'l-'rJ, ee$77[S-r-,ttt! t\.54 :l'l.tjg-tr57i @:i!rl#d':'.:chrrirs .$iii q$+'."ri";,d{-cfhrirn:.-'or3f<'l File No. 247 -18-000S79-AD 70355 McKenzie Canyon Road, Terrebonne Etr Gommun D€p.rtfiGnt PO lrt II,'' ilf !i.lr"!.':ct ffi GALAVAN, $TEVE&LINDA FO$TER, AMANDA (GB) 7{1345 MCKENZ]E CANYCIN RD TERREEONNE. OR 97750.9277 i1::": Etr Fib # zl7-/8-ooo37r'4D Gomrnu nt Department PO OF Avsnue . bend, OF 97701-1925 117 RECEIVED MAY 04052r00010? ffi I 0 201$ Deschutes County CDD TAYLOR, KENNETH K 70290 MCKENZIE CANYON RD- sisieis, on gzzsd-bdgs lon #,, ts q. b1 t N o ( ksll fo T- byunol,Y: TAts Sr'A r'S QSuee//7 lm<*.jr Froiil: consu meri nsurance@consumeri nsu ranceor.co m S;sfiti Wednesday, May 16, 2018 5:41 PM Toi Matt Martin sunjust, File N u m b erz247 -18-O0O379-A D Afiaeh'ittentll LETTER.pdf Please Iook at attachment. Thank you, Sheila D Harris 1 To whom this is concerning , I have heard that there is a person(s) applying fcr a Marijuana grow pennit cut on Mckenzie Canyon Rd. I am very concerned about tFtis. There is several reasons why I am very concerned about this. I love rny nephews who are nrinors that will :be having to live next door to the property that they are asking for a Mariiuana grow permit. They should not be subjected to the drug' trade, and that is really what this is even though our wonderful state of Oregan has rnade this legal it still is a shoutrd be protecting people whither they are drug trade. We 'minors, elderly, or in between age. Ye$, I have heard this is nst a gateway drug....but t arn still not believing that siince we have seen to many people sta,rt with Marijuann and mCIve nn to the heavier drugs. This is sornething no sne should want to see, srnell or deal with this issue. This has got to stop! What about the rnassive amount of lisht they need,for the grow? how will they ds that? they are in the rniddle of the canyon withou{ sunlight except for a short amount of time. lf tkey add generators ts running the lights that witl disrupt the wlrnle neighhorhood and making quality of tife not so good. Marijuana plants are a MediterraneanVtropical plant. How are they ptanning on watering these plants? They take a lot sf water. That leads me on to the water issue since they can not use irrigation water since that is federal water ar.ld is illegal to use for a Marijuana grow operatians, lf they u$e the well water then that will drop the water table down and the neighbors will be withnut water. Unless they are willing to pay and have everyone have their wells drill deeper there is will be people witlrout water. Again quality of life decreases" This will also cause a major traffic issue as well due to the roed is not huilt to'handle the excessive amount of tmffla that will be generated by employees and trucks to be going up and down the roed during harvesting seasofl. Not to mention the water trucks ts water the plants, since I do not see the growers as willing to drill the neighborhoods wells deeper. The road is dangerous due to the waterhole's {can not claim them as potholes) and rocks in the road. There are children that walk to the bus stop and with the excessive traffic someone will be,hurt wither it being a walker and a drlver hining them. I do not see a happy ending with the road issue, of the grow will do to the local wildlife? I am sure with the rnore traffic and tlre stink it will run the wildlife off ss well, What about the animals that are raised near a Srow area? How does this effect thern? What does the Hurnane Society Of Amertca for animal rights say? This grow does not need to go in on Mckenzie Canyon. We have enough stink weed grower$ already we do not need more. for reading thle- G-+qseeQ-t1-LbL fw\sraM Ashley Williams From: Janet Nash < [email protected] > Sent: Wednesday, January 16,2019 6:51 PM To: Jacob Ripper Subject: Re: Address re comments for file 247-18-00504-AD Charles K and Janet Nash 62645 Dodds Rd Bend, OR 97701 Thank you On Wed, Jan 16, 2019 dt4:00 PM Jacob Ripper Hello Janet, We had to reassign a few applications here in the Planning Division and I ended up being assigned the application for marijuana production/processing at 2545A Walker Road. Your previous comments have already been included in the record, but it looks like I don't have a mailing address for you. If you want to be added to the notice list for any future decision andlor hearing, I'll need you to provide a postal mailing address, Thank you, Jacob Ripper I Senior Planner Deschutes County Community Development 117 NW Lafayette Ave I Bend, Oregon 97708 Tel: (541) 385-1759 Mail: PO Box 6005, Bend, OR 97708 TItrE | Let us know how we're doing: Customer Feedback Survev Disclaimer: Please note that the information in this email is an inforntal statement made in accordance with DCC 22.20.A05 and shall not be deemed to constitute final County aetion fficting a change in the status of a person's property or conferring any rights, including any reliance rights, on any person. 1 Tra Griffin Frcm: Abby Kellner-Rode < [email protected] > Sent: Thursday, July 19,2018 2:08 PM To: Anthony Raguine Subject: Re: More com ments regardi ng Fi le num ben 247- 1 8-0005%-AD/505--AD/506-S P, Application to allow mar'tjuana production and processing at 25450 Walker Rd. Attachments: farm kids l jpg;farm kids 2jpg; farm kids 3jpg; farm kids 4ipg; farm kids 5jpg; farm kids 6JPG; farm kids Tjpg; farm kids Sjpg; farm kids 9.JPG; farm kids 10.JPG; farm kids 11.JPG;farm kids 12)PG; farm kids 13JPG;farm kids 14.JPG; image0Ol.png; image002.png; image003.png; i mage004.png; image005jpg; image006jpg; image007j pg; image008jpg; image009 jpg Mr. Raguine, Please let me know if the attached photos work better Thankyou. Abby Kellner-Rode This email was previously sent July 5tl1 but I see no record of it in the online comments. I hope you will please include it. Thank yorl Abby Kellner-Rode Boundless Farmstead 25360 Walker Rd" Ben4 OR 97701 Dear Commissioners Baney, DeBone and HendersorL Senior Planner Anthony Raguine, Nick Lelack, Jacob Ripper, Finfly, I would like to ask for an extension of comment time to this application. The 4th of July holiday made it very difficult to be able to gather comments, as most people have been out of town orbusy celebrating. Many people would like the opportunity to comment. Secondly, I did not mention a very important reason wlry you must deny the application for pot growing and processing at25450 Walker Rd. Our farm hosts many children through the Farm Kids program. Attached are photos from this spring of various school groups which came to our farm. The program is through a parfirership with the Bend-LaPine school district, Central Oregon Locavore and our farm. The schools tirat participated were from throughout central Oregon. We teach mairily kindergarten through 3rd gladers, but this year also had a 5th grade group. Ourentire program had more tlnn 15 field trips and around ?00 kids involved. Farm kids has also expanded to include preschoolers and homeschoolen this srunmer, and there is a fall component planned as well. Here is a link to this program. httos ://centraloreeonlocavore.orey'proErams/fa.rm-kids In the regulations curent and prcposed: a. The use shall be located a minimum of 1000 (2,640[eet from: i, A public elementary or secondary school for which attendance is compulsory underOregonRevised Statutes 339.010, et seq., includingany parking lot apputenantthereto and ary property used by the school; ii. A private or parochial elementary or secondary school, teaching children as described inORS 339.030(1)(a), including any parking lot appurtenant thercto and ary prcpeny usedby the school; iii. Alicensedchildcarecenterorlicensedpreschool,includinganyparkinglot appurtenant thereto and aly property used by the child carc center or preschool. This does not include licensed or unlicensed child care which occun at or in residential stntctures; iv. Ayouthacfivity centel and v. National monuments ard state pa*s; vi, Public (Federal) lands Although we arc not a firll time school, we have many occasions to be a youth activity center and educational center for children. Please deny the application for gmwing and processing marijuana at 25450 Walker Rd. 1 Sincerely, Abby & Andre Kellner-Rode 25360 WalkerRd. Bend OR. 97701 91r-24L-6289 z From: A\hby-Kethel8ade To: Tammv Baney; Tonv DeBone: Anthonv Raouine; Nick Lelack; lacob Rioner; Phil Henderson SubJect: File numben 247-18-000504-AD/505-AD/506-SP Date: Thursday, July 19,2018 1:30:23 PM Dear Commissioners and Planners, If the following is true, why do we have to continue to fight the licensing of new pot grows? Someone please tell me,... According to the following article, "At the end of May, the OLCC announced it would cease processing new licenses on June 15, citing the oversupply." https://www.bendbulletin.com/localstate/63 13429-lSlAegal-marijuanas-path-to-the-black- m arket? referrer:story&referrer:p opul ar In order to file an appeal is there more to it than writing letters? I and many of my neighbors have written several letters. Will there be a formal hearing? When does a decision get made? What else should we be doing to stop this pot grow next door? Also, I sent a letter which included several photos, related to our farm, Boundless Farmstead, serving young children from the public schools, through the Farm Kids program. I do not see it as a part of the public record of comments. Why? I have resent it to you. A few of my neighbors also sent letters which are not online. I thought everything sent in regard to this issue would be a part of the public record. Thankyou, Abby & Andre Kellner-Rode Boundless Farmstead 25360 WalkerRd. Bend 97701 Sent from my iPad ^1 Tracv Griffin From: Mar Mor Farms Dear Commissioners Baney, DeBone and Henderson, Senior Planner Anthony Raguine, Nick Lelack, Jacob Ripper, Further to my email of July 6, this proposed grow and processing operation would be located LESS THAN I/2MILE from the BLM trailhead / access point on Walker Rd. This access point and the acres it opens up is used by pedestrians with and without dogs as well as horseback riders. The potential for problems is significant. Please deny this application. Sincerely, Rowan Hollitz 62311Dodds Rd, Bend, OR 97701 ( 1 From: Eloundless Farmstead To: Tammv Banev; fgpllQgpgpg; Phil Henderson; Anthonv Raouine; NiCllelaCk; Jacob Riooer SubJect Comments on File number: 247-18-000504-AD/505-AD/506-SP Dele: Friday, luly 6,2018 2:21:19 PM 5 July 2018 Regarding application for marijuana grow operation File N u m be r. 247 -18-000504-AD/505-ADI506-S P DearCommissioners Baney, DeBone, and Henderson, SeniorPlannerAnthony Raguine, Nick LeLack, Jacob Ripper, and to whom it may @ncern, My name is Megan French and I am a resident, co-owner, and primary farmer (along with my partner David) of Boundless Farmstead LLC at 25360 Walker Road. We are a diversified commercial vegetable farm using chemical-free and organically-aligned growing practices, selling wholesale to restaurants and to Agricultural Connections, retail at the farmers market, and through our Communi$ Supported Agriculture (CSA) program. We conservatively feed over 100 families in Central Oregon. We received notice of the marijuana permit application for the property just to our east at 25450 Walker Road and are asking that you please DENY this application for the following reasons: 1. Student, child, and family involvement at Boundless Farmstead. Our farm has quickly become a fixture in the Central Oregon smallfarm and agricultural community, and often serves as the location forworkshops, field trips, intern leaming sites, and more. ln 2018 alone, Boundless has been asked to represent smallfarms on the local news Supper Club program, as a speaker at City Club Central Oregon, as a guest in OSU classrooms, at the Govemofs Regional Solutions meeting, and more. a. This year, we hosted over 250 Kindergarten through 2nd grade students through the Central Oregon Locavore Farm Kids Program. This program is an amazing opportunity for children to get outside and leam about sustainable agriculture. Our farm is one of the closest to Bend and provides easy bus- ability. b. We get inquiries frequently to host field trips and kids clubs (Environmental Center, schools, etc) and plan to continue accommodating these groups. We want schools, parents, and children to feel safe and comfortable coming to our farm to learn. c. We have also hosted workshops for adult students through OSU Extension, as well as volunteering and learning groups from Rogue Farm Corps, COCC students, painting/art outings, etc. We would like our farm to remain a fixture of leaming and agricultural involvement without people feeling uncomfortable with nearby operations. lt is crucial to our community that we continue educating about sustainable farming for our food security and sovereignty. 2. Agritourism. Similar to the above mentioned, agritourism is a large part of our farm. Being a small scale farmer, we rely on events for promotion, marketing and finances. We host small farm concerts for budding local musicians. We also plan to host farm- to-table dinners and have considered opening up the farm for a very small handful of private events to add some extra income to the farm. We want our farm to remain inviting for people of all ages and allwalks of life. 3. EFU Concerns. Boundless Farmstead was recently filmed by Wahoo Films and Central Oregon Landwatch in an effort to continue keeping Alfalfa designated EFU The encroaching neighborhoods and grow operations are exactly why Oregon has designated areas as EFU. a. "A vibrant localfarm economy requires a critical mass of farmland. When too much residential development encroaches on farmland, a downward "cycle of conversion" can begin, in which farms experience conflicts with neighbors such as trespassing, littering, pets chasing livestock..." (oregon.gov DLCD Farmland Protection Program) We feelthat the word'residential' may also be replaced by 'industrial' and worry about all of the above stated with a large manufacturing warehouse next door. We knowall of our neighbors currently and have concerns of property owners who do not live on the property (Hermosa Beach residents) caring for and maintalnlng a safe, positive atmosphere. b. A large warehouse being built on natural high desert land is a maior concern for the wildlife that migrates through our area as vtrell. We can provide images of large herds of elk migrating directly across the land where the warehouse for marijuana growing is set to be built. Also, the site of the potential grow op would be easily within 2000 feet of public lands (BLM). Recently, the commissioners met to discuss not allowing MariJuana Grow Operations with 2,600 feet of public lands; this permit would fail under that rule. t. Our property (during past owners) was given an award forwildlife habitat because of the trees, vegetative variety, bird and bat houses, rarater, etc. We pride ourselves in continuing the tradition of the past homeowners and working with wildlife and nature. c. Seeing open spaces and potentialfarmland covered in a concrete structure seems counterintuitive and counterproductive to the goals of the EFU. 4. Financial Concerns. Farm land is becoming more scarce and more ditficult to acquire for Oregonians looking to farm. At Boundless, David and I were able to begin a commercial vegetable farm due to the contributions and lifetime of hard work by his parents. We are a multigenerational household and would not be able to farm without them. We are fortunate to have family support, but many are not. Marijuana grow operations only furtherthe difficulty in finding affordable farmland by artificially inflating property prices. lt is already tremendously difficult for young farmers to find and farm land in Oregon; marijuana grows are making it nearly impossible. ln all, I think the Alfalfa community, the small farm community, and Central Oregon agriculture would benefit from denying this application specifically, but also considering the impact of allfuture grow operations. lf the growing is done out of the soil, out of natural light, and with lack of concern for water, then the operations should not be designated as farm-use and should be designated as manufacturing. lf you would like any further proof of: fleld trips, workshops, etc., I can provide letters from the nonprofits we work with explaining what we have been involved With and what we will be participating in. Thank you for your time and consideration, and I please ask that you deny the marijuana permit at 25450 Walker Road. Sincerely, Megan French David Kellner-Rode and Megan French 503.883.1758 www. houn dl essfa rm stead. com www fa cehocrk. com/houndl essfarm stead From: Joanna Booser To: Anthonv Raouine; cdd-webmaster; Sarah McClure: Mandv Muller Sublecl 25450 Walker Road proposed land use" These are my comments, due in writing today to meet the 10 day deadline to comment on the application for approval of mariJuana production and processing in EFU zone Dale: Saturday, July 7, 2018 3:21:36 PM Dear Deschutes County Planning Division, Amanda Muller and I own 40 acres with the mailing address of 25285 Walker Road, Bend OR 97702 These are my written comments on the proposed land use action at25450 Walker Road in Alfalfa OR, to allow construction and operation of a very large building and business for marijuana production and marijuana processing in the exclusive farm zone. I was able to review the documents online. Here are my concerns: 1. The very large size of the industrial type building does not fit in with the character of the EFU zone. 2. Since the the owners only need to produce 1/4 of the marijuana they plan to process on site, will they be hauling in up to 3/4s of their supply from other growers? 3. What is the recourse for the neighbors if the smell is unacceptable? 4. Alfalfa had a bad experience with razor wire, tall ugly fences, and periodically very strong odors on the pot farm across from the Alfalfa Store. The application for this proposed land use action indicates that no new fences or razor wire are planned, but the neighbors wonder what would happen if they end up deciding to protect their facility in that way. That would be unacceptable to the quiet rural farming neighborhood. 5. The clear night sky without light interference, the fresh air scented with sage, and the extreme quiet at night were all reasons we wanted to live where we do. If any of these would be impacted by the proposal, that would be a big concern, and not acceptable to the neighborhood. 6. What is the recourse for the neighbors if the noise from the fans or other equipment is unacceptable? 7. What is the recourse for the neighbors if the lighting level is unacceptable, or if they decide to add greenhouses with bright grow lights in the future? I would prefer not to have this proposed marijuana growing and processing facility built in our neighborhood. If it is approved anyway, we'd like to know the answers to the above questions, and exactly how to get help if the the light, smell, noise and visual impacts become unacceptable to neighbors. Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the proposal, and express our concerns. Joanna Booser 25285 Walker Rd Bend OR 97702 From: Steven Pauldino lo: Anthonv Raouine Cc: McGean Michael Sublecl: File NumbeE: 247-r8-000504-AD / 505-AD / 506-SP Date: Friday, July 6, 2018 2:49141 PM Dear Mr. Raguine, I am writing in reference to the Notice of Application that we received in the mail regarding Mark Weisheit's application for approval to grow and process marijuana at 25450 Walker Road, Bend. Our lot (Tax Lot 1714280002901) borders Mr. Weisheit's lot on the north side of his property We oppose the application and request a public hearing to present our views about Mr. Weisheit's application. Thank you, Steven Paulding. 62605 Dodds Rd, Bend, OR 97701 720-2s3-2015 Cc: Attorney Michael McGean From: hhn-Clanon IO: Nick Lelack; JAfob-Einlefi Anthonv Raouine; Tamnw Baney; Tonv DeBoner Phil Henderson Sublectr Regarding application br a rnarijuana gror r operation File number: 247-18-000504-AD/505-AD/506'SP Dalei Friday, July 6, 2018 3:28:45 PM I I Fi le numb e r 247 -l 8 -0005 04 -AD/5 0 5 --AD/5 06- SP t I Dear Commissioners Baney, DeBone and Henderson, Senior Planner Anthony Raguine, Nick Lelack, Jacob Ripper, I and everyone I know in my community, strongly oppose the request for this, another permit in Alfalfa. My reasons are simple, I live out of town to get away from it all. To see the stars and let the quiet serenity of the high desert envelop my spirit. I enjoy a good walk with my dog down the ever sleepy Walker road, where she's able to be off leash and meander at will. I fear the proposed farm will take away the stars from my nights sky as similar farms have done to my neighbors. The harsh light pollution does not belong in the country. The quiet dead end road that provides the stillness my dog and I so enjoy will now have ffaffic, fences, prison-like barb wire and cameras. Stars gone, serenity gone. These life altering issues aside, I get my drinking water from a well, as do my neighbors. These wells are going dry. As you know, marijuana farms grow year round and partially supplement their needs with well water. The timing of wells going dry and marijuana farms coming in is undeniable. I don't oppose the idea of growing marijuana but I do oppose the way it's currently being grown. It's simply not sustainable and has an immensly negative impact on the community. I know you wouldn't grant a permit if the lot was next to yours, so please don't pass one for the lot next to mine, Thank you for your time and consideration. John Clayson From: David Kellner-Rode lo: Anthonv Raouine; Nick Lelack; bfoLBillet; Tammv Banev; Tonv DeBone; Phil Henderson Subjecl File number: 247-18-000504-AD1505--AD1506-SP, Application to allow marijuana production and processing at 25450 Walker M. Dale Friday, luly 6, 2018 9:05156 A|4 July 6, 2018. Regarding application for a marijuana grow operttion File mrmber: 247- I 8-000504-AD/505-AD/506-SP Dear Commissioners Baney, DeBone and Hendersoq Senior Planner Anthony Raguine, Nick Lelack, Jacob Ripper, My name is David Kellner-Rode, and I am one of the owner/operators of Boundless Farmstead, LLC located at2536O Walker Rd. We operate a farm with 5 acres of vegetable production, sold to local families, at the Downtown Bend Farmer's Market, and to local restaurants. We raise poultry, and have 12 acres of hay fields. I send this email to ask of you to please DEI.IY the application of Mark Weisheit at25450 Walker Rd. for a marijuana production and processing facility. This is located immediately to the east of our farm. There are many reasons why I believe this aforementioned application should be denied. 1. Inappropriate use of EFU zoned land 2. Direct detriment to our business 3. Proximity to Public Lands Manufacturing and processing marijuana in a 10,000 square foot indoor warehouse is not an agricultural act.Itis simply manufacturing. It is merely a combination of inputs to create an end product. There is no sun, no soil, no weather to contend with. It is not agriculture. Manufacturing processes should be strictly confined to industrially zoned areas. Please, DO NOT ALLOW manufacturing to take place on Exclusive Farm Use land. Other consequences of manufacturing include noise pollutions, light pollution, heavy traffrc (on a road that is currently unpaved, has the county thought about the costs ofincreased traffic on an unpaved road?), none of these are things that are congruent with EFU land or country living. I believe that allowing a marijuana manufacturing and processing facility next door to our farm would be directly detrimental to our business. This spring we had over 400 elementary school aged children from Bend-Lapine School district come out to our farm in a series of field trips for a program sponsored by Central Oregon Locavore called Farm Kids.We strongly believe that there are many significant educational benefits to introducing children to farms. However, I do not see how we could possibly continue to invite the school district out to our farm, if there was marijuana being manufactured directly next door. We would hate to have to cancel such a beneficial program because someone had to get stoned. I know that the county commissioners are currently debating a rule regarding proximity of grow operations to public land. Our farm borders the Juniper Woodlands BLM land to the west. I know that the western edge of the 25450 property line is under 1500 feet from the BLM land. At the very least this application should be put on hold until a decision is made on that rule. Please DENY this application. There is not need for yet another marijuana processing facility in Deschutes County, we do not need manufacturing taking place on EFU lands, and we do not need marijuana manufacturing taking place next to our precious public lands. Thank you for your work. Sincerely, David Kellner-Rode Boundless Farmstead 503883 1758 From: Janet Nash IO: Anthony Raouine Sublocl: Comments on file #247-18-00504AD, 25450 Walker Rd Dale: Friday, July 6, 2018 3102:20 PM Dear Mr. Raugine, As the period for comments comes to a close on this application, let us please state for the record we are OPPOSED to this application. The applicants have not posted their Notice of Application sign. OLCC has placed a moratorium on accepting applications for license. The over abundance of marijuana in Deschutes County and Oregon is well documented. The largest operator in the Alfalfa area is currently not operating and falling into physical disrepair. The application is within ll4 mile of a well used BLM Trailhead, Juniper Woodlands Trailhead. We will simply reiterate opposition. Charles and Janet Nash From: Brooke Klein To: Lammy_Bang$ Tonv DeBoner Phil Henderson @: Nick Lelack; Jacob Riooer; Anthonv Raouine Sublect: Fwd: Daler Friday, July 6, 2018 1:56:43 PM Regarding application for a marijuima grow opeftIuon File rurmber: 247-18-000504-AD/505-AD/506-SP Dear County Commissioners, I have lived in Alfalfa now for the past two years. We were atEacted to this community due to its nrral and agricultural nanre. I ride horses and own goats, ard it has provided a grcat envirorunent to do both. Unfortunately, we have seen negative effects due to the overwhelming growth of cannabis on surrounding farm land. The culture of the community is changing, along with the landscapes we love. Cannabis seems to be tlre cash crop of our time. It may be no surprise that so many folks want to gtow it and cash in on the proflts. Howwer, it seems like the long term effects of what we are doing to our.land and its resources should be at tlre forcfront of discussion As well as the fact tlnt we are currently over producing rvhat our local economy can conflrme. My arguments against approving further permits to grow cannabis on EFU lands are simple to undersknd. Firstly, this is a crop tlut is not grown like any other in the area. It is confined to a green house, and most growers want to grcw yeiu round thus trading in their surface water rights and digging wells. This not only steals from our fresh water aquifer, but also turns the once irrigated lard back to dust and desert. We are only living in the high desert due to the availability and accessibility of irrigation water. Without access to water, it is impossible to grow food. Secondly, it is a crop tlnt is uzually grown with artificial light in these greenhouses to enhance yields. Outside of the growers own electric expense, this affects wery neighbor around, as tlte glow from the grten houses canbe seenfor miles around. Thirdly, tlre growing of cannabis does not make an area more desirable to live, That is, uriless you are the one with the financial reward Urually, there is a smell or noise offans neighbors complain of and no one lives on the property as it is a business only. They become compounds zurounded with wire and cameras. Although I krnw many of these detainments are legal obligatioru weVe set on them, does this sound like someone you'd like to have as a neiglibor? I know you have all the statistics in front ofyorl so IVe decided to keep this as short and to the point as possible. Ultimately, tlre culture and livability of our homes and landscapes are changing and I don't think its for tlrc better. Please deny any further applications for gowing and processing cannabis onEKI land. There has to be anotler way. Thank you for your consideration and your service. KindestRegards, Brooke Klein From: Abbv Kellner-Rode To: Nick Lelack; JafAb-8ipn$ Anthonv Raouine; Timry-Ea[e$ Tonv DeBone; Phil Henderson Sublect: Additional commenE regarding File number: 247-18-000504-AD/505--AD/506-SP, Application to allow marUuana production and processing at 25450 Walker Rd. Dalo: Saturday, June 30, 2018 3143;19 PM Dear Commissioners Baney, DeBone and Henderson, Senior Planner Anthony Raguine, Nick Lelach Jacob Rippet, I would like to add some more comments to my disapproval of the marijuana grow and processing application. According to the proposed revisions that the County Commissioners will be discussing this Monday, under "6. Separation distances- minimum separation distances shall apply as follows: a. The use shall be located a minimum of 2,640 feet from: vi. Federal lands" The address,25450 Walker Road is less than 1600 feet from BLM lands at the end of Walker Road. The BLM lands are our westem border, and our property is approximately 1500 +/- feet wide, east to west. 25450 Walker Rd. Is our eastem border. The BLM lands are used daily by many people, there is a non-motorized trailhead and parking area. Please deny this application. Thank you, Abby & Andre Kellner-Rode 25360 Walker Rd. Bend, OR.97701 971-241-6289 Jacob From: Anthony Raguine Sent: Friday, June 29, 2018 11:43 AM To: Jacob Ripper Subject: FW: File number:247-18-000504-AD/505--AD/506-SP, Application to allow marijuana production and processing at 25450 Walker Rd. rE,'@||''!1|@ Fromr Abby Kellner-Rode Sent: Friday, June 29, 2018 11:42:45 AM (UTC-08:00) Pacific Time (US & Canada) To: Nick Lelack; Jacob Ripper; Anthony Raguine; Tammy Baney; Tony DeBone; Phil Henderson Subject: File number: 247-18-000504-AD/505--AD/506-SP, Application to allow marijuana production and processing at 25450 Walker Rd. June 28 2018. Regarding application for a marijuana grow operation F ile numbe u 2 47 -18 -000 5 04-AD/5 0 5 --AD/5 06- S P Dear Commissioners Baney, DeBone and Flenderson, Senior Planner Anthony Raguine, Nick Lelack, Jacob Ripper, My husband, Andre and I own Boundless Farmstead, a}A-acre, farm in Alfalfa, at25360 Walker Rd., Bend, OR. We, along with our son David Kellner-Rode, grow vegetables and raise poultry. We sell our produce to local restaurants, CSA members, a local distributor, and at the local farmers market in Bend. We received a notice in today's mail, about a marijuana grow operation application for right next door to us. We are VERY MUCH AGAINST the approval of this application for growing and processing. I have been attending local neighborhood meetings where people of our community have been very concerned about a number of issues surounding the cannabis growing here and in other farming areas in Deschutes County. I have also attended meetings sponsored by the county, since November. I firmly believe that Deschutes County should opt out of the cannabis grow industry or at the very least move it to industrial / commercial zoning. Some of my concems: 1 We live in the High Desert and water is power. We all need it, and our water supply is diminishing at arate, according to Kyle Gorman's testimony, earlier this year, of at least a foot a year over the last 25 years. My small neighborhood of Alfalfa has had a rash of wells going dry in the last year, simultaneous with and in proximity to a significant number of pot operations going on line. Some folks here are reaching panic stage and are desperately looking for answers, causes and solutions.We do not really know how much water the cannabis industry uses, except for what they have told us. I have heard and read very different statistics. According to groil "After playing with a number of different formulas over the years and trying to find what fits, the best figure we've come up with is one gallon of water per day per pound of processed flower, i,e. a one-pound plant needs one gallon of water per day, whereas a five-pound plant needs five gallons per day, and a lO-pound plant needs l0 gallons per day. One Acre-Foot= 3251851 U.S. gallons The I :l :1 ratio was determined by polling numerous cannabis farmers about their water usage. Emerald Growers Association and Mendocino Cannabis Policy Council conducted the polls," I, along with a majority of the voters, voted to make recreational pot legal because, although I don't smoke it p"rrorrilly, I don'ifeel'that the government should criminalize people for smoking pot, or spend tax money to use the court system and then incarcerate for victimless behaviors. When I voted on that, however, I did not ever think that what is essentially an industrial manufacturing business would be taking over and changing the very nature of farm country. This is not a traditional farm product at all. This is more akin to a factory. These indoor grows do not need to take up good farmland and valuable agricultural water. What was initially hoped to be a "cottage" industry has become a monster, The price per acre in our area is being affected which it makes it hard for farmers to enter the market who would want to grow food. According to some of the testimony you heard earlier this year, they don't even grow it in the ground, but in pots, which surely could be located in a factory, where they could still benefit from the sun and water which they do need. They are similar to a business, now located on 2nd Street, in Bend, called Volcano Veggies. Volcano Veggies also doesn't need a farm--they grow organic lettuce and other greens, hydroponically and with artificial lights in a warehouse. A very good Bend Bulletin article that speaks to growing marijuana in an industrial zone, where I firmly believe it belongs, is found here. lttp#/wsrw;bsndli$lletinr0o$.&Hgine$$/59e[$S$illi51fsus,fi*iugbje-prae[ices-Erqfit:.0-+mlebis.cotwel:t*c,$ Another issue is the overproduction of pot contributing to a black market gone out of control. Here are recent articles: Etp;/frnniltrihnneieOrrif,newsAqprstor,ie{',fepgrt:ovs{:P.r9.q11Erlicn:-of-Pot.fpSds:t?,lsek:fi}at'kef "Oregon has an "expansive geographic footprint" on the black market across the country. A counties -- Jackson, Multnomah, Josephine, Lane, Deschutes and Washington -- "lead the way" in supplying much of what's shipped out of state, the analysis said. . ..The report's other key takeaways: Overall marijuana production in Oregon far outpaces demand, hash oil. manufacturing has fueled a rise in explosions and serious injuries and the state doesn't comply with key federal marijuana enforcement priorities." bw*sr//'ranzy.w"or.egq.nlive$om/Rrqrijgn{la/index:ssfl20t$/05/black-qlar&e!.,BVputtp.dUo$i,p"lL$nx.h1ryl z ve years into its experiment with legal, regulated cannabis, Washington state is that pot still attracts worked out criminals. . .Legalization was also supposed to end pot smuggling, but that hasn't pot, such as Oregon, has led to a market glut either. . . Overproduction in Washington and other states with legal prices in the legal market." - and rock-bottom wholesale Given the.,over production" of marijuana and the estimated amount leaving the state illegally, attention must be given to creating some balance in approvals to reduce the greediness of the producers. Please make a firm stand Io rtop accepting future applications for marijuana production (at least in rural Deschutes Corurty) until our state has a better understanding of where over 65% of the product is going! pot is an extremely wetl funded industry, as you know, unlike traditional farming, whereby, when you choose to grow food, you know you are not choosing a profession which will gain you a big income. You are lucky to Jqueak by, but you choose it because of the way of life it gives you. Right now the average age of farmers in Oregon is OO years old, Not many young people are choosing food farming because it is expensive to buy and maintain farm property and it is a chancy business. We depend upon the whims of nature to help provide. We are NOT making $1OOO+ per pound for our produce, as pot growers are. And we cannot afford the lawyers necessary to fight for our way of life, We also chose to farrn because of the peace and quiet; not to listen to constant drone of machinery/fans/ etc. We were drawn to the birds, the animals, the big skies, sunrises, sunsets, and bright stars; not the light pollution because of the 7am to 7pm hours, as opposed to a dawn to dusk tiping. We love our views of mountains and juniper, the fragrance of healthy nature, not the constant stink of "skunks" when you pass by a pot farm. Instead of open farming property with wire fences and welcoming neighbors, we have wooden fences blocking open views, locked gates, No Trespassing signs and cameras. This does not',relate harmoniously to the natural environment and existing development" of the Alfalfa community as referenced in the County standards. EFU zoning is supposed to limit development that could conflict with farming practices. Pot "farming" is not traditional farming, but manufacturing of a medical and/or recreational drug. It definitely conflicts AND DEGRADES a rural lifestyle. I believe the applications all need to be rejected until they are moved to an industrial zone. We already have too many grows in our little community of Alfalfh, It is obvious to me that you should not approve any more, especially in Alfalfa. I'm just not convinced that it is the best use of our dwindting food-growing land and our limited water resotuces. I feel it is critical that we develop a long-range plan for the sustainability of our local food resources, in the face of global warming and drought, particularly as our population grows. Local food farms conhibute to the long-term sustainability, health, and resilience of our community. Yet food farmers face substantial economic disadvantages and are unable to compete on an even playing field with the cannabis industry for land and labor. Furthermore, as our beautiful, open, pastoral iandscapes of livestock, crops and bustling family farms transition to the blight of cannabis grows and ptocesring facilities that look like prisons, our growing agri-tourism activity, which is a great benefit to farmers and our region, will also suffer. Land Use Applications for marijuana development on our rulal lands in Alfalfa continu" to flow in to the Community Development Department. Property owners of these applications do not live in Deschutes County. They are from elsewhere - Missouri, New Jersey, Tennessee, Florida and this cunent application, is fiom Mark & Elizabeth Weisheit, from Hermosa Beach, CA. They are not primary residentJfiere. These property owners are not directly committed to enhancing "the county as a safe, sustainable and highlydesirable place to live". Instead these property owners will, if you accept their Land Use Applications, assist in transforming our rural community to an industrial environment at our collective expense *d to their financial benefit. Land use planning for unincorporated Deschutes County must protect those property owners committed to farming practices that require soil, open fields and water. It is apparent that marijuana production does not require rural land in EFU zones. There are notable examples'of successful m*ijo*u growing operations in commercial and/or industrial zones in ow county already. I have reviewed everythingcvailable on DIAL regarding this proposal. The proposed building is a 10,000 square foot grow and processing factory, to be situated on farm land. It belongs elsewhere. 3 Please say NO! to this new application' Sincerely, Abby Kellner-Rode Boundless Farmstead 25360 Walker Rd, Bend, OR 97701 97r-241-6289 4 From: Cody Hennigan Mr. Raguine, I write to you to express my concems and opposition to the marijuana processing request for 25450 Walker Rd. I would like to start by saying I do not oppose marijuana production or it's value to our economy. What I do oppose is paving over or building large shuctures on valuable central Oregon farm land. I am a farmer and much like you, depend on the central Oregon food system to survive.'If Mr, Weisheit were to be allowed to build the necessary structures for his production, he would be taking a large amount of acreage out of production permanently. We crurently feed hundreds of central Oregoneans off of merely a few acres. Not only will his land be removed from actual food production but it will also take away possible housing options in an already unstable local housing crisis. The traffic, construction and infrastructure necessary for this type of facility would be dehimental to our gravel road, quiet neighborhood and sensitive ecosystem, We already have a large grow a mile away on Alfalfa market and during winter the night sky is lit up from their light usage. Imagine your neighbor decided to install a spot light outside your bedroom window?!? The farm next door to this proposed site also hosts numerous children's field trips (through Locavoreos Farm Kids program) to help educate our youth on the local food movement. This facility would be like building a brewery next to a school. Lastly, this site is no more than 1500 ft from federal BLM land, Perhaps we should consider placing a federally illegal product so close to federally regulated and owned lands. Please consider the negative impact on our community when considering to approve this request. Thank you, Cody Hennigan 1 '1" l: ',ffi,, Mailing Date: ,Juri0 27 18 ,i rl t PMENT t ..- :t" ' 'wolic E osinFPftcnriOFI' r. i :t .iI :l 1, ,t 1 ''ewnlgni :::;:, 1 ''i::l': r :l I: nFFucAnn: Marl{:Weisheit .i ::: . .AGELtlnj BlarkmOre Plannlng and Develapment Services, LLe 't.tr i ntioF€$*tr, The appticaiit rdquests approval of an Administrative Determinatibn to :i iillow marijuana production and aPproval of an Admlnistrative i'1 '...Deternilnalion.andra:Site Plan Review (o,allow marijuana processing in I 'ihe Exilusive Fann:Use Zone, il L. ..; .. . :. ::.. ..- :.::.:.. .! : tO"CAnOIilr. . ,, , . The subject.propeiryrhal,an absigned address of 25450 Walker Road. l, ' " . ..: . : :.1 ... .:... .:.: Map17;1*28, j:i . . .. ,... ,Be-nd;,andlsfur:ther,identifred:on:CountyASse5sorTax as:tbx:lot ': 1i 1 .. . ' rsr.:re^:;:.-1--.2902" . ... ::. . ; .... . 'ti .. . . . L.::.. r . : ._ i' 'SfAFF : , Anthony Raguine,,senior P.laniier;, !, Goltf-cf" . ilil^:.- h:::.rilAra!-q,rr:r':-- ; ia: Ea;.raa;A::47 .l:i , niittiony,Raiuint@deschutes,org ; i41:.:51t 39 i _j '+ :" --' :I SO-SU-MENI$];:.r: .:'Can::be:vlewed:€nd'downloaded:fi.bm::,,, t..' I : .i, i wwW:6uilainepai' tS;o'regon:goV and h*p:l)uiii,oescnutes.org i .$i srANbAiDS:ANbniFai.cA4[E CRiiiniA I '''.'' ,,i Tltle 1,8, Deschutes counlyZoning,OrJlnance Chapter, 1 8,1 6; ExclUsive Farm'Use:Zones: Chapter I 8, 1 l'Si,SUpplem entary ProvlSlons chapter 1 8i1 z4islte Plah,Review Tltle 22, Deschirtes County Deve16pment Protedur'es.Ordinance coples of the:appiicetlon; all documents and eVldence:submitted by or: on behalf of the applicant andappllcablecriterlaareavailableforinspeitlonatnocost. Copiescanberpurchasedfor25cens per page. The Planning Divtsidn is located in the Community Development Department Offlce at rt7 lW LafayetteAienue,Bend, Oregorl 97703 | P;OiBox6005,gend,OR9?'?08'6005 B (541) 388-6575 @ [email protected] E lA M,deschutes.ort/cd I I 17 NW Lafayette Avenue, Bend, Oregon. i Any lnterested person may sqbmltwritten comrhents on the proposed [and use actlon, Your lnput i ls lmportant to us. ALL WRITTEN TESfIMONY MUST BE RECEIVED BY THE DESCI{UTES COUNW pltNNtNG NO LATER TFTAN TEN (10) DAYS FROM THE DATE OF MAILING. Nouce of the i DtVtStON declslon will be provtded by a separate mallhg. For more lnfofmatlon or to request coples of the flndlngs and declslon, corttact the xstgned plpnner. 'ii This Notl.ee wcs malledpursuant to oeschutes Caunty code chapters 22.20 and 22,24. 247-1 8.00050+AD / 505-AD / 506'5P Page 2 of 2 * It='- H t: Files: 247-18-000504-AD l50SAD / 506-SP .i I 25450 Walker Road I $ I i i I j t i :::'r:rl" fi r 'i : :,:i. I r{- ., 1... i ,, ,{: I ::. i- . i .l: .rj:+ai. t ':i :,. i, r.".-;t.: 'i r 'I j .t f. ,. .l i. ]1: :il I ",' r-1 'i i: ,li .i: l, t: '. 1 I + t, t I t I .i ,i ':;a r:]*1 ii::: j: ; { i I I i + t :!. : ...-..;. n.: ,-jl. * -,t ."o , i: _iri: ! f .. r:.: ;:,:i:ltri: ' r"': ?';:iur:' -,1 ili,|$i,r "r= t,.11..,.i I .:.ir ,;r,.,Iili.i: From; lanet Nash To: CDD Plannino Sublect: File #247-18-00504AD, no sign on property Daler Monday, July 2,2018 4115:21 PM Hello, I am a a neighbor to this properly, no notice of application sign is in evidence. I believe their clock is ticking. Notice was mailed June 27 , sign available Tune 27 " Materials state that the sign must be up 10 days before comment period ends. Which appears to be July 7. Anthony Raguine is out of the office until July 5 File #247-18-000504AD 25450 WalkerRd owner: Mark Weisheit Thankyou, Charles and JanetNash From: Gigi Mever IO: Nick Lelack; lSgg[$ippgp Anthonv Raouine; f3luny-Earcy; Tonv DeBone; Phil Henderson Sublect: Re: File number: 247-18-000504-AD/505-AD/506-SP, Application to allow marijuana production and processing at 25450 Walker Rd. Dale Thursday, July 5,2018 10;02115 PM Dear Commissioners and Planners - I am witing to voice my opposition to any further permitting of cannabis grows and/or processing on rural lands, and specifically, I am voicing opposition to the above-mentoned applicant. Our community of family farms in Alfalfa has been substantially denigrated by the proliferation of cannabis manufacturing infrastructure, which are blights on our pastoral landscape; resembling prisons, depleting and diverting our precious water resources away from food production, and contributing to a proliferating glut ofproduct being sold across state lines and into the black market. I support all of the well-elucidated arguments from my neighbor Abby Kellner-Rode, who is most directly effected by this particular application and has expressed her opposition below. Please place a moratorium on any new permits and consider restricting these resource- intensive and community-fragmenting drug factories to industrial zones, where they can be better monitored and regulated and cause less havoc to our peaceful farming neighborhoods Thanks, as always, for your consideration. GigiMeyer Windflower Farm 26285 Walker Rd, Bend, OR 97701 541,678.3166 www.wi nd fl owe rfa rm bend. com On Jun 29,2018, at Il:42 AM, Abby Kellner-Rode June 28 2018. Regarding application for a marijuana grow operation Fil e numb er : 247 - 18 -000 5 04-AD/5 0 5 --AD/5 06- SP Dear Commissioners Baney, DeBone and Henderson, Senior Planner Anthony Raguine, Nick Lelach Jacob RiPPer, My husband, Andre and I own Boundless Farmstead, a2}-acre, farm in Alfalfa, at 25360 WalkerRd., Bend, OR. We, along with our son David Kellner-Rode, grow vegetables and raise poultry. We sell our produce to local restaurants, CSA members, a local distributor, and at the local farmers market in Bend. We received a notice in today's mail, about a marijuana grow operation application for right next door to us. We are VERY MUCH AGAINST the approval of this application for growing and processing. I have been attending local neighborhood meetings where people of our community have been very concerned about a number of issues surrounding the cannabis growing here and in other farming areas in Deschutes County. I have also attended meetings sponsored by the county, since November. I firmly believe that Deschutes County should opt out of the cannabis grow industry or.at the very least move it to industrial / commercial zoning. Some of my concems: We live in the High Desert and water is power. We all need it, and our water supply is diminishing at a rate, according to Kyle Gorman's testimony, earlier this year, of at least a foot a year over the last 25 years. My small neighborhood of Alfalfa has had a rash of wells going dry in the last year, simultaneous with and in proximity to a significant number of pot operations going on line. Some folks here are reaching panic stage and are desperately looking for answers, causes and solutions.We do not really know how much water the cannabis industry uses, except for what they have told us. I have heard and read very different statistics. According to http://www.thegaqjier.com/2015/07l02lhow-much-water-does-one- m arij rr an a-frl ant-n eed-to-grow/ "After playing with a number of different formulas over the years and trying to find what fits, the best figure we've come up with is one gallon of water per day per pound of processed flower, i.e. a one-pound plant needs one gallon of water per day, whereas a five-pound plant needs five gallons per day, and a 1O-pound plant needs 10 gallons per day. One Acre-Foot = 325,851 U.S. gallons The 1:1:l ratio was determined by polling numerous cannabis farmers about their water usage. Emerald Growers Association and Mendocino Cannabis Policy Council conducted the polls." I, along with a majority of the voters, voted to make recreational pot legal because, although I don't smoke it personally, I don't feel that the government should criminalize people for smoking pot, or spend tax money to use the court system and then incarcerate for victimless behaviors. When I voted on that, however, I did not ever think that what is essentially an industrial manufacturing business would be taking over and changing the very nature of farm country. This is not a traditional farm product at all. This is more akin to a factory. These indoor grows do not need to take up good farmland and valuable agricultural water. What was initially hoped to be a "cottage" industry has become a monster. The price per acre in our area is being affected which it makes it hard for farmers to enter the market who would want to grow food. According to some of the testimony you heard earlier this year, they don't even grow it in the ground, but in pots, which surely could be located in a factory, where they could still benefit from the sun and water which they do need. They are similar to a business, now located on 2nd Street, in Bend, called Volcano Veggies. Volcano Veggies also doesn't need a farm--they grow organic lettuce and other greens, hydroponically and with artificial lights in a warehouse. A very good Bend Bulletin article that speaks to growing marijuana in an industrial zone, where I firmly believe it belongs, is found here. http://www.bendbulletin.com/ husi n ess/5904808- 1 5 1 /sustai n ahl e-f ra cti ces-profi t-cannahi s-comnani es Another issue is the overproduction of pot contributing to a black market gone out of control. Here are recent articles: httfr://m ailtrihune.com/news/tol-stori es/renort'over-rodrrcti on-of-lot-feeds- hlack-market I s 1 h ttl s : //www. oregon i ve. com /nr a rij uan a/i n dex. sfir 0 7/03 / oregon:a:top:sourceJor:hl ack. htm l " Oregon has an " expansive geographi c footprint" on the black market across the country. A half-dozen counties -- Jackson, Multnomah, Josephine, Lane, Deschutes and Washington - "lead the way" in supplying much of what's shipped out of state, the analysis said. . '.The report's other key takeaways: Overall marijuana production in Oregon far outpaces demand, hash oil manufacturing has fueled a rise in explosions and serious injuries and the state doesn't comply with key federal marijuana enforcement priorities. " /05 I httns'//www oregoJrl ive. cnm /m arij rr ana /index ssf o 1 8 h I a ck=m arket=oveilrroducti on:am .htm I htrfrs./iwww npr org/^018/O5/'!6/61057o5o9/desliteJega.li-ation-manjrrana-hlack- market-hides-in-nlain-sighf - "Five years into its experiment with legal, regulated cannabis, Washington state is finding that pot still attracts criminals... Legalization was also supposed to end pot smuggling, but that hasn't worked out either. . . Overproduction in Washington and other states with legal pot, such as Oregon, has led to a market glut and rock-bottom wholesale prices in the legal market." - Given the "over production" of marijuana and the estimated amount leaving the state illegally, attention must be given to creating some balance in approvals to reduce the greediness of the producers. Please make a firm stand to stop accepting f.uture applications for marijuana production (at least in rural Deschutes County) until our state has a better understanding of where over 65% of the product is going! Pot is an extremely well funded industry, as you know, unlike traditional farming, whereby, when you choose to grow food, you know you are not choosing a profession which will gain you a big income. You are lucky to squeak by, but you choose it because of the way of life it gives you. Right now the average age of farmers in Oregon is 60 years old. Not many young people are choosing food farming because it is expensive to buy and maintain farm property and it is a chancy business. We depend upon the whims of nature to help provide" We are NOT making $1000+ per pound for our produce, as pot growers are. And we cannot afford the lawyers necessary to fight for our way of life. We also chose to farm because ofthe peace and quiet; notto listen to constant drone of machinery/fans/ etc. We were drawn to the birds, the animals, the big skies, sunrises, sunsets, and bright stars; not the light pollution because of the 7am to 7pm hours, as opposed to a dawn to dusk timing. We love our views of mountains and juniper, the fragrance of healthy nature, not the constant stink of "skunks" when you pass by a pot farm, Instead of open farming property with wire fences and welcoming neighbors, we have wooden fences blocking open views, locked gates, No Trespassing signs and cameras. This does not "relate harmoniously to the natural environment and existing development" of the Alfalfa community as referenced in the County standards. EFU zoning is supposed to limit development that could conflict with farming practices. Pot "farming" is not traditional farming, but manufacturing of a medical and/or recreational drug. It definitely conflicts AND DEGRADES a rural lifestyle, I believe the applications all need to be rejected until they are moved to an industrial zone. We already have too many grows in our little community of Alfalfa. It is obvious to me that you should not approve any more, especially in Alfalfa. I'm just not convinced that it is the best use of our dwindling food- growing land and our limited water resources. I feel it is ritical that we develop a long-range plan for the sustainability ofour local food resources, in the face of global warming and drought, particularly as our population grows. Local food farms contribute to the long-term sustainability, health, and resilience of our community. Yet food farmers face substantial economic disadvantages and are unable to compete on an even playing field with the cannabis industry for land and labor. Furthermore, as our beautiful, open, pastoral landscapes of livestock, crops and bustling family farms transition to the blight of cannabis grows and processing facilities that look like prisons, our growing agri-tourism activity, which is a great benefit to farmers and our region, will also suffer. Land Use Applications for marijuana development on our rural lands in Alfalfa cbntinue to flow in to the Community Development Department. Property owners of these applications do not live in Deschutes County. They are from elsewhere - Missouri, New Jersey, Tennessee, Florida and this current application, is from Mark & Elizabeth Weisheit, from Hermosa Beach, CA. They are not primary residents here. These property owners are not directly committed to enhancing "the county as a safe, sustainable and highly desirable place to live". Instead these property owners will, if you accept their Land Use Applications, assist in transforming our rural community to an industial environment at our collective expense and to their financial benefit. Land use planning for unincorporated Deschutes County must protect those properly owners committed to farming practices that require soil, open fields and water. It is apparent that marijuana production does not require rural land in EFU zones. There are notable examples of successful marijuana growing operations in commercial and/or industrial zones in our county already. I have reviewed everything available on DIAL regarding this proposal. The proposed building is a 10,000 square foot grow and processing factory, to be situated on farm land. It belongs elsewhere. Please say NO! to this new application. Sincerely, Abby Kellner-Rode Boundless Farmstead 25360 Walker Rd. Bend, OR 97701 97r-241-6289 From: Brooke Klein To: Tammv Banev; Tonv DeBonel Phil Henderson Cc: Nig,klClAgk; Jffob.8irueU Anthonv Raou ine Sublecl Fwd: Date: Friday, July 6, 2018 1:56:43 PM Regarding application for a marijuana grow opeftItion File rmmber: 247-I8-000504-AD/505-AD/506-SP Dear County Commissioners, I have lived in Alfalfa norv for the past two years. We were attracted to this community due to its rural and agricultural nature. I ride horses and own goats, and it has provided a great environment to do both. Unfornurately, we have seen negative effects due to the overwhelming growth of cannabis on surrounding farm land. The culture of the community is changing, along with the landscapes we love. Canrabis seems to be the cash crop of our time. It may be no surprise tlut so many folks want to grow it and cash in on the profits, Howwe! it seems like the long term effects of what we are doing to ow lald and its.resources should be at t}e forefront of discussion- As well as the fact that we are cunently over producing rvlut our local economy can consume. My arguments apinst approving furtlrer permits to grow carmabis on EFU lands are simple to understand, Firstly, this is a crop that is not grown like any other in tlre area. It is confined to a green house, and most growers want to grcw year round thus trading in their surface water rights and diggng wells. This not only steals from our fi€sh water aquifer, but also turns the once irrigated latd back to dust and desert. We are only lir"ing in the high desert due !o the availability and accessibility of irrigation water. Without access to water, it is impossible to grow food. Secondly, it is a crop that is uzually grown witl artificial light in these greenhouses to enlance yields. Outside of the growers own electric expense, this affects wery neighbor around, as tle glow from the grten houses canbe seen for miles around. Thirdly, tle growing of cannabis does not make an area more desirable to live. That is, unless you are the one with the financial reward Unrally, there is a smell or noise of fans neighbors complain of and no one lives on the prcperty as it is a business only. They become compounds sunounded with wire and cameras. Although I krnw nuuly of these deainments are legal obligations wele set on them, does this sound like someone you'd like to have as a neighbofl I know you have all tle statistics in front ofyou, so IVe decided to keep this as short and tio the point as possible. Ultimately, the culture and livability of our homes and landscapes are changing and I don't think its for the better. Please deny any further applications for growing and processing carurabis on EFU land. There has to be another way. Thank you for your consideration and your service. KindestRegards, Brooke Klein From: David Kellner-Rode To: Anthonv Raouine; Nick Lelack; Jacob Rioper; f3pn64Q3ggy; I-Qry-De≠ Phil Henderson SubJect: File number: 247-18-000504-AD/505--AD/506-5P, Application to allow marijuana production and processing at 25450 Walker Rd. Dale Friday, July 6, 2018 9:05:55 AM July 6,2018. Regarding application for a marijuana grow opemtion File rurmber: 247- I 8-000504-ADi505-AD/5 06-SP Dear Commissioners Barey, DeBone andHendersor\ Senior Plarmer Anthony Raguine, NickLelack, Jacob Ripper, My name is David Kellner-Rode, and I am one of the owner/operators of Boundless Farmstead, LLC located at2536} Walker Rd. We operate a farm with 5 acres of vegetable production, sold to tocal families, at the Downtown Bend Farmer's Market, and to local restaurants. We raise poultry, and have 12 acres of hay fields. I send this email to ask of you to please DEIIY the application of Mark Weisheit at 25450 Walker Rd. for a marijuana production and processing facility. This is located immediately to the east of our farm. There a.re many reasons why I believe this aforementioned application should be denied. 1. Inappropriate use ofEFU zoned land 2. Direct detriment to our business 3. Proximity to Public Lands Manufacturing and processing marijuana in a 10,000 square foot indoor warehouse is not an agricultural act. It is simply manufacturing. It is merely a combination of inputs to create an end product. There is no sun, no soil, no weather to contend with. It is not agdculture. Manufacturing processes should be strictly confined to industrially zoned areas. Please, DO NOT ALLOW manufacturing to take place on Exclusive Farm Use land. Other consequences of manufacturing include noise pollutions, light pollution, heavy traffic (on a road that is currently unpaved, has the county thought about the costs ofincreased traffrc on an unpaved road?), none of these are things that are congruent with EFU land or country living. I believe that allowing a marijuana manufacturing and processing facility next door to our farm would be directly detimental to our business. This spring we had over 400 elementary school aged children from Bend-Lapine School district come out to our farm in a series of field trips for a program sponsored by Central Oregon Locavore called Farm Kids.We strongly believe that there are many significant educational benefits to introducing children to farms. However, I do not see how we could possibly continue to invite the school district out to our farm, if there was marijuana being manufactured directly next door. We would hate to have to cancel such a beneficial program because someone had to get stoned. I know that the county commissioners are currently debating a rule regarding proximity of grow operations to public land. Our farm borders the Juniper Woodlands BLM land to the west. I know that the westem edge of the 25450 property line is under 1500 feet from the BLM land. At the very least this application should be put on hold until a decision is made on that rule. Please DEIYY this application. There is not need for yet another marijuana processing facility in Deschutes County, we do not need manufacturing taking place on EFU lands, and we do not need marijuana manufacturing taking place next to our precious public lands. Thank you for your work. Sincerely, David Kellner-Rode Boundless Farmstead 503883 1758 From: lqhn-Clavsao To: Nick Lelack; lafob-Bioper; AnlbsnysAgUne; I-arnny-Eaogc; I-onsDeEone; Phil Henderson Sublecl: Regarding application br a marijuana grow operation File number: 247-18-000504-AD/505-AD/505'SP Dale: Friday, July 6, 2018 3:28:45 PM I I File numb e r 247 -18 -000 5 04-AD/5 0 5 --AD/5 06- SP I Dear Commissioners Baney, DeBone and Henderson, Senior Planner Anthony Raguine, Nick Lelack, Jacob Ripper, I and everyone I know in my community, strongly oppose the request for this, another permit in Alfalfa. My reasons are simple, I live out of town to get away from it all. To see the stars and let the quiet serenity of the high desert envelop my spirit. I enjoy a good walk with my dog down the ever sleepy Walker road, where she's able to be off leash and meander at will. I fear the proposed farm will take away the stars from my nights sky as similar farms have done to my neighbors. The harsh light.pollution does not belong in the country. The quiet dead end road that provides the stillness my dog and I so enjoy will now have taffic, fences, prison-like barb wire and cameras. Stars gone, serenity gone' These life altering issues aside, I get my drinking water from a well, as do my neighbors. These wells are going dry. As you know, marijuana farms grow year round and partially supplement their needs with well water. The timing of wells going dry and marijuana farms coming in is undeniable. I don't oppose the idea of growing marijuana but I do oppose the way it's currently being grown. It's simply not sustainable and has an immensly negative impact on the community. I know you wouldn't grant a permit if the lot was next to yours, so please don't pass one for the lot next to mine. Thank you for your time and consideration John Clayson From: Janet Nash To: Anthonv Raouine Sublect: Comrnents on file #247-18-00504AD, 25450 Walker Rd Dale: Friday, July 6, 2018 3t02:20 PM Dear Mr. Raugine, As the period for comments comes to a close on this application, let us please state for the record we are OPPOSED to this application. The applicants have not posted their Notice of Application sign. OLCC has placed a moratorium on accepting applications for license. The over abundance of marijuana in Deschutes County and Oregon is well documented. The largest operator in the Alfalfa area is currently not operating and falling into physical disrepair. The application is within 1/4 mile of a well used BLM Trailhead, Juniper Woodlands Trailhead. We will simply reiterate opposition Charles and Janet Nash From: Boundless Farmstead lo: Ia.Oru-gil€U; I-O$LDeBAn$ Phil Henderson; Anthonv Raouine; Nick Lelack; Jacob Rinoer Sublect: Comments on File number: 247-18-000504-AD/505-ADi505'SP Dalei Friday, July 6, 2018 2121r19 PM 5 July 2018 Regarding application for marijuana grow operation Fi le N u m be r: 247 -18-000504-ADI505-AD/506-S P DearCommissioners Baney, DeBone, and Henderson, Senior PlannerAnthony Raguine, Nick Lelack, Jacob Ripper, and to whom it may con@rn, My name is Megan French and I am a resident, co-owner, and primary farmer (along with my partner David) of Boundless Farmstead LLC at 25360 Walker Road. We are a diversified commercial vegetable farm using chemical-free and organically-aligned growing practices, selling wholesale to restaurants and to Agricultural Connections, retail at the farmers market, and through our Community Supported Agriculture (CSA) program. We conservatively feed over 100 families in.Central Oregon. We received notice of the marijuana permit application for the property just to our east at 25450 Walker Road and are asking that you please DENY this application for the following reasons: 1. Student, child, and family lnvolvement at Boundless Farmstead. Our farm has quickly become a fixture in the Central Oregon smallfarm and agricultural community, and often serves as the location forworkshops, field trips, intern learning sites, and more. ln 2018 alone, Boundless has been asked to represent smallfarms on the local news Supper Club program, as a speaker at City Club Central Oregon, as a guest in OSU classrooms, at the Govemof s Regional Solutions meeting, and more. a This year, we hosted over 250 Kindergarten through 2nd grade students through the Central Oregon Locavore Farm Kids Program. This program is an amazing opportunity for children to get outside and leam about sustainable agriculture. Our farm is one of the closest to Bend and provides easy bus- ability. b. We get inquiries frequently to host field trips and kids clubs (Environmental Center, schools, etc) and plan to continue accommodating these groups. We want schools, parents, and children to feel safe and comfortable coming to our farm to learn. c. We have also hosted workshops for adult students through OSU Extension, as well as volunteering and learning groups from Rogue Farm Corps, COCC students, painting/art outings, etc. We would like our farm to remain a fixture of learning and agricultural involvement without people feeling uncomfortable with nearby operations, lt is crucial to our community that we continue educating about sustainable farming for our food security and sovereignty. 2. Agritourism. Similar to the above mentioned, agritourism is a large part of our farm. Being a small scale farmer, we rely on events for promotion, marketing and finances. We host small farm concerts for budding local musicians. We also plan to host farm- to-table dinners and have considered opening up the farm for a very small handful of private events to add some extra income to the farm. We want ourfarm to remain inviting for people of all ages and allwalks of life. 3. EFU Concerns. Boundless Farmstead was recently filmed by Wahoo Films and Central Oregon Landwatch in an etfort to continue keeping Alfalfa designated EFU The encroaching neighborhoods and grow operations are exactly why Oregon has designated areas as EFU. a "A vibrant localfarm economy requires a critical mass of farmland. When too much residential development encroaches on farmland, a downward "cycle of conversion" can begin, in which farms experience conflicts with neighbors such as trespassing, liftering, pets chasing livestock..." (oregon.gov DLCD Farmland Protection Program) t. We feel that the word 'residential' may also be replaced by 'industrial' and worry about all of the above stated with a large manufacturing warehouse next door. We know all of our neighbors currently and have concerns of property owners who do not live on the property (Hermosa Beach residents) caring for and maintaining a safe, positive atmosphere. b. A large warehouse being built on natural high desert land is a maior concern for the wildlife that migrates through our area as well. We can provide images of large herds of elk migrating directly across the land wlrere the warehouse for marijuana growing is set to be built. Also, the site of the potential grow op would be easily within 2000 feet of public lands (BLM). Recently, the commissioners met to discuss not allowing Marijuana Grow Operations with 2,600 feet of public lands; this permit would fail under that rule. Our property (during past owners) was given an aurard forwildlife habitat because of the trees, vegetative variety, bird and bat houses, water, etc. We pride ourselves in continuing the tradition of the past homeowners and working with wildlife and nature. G. Seeing open spaces and potentialfarmland covered in a concrete structure seems counterintuitive and counterproductive to the goals of the EFU. 4. Financial Goncerns. Farm land is becoming more scarce and more ditficult to acquire for Oregonians looking to farm. At Boundless, David and I were able to begin a commercial vegetable farm due to the contributions and lifetime of hard work by his parents. We are a multigenerational household and would not be able to farm without them. We are fortunate to have family support, but many are not. Marijuana grow operations only further the difficulty in finding affordable farmland by artificially inflating property prices. lt is already tremendously ditficult for young farmers to find and farm land in Oregon; marijuana grows are making it nearly impossible. ln all, I think the Alfalfa community, the small farm community, and Central Oregon agriculture would benefit from denying this application specifically, but also considering the impact of all future grow operations. lf the growing is done out of the soil, out of natural light, and with lack of concern for water, then the operations should not be designated as farm-use and should be designated as manufacturing. lf you would like any further proof of: field trips, workshops, etc., I can provide letters from the nonprofits we work with explaining what we have been involved with and what we will be participating in. Thank you for your time and consideration, and I please ask that you deny the marijuana permit at 25450 Walker Road. Sincerely, Megan French David Kellner-Rode and Megan French 503.883.1758 www. houn dl essfarm stead. com www. facehook. com/houndl essfarm stead From: Steven Pauldino To: Anthonv Raouine Cc: McGean Michael Sublecl: File Numbers: 247-18-000504-AD / 505-AD / 506-SP Dale: Friday, July 6, 2018 2:49:41 PM Dear Mr. Raguine, I am writing in reference to the Notice of Application that we received in the mail regarding Mark Weisheit's application for approval to grow and process mariiuana at 25450 Walker Road, Bend. Our lot (Tax Lot 77\4280002901) borders Mr. Weisheit's lot on the north side of his property We oppose the application and request a public hearing to present our views about Mr. Weisheit's application. Thank you, Steven Paulding 62605 Dodds Rd, Bend, OR 97701 720-253-2015 Cc: Attorney Michael McGean From: loanna Booser To: Anthonv Raouinel cdd-webmaster; Sarah McClure: Mandv Muller Sublect: 25450 Walker Road proposed land use. These are my comments, due in writing today to meet the 10 day deadline to comment on the application for approval of marijuana production and processing in EFU zone Dale: Saturday, July 7, 2018 3:21:36 PM Dear Deschutes County Planning Division, Amanda Muller and I own 40 acres with the mailing address of 25285 Walker Road, Bend OR 97702. These are my written comments on the proposed land use action at25450 Walker Road in Alfalfa OR, to allow construction and operation of a very large building and business for marijuana production and marijuana processing in the exclusive farm zone. I was able to review the documents online. Here are my concerns: 1. The very large size of the industrial type building does not fit in with the character of the EFU zone. 2. Since the the owners only need to produce 1/4 of the marijuana they plan to process on site, will they be hauling in up to 3/4s of their supply from other growers? 3, What is the recourse for the neighbors if the smell is unacceptable? 4. Alfalfa had a bad experience with razor wire, tall ugly fences, and periodically very strong odors on the pot farm across from the Alfalfa Store. The application for this proposed land use action indicates that no new fences or razor wire are planned, but the neighbors wonder what would happen if they end up deciding to protect their facility in that way. That would be unacceptable to the quiet rural farming neighborhood. 5, The clear night sky without light interference, the fresh air scented with sage, and the extreme quiet at night were all reasons we wanted to live where we do. If any of these would be impacted by the proposal, that would be a big concern, and not acceptable to the neighborhood. 6. What is the recourse for the neighbors if the noise from the fans or other equipment is unacceptable? 7. What is the recourse for the neighbors if the lighting level is unacceptable, or if they decide to add greenhouses with bright grow lights in the future? I would prefer not to have this proposed marijuana growing and processing facility built in our neighborhood, If it is approved anyway, we'd like to know the answers to the above questions, and exactly how to get help if the the light, smell, noise and visual impacts become unacceptable to neighbors, Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the proposal, and express our concerns. Joanna Booser 25285 Walker Rd Bend OR 97702 Tracy Griffin Frcm: Mar Mor Farms < marmorfarms@gmai l.com > Sent: Friday, July 20, 2018 9:44 AM To: Anthony Raguine Subject: Fwd : Fi le n u m ben 247 -1 8-000504 -AD/5 05 --AD/506-S P Forwarded message From: Mar Mor Farms July 6, 2018. Regarding application for a marijuana grow operation F i le n u m b er: 247 -18-000504-AD/505--AD/506-5 P Dear Commissioners Baney, DeBone and Henderson, Senior Planner Anthony Raguine, Nick Lelack, Jacob Ripper, I own the 40 acre property at 6231 1 Dodds Rd, which on its north side abuts Walker Rd directly across from the proposed marijuana grow and processing operation. I am VERY MUCH AGAINST the approval of this application for qrowinq and grocessin0 marijuana! This is the kind of operation which most certainly belongs in an industrial park, NOT on Central Oregon farm land. Some of my concerns: Water We live in the High Desert and water is necessary and NOT unlimited. We all need it, and our water supply is diminishing at a rate, according to Kyle Gorman's testimony, earlier this year, of at least a foot a year over the last 25 years. Alfalfa has had a rash of wells going dry in the last year, simultaneous with and in proximity to a significant number of pot operations going on line. We do not really know how much water the cannabis industry uses, except for what they have told us without meaningful i ndependent verification. 1 According to htto : //www. t h eq a n i i e r. co m nA 1 5 I 07 I A 2l how -m u ch -wate r-d oes-o n e- m ari i u an a- p lant-n eed-to-q rowl "After playing with a number of different formulas over the years and trying to find what fits, the best figure we've come up with is one gallon of water per day per pound of processed flower, i.e. a one-pound plant needs one gallon of water per day, whereas a five-pound plant needs five gallons per day, and a 10-pound plant needs 10 gallons per day. One Acre-Foot = 325,851 U.S. gallons The 1:1:1 ratio was determined by polling numerous cannabis farmers about their water usage. Emerald Growers Association and Mendocino Cannabis Policy Council conducted the polls," U n i nten ded Co nseq ue n-c-es My vote to make recreational pot legal was for the de-criminalization of individual use. I had no inkling that the result would be that what is essentially an industrial manufacturing business would be taking over and changing the very nature of our EFU zoned farm country. This is not a traditional farm product at all. This is more akin to a factory. These indoor grows do not need to take up good farmland and valuable agricultural water. What was initially hoped to be a "cottage" industry has become an unchecked behemoth. Just because the State Legislature "says" pot is a "farm crop" doesn't make it so in the real world. According to some of the testimony you heard earlier this year, they don't even grow it in the ground, but in pots, which surely could be located in a factory, where they could still benefit from artificial lights and commercial water. They are similar to a business, now located on 2nd Street, in Bend, called Volcano Veggies. Volcano Veggies also doesn't need a farm--they grow organic lettuce and other greens, hydroponically and with artiflcial lights in a warehouse. A very good Bend Bulletin article that speaks to growing marijuana in an industrial zone, where I firmly believe it belongs, is found here http: i/www. bend b u lleti n. com/bu s i ness/S 904 I 0 B- 1 5 1 /s u sta i na bl e- oractices- o rofit- cannabis-companies Overproduction Another issue is the overproduction of pot contributing to a black market with pot shipped clandestinely out of state. Here are recent articles: http://mailtribune.com/news/top-stories/report-over-production-of-oot-feeds-black- market 2 httos:i/www.oregonlive.com/mariiuanalindex.ssf/2017iO3/oreoon a top source for bl ack.html "Oregon has an "expansive geographic footprint" on the black market across the country,A half-dozen counties -- Jackson, Multnomah, Josephine, Lane, Deschutes and Washington -- "lead the way" in supplying much of what's shipped out of state, the analysis said... .The report's other key takeaways: Overall marijuana production in Oregon far outpaces demand, hash oil manufacturing has fueled a rise in explosions and serious injuries and the state doesn't comply with key federal marijuana enforceme nt priorities. " https://www-oreqonlive.comlmariiuanaiindq(.ssf/2018/O5lblack market overproduction am.html httos: //www,nar .oral 2A 1 A 0 il 16/6 1 0579 99/desoite-leoa I ization -ma ri i ua na-b lack- market-hides-in-plain-siqht - "Five years into its experiment with legal, regulated cannabis, Washington state is finding that pot still attracts criminals...Legalization was -also supposed to end pot smuggling, but that hasn't worked out either...Overproduction in Washington and other states with legal pot, such as Oregon, has led to a market glut - and rock-bottom wholesale prices in the legal market." Given the "over production" of marijuana and the estimated amount leaving the state illegally, it's time to stop approving new applications such as this one until state regulators and law enforcement have control of the production supported by demand in the state. Resource allocation Pot is an extremely well-funded industry, as you know, unlike traditional farming. lF you choose to grow food (plants or animals), you know you are not choosing a profession which will make you rich. You are lucky to squeak by, but you choose it because of the way of life it gives you. Currently, the average age of farmers in Oregon is 60 years old. Not many young people are choosing food farming because it is expensive to buy and maintain farm property and it is a chancy business. We are NOT making $1,000+ per pound for our produce, as pot growers are. And we cannot afford the lawyers necessary to fight for our way of life. We also chose to farm because of the peace and quiet; not to listen to constant drone of machinery/fansl etc. We were drawn to the birds, the animals, the big skies, sunrises, sunsets, and bright stars; not the light pollution because of the 7am to 7pm hours, as opposed to a dawn to dusk timing. We love our views of mountains and juniper, the fragrance of healthy nature, not the stink of "skunks" when you pass by a pot farm or when you find yourself down-wind of a pot farm. lnstead of open farming property with wire fences and welcoming neighbors, we have wooden fences blocking open views, locked gates, No Trespassing signs and cameras. This does not "relate harmoniously to the natural environment and existing development" of the Alfalfa community as referenced in the County standards. 3 EFU zoning is supposed to limit development that could conflict with farming practices. Pot "farming" is not traditional farming, but manufacturing of a medical and/or recreational drug. lt definitely conflicts AND DEGRADES our rural lifestyle. New applications such as this one need to be rejected. These operations must be moved to an industrial zone. We already have too many grows in our little community of Alfalfa l'm just not convinced that it is the best use of our dwindling food-growing land and our limited water resources. lt is critical that we develop a long-range plan for the sustainability of our local food resources, in the face of global warming and drought, particularly as our population grows. Farmers face substantial economic disadvantages and are forced to compete on an even playing field with the cannabis industry for land and labor. Non-residents Land Use Applications for marijuana development on our rural lands in Alfalfa continue to flow in to the Community Development Department. Property owners of these applications do not live in Deschutes County. They are from elsewhere - Missouri, New Jersey, Tennessee, Florida and this current application, is from Mark & Elizabeth Weisheit, from Hermosa Beach, CA. They are not primary residents here. These property owners are not directly committed to enhancing "the county as a safe, sustainable and highly desirable place to live". Instead these property owners will, if you accept their Land Use Applications, assist in transformino our rural communitv to an industrial environment at our collective expense and to their financial benefit. Land use planning for unincorporated Deschutes County must protect those property owners committed to farming practices that require soil, open fields and water. lt is apparent that marijuana production does not require rural land in EFU zones. There are notable examples of successful marijuana growing operations in commercial and/or industrial zones in our county already. In conclusion The proposed 10,000 square foot grow and processing factory building is on farm land. It belongs elsewhere. Please deny this new application Sincerely, Margot Barron Mar Mor Farms 6231 1 Dodds Rd Bend, OR 97701 4 Ashley Wlliams Frcm: Nunzie < [email protected] > Sent: Wednesday, April 3, 2019 4:50 PM Tol Board; Jacob Ripper Subject: Weisheit appeal of mj processing and production 247-19-00A178-A Attachments: processing image-Deschutes County is Oregon's third-largest hemp growing county; lndustrial hemp projected to be $1 billion commodity in Oregon.pdf; ATT00001.htm Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Flagged Greetings Please enter this email and attachment into the open written recording re:247-19-000178-A Commissioners: I attended the public appeal hearing of the Weisheit marijuana processing and production on Walker Road, What is apparent is the applicant property owner and business owner do not have a clear plan for either the totality ofthe proposed production and processing operation nor a clear plan for the starting business plan for the proposed grow and processing. The applicant's testimony was vague, conflicting and it is unclear whether the applicant has the knoweldge to implement the plan for which a partner in a business answered questions. So the question is for this EFU properly: is the use a commercial use of farm land because the property owner is not the business? It is curious that after all the time between when Weisheit applied last year, throughout the hearing and now during this year's appeal, that now in April: details are not forthcoming. The applicant has the burden of proof. Merely stating that Code conditions will govem a business model is ludicrous. Code conditions are not assurances that a business model will achieve code. The applicant has not proved that their operation meets the County's mj standards. Similarly, there is no assurance that OLCC's regulations governing mj will be perfected at this Walker Road property. OLCC is hugely deficient in staffing our region. In fact for the 6 counties that OLCC has oversight from one office, only l2.49Yo of this is in Deschutes County. So merely relying on OLCC to implement state codes which are not the County codes is also a poor judge that there is adequate OLCC staffing for our rural community, There remain many irregularities within OLCC and this is why there are a spate of 'adopt by emergency' clauses in marijuana legislation before this Oregon's 2019 legislative session. The biggest reason to deny the Weisheit approval is because County land use approvals are granted for 2 years and funding methodologies that the County currently uses could be stripped during those 2 years (SB 365 dash I adopted which passed out of committee yesterday could go into effect with emergency declaration upon passage) This is but one example where the County must deny this application because the State's regulations are throwing out local control. (As seen in SB 365's passage) It is time for local control to only approve a well thought thru marijuana plan. One that can prove without doubt .r that it's odor control will function and one that doesn't state that only half of the HVAC units will operate for 15 ' minutes of the day. 1 The Weisheit application has not shown how it will take deliveries or make shipments without exposing the - interior air outdoors. The Weisheit application has not identified even the types of products it intends to finish in it's production facility. Attached is an image of extracting equipment which is high pressure for cannabis CBD products. You can see the pressure gages on the distillery equipment. This is important from a public safety perspective that fire fighting volunteers have adequate training in managing all of the contents at the proposed site: be they chemicals, pesticides, miticides and or extracting agents. Applicant also has not shown where they will dispose of water on the property without using a septic system: as you know septic systems are not allowed per DEQ requirements, The simple solution is to not approve the Weisheit production and processing application zn-l'r,40ot7l-e. The applicant has not met the burden of proof. Thank you for considering my views Nunzie Gould, a rural EFU land owner in Deschutes County z F$lllg :€F.Wgffiffi Published March 17,2019 at os:rgAM Oeschutes County is Oregolr's third-largest hemp growing county lndustrial hemp projected to be $1 billion commodity in Oregon Brian Smalley, the majority owner of Freedom Hemp Co. in Culver, looks over some of his hemp processing equipment on Saturday. (R1an Brennecke/Bulletin photo) View larger image I Buy photo o ooo Oregon's industrial hemp crop is poised to Years of hemp growth in Oregon grow past $r billion as produets containing CBD, cannabidiol, become more The number of industrial hemp farms in Oregon through March 5: commonplace and since the zor8 farm bill Year Growers Acnes removed industrial hemp from the controlled 2015 13 105 substance list. 2016 83 1,200 -Iockeying for position, hemp growers are 2017 246 3,000 -.ratching up licensing registrations that will 2018 584 11,754 allow them to grow industrial hemp, which is 2019 615 20,278 used in more than 3o,ooo products. Source: Oregon Department of Agriculture letter to the U.S. Department of Agriculture eschutes County is the third-largest industrial hemp-growing county, with Jackson and Josephine counties in southwest Oregon dedicating the most acreage to the crop, according to Oregon Department of Agriculture (http:/loda.state.or.us/dbs/licenses/search.lasso?&division=cid) data. There are 76 industrial hemp farms registered in Deschutes County, compared with r39 in Jackson and 85 in Josephine counties. Oregon hemp is expected to leap ahead of the state's No. z commodity, cattle and calves, which were worth $Brg.B million in zot7, the most current year data are available, according to Jay Noller, head of Oregon State University's Crop and Soil Science Department. Oregon ranks third, behind Montana and Colorado, in acreage dedicated to industrial -effip, according to New Frontier Data, a Washington, D.C., cannabis analytics firm. "It's the newest, hottest craze at the moment," said Matt Cyrus, a Central Oregon hemp grower and the Deschutes County Farm Bureau president. "It's a beneficial product. I expect in ro years to be a standard ingredient in everything from dog food to soft drinks." Qnus operates a farm in Sisters. Last year, he farmed zT acres, and this year, he'll be planting more than 1oo acres in anticipation of a surge in demand for CBD products. Similarly, Brian Smalley, majority owner of Freedom Hemp Co. in Culver, is among those farmers poised to take advantage of the federal descheduling of industrial hemp. This year, he expanded from a couple hundred acres in Culver to z,ooo acres plans to plant them all. In addition, he's investing in a larger on-site processing "nd cility. "I've been growing hemp for a long time," Smalley said. "I love the plant. This stuff is nazing. "We're in the right climate here, (in Central Oregon). This is hemp paradise. It's fantastic." Rules still needed In a state where recreational and medical use of cannabis and hemp are legal, there's a potential for opportunity now that the federal government isn't prohibiting hemp growing and processing, Cyms said. Last year, there were nearly 12,ooo acres licensed by agriculture officials for hemp production in Oregon, and so far this year, 35,ooo acres have been registered, Noller said. Trom an economic standpoint, it's a good thing," Noller said. "Oregon has a strategic and biological advantage because we're at the right latitude to produce the genus of cannabis plants." Worldwide, industrial hemp is a $g.Z billion industry and is projected to grow 15 percent this year, according to New Frontier. Growing number of farms The growth in the number of industrial hemp farms comes at a time when Oregon marijuana growers are struggling with overproduction and declining prices, said Beau Whitney, New Frontier Data vice president and senior economist. Some marijuana farmers have even switched over to industrial hemp because of the saturated legal marijuana market, Whitney said. "Industrial hemp demand is more stable and is in fact increasing substantially while \e state is not oversaturated in supply," Whitney said. "It's an interesting dynamic in Lrregon that a lot of these higher THC growers have switched over to industrial hemp." Industrial hemp and cannabis plants look the same but are different in the production of THC, tetrahydrocannabinol, the psychoactive aspect of marijuana that makes people feel high. CBD, which can come from marijuana plants or industrial hemp, contains less than o.g percent THC. In Oregon, hemp plants are tested by private labs before harvesting for THC levels, said Sunny Summers, Oregon Department of Agriculture cannabis policy and special projects coordinator. "In Oregon, we're poised to move right into whatever the USDA requires," Summers oaid. CBD products are unregulated and unmonitored by the Food and Drug Administration. They can be bought online, at CBD stores or at state-regulated marijuana retail outlets. In the past three years, the breadth of CBD-added products has surged. Users swear by CBD as a treatment for everything from anxiety to chronic pain. "Consumer acceptance for cannabis has grown, and retailers see movement for cannabis for medicinal and lifestyle uses," Whitney said. "For example, Sephora now sells a CBD mask. The growth of the product offerings has exploded." CBD from hemp 're U.S. Department of the Agriculture has said it will issue rules overseeing rndustrial hemp and its products later this year. Those rules will regulate how hemp and CBD can be transferred out of state for processing and sales. It is legal to transport some forms of industrial hemp-based products across state nes as long as that state has laws aligned with the federal laws, Whitney said. A truck nauling industrial hemp from Oregon to Colorado was stopped in Idaho in late January. State police confiscated about Z,ooo pounds of industrial hemp, and the driver could face felony marijuana trafficking charges. Srnalley, the Culver grower, processes and distills his industrial hemp on-site and will be expanding his processing facility over the coming year, which will enable his firm to process hemp for other growers. Other hemp farms have to send out for processing, Whitney said. There are a limited number of processors in Oregon, which is causing a pinch point, Noller said. More processors are needed to accommodate the surge in hemp production. Most of the CBD products created from the hemp are considered supplements and are "ot subjeet to FDA oversight, Whitney said. "What we're seeing is that the demand is going to be so large for industrial hemp products that it will consume the available processing capacity for some time," Whitney said. "There's a lot of growers, but not a whole lot of people who can process the product." - Rep or ter : 5 4t - 6 g g- z t t 7, sr oig @b endbulletin. com Ashley Wlliams Frcm: Janet Nash < [email protected] > Sent: Monday, March 25,2019 9:38 AM To: Board; Jacob Ripper Subject: File#247-19-OOO178-A, Weisheit application forgrow on Walker Rd Attachments: AO1 0000039 1 441 39LH08AFl LUZH 7K6.pdf Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Flagged IEXTERNAL EMAIL] Hello Commissioners and Jacob, in Attached please find page 45 of the original application that details the 16 HVAC units that will be used conjunction with the marijuana grow at 25450 Walker Rd., Bend, oR . above the This document is in support of testimony given on March 2A,2olg that the units will generate noise normal levels found in tiris rural neighborhood, where sound travels easily in the topography. Thank You, Charles K and Janet Nash neighbors on Dodds Rd 1 Maintenance for this system will be in accordance with manufacturer instructions: and the ,,The life of a filter is determined by the concentration of the contaminant, the relative humidity you when it is ready to volume of air being cleaned. Unfortunately, there is no indicator light on the filter that tells many of them have lasted be replaced. Typically 12-19 months is expected of the original can-Filter, although much longer." Therefore, providing odor control as described above will satisfy the requirements of DCC 1g.116.330(8ltl0XdXii), and prevent unreasonable interference of neighbors' use and enjoyment of their property. Noise The Deschutes County code DCC 18.116.330(BX11Xa) reads: with the following: Noise. Noise produced by marijuana production and marijuana processing shall comply a. sustained noise from mechanical equipment used for heating, ventilation, air condition, odor control, 10:00 fans and similar functions shall not exceed 30 dB(A) measured at any propertv line between p.m. and 7:00 a.m. the following day' Equipment information and sound ratings have been tabulated below' 'Quantity North Equipment Tag Serves dBA Rating 5L i1 M itsubishi M UZ-FH06NA- -,,,...=.'.,--''------HP-2 Clone Mitsubishi MUY-D35NA HP-3 Mother 51 1 Carrier HP-5-8 Flower Rooms 79. 4 MitsubishiM Uz-nM HP-4 Processing N 51 :t 1 Bohn BN-HTSTB COMPRESSOR Processing S 76 Tag Rating East ut Serves dBA Carrier 50KCQA6A0A3 HP-r.3 Misc,, 79 1 Tag Rating South Serves dBA .HP-1 Mitsubishi MUZ-D30NA Dryine 51 1 HP-9-12. 79 4 Ca Flower, Veg s 70 1 G reenheck cSW-12.81-41'10-0-10 Processing AAON nq-OOg-g-H-EA09-934 MAU-1 Processing S 76 'L decibel The building along with all equiprnent desoibed above was modeled in the MAS Environmental property 1'5 meters, the approximate map tool. Noise receivers were modeled at the loudest point of each line at in the correct height of a human listener. The model includes full, simultaneous operation of all equipment propagation, diagram of locations respective to the building. A closeup of the building with color-coded noise a pages. the whole site and receiver locations, and a table of final noise levels are on the following i,ri::ti.! iii::ii i\ -',t tii rr.:.:;.,-r ;ji:li r'. 'l,. i L l! r: - i ' :::'; COLEBREIT .,.:i .i.!;.i:ti.ti. !r{clxlrRltac i:li Jacob Frcm: Nunzie < nunzie@pacifi er.com > Sent: Friday, March 22,2019 2:59 PM To: Jacob Ripper Subject: Re: Weisheit Marijuana Appeal 19-178-A Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Completed 19845 fW Brown Rd Bend OR 97701 thanks, p.s. what is the date of the photo of the H2D2 site that was part of your powerpoint? Did you take that photo if not what is the source of the photo? Nunzie On Mar 27,2019, at 5:39 PM, Iacob Ripper wrote Hello Nunzie, your I went to pick up the hearing exhibits from the Board of County Commissioners' office today and "blue sheet" request to speak form with your contact information didn't make it in my packet. Rest assured your written testimony including all four exhibits did and are part of the record. However, I don't have a mailing address for you. lf you would like to receive a copy of the Board's decision, please reply to this emailwith your mailing address Thanks so much, Jacob Jacob Ripper I Senior Planner Deschuter County Community Development 1 1 7 NW Lafayette Ave I Bend. Oregon 97708 Tel: (541) 385-1 759 | Mail: PO Box 6005, Bend' OR 97708 IT EI EI Let us know how we're doing: @ Disclotmer: please note thot the information in this emai! is on informal statement mode in accordance with DCC 22.2A.005 and shall including not be deemed to constiwte final County action effectinga change in the status of o percon's propertyor conferring any rights, any reliance righs, on dnY Person. 1 3-20-2019 Testimon! at Appeal Hearing of W_eisheit mj production and processing 25450 Walker Road, rural Deschutes dornty-r 247-'t g-00050 4-AD, 505_AD, 506_sp, 1. The application should be denied. 2' The property has Federally owned subsurface Rights dating shown by the applicant's to I937 as title report submitted at application. No structures containing a controlled substanace act (c.s.A.) marijuana item such as should be planned over top of the federally rights. owned subsurface 3' The propefty has walker Road as an Row across the southern portion the site' All traffic headed of to the. BLM's Jrnip". woodland Recreation trairhead which is west of the Area subject woufd traver across taxrot 2go2 to reach er"p."y this the pubric recreation'trairhe.o.' eiM p]rnn.o perfected their ,nd Juniper woodland Recreation'pirn in obtonJrlboe an exampre hearthy and this is of outdoor recreation in our community which our community and for is known. Please pr"r.ru. and prote.t 6r, by not adding a marijuana production community pio"essing so close to this public recreational asset. "ni BLM 4. Fencing: the. proposed marijuana production and processing apprication shows a rair and fence exampre ot a r'ow p;;il;r.e with connJcting swag chain which is incompatible with the olc'c;s z ioot fence tall fence criteria. The proposed does not meet OLCC,s r.egutations. 5' The colD canal system that traverses the property has a Row road thru the property' This application has not proved how it will exclude individuals allowed to use the colD canal and canal'Row rno who do not have an rnarijuana handler license. oLcc 6. The buirding officiar comments that when a buirding permit is issued, will then review the plans is he insufficient asiuirn.. that the hazardous and cBD extration which ti" prrt producti* ffffi::::rt"i: or ,r, sarery 7. Marijuana production and processing at the proposed tocation is EXHIB|T fuPAGE,---.:-. incompatible with the adjacent neighboring rural Deschutes County as others will testify. There is overproduction in our county and in our state. 8. The hearings officer granted 2 years to perfect on the HO's approval; meanwhile, the 2019 Oregon legislature is underway and together with OLCC are pressing to remove Deschutes County's authority to regulate marijuana, moving to cancel all opportunity to collect SDC's from every type of marijuana businesses such as this Weisheit producition and this Weisheit processing proposal. Because the BOCC has no control over whether in 2 years events would be allowed at the processing and/or production site at the Oregon legislature which will supercede the County's current marijuana regulations; and because the BOCC has no control over when consumption of marijuana would be allowed at events that the Oregon Legislature and OLCC want to allow at the proposed site: it is impossible today for BOCC to quantify what might be allowed under the Hearing's officer's 2 year window of perfecting on the approval of the Weisheit mariuana application. For these reasons you'll find this specific application deficient in proving that it does not pose risk to our rural Deschutes. Today BOCC does not manage marijuana production or processing and it is imprudent to approve this Weisheit marijuana application because OLCC isn't issuing licenses for marijuana production and because the BOCC will not be able to regulate the OLCC's self begotten Problems. is worthy of denial. rhank you etJUryt2lag*d Nunzie Gould, an EFU property owner in Deschutes County' (, Attached Exhibits: 2 ,7,Y Deschutes County Board of County Commissioners Appeal of Administrative Declsion Hearing File No. 247-18_000504-AD, 5O5_AD, 50GS-p Applicant/Owner: Mark and Elizabeth Welsheit Supporting Documents to presentation steve Paulding's (owns adjacent lot to the weisheitt) 62605 Dodds Rd, Beni oR 97701 7 2G,253-2O1 5 ; qypeutr{iqg.tsvlse,gosl ::' ' Three minute speech presented at the hearing chart illustrating the LLcs that have ' been formed by the weisheits and their business partners for purposes of developing. running and managing their rnariluana Uurlnrrra, ' Property Documents (5zg4g wayside Loop, La pine oR g77gg| o D|ALscreenshotof Map ofTaxlot 211O29D010300 o D|AL screenshot of Tax Account summary for Account #r4a7og o Warranty Deed: purchase by Mustafa Soylemez ' email from Jacob onat to Deschutes county planner Jacob Ripper re: Marijuana',lt7l2o19 Wetsheit ApprovarApprication with cc: to Mustafa soyremez & Mark rrrieisrreii * Property Documents (1216 NE lst St, Bend OR 9770U , ,,.: o DIAL screenshot of Map of Taxlot 171232M07200 o DIAL screenshot of Tax Account summary for Account #ro3z21 o Warranty Deed: purchase by Mustafa Soylemez Quit ctaim Deed: o transfer from Mustafa soylemez to private Reserve Equity partners LLC o Articles of lncorporation & Amended Annual Report for private Reserve-- -. - - Equity-a-'' Partners LLC (Members: Mustaf Soylemez, Jacob Onat) a of lncorporation & Amended Annual frticle.s Report for High Desert Equity Ipartners, sr rrrsrr' lnc. (Members: Mustafa Soylemez, Mark Weisheit) Articles of lncorporation & Amended Annual Report for LM Management services LLC (Members: Mustafa soylemez, Mark wersheit, Erizabeth weisheit, sam onat, lacou onat) Articles of lncorporation fior High Desert Agriculture, lnc. (Members: Mustafa Soylemez, Mark Weishei! Jacob Onat, Sam Onat) a Page 1 of 3lLu2oL9 letter from the weisherts to his Alfalfa neighbors I ffiFtlBff .L.pAGEo*,***. My name is Steve Pauldiry: I'm a finmcial crimes risk anabrst for Union Bank in California. Our group monitors hank cusnmer transafiions for mouey hrrndering and terrorist financing. Nlyt*if" and I or+rnan adjacentpropertytotheWeisheits.Abigreasonvihymywife andl oppose ttre Weisheirs' application to build a marijuana business next door to us onXFalkgr Rd can be fogndinthe docuqe-ngfionyouholdinyoruhands.I have givenyou aprinted copyof several Oregonpublic records (all ofthem are available onthe'iht$.ag ). Although tle Weisheits have led rn to believe thar they ale a family-run business: a mother, Etizauc'^1[ and her tno sons, Mark and John, I can find no legal proofthat Iohn is include{ as their Oregon business partoer. Insead, I wasverysurprisedto discover thartheir actual business partneffi includednvo men connectedto thel,aPine DrugRaid, MustafaSoylemez and Sam bort. M. Soylenez ouns the La Pine p,qo5re4y and Sam Onat was arrested at the drug mid. I have found three legnltBregi$ered Oregon companies benryeen the Weisheits, the Onats and M. Soylemez: 1: .,Hryh Fesg,st$qirig$,P,*rqnem;Jn+, (201 6) j' Members: Mu*afaSoylemez, MarkWeisheit ' . tff'*fmflgpmecJ$err.i,e.psl Q(201?) ,, - - .'. - - Mernteri: Mustafa Soylemez, Mark and Eliaabeth Weisheit, Sam and Jacob Onat i tligh Ddseqt,&d,p"u{Ss,gnlsq, (20 1 S) Membeis anA i*iH*ms with Direct l(nowledge : Mustafa Soyleuw" Mark Weisheit, Sam andJacob Onat M. Soylemez also ovns the retail uariiUana store The tocal Market (with Jacob Onat, son of Sam Onat). h is apparent that M. Soylemez is activilyirivolved with the Weisheits' W-alker Rd business plans becauseheiscopied onul/!9/Z0lgemailbetr,veenJacobOnatandJacobRipper(seethe 'Weisheits' marijuana application). Duringallofthe commrmicuions Ihave hadwiththe Weisheits,fteyngvermentionedM. Soylemez and Sam Onat. Instead, in a recrnt emgil frq6 the Weisheits they amnUlfied to assure tne sunorrnditrgAlfalfa neighbors that Sam Onar was not involved in the Weisheits' plans for Ifralker Rd and thar they had no insigtn into or invohement in anything Sam Onat is doing, in La Pine or elsewhere. They say this wen though he is their business pamner. We oppose the Weisheits' application for avariety of reasons: the potentially ne act to o* pioptryvalues, to o* qoality oflife and to the Alfalfafarm econo4l'and community, and becurse nvo oftheir business parurers are c'onnected to the drug raid in La Pine vitrich is under cfininal investigUion. And we oppose their application becausewe can't trustwbar they say. L Weisheit, Onat & Soylemez Gonnections , rLa Pine. ':'1.,,'..'':' ::., Froper!1r rlH TI al Ownens: ,, Gi,ners; ,: 'Mustafa,soylEmez MarkWeishelt Ellzabeth'Welsh€lt Drug raid airestl Jacob Onat $am Onat, (N Company Gonnections' LM Malragement ,,Jacob Servrces LLC Menrbers ':.Qnat ' Higir Deserr Agriculture. lnc Menrbers Hrgh De.serl Equiiy Pail'tners, lnc Menrbers i';.!-,iir? I)esr:ft tt te.s C o u nt t7 I' r' o p c r t y I r tfor rn u ti o n ''r l\ Dral 'r.iiirh ' rpupanoclr sr* '' '.-r- ".-1.;.riil :,- ..;.:;i " ':. l;i?fb. {Bc,s hhrndbi lE dhpkyait b. tF $h.tE prop6dy..lrdr &irfi€d lrrlomaiqn rnd (H$s n mnabb 8il! lha mu m dr tdlt 3ld€ o{ tF tcren. eqrsi4$ ;.!R#el: j r ;'i:.r:x :il;.r:i,i uustAF PbFrty Tu lCumt Ydli S4,19,1.05 gg"tlt !"Sii._u.i!:r{.-t,:ltnry llt rrd tthr ?llcPtDol03dO Ar af Jan.l , eO1 a leo.l|lll14070q 2018- 2019 Tq Ys szSlrrMYStDE LOOF. LA Prii, Ofi f/7$ Stllrr Assda Rl.t ltrrtlt thkj*r$ 's4r,r?! :ltlF*$-h*iiii.;:::'ll:.$+,i: ifiFtl!::d.rr. . n . At*s Pr(+qtt tJr$rlp{an: O SOYLEMEZ, MUSTAFA FO lb5grElu AratdVdH! 1?60 r,roNBovldAvE lA9 Lti;i Aiiii;{! ga62? cdgrAuEsA, cA lnsrAflt:1.2? rlrj.1lili.:1.i}lpri-:i.l':1ilii:i"i4i PEpt v Cl$r {01 - TFAST ){iijSi":i!:Jiq :! tiliir omcdRecsds 201 Aften reordlng bo: retum PG 07/16il2015 08:54:26 Musbfa Soylemez $10"m $1 r.00 t1o-0o $6.00 Fl.0o 1760 Flonrovla Avenue Sulte A9 L NlncyBhlrxrEilp, Cawrt'cLfi forD!$iri8 Coerny, OrEgort Crsta Mesa, cA9z627 cfift tFt lhr hsmarnt bqttit d harh Ult lrdf,r.d h tn clstc r*oldr, Nancy BHrenship. County Clert ''. t ... UnHl a dunge ls requested all tax staternsts sldl be sert to he rolorrhE aftlress: Mushfa Sorylemez 1760 f4onrwla AvenE $iF A9 Costa Mesa, c492677 File No.: 7061-2{82222 (SlN) Date: July 06,2015 SHTUTORY WARRANW DEED Dsrnis Phipps and Glnger t{alles locke, Gntntor, comrelE and wanants to llustrta Soylenrez r, , Grantee, the following described real property free of llens and encumbnnces, srcept as spedflcally set bfth hereln: LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Real property ln the County of DesdruEs, State of Oregon, descrlbed as tullom: lot 21 Slock 9, FORESr VIEW, reoorded June 1Q 1971, ln Cablnet A, Frga 364, Derdrues,l County, Oregon .-., .' subJcctior t. Ta ft4erlot e '_ ' :.. APt{:1.10709 Stafriory\lhnarf Deed Fle No.: ?O6t-fl84:r:!:l (Stll) -flio0ued "aEFone SIGNING ORACCEmNG rrrS tnSrnUMENT, THE PERSONTMNSFERRTNG FEEITTLE SHOUTD CHAFIER 855r OREGON LAWS INSTRUMENT DOES NOT ATLOW T.ISE OF fiE ,INSTRUI,IENT IN VIOI.ATTON OF APPUICABLE I-AND USE LAWS AI.ID RFGULATIONS. BEFORE SIGNING OR ACCTFNNG fiIS INSTRUMENT, THE PERSON ACQUIRING FEE TITI.E TO THE PROPERTY SHOTJLD CHECK WTTH THE APPROPRIATE CITV OR COUNTT PUI{NING DEPARTI\4ENT TO VERIFY.THATTHE UNIT OF IAND BEING TRANSFERRED IS A IAWFUILY ESTABUSHED LOTOR PARCEL' AS DEFINED IN ORS 921010 OR 215.010' TO VERIFY THE APPROVED USES OF THE LC'T OR PARCEI, TO DETERMINE ANY UMTiS ON I.AWSUITS AGAINST FARIIING OR FOREST PRACICES, AS DEFINEo IN oRS 30.930, AND TO INQUIRE ABOUTfiE RIGI.{TS OF NEIGHBOR1NG PROPERTY OWNERS, IF ANY, UNDER ORS 195.300, 195.301 AND 195.305 TO 195.336 AND SECIIONS 5 TO 11, CHAPTER 424, OREGON LAWS 2007, SECITONS Z TC] 9 AND 17. cHAprER 855, OREGON LAWS'zOOg,AND SECnONS ZTO7, CHAPIERS, OREGON uws 2010. Dated this ott i5 ori. -. ".aJ9.-. ,, 'f'.r-l .:: i SIATE OF Oregon County of Descfrutes ': Thls lnstrument was acknowledged beftre me on this 15 0", by Dennls Phlppc bt Trac€f ]astrell, ag hls attorney ln fact N) Ncbrv P?rb'[c 6^- Orqggn tillrit iil;'#dd i,,#i#"i'r -r f - r, tr coims$()lr reaofz -i 7 "lr ',Ww &.2. ffi SF |:1arrt4. 4. !r'"'rn:'s ' tr*:ntodll&d r4amrgrfi6mAt,t ftrldotr.dltc: t'i*rinit$ffiNv: fro$1, ''r ..1,. rr*. ::.i:: i. r;. sF/l*, TrHr 'ft*H*, tfi,, - - _ji" rrmdafidPrcpef Hbs , rflt lffi*_-r,, zqt g.{}i'17J EFt crne[ RE ctc',rlF rrrve,w'*iPchnlent lF,ffir fltg,SrrF:: X) uoclnfilft. 0 , fqnB$!tL&.$Plnltlit*" ftttiitlcr fqqfirt : T* tqt l7i',t4240q?eF fir*"Nutt$q: i*za*cfrE;wtot rf Pl.fPU${[l6t\l fnccla:OocfU aoi 39?tFESElogtA 'il !tEErfi ,Jq{ptqFt:, .;50{6 ' NRCS -s 6){ e{ldqo i€ll iirifi tiiirr6fi -diiiijiii]s!tia,+i . -rta!trt rr..s.+ latz6 tlt 'r,s3rt, YL6tJ TVI8I€BOU . 8H; 3AV Yl/\Cdt{ofi Ezr t:-c.-b - rF r*p.{uriard crl 483[tvd l(lFr3*l:,':r. tuil : j: !no3 3la:]8!U ilV^lud H , ftolrsyffiry locfor}tf||ddiel ----lffi.---_jF:E-J;;r.{ .: l'rrttrffifiif "; !,-r'i.l' i' : .I{..f!tsIilSt1 c eTF,tl.!!r?ttxq -^o#r,H## iilrlliffifia.ri: L !n nL dtoa - or& Gdj) do-EiiEGii;stnji 'r*aa-'s#h*g*#e . {Ji:?li[ii!6'ft=dFiiiii or't!g?t @/ov\r4eeu t tFrqr .1.'!-!n-ifr:?=:fu- {e^ lryod r+,q.oi 'gn $Ea{ltld ,ta i i, r...: (i'r iil);tr{qQF# r:. 'il=i,i.:.;r .. .i r,,. :,i:5;r.;i.rr i.1..t. .i !*i[l 'rc q p .n9lq lqt s nw.{ loF.r -i;r--- qqre *filf.r",rq.,,rag4F[rFpsn,Iy.do.d **4,,1&l*t Lt o L I D ru. r p rc li 1 fi a tI o t, f i1 u r ut,7s?j 1 n VJ.$a6| ilumbcc l20f0t Cornty Omdnl Recorde W g s t g rll ritt.tE,,,o,, lQl 360 SllY Eondr sulta 1OO 3*o r,u ou2orzo{6 12:51:96 911.p9 9tS.O0 $Ao0 010.00 $21.00 L llH EhnbtdrlD count chlt tsr ltuciurr conu, ontm, ilrtt iretnc hEifu.ntldaililld nrda w r.cdrdhtu clrrt ils+a'tsoYLms EGa{{& t760 ilonruvla Av€nuo, Stilto Ag Nanay BlaftenshlP- Counly CHk corc. llaearcl 92G27 STATUTORY WARRATITY DEED VDashC.ttlcCo.whoacquir€dtitlcasVDarh€attlcCo'rInc',Grantor(s), convey and warrant to Hurtef! soyt€mrz. Grantee(s), the followlng described real property free of encumbrances except as spedflcally sct forth hereln. SEE ATTACIIED flHIBIT "A" Account: 103221 Map & Tax Lot: 17121i2-AA'O72OO of t€cord, if anY, as of the date of this Thls Drooerty ls free of encumbrances, F(CEPT: All those ltems ililial iiliiiii"e anirear proPertv taxes due, but not vet pavable' (Here comply wlth requlrements of oRs The true onsideratlon fior thls conveyance is i535'OOO.OO- 93.030.) ExGcrrtcd thls h( dt of Ausust,2016 V Da.h Gattlc Go. .l' ly: W. BcnE Itr FITIJRNTOS'E$CNN Tltu:a ESGRST' ; :li I t tl Stato of Orugon, Counw of D.cchrrt r ) ss. Thls lnstrument was before me on thls ffi*of August:2016 by:t(annsth w. !.nrr, 't,, I?-- EXHIEIT ''A' - W.at of thc o? tha t3 t0Hffi ,$il'fi recording return to: D{ Cntrl th* ril t lt:19;$ li t.n lrg.00 .00 E:*.+- llr tlt.0o HUGIITTTAV/ ._ -d _ *._*r$.o tl. 00 .iil - -.*.+.,i.:-- * * - -::i--T.:T-.--*; P.O.Bor 7619 Bcn4OR 97?08-7619 Reserve &iuityPiirtriers, LLC 216 NE l$ Streeq Bcn{ OR 9??0t Until a change is requestcd, Cll tor staternents shall be s€nt to &e Reserved for Rccordcds Use as Above cir4rrcr*iMpsF€,t MUSTAFA SOYLEMEA Grantor(s), rcleases and quitclaims to FRLVATEI,$,SER\'E EQHIY PARTNERS LtC, Grantce(s), all righq title, and interest in and to thc followiqg{Soritpd real, fr pffry: sEEAI-IACEEDEIHIBIT..A'' Deschutes Couty Tax Account: 10322I Deschutcs CountyMap & Tor Int l?1232.AA{720tt ThFtruc andag$$ sonsidua$enf,orsis conveyance is membership as a co-owner and manager of private Rcsewo, Equityiparfi pt"sr IJI"G, Granteq t+ E:recutcd this 31$Oay. of Janr:ary, 201 7 Mustefa Soylcmez-fuor State of Orcgon, county ofDerctrnter ) ss. This lnsftlrnent was aclsrowldg$ bcfore mo on Uris 3ttAay ofJnnuary,201T byMusteh$yltrtten, rt individual. My expircs TT t€ EXHIB TA That parcel of lurd Iying in the Northcast Quartcr of thc 89P5?4In Wsst, thencc Sqfth 50 fcst toE point ontre NE t/4NFcli4i..th:rrrc, North 89o57'4lu East alongthe said Soutlt boundry of the said NEI/4NEI/4 120 fect ro the pqiln't .of begniiiis IL Hollitz Comments @ March 20 Appeal Hearing for Weisheit MJ production and processing application on Walker Rd. R;owan Hglli4 62911 DodCs Rd* tsend. O-R 97701, 1. Weisheit claims they want to be a good neighbor. But they will continue to live in Southern California. That's not my neighborhood. 2. Alfalfa Volunteer Fire Department (AFD) a. I am one of the founders and was a board member for 5 opi:dgin vears.J. lt is my:,qanqid.efqd that: i. AFD volunteers have the equipment and training needed to fight wildland and structure fires and be effective first responders to most medical emergencies. ii. AFD volunteers have NOT been sufficiently trained for potential fires and/or explosions at a processing facility which by its very nature uses vola$le qhqmicglg in the process. iii. AFD personnel do NOT have the authority to inspect processing facilities on a surprise basis to ascertain what chemicals are actually being used for processing, where fire extinguishers are located, storage safety, and other factors. EXHIBff {-PAqE ]& b. AFD Fire Chief LaVallee stated that fire response times from 911 call to rollout range from 3-4 minutes to 5-6 minutes. Adding the average drive time from the station to the proposed Walker Rd facility (on dry roads in daylight) of 3+ minutes means that at bes-t it would be 6 - 10 minutes before any remedial action would be taken assuming tltqle we.rp.ltg-delays getting onlq" tlm prgpertv b"egquse sfjqcfed gateq. This is significant, given the potential for devastation from an explosion and fire. c. AFD personnel have no prior knowledge of processing plans and chemicals to be used, nor authority to investigate processing operations. They therefore cannot with any certainty "certif[y] that they will be able to provide Protection." lfthis application is approved, there exlsts a significant potential for a disaster that would affect the applicant Af,{n the neighbors. ctv- at709Q-Ll-LhT +P'nlL Nicole Mardell From: Jeri Mason TO: Nicole Mardell, Assistant Planner, Deschutes County Development Dept RE: Applicant: Richard & Norma Tewalt Application No: 247-l 7-0002 I 7-AD Appellant: Bob King Appeal No: 247 -17 -004723 -A Dear Ms Mardell, We are writing this letter to state our objections and concerns regarding the application for a Marijuana Operation on Goodrich Rd. We share the concems and objections that most of our neighbors have and want to emphasize some of them. \ryATER/GROUNDWATER: We have private wells and those of us that are near the applicant's property may have to deal with potentially contaminated water or lack of water (dry well) if applicant decides to use more water than their allocation of water rights and/or pump from their own well as opposed to purchasing water. No one knows how much water is underground and wells can be 500 ft deep to access it. How many residents would want to spend thousands of dollars to drill a new well to obtain water? Can we be assured that effluent which could contain pesticides and ferlilizers will not be dispersed on the open ground to eventually migrate into our wells? How will this be monitored for neighborhood health and well being? POWER: Applicant will need to install an 800 amp 3 phase service for this type of operation. Central Electric Co-Op has indicated in their "Ruralite" publication that they are at maximum now due to the many new members that they service. Many of CEC's members will be using more energy in the winter in the form of heat tape (to prevent freezing pipes/hydrants) and additional heaters in barns and homes. There is a great potential that the applicant's energy use could trigger a major power outage (or multiple outages) for many residents with damaging and costly effects such as freezing pipes and livestock death. On Jan 6,2017 there was a 5 hour outage in our area, and the low temperature was -10 and the higlt for the day was 18 degrees. NOISE/ODOR/LIGHTING: When you move to a rural farm area it is reasonable to expect that there may be a certain amount of some "farm noises and smells", but not on a2417 basis so that it interferes with your quality of life and enjoyment of your home and the area. Applicant alluded that the directional flow of winds would mitigate the smells from his property. We know that is not always true, as we live upwind from a horse boarding facility. Most people like to be outdoors at different times of the day to appreciate the scenery, fresh air and beautiful skies, and not have to wonder if they instead moved to a busy, "polluted cityscape" with the additional noise, I smells and increased traffic. This is what a marijuana operation would bring to the neighborhood, and wliy people perhaps chose to move away from their city in the first place. SAFETY: There are many more users of Goodrich Rd now due to a variety of reasons such as walking, biking or driving to scenic areas nearby including the Deschutes Land Trust at the end of Goodrich Rd. As others have mentioned, there is a school bus stop at.Goodrich and Edmundson Rds and the "Heart of Oregon Corps/Youth Build" school is on the corner of Hwy 126 and Goodrich Rd. We have seen these young adults walking up and down our street. Should they be distracted or tempted knowing this operation is close by? Since Goodrich Rd has been designated as a Scenic Bikeway, many bicycle groups including the Cascade Cycling Classic make it a point to ride down our street (from Edmundson Rd) and continue on west to Sisters and beyond. Do we want these groups to not visit the Sisters area because they don't feel they should be breathing in the stench as they compete and enjoy their ride? Or the possibility of "encountering" one of numerous vehicles entering or leaving the applicant's driveway? And do we also want to live near a hot spot for criminal and deceptive activity? Should families keep their children with or without pets from walking or biking in their own neighborhood for those reasons as well? CLOSING: Please consider all compelling objections and statements that have been made by everyone in opposition to the applicant's proposal. It seems that the applicant in the past has not cared about any codes and regulations. How are we to be assured that going forward they would be good stewards of the land and neighborhood by being honest and forthright? It appears that there has been no accountability for bad actions and decisions and, now, the neilhborhood be damned. In retrospect, we feel that the number of applications and approvals in the state and county wouldn't have gotten this far if the public had been more aware of the reality of what the impact of this decision (that didn't pass in Deschutes County) would have on rual and agricultural neighborhood land. Here is an opportunity to help fix that. There have been news articles from the major networks that indicate marijuana from Oregon is showing up in other states. Perhaps the County (and State) should take a moratorium from approvirig this and future applications to determine if the supply is outpacing the demand for this product. Sincerely, Gary and,Jeri Mason 69330 Goodrich Rd Sisters OR 97759 2 Nicole Mardell From: Laurie McCallum Please see attached letter concerning the Appeal # 247-L7-O00723-A Thank you for your consideration. Laurie McCallum Concerned Neighbor Laura Ann McCallum Trust 10/23117 69401 Goodrich Rd. 541-504-3149 OBJECTION TO LAND USE ACTION PROPO-SED LAND USE ACTION File Number: 247-I7-0002I612I7-AD Applicants Richard and Norma Telvalt 69186 Goodrich Road Sisters, OR 97759 Appellaut: Bob King Appeal #: 247-17-000723-A To Nicole Mardoll, Assistant Planner Phil Henderson-County Commissioner Tammy Baney- County Commissioner Touy Debone- County Commissioner Dear Deschutes County Planrring Department and Courty Cornnrissioners, I am writing this lettrr to ask you to dcny the proposed recreational marijuana facility that is adjacont our prope4y. My Husbord and I live at 69401 Goodrich Rd. and farm one of the largest hay properties in tle area with 360 acres of premium orchard graSs hay, yielding thousands of dollars in revenue a year. We also run a herd of 100 premier breeding stock alpacas and oater our hay specifically to be balanced nutritionally for their needs. This has allowed us to become tlo go to farm for the best alpaca hay in the area. We have sold hundreds of tons of this premium orchard grass hay to alpaca farms in OR, CA, and lD and would like to continue to do so rvithoul. the worry of a marijuann facility literally across the road from our fields. We agree with all of our neighbors that this type of facility is not appropriate in a rural residential area with the possibility of strong odor, Ioud noise, increase traffic, and potcntial criminal activity being inlroduced into our community, However, our main concern is the possibility of water contamination not only that may affect our fields by direct nrnoif but also contamination of our aquifer that we share to inigate our fields. The applicants have not shorvn propff disposal of contaminants in the past and worry that this preccdent rvill contfurue in the fuhue, putting our lively hoods and hcalth in jeopardy. We respectively ask that you allow our small but strong Goodrich community to remain peaccful and pristinc and deny their application for a recreatioual marijuana facility. i\,,r^{Vt Laura Ann McCalltun, Trustge Nicole Mardell From Nunzie < [email protected]> Sent: Monday, October 23,2OL7 2:31 PM To: Nicole Mardell LC: Kimberley Priestley Subject: public testimony regarding 247-17-OOO723-A Tewalt mj production application Kindly enter this email into the public testimony record regarding the Appeal 247-17-000723-A; 247-17-000217-AD and please confirm receipt of this email. Applicant identifies that Bend Water Hauling will provide water for the proposed marijuana grow. A legal waier source for an indoor marijuana grow is called a nursery use water right. Applicant has not shown which nursery use water right Bend Water Hauling will be using for the proposed marijuana grow: or that the nursery use water right is being assigned either to the applicant Tewalt or to the subject property. Applicant has not shown that groundwater or surface water hauled by Bend Water Hauling and proposed to be used for this new use has been mitigated by the Deschtues Mitigation Rules which were implemented in 2005. Since Bend Water Hauling was incorporated prior to the inception of the Deschtues Mitigation Rules, it is unclear whether the proposed water supply would not injure our Deschutes Basin. In order to not injure our surface and/or our groundwaters, the Deschutes Mitigation Rules must be followed. Applicant has not shown Bend Water Hauling be used for the proposed new marijuana grow. which water right of will \ Using Bend Water hauling ground water without mitigation or using water to grow marijuana without a nursery use water right for the new proposed marijuana grow is not legal. As CDD well knows, Marijuana is not your ordinary agricultural crop. Indoor marijuana cannot be grown with inigation water rights such as those from Three Sisters Irrigation District (TSID). Marijuana also cannot be grown merely using exempt well water without a water right. Applicant has not shown and CDD has not identified the legal nursery water right to be used for the proposed marijuana grow (i90'-lr1(r-f)0 Oregtrn Atllrin i.st6tiye I\ules [hereafter OA R] 345-025- 1030 (5) (l) (r)) ; ORS 537 5'15 ( I ) (h): t)A lt | 0 Just because Bend Water Hauling is allowed to haul water doesn't mean that the water it hauls is nursery use water or is allowed to be used to grow marijuana. Therefore CDD must deny approving the marijuana grow until CDD can prove the legal water right: the actual nursery use water riglit proposed for the Tewalt marijuana grow; CDD carurot merely assume that Bend Water Hauling is confeming a nursery use water right without identifying the water right certificate which is specific to nursery use or to the proposed marijuana grow site. CDD's Peter Russell states that a driveway permit is needed. CDD did not specify that the driveway permit is needed on the proposed site. Is CDD inferring that a driveway perrnit on an adiacent propefiy to the south will access the proposed property? if so kindly provide the deeded Easement of the ROW across the property to the South that shows that it benefits the proposed subject grow proper"ty. Also, kindly confirm the surface of the existing driveway on the property on the south and whether it is all-weatl'ler and can suppofi fire trucks of 60'000 lbs with the appropriate sized turn around. CDD clairns this land use application is not a site plan; yet this very administlative decision will be used for a Land Use Compatibility Statement (LUCS) that applicant will need to funrislr OLCC for their application to OLCC for a rnarijuana producers license. As such this is a site plan review for the very puryose of OLCC's next steps. I highly doubt that grow light will provide sufficient heat for the proposed grow. The engineer who certified this obviously is oblivious to winteftirne climates on Goodrich Loop in Central Oregon. Since Central Electric Cooperative has identified that a new electrical service will be required, would you kindly advise which trees along Goodrich Loop will be topped to bring in the high voltage service that the proposed grow will use. I make these comments in an effort to help CDD be able to actually manage and enforce approval criteria. In my opinion, marijuana production belongs in industrial zones as marijuana is not any ordinary agricultural crop, Goodrich loop road provides direct aceess to Deschutes Basin Land Trust's Whychus Canyon Preserve. Deschutes Basin Land Trust provides park amenities to our children and youth, resident and visitors n the absense of Deschutes County not having a parks and recreation department. Therefore it is to be expected that as our community expands, that more destination traffic and vehicles will use Goodrich Loop to access Whychus Creek Preserve. I do not believe CDD has any factual information from any of its approved grows on actual transportation counts for marijuana production in Deschutes County. As stated before marijuana production is not a warehouse; and marijuana is not like any other agricultural product in Deschutes County. CDD should provide transportation information that is real time (not a bad comparative in a transportation manual) and not assume that a mj,grow will have less than 50 ADT trips and therefore is exempt from needing to furnish a transportation analysis. Examples of Deschutes county approved marijuana production sites are: Hopmann on Dayton, Oregrown on Mock, Elite Soils on Johnson Ranch: CDD doesn't have real time transportation counts from any of the above, and therefore CDD cannot state that the proposed marijuana grow will have less than 50 ADT h{ps. Please add me to parly of interest list and to your notification list regarding24T-17-00A7X-A Nunzie Gould 19845 JW Brown Road Bend, OR 97701 From: Mary Jones Hello Nicole, please see the information and letter below for written testimony against the proposed marijuana production facility. Applicant - Richard & Norma Tewalt Application No. - 247 -17 -000217 -AD Appellant * Bob King Appeal No, - 247'17'000723-A I Th*k yotr, i Mary Claire Jones , Deschutes County Board of Commissioners PO Box 6005 Attn: BOCC Bend, Oregon 97708-6005 October 22,2017 Re: Richard and Norma Tewalt's Application to grow and operate a facility for Marijuana at 69188 Goodrich Road, Sisters, Oregon, 97759 Dear Commissioners Baney, DeBone and Henderson, The purpose of this letter is to highlight some of the reasons why we oppose situating a commercial mar[uana production facility in a residential neighborhood. lncreased I ntroduction or Expos re to Mariiuana/Druqs to Minors: I 1. The above pictures show our family. We live within 1 mile of the Tewalts. The one on the left was taken less than 11 months ago. The sibling photo on the right was captured this year on Memorial Day. As I write this letter, the ages of our children are 9, 7 , 4 y4 ,2 y1 and 10 Yz months. These minors/children are just 5 reasons to reject this application as these precious kids would be vulnerable to the many negative effects of a marijuana production facility within one mile of where they live, play outside and enjoy having friends and/or family over innocent childhood fun" 2. Outside our own family of small children, there are up to 7 children under the age of 17 that catch the school bus on the corner near our house every school day and return home the same route. This does not include the additional school children already riding the bus when they arrive at our corner. Angther neighbor boy turns 17 in November and drives himself to schoolevery day, passing the Tewalt property in both directions. Down the road from us, all within 3 miles are at least 19 other school aged children, all under '18 years of age. Do we really want these young, impressionable individuals exposed to marijuana when their brains and bodies are still developing? When I was growing up in the 80s, there was a national campaign called "Just say NO!" Don't we want to extend the same message to this generation as well? https://en.wikipedjg.orq/wikiiJust Sav. No 3. Heart of Oregon Corps is located about 1000 feet away from the Tewalt property. We have passed the students countless times when they often take breaks and walk up Goodrich Road. Without a doubt, these vulnerable young adults could easily learn of the facility. This could cause "a barrier to success" when the goal of the program is the opposite. From their website ( lrttp://heartofolgqon.org/ ) , the mission statement is : " We are a Central Oregon non-profit engaging local opportunity youth, ages 16-24. Every year, we provide job skills training, education, and leadership development to over 300 local young people who face major barriers to success. We are empowering a generation of young people to believe in themselves and achieve self-sufficiency. " These students are working very hard to acquire skills and education that will promote a healthy and successful life. The homepage for the organization mentions they are empowering change. Allowing the production of marijuana in a commercial facility so close to one of their training sites would not assist them in meeting their goals. Here is a brief excerpt from a real Heart of Oregon Corps participant. "...Michael was 16 and on a path to self-destruction. Drugs, delinquency, and recklessness were his way of life....Michael's journey is proof that the right opportunity can make allthe difference. He says it best: "the program truly changed my life. lf I didn't do YouthBuild I would probably be in jail." htto ://hea rtofo req on. orq/whorwe-a relvo uth-stories/m ich ae l. htm I This young man, and many others like him, may not have been so successful were he to encounter a drug facility about 1000 feet away from where he was trying so hard to begin a new path. 7 Surveillanc Cameras don't / won't ston Crime Mr Tewalt mentioned they would have security cameras installed to monitor traffic at the production facility. Simply put, a camera won't stop a crime, it willjust record it. I don't need to repeat the many different alarming stories and statistics around crime that have been shared already as they relate to the production of marijuana. Please consider the crime target this facility would be in a currently safe area where children are thriving. Do we want the future members of Deschutes County exposed to such violent crime risks? Enhancinqthe lives of citizens bv deliYerinq qualitv services in a cost-effective ma.nner. The above statement comes from the Deschutes County website homepage, New to this process, I spent some time looking over some of the resources, programs and offerings posted on the ite, The statement mentioned above caused me to wonder how would this marijuana operation enhance the lives of the citizens? Please, commissioners, recognize your role in delivering a quality service to the citizens of our neighborhood, city of Sisters and Deschutes County by rejecting this application. As the picture below shows siblings attending to the cries of their newborn sister, please don't disregard the "cry" of around 80% (or more!) of the neighborhood urging you to reject this application Thank you for your careful consideration Sincerely, Mary Claire Jones 3 Nicole Mardell From: td tammy < [email protected]> Sent: Sunday, October 22,2a17 9:34 PM To: Nicole Mardell Subject: Regarding the Marijuana grow opperation on 59188 Goodrich Roa To: Deschutes BOCC Re: Applicant - Richard & Norma Tewalt Application No. 247 -17-0002 1 7-AD Appellant- Bob King Appeal No. 247 -17 -00723-A For: Submittal to the Record Dear BOCC Members, I am a resident of Deschutes County and have many concerns with the numerous Marijuana grows popping up like wildflowers in our County. Until much more research is done on these operations. Please Stop these Approvals. My main concerns are: Quality of Life, Water Usage, Power Usage, Clean Air, Crime & The Declineing Home Values these Marijuana grows bring to our Residential Neighborhoods. Deschutes County as I have always Loved it: A place to Smell The Fresh Clean Air, Beautiful White Snow, Animals on Farms in Fields, Beautiful Skies, Friendly comfortable Residents. When I did not live here, I spent half my time over here in Bend, because of those reasons and eventually moved here. How many Marijuana grows does there need to be in Deschutes County to supply the local "Recreational" needs of the County ? We seem as a county to already have had and still have problems with the Marijuana grows already in production now. They are in Agricultural, Residential areas and they dont make a good match. Marijuana is a usage Form of Agricultural, but it is a totally different industry. If it belongs at all, It doesn't belong near Residential homes anymore than, Large Cornfields belong growing in downtown Bend next to the Courthouse, thats why they aren't there. In the Business Dictionary this is the definition of Quality of Life: Daily living enhanced by wholesome food, clean air & water, enjoyment of unfettered open spaces & bodies of water, conservation of wildlife & natural resources, security from crime & protection from radiation & toxic substances. It may also be used as a measure of the energy & power a person is endowed with that enable him or her to enjoy life & prevail over lifes challenges irrespective of the handicaps he or she may have. PLEASE STOP THE APPROVALS OF THESE MARIJUANA GROWS IN OUR AGRICULTURAL RESIDENTIAL AREAS. Respectfully, Tammy Threlkeld 23344 Alfalfa Market Rd Bend, OR 97701 Nicole Mardell From: Frank Tullius < [email protected] > Sent: Sunday, October 22,20!7 L1:50 AM lo: Nicole Mardell Cc: [email protected]; Tammy Baney; Tony DeBone Subject: Comment in opposition to allowing a Marijuana operation in Sisters area Attn: Nicole Mordell Assistont Plonner RE: Applicont - Richord & Normo Tewolt Applicotion No. - 247 -17 -OOO217-AD Appellont - Bob King Appeol No. - 247-|7-OOO723-A As a resident of the Sisters, OR, area for some 20 years I wish to speak in OPPOSITION to allowing the aforementioned Marijuana Grow operation planned for this area. I am a Retired Law Enforcement Administrator of 37 years in the State of Oregon and well familiar with the issues surrounding such operations. As such, please assume that my negative position is wellfounded. I may be contacted: Respectfully, FRANK J. TULLIUS 17323 MOUNTAIN VIEW ROAD, SISTERS, OR 97759. Ph.: 541-549-0695 I Nicole Mardell From Sharron Tulllius < [email protected]> Sent: Sunday, october 22,20]-7 12:L8 PM To: Nicole Mardell Cc: [email protected]; Tammy Baney; Tony DeBone Subject: Subject Comment in opposition to allowing a Mar'1'uana operation in Sisters area Attn: Nicole AAardell Assistont Plonner RE: Applicont - Richord & Normo Tewolt Applicotion No. - 247-17-@O?17-AD Appellant - Bob King Appeol No. - ?47-17-OOO7?3-A As a resident of the Sisters, OR, area for nearly 20 years I wish to speak in OPPOSITION to allowing the aforementioned Marijuana Grow operation planned for this area. I am a Retired Law Enforcement Office Manager of 29 years with the State of Oregon and am familiar with the issues surrounding such operations. Respectfully, Sharron L. Tullius 17323 Mountain View Road Sisters, OR 97759. Ph.: 541-549-0695 1 Nicole Mardell From: Danny Lingo October 20,2017 Nicole Mardell Assistant Planner 117 NW Lafayette Bend, OR 97703 RE: OPPOSITION TO APPLICATION #247-17-0002L7-AD. APPLICATION OF RICHARD ANI) NORMA TEWALT. Ms. Nicole Mardell I am witing in opposition to application #247'17'000217-A as introduced. Applicant - Richard and Norma Tewalt Application # - 247 -17-000217-AD Appellant - Bob King Appeal N o. 247 -17-000723-,4' I This rural/residential Federally Illegal Marijuana grow application is a profit based business. The application clearly undermines the most important aspects of our community; public safety, quality of life, and our property values. Those who oppose this application have read numerous local and out-of-county news articles of law enforcement and safety issues regarding marijuana grows. It is not difficult to locate news articles relating to fatal armed robberies, fatal shootings, kidnappings, butane hash oil explosions, increase criminal activity, increased traffrc and driven down property values. I am a retired Sheriff Sergeant from a large department. I have served 31 years in law enforcement. I can easily attest to the concerns of our neighborhood, not only by reading the articles, but by first-hand knowledge and experiences. As a regular part of my duties, I have personally responded to numerous marijuana grow incidents in residential areas as well as rural. The responses ranged from assault, murders, thefts, explosions, fires, found booby traps and civil unrest. I consider the impacts of the marijuana grow very important for many reasons. The impact I have personally witnessed from marijuana grows will irnpact our community in a negative fashion by; 1. Reducing the property values of our neighborhoods, 2. Creating a safety issue through excessive security of the pot grows, or the lack thereof, 3. It provides access to criminals who seek to steal from growers. It is well known that these businesses operate by cash arrd there is often large amounts of cash available on the properties to invite criminals, 4. There is limited law enforcement in our community for regular patrols, 5. There will be a number of area children that will be exposed to the location. They will no longer be able to ride their bikes or walk freely near the residence. Their parents will fear for their safety with the high probability of criminal activity It is my understanding that Oregon House Bill 3400 lists marijuana as an agricultural farm crop, even though it is a federally illegal drug. As such, our communities have become a haven for the illegal distribution of marijuana. We have thousands of marijuana growers in Oregon, many are out-of state investors. This has contributed to Oregon becoming a mega for federally illegal marijuana grows and turning our rural residential areas into for-profit, marijuana compounds. I have law enforcement associates throughout the country. As I travel through the Northem states (Idaho, Montana, Wyoming), I have had the opportunity to speak with many out-of'-state police officers. It is a well- known fact, although many officials in Oregon State refuse to address it, that Oregon has become a major distributor of marijuana to many other states. As an example, drive through Idaho with an Oregon license plate and exceed the speed limit by any amount or have a violation that would equate to any Probable Cause enforcement stop. It is absolutely evident; law enforcement is looking for the transportation of marijuana. Sadly enough, it is not a difficult plight. 2 Rural areas, such as ours, are located and utilized by growers because we are vulnerable. We are a community that will have limited access to deal with any issues relating to this for-profit grow. In my law enforcement eareer, I have previously worked as a narcotics enforcement officer. Two former departrnents, one 10,000 members and the second 3,000 member strong. We were unable to completely stem the flow of narcotics or the cime within marijuana grows in our communities. The Deschutes County Sheriff s Department, although highly trained and efficient, will be no match for the continued growth of these federally illegal for-profit grows. I cannot debate Oregon's legalization of marijuana. I can, however, testify to the effects of such actions. States like Oregon and Colorado have had a frightful increase of fatal vehicle related deaths related to marijuana. Many fatal collision investigations have been overlooked due to the lack of law enforcement training. As we continue to see the growth of marijuana usage and marijuana for-profit businesses, we will continue to see the decline of our comillunities. We are enticing our children to use the drug with the extensive neighborhood grows and local business with inviting logos. Does anyone believe the several thousand marijuana grows in the areaare for local consumption only? We are inviting the out-of-state distribution of marijuana. We are inviting criminal competition from local growers. We are inviting the homeless, low level street drug dealers, and local kids looking for drug money to steal from local growers. We are inviting the competition of the Mexican Cartel. As mentioned previously, many out-of-state investors are investing in our communities to make a profit. As evidenced by many testimonials of neighbors of growers, they have relatively no concern of local laws, or our safety; it is merely profit. Once a property (investment) become less profitable, excessive loss due to thefts, robberies, wells dry up, criminal behavior brings in law enforcement attention, community outcry, or a failure to produce crops, the growers will leave and find a new area to destroy without conscience. The communities are left to recover from misguided for-profit greed' Our residents are extremely worried about this applicant's marijuana grow within our neighborhood due to the possibility of increased crime. This is a business that, if accepted, should only be permitted within the boundaries of the city limit, whereupon; local law enforcement is more accessible to respond to incidents. If an application is granted, Oregon House Bill 3400 will in fact give this applicant free rein on our safety. There will be no restrictions for the applicant to expand. Our community will see a rise in criminal activity and thefts' Our communities will no longer be the safe haven we strive for. .... Most importantly it is an impact on public safety, quality of life, and our property values. 3 If the application is approved it.will have a chilling-impaet oR oul neighborhood. I respectfully oppose the application #247-17-000217-AD Sincerely Danny Lingo 17760 Edmundson Rd. Sisters, OR 97759 [email protected] s41-233-0650 cc: Commissioner Phil Henderson Commissioner Tammy Baney Commissioner Tony DeBone 4 Nicole Mardell From: Roland Merandy FROM A THREE-YEAR TENANT OF BOB KING To Board of County Commissioners, My name is Roland Merandy. My wife Darla & I live in Bob Kings House at 6922A Goodrich road adjacent to thi Tewalt property, to the north, where the proposed marijuana grow facility will be located. We have rented the home frbrnBob for thlee years now. This relationship may come to an end if the the application to grow pot is approved. Darla is a client success manager(data management) working full-time from the office in our home & fam a semi-retired audio video technician/project manager. We feel we need to set a few things straight for the record. point #l: Bob King's property is anything but neglected, as Norma Tewalt has stated" Anything we need for our home is granted & iaken iare of. All new kitchen appliances, completed deck surrounding three sides of the house, winterized pump house, new windows, new roof, etc. As far as the front hay field goes Bob has maintained that foi us [ong as I am aware. Last year, however, we had a less then desirable crop so Bob decided to turn the field over & re-seed it, Unfortunately the gentleman who does the work for the property has been too busy to complete the project this year so the field was rototilled & that's as far as he got. We are currently in the pror"rr of completing the hay field now that most of the contractors current fields have been harvested, freeing up his time. So next year our field will be almost as beautiful as the Tewalt's. This all seems inelevant to the growing of Marijuana but I feel obligated to make sure Bob King,s reputation is not slandered. He does care very much for his property & arca it is located in. Bob may never have lived on the property, as previously stated, but he soon will. A horse barn was part of the plan & that structure will be about iOO f".i from the grow facility. The last thing this plan needs is a pot growing facility next door. point #2: For the record the proposed structure can be seen from our house & from where we park our cars. Currently there is a large juniper tree in front of the living room windows so we cannot see it from there. But that tree will need to come down sometime soon since it is intruding on the structure. Then we will be able to see the pot farm from our living roorn: The proposed structure can be seen from the upstairs offtce where Darla works full-time. I know this because I can see from the office window the plot area where the structure will be built. plus I have measured to the location, according to the subrnitted drawings lneasurements (not the cartoon scale). point #3: The unresolved noise factor is a major concern for us. One of our current enjoyments and use of our property is when we go out at night and sit on our deck or walk around the property in a quiet, safe .nuiro*rnt. Approving a Marijuana production facility next to where we spend this time will definitely effect this current enjoyment and use of our property because of the added noise and security compromise of the environment. The applicant does not indicate the orientation of the HVAC system(s) and noise levels. How many HVAC systems will be used to support a facility of this size and with this many individual grow rooms withindividuaf thermostats? Where will these HVAC System(s) be placed, North side (facing us), South side(facing the applicant's house), or ? All the application indicates is that the HVAC system(s) will run 1 intermittently on and off throughout the day and night. Since the application did not meet this specific requiled information on noise pollution and therefore does not prove the facility will not affect the neighbor's current enjoyment and use of their properties this application should be denied. Point #4: The County requested an updated Plot Plan To Scale. The resubmiued Plot Plan is still not to scale. 'To Scale' is defined as 'with a uniform reduction or enlargement'. The Plot Plan subrnitted does not meet this uniform definition as a 60 foot measurement (Proposed Barn) on the Plot Plan is almost the same size as a 1000 foot measurement (Setback from Goodrich Road) on their Plot Plan. rhe application should be denied as a 'To Scale' Plot Plan was never provided, which is a requirement of a complete application. Point #5: Upon hearing the ex-police officers testimony at the hearing, reading current events pertaining to marijuana growing, watching fictionalized accounts about marijuana growing on TV I'm a "little bit scared" to have this happening directly next door to my home, where there is not and will not be any security fencing separating our property from the grow building. There is a very old field fence that is only three feet tall & has a break in it just east of where the structure will be built. I believe it has been stated that cameras will be installed. Cameras are not tamper proof & not I 00% reliable.To put it more plainly I'm bloody tenified of the crime that this proposal may incur. Do I need to buy more weapons & watch dogs to protect myself & my family from potential pot thieves? It will be easier to move away & make room for more of the same. Is that the future of Goodrich Road? The approval of growing a crop that will surely bring a criminal element into an otherwise peaceful landscape is ludicrous. Please deny this application. Thank You, Roland and Darla Merandy 2 Nicole Mardell From: David Barclay To the Honorable Commissioners of Deschutes County, My name is David A. Barclay and I am writing you concerning the application for a Mar'rjuana Grow operation at 69188 Goodrich Rd. Sisters OR. 97759. The application information is as follows: Applicant: Richard & Norma Tewalt Application No. 247 -17-0021 7-AD Appellant Bob King Appeal No. 247 -17-000723-AD firit tet me explain who I am and my relation to the applicants for this Marijuana Grow operation, I am the immediate neighbor on the north side of Richard and Norma Tewalt. I live at 6914F Goodrich Rd. Qisters Oreqon, 9775d. I have been neighbors with the Tewalts for over 37 years. Our driveways are side by side and onri?-iletapart. I am all in favoi of a person doing what they want on their own land, as I would like the ability to do as I wish on mine. The frustration I have is when a person's activities on their property start to negatively affect their surrounding neighbors. I am not against the act of growing Marijuana since it is legal in the state of Oregon, What I am agiinst is the negative effect the farming and harvesting of said marijuana on my home and way of life. Since we share driveways all traffic will be within 15 yards of my home and people will have access to my property regularly. I am concerned with the employment process in which the Tewalts will obtain their w6rkeri and other employees. Will they require background checks, drug screening,and pay them in accordance federal and state laws? Will the employees have respect for my family, pets, livestock, and property? Willthey be working all hours of the day and night? Will that effect my way of life and comfort in my home? The smell is a huge concern of mine. There are many other marijuana grow operations in the area and I can smellthem daily as I drive the roads around Deschutes County. For example, as you travelwest toward Sisters, just above tumalo on the Sisters side and near the Bendistillery, you can smell a grow operation at all times ot'tfre day all year long. That's when I am driving home at 55 miles an hour with my window cracked. How do you think the smell is going to be as I try to sit on my back patio in the summer? I know one could claim they are going to have all the best equipment to purify the air but we know that is not really going to help. I am g0 yl"r" jtd, tr]aue met and worked with many walks of life. Mar'rjuana is a big stinky plant and with the aid of science it's just going to get worse. I live in the country to have fresh air with peace and quiet. This marijuna grow is going to change all of that. I urge you to not allow this application to be completed. Goodrich is my home and my family's home' I honesly dJn'ibelieve this marijuana grow operation will help our community. Feel free to contact me with any questions. Sincerely, David A. BarclaY 541-408-2949 69148 Goodrich Rd. Sisters OR, 97759 Nicole Mardell From: Triplett, Thomas It was suggested that I share this with you Schwabe Williamson & Wyatt Thomas Triplett Shareholder Direct: 503-796-2901 ttriplett@schwa be.com ldeas fuel industries, learn more at: Www.s-chJUebe.lorn From: Triplett, Thomas Sent: Monday, October 15,20!7 L1:19 AM To:'ta mmy. [email protected]' Dear Tammy: I write in connection with the above captioned matter. Please cause this emailto be placed in the record; shared with the Commissioners and legal counsel for the County. I know that this will seem to cover ground that has been plowed many times but, at the risk of repetition it needs to be revised. I will attempt to make this short and to the point: r All concede that growing; processing; distribution; sale; and use constitutes a felony under federal law r The Oregon and Washington Supreme Courts have held that federal law on this subject, under the Supremacy clause to the United States Supreme Court, trumps any contrary state or federal law o Under criminal law, any person who aids and abets another in the commission of a felony, is also a felon r lt is uncertain whether Jeff Sessions will revoke the comfort letter issued by the prior administration. Turning from the law to the practical, how can I explain to my 14 year old grandson the following: . Why are our county commissioners aiding and abetting those violate the law. . Why he should respect those in the position to administer the law . Why he cannot visit our ranch when a neighbor is processing marijuana . Why it is less safe to come to the ranch because of a neighboring magnet for criminal activities . Why we will likely lose our well water at its current level because if inappropriate use by marijuana growers during the period that there is no district irrigation water available . Why unlawfulconduct is allowed to impinged upon our quality of life and the value of our homes ln conclusion, the Commission needs to engage in serious sole searching. lt needs to balance its quest for revenues against the factors set for above. From my prospective, the conclusion ought to be obvious I Respectfully Tom Trip I NOTICE: This email- may contain material that is confidential, privileged and,/or attorney work product for the sole use of the intended recipient. Any review, reliance or distribution by others or forwarding without express permission is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intdnded recipient, please contact the sender and delete all copies. 2 Nicole Mardell From: Monika Piatt < Monika@ rescueresponse.com > Sent: Tuesday, October L7,2OL7 4:L1 PM lo: Tammy Baney; Phil Henderson;Tony DeBone Cc: Nicole Mardell Subject: File # 247-L7-0002L7-AD (247-17-OOO723-A) Tewalt Application Open Record Attachments: File # 247 -L7 -0002L7 - AD (247 - 17 -0007 2 3 -A) Tewa lt A p p I icatio n. d ocx Thank you all for making the time to listen to the residents who were able to stay until the end of yesterday's hearing. You displayed great patience and perseverance, which our county needs during this time, Other residents will be writing to you as well, during this open record period. Thank you for your consideration as you serve our countyl Monika Piatt Rescue Response Gear lnc. M onika.@ fegc_uqfespon-se-.co t"n 541-549-1485 Office 54I-549-2t55 Fax I F i le # 247 - 17 -000217 - AD (247 -17 -OOO7 23-A) Tewa lt Appl icatio n Dear Commissioners Tammy Baney, Philip Henderson and Anthony DeBone: As our family has resided in Deschutes County lor 22 years, I thank you for listening and looking deeper into stopping marijuana commercial production facilities in neighborhoods. The surrounding 28 properties within 1,000 feet of our home appealed a 10,000 square foot grow operation, because the county had approved this without any hearing. Thankfully, in our case, the Board of County Commissioner finally denied the application, although it was apparent Deschutes County itself had allowed this, without any consideration to the detriment of the tax payers who have resided here for decades. Rural Deschutes County DID NOT vote to legalize marijuana, nor did it vote to turn this federally illegal plant into an agricultural crop, the legislature did. Other crops do not have 80% leaving the state via the black market. Alfalfa residents have been living "next door" to large scale grow operations for years. Please consider how this city has been adversely affected by this infiltration on every level. They can no longer ride their horses on the streets, due to the influx of traffic from the growers, staff and their visitors, as it is now unsafe! Additionally, Alfalfa Valley Hemp Farms recently filed a law suit against Deschutes County regarding existing light regulations from 7 pm to 7 am. They claim they are harmed by this code because this is inconsistent with operation of other farm crops and an unreasonable regulation. Please note other crops are not limited to being grown indoors, what special rights will be requested next by growers? What about the rights of the residents who reside next to production facilities? ls it a good use of our counties land to allow growers, their employees, without background checks, to move in and demand special rights or privileges in growing a federally illegal plant? Light pollution and even helicopters hovering over their crops all night long on frosty nights in Sisters, all to the detriment of neighbors. Our family has owned a rescue and safety business for over 20 years. We pay State, Federal and County taxes, with corresponding state and federal license numbers. The growers can do the same, as they are business owners and should be treated as such, not undisciplined children who should expect to have their way. Additionally, they should be held accountable and liable for the packaging of their products, for example, which can be consumed by children. My street, Alfalfa Market Road has greatly increased traffic largely due to Alfalfa grow operations, at all hours of the day and night. Adding a huge commercial grow operation on a blind corner, of a well-traveled road, where speeds exceed 55 mph, would have significantly increased fatality risk on a road local residents are already avoiding, because of this safety issue. ln this case it would have added a commercial business into an existing rural Deschutes County neighborhood. Along these lines, I ask that you consider the size of EFU and MUA zoned property in relation to smaller residents who live around it with family, kids and farm animals. For example, I am a 4H leader working with kids who are tending farm animals, as well as learning about horticulture, Our state is troubled regarding education. With parents and kids alike having greater access to pot, will this be part of the problem or the solution? I don't envy the position you are in, but I do greatly appreciate the stance you have taken thus far. People have reached out to me from Alfalfa, Tumalo, Redmond, Sisters, Three Rivers and Bend, with concerns of what is happening to rural Deschutes County. Residents are especially concerned when nearby properties go on the market now, because a grow operation could move in there NEXT... There is already too much marijuana growing in this county than is used in the dispensaries, according to law enforcement and 221 News, We need to not compromise our county based on this single industry. Please consider locating these in Commercial areas, where they can be monitored. There is much to glean from Colorado. For example, Durango was spot lighted in the news, as a former tourist destination, until pot and homeless people moved in. We already have a lack of Code Enforcement, such as skunk smell so strong, it affects both the outside and inside of homes, shipping cargo containers used for fencing, cars with blacked out license plates from Oregon and other states at all hours of the day and night. There are not just workers who travel to these grow operations, as proven by black market statistics. Oregrown has a Delivery service, as their large bill board displays in Bend. How are these growers transporting this federally illegal drug? According to Marijuana Retailing standards and criteria, the use shall not have a walk-up or drive-thru window service. Does this sound legal? Marijuana and Hemp are now being cross pollinated as a way of being an "agricultural crop", with THC in the Hemp, as opposed to just CBD. Specific seeds and clone plants have been engineered to make this possible. This would allow Hemp to be recognized with Federal exemptions and privileges of agriculture, which a Federally lllegal plant should not have. Please realize, these growers can then sell the modified Hemp like tomatoes or other agricultural crops from their property, without the taxes or regulations attributed to growing marijuana. lronically, Marion County with its pristine vineyards, has opted out of growing Marijuana...it is hypocritical for Salem to make state decisions and mandates, when they are not living "next door" to these operations. We here in Deschutes County are willing to fight for our public safety, quality of life and property values too! Thank you again for considering the voices of those wanting to preserve Deschutes County. Monika and Lance Piatt 23095 Alfalfa Market Road Bend, OR 97701 m on i ka@res cue rep.po nse, co m Nicole Mardell From: Tammy Baney Sent: Wednesday, October L8,201-7 1:10 PM To: Tony DeBone Cc: Nicole Mardell; Phil Henderson Subject: FW:10/16/L7 Pot Farm Hearng Tony- Please see the email below; Janet did not have an address for you and asked that I forward it on. I have also copied Nicole for inclusion in the public record. ln service to our community- r / anny Tammy Baney I Deschutes County Commissioner f $ & Direct: (541) 388-5567 | 1300 NW Wallstreet, Suite 200 | Bend, OR 9770L tammyb@deschutes,org I www.deschutes.org From: Janet Dorgan [mailto:janetadorgan @bendbroadband.com] Sent: Monday, October 1,6,2017 9:19 AM To: Tammy Baney Deschutes County Commissioners: Regarding the October 16, hearing on the application for a pot farm in Sisters, I have the following concerns: 1. During a previous pot farm hearing, we heard from Commissioner Baney concerns over the lack of specificity. Have these concerns been addressed? We were told that the commissioners have the power to do so, 2. How many planners etc. are being used to facilitate each pot farm application? What is the total salary of planners and other Deschutes County employees? How much time is spent on each application? ln other words, what is the cost to the tax payer of each application? 3. The state has collected S8S million in taxes. Even though Deschutes County bears the brunt of negative effects of pot farms in the forms of odor, increased traffic, decreased property values, we only receive S Z4O, 000 + in distributions. 4. How willthat money be used? 1 5. Cresswell, Or. voted against recreational marijuana 53% to 47Yo. Because of the narrow ma-r3ih, tlte.issue is on the November ballot. lf Cresswell can put the issue on the ballot to allow pot, Deschutes County can put the issue on the ballot to disallow recreational pot grows in rural Deschutes. Janet Dorgan 541-504-7096 2 Frcm: Patti Adair .)188 Goo;drich Road. AFFA1R,, grow. ft is so important to stond up for these children ond the 5 young children of Adam & filory Claire Jones. And then weseehow the stof f of our county hqs treoted us. The Tewolt marijuono qnd notificotion post on Goodrich otmost immediotely blew down. f notified Nicole she replied that wss fllg, lvlcybe it wos fine for her, but whot obout oll those fomilies that live in flffi.uo. The TEw4ulgreenhouse is ccpoble of four croPs o yeo?. The noise, odor, ond troffic thathltomRo$ithis operotion NO ONE seems to understond. Odr oppeal was os I witnessed sitting here lost month. ft seemed our oPPeol . Our ottorney ,Liz, claarly pointed out +his biqs when she wos finally ollowed to oddress the commissioners. tVe wonder why woutd anyone go to such expense of building o 3600 sguare foot gieenhouse including o bothroom ond stote on September 18th at the first part of this HEARING that they we?e going to storf smoll. We con only presume they ore goiftSffiJl ond then WE, the community of ioodrich will be stuck with mcire trim- th$*ad thot we con imogine. You mcy NOT know but ft tokes 2 people over orty hours to horvest 100 sq f eet of Morijuono. The crop demonds doity inspections. You will hova your honds full growing morijuono which nothing like TOAAATOES qs some hove mentioned. After collecting 100 signatures from nroinly the Sister's community,we ore wondering if you, our Deschutes County commissioners, ore going to heor our plea for sofety.? Thonk you. Most Sincerely, rtti Adoir r@ \eon tu Shsav> ciR q++54 bl),4u*nLovla a? (Bocc) PAGE l oF PAGES pETtnoN To rHE DEscHurEs couNTy BoARD or Fww coMMtsstoNERs petition against marijuana production facility at 69188 Goodrich Roa4 Slsters, oR 97759 - 17 wner: Norma and Richard Tewalt ADDE-NDUM # 7 7A 76 Applicant / Agent: Norma and Richard Tewalt File #z 247-L7-0O0215'LR|247-L7-O00217-AD From: The Below Signed Appellants as Neighbors to the Subject Property Date: August25,2OL7 WHEREAS, you are our elected representatives; and is provide for the safety WHEREAS, it is universally accepted the first duty and responsibility of elected representatives to and security of their constituency; and place regulations on the time, wHEREAS, the BOCC has been granted legal authority by the state Legislature to reasonable these must be place, and manner of produciion of marijuana in Deschutes county, pursuant to oRS 4758.340, and provisions public health and consistent with the county comprehensive plan and Zoning ordinances and applicable of safety laws; and ,,Findings not allow the Planning Division WHEREAS, in the and Decision," it is stated, "The Deschutes County Code does property, lmpact of marijuana on to approve or deny thiiapplication based on. ..previous code violations on the effects on chlldren neighboring pets and livestock, lncreased crime and threatto safety of neighbors, or Potential negative in the area."; and protection of DCC 9.12 and WHEREAS, the Oregon legislature recognized and, by excluding marijuana production from normal farming rRS 30.3g05, Right to Firm, publicly acknowledged that marijuana production is not equivalent to perations and requires special consideration and greater over-sight; and agencies throughout the WHEREAS, based on results to date, it is now recognized and acknowledged by law enforcement public issues, including State that mar'rjuana production has a history of frequently bringing increased crime and safety threats of bodily harm, to a here:before safe neighborhood; and once they were put on notice that a WHEREAS, the Applicants, initial application included "Phase l" which they withdrew line-of-sight to see-through, dilapidated, piecemealed structure only 30 feet from the nelghbo/s property and withln a 1," but indicated the neighbo/s residence was not going to be approved by the County, the Applicant withdrew "Phase their preference for substandard quality of construction and an absence of concern for public health and safety; and respect and consideration for the WHEREAS, the Applicant,s above described behavior indicate the Appticant has a lack of neighbors and neighborhood and the established codes; request the Bocc to THEREFSRE, for the reasons stated above and in our appeal, we the undersigned do respectfully give to code conslder this appeal in the scope of their highest duties and responsibilities and full consideration "previous threat to safety of violations on the property, lmpact of marijuana on neighboring pets and llvestock, lncreased crime and Tewalt's Application for a neighbors, and potential negative effects on children in the area" and deny Norma and Richard A marljuana production facility marijuana production facllityto be constructed at 69188 Goodrich Road, Slsters, oR 97759. We plead with does not belong in the Goodrich neighborhood, a wellestablished family, normal-farming nelghborhood. the BOCC to ls application. oAnh Signature address Prlnt name Emall back to [email protected] or [email protected] - Got questlons call 54{-323'6999 PETTflON TO THE DESCHUTES COUNTY BOARD OF COUNW COMMTSSTONERS TBOCC) PAGE 1 OF _ PAGES Petition agalnst marijuana production facllity at 69188 Goodrlch Road, Sisters, OR 97759 Jwner: Norma and Richard Tewalt ADDENDUM # 11016 77 Applicant / Agent: Norma and Richard Tewalt File #: 247-17-O0O2L6-LR/247-L7-OOO2L7-AD From: The Below Signed Appellants as Neighbors to the Subject Property Dater August25,2Ot7 WHEREAS, you are our elected representatives; and WHEREAS, it is universally accepted the first duty and responsibility of elected representatives is to provide for the safety and securlty of their constituency; and WHEREAS, the BOCC has been granted legal authority by the State Legislature to place reasonable regulations on the time, place, and manner of production of marijuana in Deschutes County, pursuant to ORS 4758.340, and these must be consistent with the County Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Ordinances and applicable provlsions of publlc health and safety laws; and WHEREAS, in the "Findings and Decision," it is stated, "The Deschutes County Code does not allow the Planning Divlsion to approve or deny this application based on. . .Previous code violations on the property, lmpact of marijuana on neighboring pets and livestock, lncreased crime and threat to safety of neighbors, or Potential negative effects on children in the area."; and WHEREAS, the Oregon legislature recognized and, by excluding marijuana production from protection of DCC 9.12 and )RS 30.3905, Right to Farm, publicly acknowledged that marijuana production is not equivalent to normal farming ,perations and requires special consideration and greater over-sight; and WHEREAS, based on results to date, it is now recognized and acknowledged by law enforcement agencies throughout the State that mariJuana production has a history of frequently bringing increased crime and public safety issues, including threats of bodily harm, to a here-before safe neighborhood; and WHEREAS, the Applicants' initial application included "Phase l" which they withdrew once they were put on notice that a see-through, dilapidated, piecemealed structure only 30 feet from the neighborrs property and within a line-of-sight to the neighbor's residence was not going to be approved by the County, the Applicant withdrew "Phase 1," but indicated their preference for substandard quality of construction and an absence of concern for public health and safety; and WHEREAS, the Applicant's above described behavior indicate the Applicant has a lack of respect and consideration for the neighbors and neighborhood and the established codes; THEREFORE, for the reasons stated above and in our appeal, we the undersigned do respectfully request the BOCC to consider this appeal ln the scope of their highest duties and responsibilitles and give full consideration to "previous code violations on the property, lmpact of marijuana on neighborlng pets and livestoclg lncreased crime and threat to safety of neighbors, and potential negative effects on children in the area" and deny Norma and Richard Tewalt's Application for a marijuana production facility to constructed at 59188 Goodrich Road, Sisters, OR 97759. A marijuana production facility does not belong in the Good a well established family, normal-farming neighborhood. We plead with the this n JA q'n 0, dddress Print name Emalliback to [email protected] or [email protected] - Got questlons call 541-323-6999 PETITIOI{ TO THE DESCHUTES COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERI' (BOCC) PAGE 1 OF PAGE5 petitlon agalnst mariluana production facillty at 69188 Goodrich Road, Sisters, OR 97759 - wner: Norma and Richard Tewalt ADDENDUM # Llp 7617 Applicant / Agent: Norma and Richard Tewalt File *: 247-L7-ON2L6-LR|247-17-OO0217-AD From: The Below Signed Appellants as Neighbors to the Subject Property Date: AugustlS,20l7 t WHEREAS, you are our elected rePresentatives; and is provide the safety WHEREAS, it is universally accepted the flrst duty and responsibility of elected representatives to for and security of their constituency; and place regulations on the time, WHEREAS, the BOCC has been gnnted legal authority bythe State Ldgislature to reasonable place, and manner of produaion of marijuana in Deschutes County, pursuant to ORS 4758.34o., and these must be consistent with the County Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Ordinances'and applicable provisions of public health and safety laws; and ,,Findings Division WHEREAS, ln the and Declslon," it is stated, 'The Deschutes County Code does not allow the Planning to approve or deny this application based on. . .Prevlous code violations on the property, lmpact of mariiuana on neighborlng pets and livestock, lncreased crime and threat to safety of neighbors, or Potential negatlve effects on children in the area."; and protecti6n and WHEREAS, the Oregon legislature recognized and, by excluding marljuana production from of DCC 9.12 )RS 30.3905, Right to Farm, publicly acknowledged that marijuana productlon is not equlvalent to normal farming perations and requires special consideration and greater over-slgh! and WHEREAS, based on results to date, it is now recognized and acknowledged by law enforcement agencies throughout the public State that mariJuana production has a history of frequently brlnging lncreased crlme and safety iss'ues, including threats of bodih harm, to a here-before safe neighbbrhood; and a WHEREAS, the Applicantd initlat appllcation inctuded "Phase l" which they withdrew once they were put on notice that see-through, dilapidated, piecernealed structure only 30 feet from the neighbor's property and within a line-of-sight to the neighiorrs residence was not going to be approved by the County, the Appllcant withdrew "Phase 1," but indicated their preference for substandard quality of construction and an absence of concern for public health and safety; and WHEREAS, the Applicant's above described behavior indicate the Applicant has a lack of respect and consideration for the neighbors and neighborhood and the establlshed codes; THEREFORE, for the reasons stated above and in our.appeal, we the undersigned do respectfully request the BOCC to cbnslder this appeal ln the scope of their highest duties and responsibilities and glve full consideration to "previous code vlolatlons on the property, lmpact of marfluana on nelghboring pets and livestock, lncreased crime and threat to safety of neighbors, and potential negative effects on children In the area" and deny Norma and Richard Tewalt's Applicatlon for a ."ii;u"n" productlon facility to be constrgcted at 59188 Goodrich Road, Slsters, OR 97759. A marijuana production faclllty doei not belong in the Goodrlch neighborhood, a well established family, normal-f"rming neighborhood. We plead with the BOCC to F applicatlon. bctz,/ L a,e ?7/a3 Signatur? oddress Prlnt nome Email backto [email protected] or [email protected] - Got questlons call 541€236e99 PETmON TO mE DESCHUTES COUNW BOARD OF COUNTY COMMTSSTONERS IBOCCI PAGE r OF _ PAGES Petitlon agalnst mar$uana productlon facillty at 691118 Goodrich Road, Sisters, OR 97759 Owner: Norma and Richard Tewalt ADDENDIJM # l lO 1617 Appllcant / Agent: Norma and Richard Tewalt File #: 247-L7-OoozL6-Lnl247-17-000217-AD From: The Below Slgned Appellants as Nelghbors to the SubJect Property Date: August 25,2017 WHEREAS, you are our elected representatives; and WHEREAS, it is universally accepted the first duty and responsibility of elected representatives is to provide for the safety and security of their constituency; and WHEREAS, the BOCC has been granted legal authority by the State Legislature to place reasonable regulations on the time, place, and manner of producion of marijuana in Deschutes County, pursuant to ORS 4758.340, and these must be consistent with the County Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Ordinances and appllcable provisions of public health and safety laws; and WHEREAS, ln the "Findings and Declsion," it is stated, "The Deschutes County Code does not atlow the planning Dlvision to approve or deny this applicatlon based on. . .Prevlous code vlolations on the property, lmpact of marfluana on neighborlng pets and llvestoclt, lncreased crime and threat to safety of neighbors, or Potential negative effects on children in the area."; and WHEREAS, the Oregon legislature recognized and, by excluding marijuana production from protection of DCC 9.12 and IRS 30'3905, Right to Farm, publicly acknowledged that marijuana production is not equivalent to normal farmlng )perations and requires specialconsideration and greater over-sighu and WHEREAS, based on results to date, it is now recognized and acknowledged by law enforcement agencies throughout the State that mariJuana production has a history of frequently bringing increased crlme and public iafetv issues, lncludlng threats of bodily harm, to a here-before safe neighborhood; and WHEREAS, the ApplicantC inltlal appllcation lncluded "Phase l" which they withdrew once they were put on notice that a see-through, dllapidated, plecemealed structure only 30 feet from the neighbor's property and wlthin a line-of-slght to the nelghboy's resldence was not Solng to be approved by the County, the Applicant withdrew ,phase l,r, but indicated their preference for substandard quality of construction and an absence of concern for publlc health and safety; and WHEREAS, the Appllcant s above described behavior indlcate the Applicant has a lack of respest and consideratton for the neighbors and neighborhood and the establlshed codes; THEREFORE, for the reasons stated ebove and ln our appeal, we the underslgned do respectfully. requesi the BOCC to conslder this appeal in the scope of thelr highest duties and responsibilities and glve full consideration to ,prevlous code violatlons on the property, lmpact of marfluana on neighboring pets and livestoclq lncreased crime and threat to safety of nelghborc, potentlal and negatlve effects on children ln the area" and deny Norma and Richard Tewalt's Application for a marijuana productlon facilityto be constructed at 59188 Goodrich Road, Sisters, OR 97759. A marijuana production facillty does not belong in the Goodrich neighborhood, a well establlshed family, normat-farmlng nelghborhood. We plead with the BOCC to deny thls appllcatlon. c'I r16?*QR%7a7 &trPrt Slgnature Print name Emallbackto [email protected] or mallbustudlo@qol,com - Got qucttlons call i11€23€ggg pETtTtoN TO THE DESCHUTES COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSTONERS (BOCC) PAGE 1 OF _ PAGES Petltlon agalnst marijuana produstion facility at 69188 Goodrlch Road, Sisterc, OR 97759 )wner: Norma and Richard Tewalt ADDENDUM # 7 70 76 77 Applicant / Agent: Norma and Richard Tewalt File #: 247-L7-OOOZL6-LR/247-17-000217-AD From:The Below Signed Appellants as Neighbors to the Subject Property Date: August25,2Ot7 WHEREAS, you are our elected representatives; and WHEREAS, it is universally accepted the first duty and responsibility of elected representatives is to provide for the safety and security of their constituency; and WHEREAS, the BOCC has been granted legal authority by the State Legislature to place reasonable regulations on the time, place, and manner of production of mar'ljuana in Deschutes County, pursuant to ORS 4758,340, and these must be consistent with the County Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Ordinances and applicable provisions of public health and safety laws; and WHEREAS, in the "Findings and Decision," it is stated, "The Deschutes County Code does not allow the Planning Division to approve or deny this application based on. ,Previous code violations on the property, lmpact of marijuana on neighboring pets and livestock, lncreased crime and threat to safety of neighbors, or Potential negative effects on children in the area."; and WHEREAS, the Oregon legislature recognized and, by excluding marijuana prciduction from protection of DCC 9,12 and ,RS 30.3905, Right to Farm, publicly acknowledged that marijuana production is not equivalent to normal farming perations and requires special consideration and greater over-sight; and WHEREAS, based on results to date, it is now recognized and acknowledged by faw enforcement agencies throughout the State that marijuana production has a history of frequently bringing increased crime and public safety issues, including threats of bodily harm, to a here-before safe neighborhood; and WHEREAS, the Applicants' initial application included "Phase l" which they withdrew once they were put on notice that a see-through, dilapidated, piecemealed structure only 30 feet from the nelghbor's property and within a line-of-sight to the neighbo/s residence was not going to be approved by the County, the Applicant withdrew "Phase 1," but indicated their preference for substandard quality of construction and an absence of concern for public health and safety; and WHEREAS, the Applicant's above described behavior indicate the Applicant has a lack of respect and consideration for the neighbors and neighborhood and the established codes; THEREFORE, for the reasons stated above and in our appeal, we the undersigned do respectfully request the BOGC to consider this appeal in the scope of their highest duties and responsibilities and give full consideration to "previous code violations on the property, lmpact of mar'rjuana on neighboring pets and livestock, lncreased crime and threat to safety of neighbors, and potential negative effects on children in the area" and deny Norma and Richard Tewalt's Application for a marijuana production facilltyto be constructed at 69188 Goodrich Road, Sisters, OR 97759. A marijuana productlon facility does not belong in the Goodrich neighborhood, a well established family, normal-farming neighborhood. We plead with to deny thls appl e/ Signoture address Print name Emallbackto@ormallbustudio@qol'com-Gotquestlonscal|541.323.6999 PETTTTON TO THE DESCHUTES COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMTSSTONERS (BOCC) PAGE l OF_ PAGES Petition against marijuana production facility at 59188 Goodrich Road, Sisters, OR 97759 Owner: Norma and Richard Tewalt ADQENWM # 1101617 Applicant/Agent: Norma and Richard Tewalt File#:247-t7-000215-LR/247-t7-OOO2!7-AD Frorn: The Below Signed Appellants as Neighbors to the SubJect Property Date; August25,2077 WHEREAS, you are our elected representatives; and WHEREAS, it is universally accepted the first duty and responsibility of elected representatives is to provide for the safety and security of their constituency; and WHEREAS, the BOCC has been granted legal authority by the State Legislature to place reasonable regulations on the time, place, and manner of production of marijuana in Deschutes County, pursuant to ORS 4758.340, and these must be consistent with the County Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Ordinances and applicable provisions of public health and safety laws; and WHEREAS, in the "Findings and Decision," it is stated, 'The Deschutes County Code does not allow the Planning Divlsion to approve or deny this application based on, . .Previous code violations on the property, lmpact of marijuana on neighboring pets and livestock, lncreased crime and threat to safety of neighbors, or Potential negative effects on children in the area."; and WHEREAS, the Oregon legislature recognlzed and, by excluding mar'tjuana production from protection of DCC 9.12 and ORS 30.3905, Right to Farm, publicly acknowledged that mariJuana production ls not equivalent to normal farming operations and requlres special conslderation and greater over-sight; and WHEREAS, based on results to date, it ls now recognized and acknowledged by law enforcement agencies throughout the State that marijuana production has a hlstory of frequently bringing increased crime and public safety issues, including threats of bodily harm, to a here-before safe nei6hborhood; and WHEREAS, the Applicants' initial application included "Phase l" which they withdrew once they were put on notice that a see-through, dilapidated, piecemealed structure only 30 feet from the neighbor's property and within a llne-of-sight to the neighbor's residence was not going to be approved by the County, the Applicant withdrew "Phase 1," but indicated their preference for substandard quality of construction and an absence of concern for public health and safety; and WHEREAS, the Applicant's above described behavior indicate the Applicant has a lack of respect and consideration for the neighbors and neighborhood and the established codes; THEREFORE, for the reasons stated above and in our appeal, we the undersigned do respectfully request the BOCC to consider this appeal in the scope of thelr highest dutles and responsibilities and give full consideration to "prevlous code violations on the property, lmpact of marijr;,a,na on neighboring pets and livestock, lncreased crime and threat to safety of nelghbors, and potential negative effects on Shildren in the area" and deny Norma and Richard Tewalt's Application for a marijuana production facllity to be construpSed at 69188 Goodrlch Road, Slsters, OR 97759. A marijuana production facility does not belong in the Goodrlch neighborhood, a wellestablished family, normal-farming neighborhood. We plead wlth BOCC to deny this appllcatlon ) v-Jso' a>r qT Slgnoture 5a Prlnt name Emailbackto@[email protected] r ,3 pETtTtoN TO THE DESCHUTES COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS {BOCC} PAGE 1 OF _ PAGES Petition against marljuana production facility at 59188 Goodrlch Road, Sisters, OR 97759 rurner: Norma and Richard Tewalt ADDENDUM # 1 10 16 17 Applicant / Agent: Norma and Richard Tewalt File #: 247-L7-o0o2L6-LRl247-17-000217-AD From: The Below Signed Appellants as Neighbors to the Subject Property Date: August25,?OL7 WHEREAS, you are our elected representatives; and WHEREAS, it is universally accepted the first duty and responsibility of elected representatives is to provide for the safety and security of their constituency; and WHEREAS, the BOCC has been granted legal authority by the State Legislature to place reasonable regulations on the time, ptace, and manner of production of marijuana in Deschutes County; pursuant to ORS 4758,340, and these must be consistent with the County Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Ordinances and applicable provisions of public health and safety laws; and WHEREAS, in the "Findings and Decision," it is stated, 'The Deschutes County Code does not allow the Planning Division to approve or deny this application based on. .Previous code violations on the property, lmpact of marijuana on neighboring pets and livestock, lncreased crime and threat to safety of neighbors, or Potential negative effects on children in the area,"; and WHEREAS, the Oregon legislature recognized and, by excluding marijuana production from protection of DCC 9.12 and IRS 30,3905, Right to Farm, publicly acknowledged that marijuana production is not equivalent to normal farming .perations and requires special consideration and greater over-sight; and WHEREAS, based on results to date, it is now recognized and acknowledged by law enforcement agencies throughout the State that marijuana production has a history of frequently bringing increased crime and public safety issues, including threats of bodily harm, to a here-before safe neighborhood; and WHEREAS, the Applicants' initial application included "Phase l" which they withdrew once they were put on notice that a see,through, dilapidated, piecemealed structure only 30 feet from the nelghbor's property and within a line-of-sight to the neighbo/s residence was not going to be approved by the County, the Applicant withdrew "Phase 1," but indicated their preference for substandard quality of construction and an absence of concern for public health and safety; and WHEREAS, the Applicant's above described behavior indicate the Applicant has a lack of respect and consideration for the neighbors and neighborhood and the established codes; THEREFORE, for the reasons stated above and in our appeal, we the undersigned do respectfully request the BOCC to consider this appeal in the scope of their highest duties and responsibilities and give full consideration to "previous code violations on the property, tmpact,of marijuana on neighboring pets and livestock, lncreased crime and threat to safety of neighbors, and potential negative effects on children in the area" and deny Norma and Richard Tewalt's Application for a marijuana production facility to be constructed at 59188 Goodrich Road, Sisters, OR 97759. A marijuana production facility does not belong in the Goodrich neighborhood, a well established famlly, normal-farming neighborhood. We plead with BOCC to deny this application. lta i 3 Desrcrr/ It b,p eiv- ct'< 'I2-t dn-*-d lf+Sg (-fionature address Print name [email protected]@-Gotquestlonscall54t.323-6999 October 16,2017 To: Deschutes County Commissioners Re: Proposed Marijuana Facility at 69188 Goodrich Road in Sisters, OR Please cease continuing to issue marijuana growers pennits in nral areas where retirees and families with children are negatively impacted by the growers who want to raise the maximum number of crops per year. It is a certainty that marijuana grow lights at night, noise from the fans running in the cold months, hanresting odors and increased commercial traffrc will diminish the enjoyment of neighboring properly owners as well as damage the value of their properties. We have friends on Knott Rd who hear the fans at night with their windows closed and smell the harvesting odors. In addition, growing this crop requires large amountb of water that is in short supply in Central Oregon. We are asking you to deny a permit for the Tewalt's marijuana production facility at 69188 Goodrich Road in Sisters. The Tewalt's reasoning that they "would now like the opportunity for this land to give back to them financially" is a weak and greedy argument to abuse that very property they have owned since the 1970's. It is an expectation that, as County Commissioners, you be good stewards of our environment. Permitttng additional marijuana farms is not only a strain on our environment but it is also a threat to adjacent properties and to the public health in Deschutes County. Thank you for your consideration. Qo\D.,,,+t Petltion agalnst marfiuana production facility at 69188 Goodrlch Road, Slsters, OR 97759 Owner: Norma and Richard Tewalt ADDLNDUM #.! 10768 Applicant / Agent: Norma and Richard Tewalt File #:247-!7-O00215-LR /247'17'AOO2L7-AD From: The Below Signed Appellants as Neighbors to the Subject Property Date: August25,2077 WHEREAS, you are our elected representatives; and WHEREAS, it is universally accepted the first duty and responsibility of elected representatives is to provide for the safety and security of their constituency; and WHEREAS, the BOCC has been granted legal authority by the State Legislature to place reasonable regulatlons on the time, place, and manner of produqtion of marijuana in Deschutes County, pursuant to ORS 4758.340, and these rnust be consistent with the County Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Ordinances and applicable provisions of public health and safety laws; and WHEREAS, in the "Findings and Decision," it is stated, "The Deschutes County Code does not allow the Planning Division to approve or deny this application based on. . .Previous code violations on the property, lmpact of marijuana on nelghborlng pets and livestock, lncreased crime and threat to safety of neighbors, or Potential negative effects on children in the area."; and WHEREAS, the Oregon legislature recognlzed and, by excluding mariJuana production from protection of DCC 9.12 and ORS 30.3905, Right to Farm, publicly acknowledged that marijuana production is not equivalent to normal farmlng operations and requires speciaI conslderation and greater over-sight; and WHEREAS, based on results to date, it is now recognized and acknowledged by law enforcement agencies throughout the State that marijuana productlon has a history of frequently bringing lncreased crime and publlc safety lssues, including threats of bodily harm, to a here-before safe neighborhood; and WHEREAS, the Applicants' initial application included "Phase l" which they withdrew once they were put on notice that a see-through, dilapidated, plecemealed structure only 3O feet from the neighbor's property and withln a line-of-sight to the neighbor's resldence was not going to be approved by the County, the Applicant withdrew "Phase 1," but indicated their preference for substandard quality of construction and an absence of concern for public health and safety; and WHEREAS, the Applicant's above described behavior indicate the Applicant has a lack of respect and consideratlon for the neighbors and neighborhood and the established codes; THEREFORE, for the reasons stated above and in our appeal, we the undersigned do respectfully request the BOCC to consider thls appeal in the scope of their highEsj duties and responsibilitles and give full consideration to "prevlous code violatlons on the property, lmpact of marUuarib on neighboring pets and livestock, lncreased crime and threat to safety of neighbors, and potential negative effects on chlldren in the area" and deny Norma and Richard Tewalt's Application for a r.il.;urn, production facility to be constructed at 69188 Goodrich Road, Sisters, OR 97759, A marijuana production facility does not belong ln the Goodrlch neighborhood, a well establlshed family, normal-farming nelghborhood. We plead with the BOCC to deny this aPPllcation era,cL P fr;;?.*,*l" ,a'1 e 6N Slgnoture oddress Pilnt nome Emall back to [email protected] or [email protected] - Got questlons call 541'323$999 a PETlrloN TO THE DESCHUTES COUNTY BOARD OF COUNW COMMtsstoNERS (BOCC) PAGE _ OF_ p4rFES Petitlon agalnst marljuana production facllity at 59188 Goodrich Road, slsters, oR g775g Name signature Street Address Phone f.- / ^ey fur,lrL Gee Zo 9trqo"byz3 l't)(tD Di o'ru L,n .Z)3 .06tr3 p /hi,^A 4 tJ-,tnrnd gn A4 5.rr PETITION TO THE DESCI{UTES COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMtSStoNERti {Bocc} PAGE _ OF _ PAGES pETtTtoN TO THE DESCHUTES COUNW BOARD OF COUNW COMMISSIONERS (BOCC) PAGE 1 OF PAGES Petitlon atainst marliuana productlon facility at 69188 €oodrlch Road, Sisters, OR 97759 - )wner: Norma and Richard Tewalt ADDENDUM # 7 19JgE Applicant/ Agent: Norma and Richard Tewalt File #: 247-t7-ooo2L6-LR/247-17-000217-AD From: The Below Signed Appellants as Neighbors to the Subject Property Date: August25,2OL7 WHEREAS, you are our elected representatives; and WHEREAS, it is universally accepted the flrst duty and responsibllity of elected representatives is to provide for the safety and security of their constituency; and WHEREAS, the BOCC has been granted legal authority by the State Legislature to place reasona$le regulations on the time' place, and manner of production of marijuana in Deschute5 County, pursuant to ORS 4758.340, and these must be consistent with the County Comprehenslve Plan and loning Ordinances and applicable provisions of public health and safety laws; and ,,Findings WHEREAS, in the and Decision," it is stated, 'The Deschutes County Code does not allow the Planning Division to approve or deny this application based on. . .Previous code violations on the property, lmpact of marijuana on nelghboring pets and livestock, lncreased crime and threat to safety of neighbors, or Potentlal negative effects on children in the area."; and WHEREAS, the Oregon legislature recognized and, by excluding mar'tjuana production from protection of DCC 9.12 and CRS 30.3905, Right to Farm, publicly acknowledged that marijuana production is not equivalent to normal farming :perations and requlres special consideration and greater over'slght; and WHEREAS, based on results to date, it is now recognized and acknowledged by law enforcement agencies throughout the State that mariJuana production has a history of frequently bringing increased crime and public safety issues, including threats of bodily harm, to a here-before safe neighborhood; and put on notice that a WHEREAS, the Applicants, initial appllcation included "Phase l" which they withdrew once they were to see-through, dilapidated, plecemealed structure only 30 feet from the neighborrs property and within a line-of-sight the neighbor,s residence was not going to be approved by the County, the Applicant withdrew "Phase 1," but indicated their preference for substandard quality of construction and an absence of concern for public health and safety; and and consideration for the WHEREAS, the Applicant,s above descrlbed behavior indicate the Applicant has a lack of respect nelghbors and nelghborhood and the established codes; request the Bocc to THEREFORE, for the reasons stated above and in our appeal, we the underslgned do respectfully code consider this appeal in the scope of their highest duties and responsibilities and give full conslderation to "previous threat to safety of vlolatlons on the property, lmpact of mar'rjuana on neighboring p€ts and livestock, lncreased crime and Application for a neighbors, and potential negative effects on children in the area" and deny Norma and Richard Tewalt's ,.ii1r.n. production facllity to be constructed at 69188 Goodrich Road, Sisters, oR 97759. A marijuana production facility plead with doei not belong in the Goodrich neighborhood, a well established family, normal-farming neighborhood. We the ts on. f + ' t xlflatar (; "qt* Fq 748 t eE /.a r{ Signature oddress 5 Wktr> Prtnt nome Ematlbackto [email protected] or malibustudio@aol,coF - Got guestions call 541€23'6999 PETITION TO THE DESCHUTES COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS (BOCCI PAGE rAErS Petition J-ArJ against mariiuana production facility art 6g1gg Goodrlch Road, slsters, oR g775g Name Signature Street Address Phone b4tt7 ?>,+l<,ttr 5o3agug4r;t> Uil^ ,t 6' 6/ 6etZZ BvL/n,- q fus-?72^ffi BHlrupSry,t", PETlrloN TO THE DESCHUTES COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMtSstoNERS (BOCC) pAcE_ oF_ PAGES V-r\\-\ xrr- r trvo'9 c.l{A sArc tt*1 ,lt- f?C-fr.r",1n{ -rrr I Apryr Fl;.;rurk o,.i l\ Sr'ni '[?*t': atiT€{< /^,tZ t4 PENilON TO THE DESCHUTES COUNTY BOARD OF COUNW COMMISSIONERS (BOCC} PAGE 1OF- PAGES petltion against marijuana productlon facllity at 59188 Goodrlch Road, Sisters, OR 97759 Owner: Norma and Richard Tewalt W Applicant / Agent: Norma and Richard Tewalt Flle #: 247-17-000216-LR{247-L7-OO0217-AD From: The Below Signed Appellants as Neighbors to the Subject Property Date: August29,2OL7 WHEREAS, you are our elected representatives; and WHEREAS, it is unlversally accepted the first duty and responsibility of elected representatives is to provide for the safety and security of their constituency; and WHEREAS, the BOCC has been granted legal authority by the State Leglslature to place reasonalple regulations on the time, place, and manner of production of mar'rjuana in Deschutes County, pursuant to ORS 4758.340, and these must be conslstent with the County Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Ordinances and appllcable provisions of public health and safety laws; and ,,Findings WHEREAS, in the and Decision," it is stated, "The Deschutes County Code does not allow the Planning Division to approve or deny this application based on. . .Previous code violatlons on the property, lmpact of marijuana on neighborlng pets and livestock, Increased crime and threat to safety of nelghbors, or Potential negative effects on children in the area."; and and WHEREAS, the Oregon legislature recognized and, by excluding marijuana production from protection of DCC 9.12 ORS 30.3g0S, Right to Farm, publicly acknowledged that mariJuana production is not equivalent to normal farming operations and requires special conslderation and greater over-slght; and WHEREAS, based on results to date, it is now recognized and acknowledged by law enforcement agencies throughout the State that mariJuana production has a history of frequently bringlng lncreased crime and public safety lssues, including threats of bodily harm, to a here-before safe neighborhood; and a WHEREAS, the Applicants' initial application included "Phase l" which they withdrew once they were put on notice that see-through, dilapldated, piecemealed structure only 30 feet from the neighbor's propefi and within a llne-of-slght to the neighbor,s residence was not going to be approved by the County, the Applicant withdrew "Phase 1," but indicated thelr preference for substandard quality of construction and an absence of concern for public health and safety; and for the WHEREAS, the Appllcant's above described behavior indicate the Applicant has a lack of resPect and consideration neighbors and nelghborhood and the established codes; the Bocc to THEREFoRE, for the reasons stated above and in our appeal, we the underslgned do respectfully request consider this appeal in the scope of their highest duties and responsibilitles and give full conslderatlon to "prevlous code violations on the property, lmpact of marijuana on neighboring pets and livestock, lncreased crime and threat to safety of for a neighbors, and potential negative effects on chlldren in the area" and deny Norma and Richard Tewalt's Applicatlon production facility marijuana production facillty to be constructed at 69188 6oodrich Road, Sisters, OR 97759. A mar'tjuana plead does not belong in the Goodrich neighborhood, a well established family, normal-farming neighborhood. We with the deny this oddress ft t k".= Prlnt nome [email protected]@-Gotquestlon9call54{.323{999 pETtTloN TO THE DESCHUTES COUNW BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS {BOCC) PAGE l OF _ PAGES Petition against marijuana production facility at 59188 Goodrich Road, Sisters, OR 97759 Jwner: Norma and Richard Tewalt ADDENDUM # 1 10 16 17 Applicant / Agent: Norma and Richard Tewalt File #: 247-L7-00O21"6-LR(247-17-000217-AD From: The Below Signed Appellants as Neighbors to the Subject Property Date: Augusl25,20t7 WHEREAS, you are our elected representatives; and WHEREAS, it is universally accepted the first duty and responsibility of elected representatives is to provide for the safety and security of their constituency; and WHEREAS, the BOCC has been granted legal authority by the State Legislature to place reasonable regulations on the time, place, and manner of production of marijuana in Deschutes County, pursuant to ORS 4758.340, and these must be consistent with the County Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Ordinances and applicable provisions of public health and safety laws; and WHEREAS, in the "Findings and Decision," it is stated, 'The Deschutes County Code does not allow the Planning Division to approve or deny this application based on. . .Previous code violations on the property, lmpact of marijuana on neighbo6ng pets and livestock, lncreased crime and threat to safety of neighbors, or Potential negative effects on children in the area."; and WHEREAS, the Oregon legislature recognized and, by excluding marijuana production from protection of DCC 9.12 and )RS 30.3905, Right to Farm, publicly acknowledged that marijuana production is not equivalent to normal farming rperations and requires special consideration and greater over-slght; and WHEREAS, based on results to date, it is now recognized and acknowledged by law enforcement agencies throughout the State that marijuana production has a history of frequently bringing increased crime and public safety issues, including threats of bodily harm, to a here-before safe neighborhood; and WHEREAS, the Applicants' initial application included "Phase l" which they withdrew once they were put on notlce that a see-through, dilapidated, piecemealed structure only 30 feet from the neighbor's property and within a line-of-sight to the neighbor's residence was not going to be approved by the County, the Applicant withdrew "Phase 1," but indicated their preference for substandard quality of construction and an absence of concern for public health and safety; and WHEREAS, the Applicant's above described behavior indicate the Applicant has a lack of respect and consideration for the neighbors and neighborhood and the established codes; THEREFORE, for the reasons stated above and in our appeal, we the undersigned do respectfully request the BOCC to consider this appeal in the scope of their highest duties and responsibilities and give full consideration to "previous code violations on the property, lmpact of marijuana on neighboring pets and livestock, lncreased crime and threat to safety of neighbors, and potential negative effects on children in the area" and deny Norma and Richard Tewalt's Appllcation for a marijuana production facilityto be constructed at 69188 Goodrich Road, Sisters, OR 97759. A marijuana production facility does not belong in the Goodrich neighborhood, a well established family, normal-farming neighborhood. We plead with the BOCC to deny this appllcation. 0 an+l /5 €&n L,4d,ta\,'#J. Signature aic)1/O dddress Print nome Ematlbackto [email protected] or [email protected] - Got questlons call 541€236999 pETtTtoN TO THE DESCHUTES COUNW BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS (BOCC) PAGE 1OF _ PAGES Petition against marijuana production facility at 69188 Goodrich Roa4 Sisters, OR 97759 wner: Norma and Richard Tewalt apaENaaulLJq_loju Applicant / Agent: Norma and Richard Tewalt File #: 247-I7-OOO2I6-LR/247-17-000217-AD From: The Below Signed Appellants as Neighbors to the Subject Property Date: Auguslzs,20L7 WHEREAS, you are our elected representatives; and WHEREAS, it is universally accepted the first duty and responsibility of elected representatives is to provide for the safety and security of their constituency; and WHEREAS, the BOCC has been granted legal authority by the State Legislature to place reasonable regulations on the time, place, and manner of production of marijuana in Deschutes County, pursuant to ORS 4758.340, and these must be consistent with the County Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Ordinances and applicable provisions of public health and safety laws; and WHEREAS, in the "Findings and Decision," it is stated, 'The Deschutes County Code does not allow the Planning Division to approve or deny this application based on. . .Previous code violations on the property, lmpact of marijuana on neighboring pets and livestock, lncreased crime and threat to safety of neighbors, or Potentlal negative effects on children in the area."; and WHEREAS, the Oregon legislature recognized and, by excluding marijuana production from protection of DCC 9.12 and )RS 30.3905, Right to Farm, publicly acknowledged that marijuana production is not equivalent to normal farming perations and requires special consideration and greater over-slght; and WHEREAS, based on results to date, it is now recognized and acknowledged by law enforcement agencies throughout the State that marijuana production has a history of frequently bringing increased crime and public safety issues, including threats of bodily harm, to a here-before safe neighborhood; and WHEREAS, the Applicants' initial application included "Phase l" which they withdrew once they were put on notice that a see-through, dilapidated, piecemealed structure only 30 feet from the neighbor's property and wlthin a line-of-sight to the neighbo/s residence was not going to be approved by the County, the Applicant withdrew "Phase 1," but indlcated their preference for substandard quality of construction and an absence of concern for public health and safety; and WHEREAS, the Applicant's above described behavior indicate the Applicant has a lack of rbspect and consideration for the neighbors and neighborhood and the established codes; THEREFORE, for the reasons stated above and in our appeal, we the undersigned do respectfully request the BOCC to consider thls appeal in the scope of their highest duties and responsibilities and give full consideration to "previous code violations on the property, lmpact of marijuana on neighboring pets and livestock, lncreased crime and threat to safety of neighbors, and potential negative effects on children in the area" and deny Norma and Richard Tewalt's Application for a marijuana production facility to be constructed at 69188 Goodrich Road, Sisters, OR 97759. A marijuana production facility does not be long ln the Goodrich neighborhood, a well established family, normal-farmilg neighborhood. We plead with the BOCC to deny this g q?d application. ffi I4'8 ^J r-t-\ /.la -s}.,1ar2.,7 Signature address Print name €mai|backto@or@-GotquestIonscall54l:323{999 pETtTtoN TO THE DESCHUTES COUNW BOARD OF COUNTV COMMISSIONERS (BOCCI PAGE _ OF PA6ES - Petltion agalnst marljuana productlon facllity at 6918E Goodrich Road, Sisterc, OR 97759 Name Signature Street Address Phone I Su,etr-rr'tc- Sichk 5*8ry szz .l 73|3n*$rtg,.Nr ?n^n 6-q- S'S'cl,tteY t-t39 7 t4'l 'vt*..t/ R/ 5ta1-52-l ? 9zs.aa r3 A g- ??"9 sz*a- Lc v ss GrcT t?o 5t- W\AErL,nl rTl F, *ltp E;eatn n Q ?zz at .z/7- t/68 huqsi Q*rf Fo 5qt^ Rr;,tD ee. q77t/ eiz. Y45E- nloT iql'Ve,^> P.t 5-t I L..orr,a ) S"l.... Z'*') SrA* -4,+Lr's , Drc-. q'f '? 5i 1?J-3 l, L lTbqo rfioattla-in lJie+> fg 5+l q 7?V sq1 {ffit*- 9tg{e(s Oe :x?V I ... /ff/s /"/6tith-r.,, i [t CuS lt f. 1*l- t<€f,A\ (9p q ?i'Tf "{4"1, / B?L "7/);#U " 4t ala /&r/nqler Bd. I :y,gkm,*"gf//ii{i-cnsmaL ,r*.f4/-/t# I ory.-eeoA Jhlgll' { c ,'tD ^qq?',-a 5Yl^Fprfd d*,'* {J-*ALfJtiq , I /x 'L**k t'1 3zB $uunzt"rrvt Vr4t f?,;\ l 5.trr9*r{r SIgTF . oR q?"5q o4 q5 / 7353 lllrsu$TAtN VlEh) Rdt tJS 4r**m-J*'tlon sr.c-frR1, AR q n51 54/-slf?^dC 1{ tTtO'7 W ,CIbco(l' {'* Signature, Street Address Phone Name **--#P (oA;,,r-l/n*-*il., ,.-Wr{r&,("' '- (rr t* u,wtu,bo,/'la-, n t o\'i^ tant"Js^"r* mSffiq4nffi "t Y,lo,/, c ild* /ta*t'w*-fu) trroot,[r!, il o*f,,^rliffi-; f,r4, I);]#,*:fr4'l*vr,Q,;/-,./-Pl J\ih | il t ?,/ /{ll $tryy14trfoy,- /r522407t' t- -r--TFr-g Y[ldrun n e,l'l n^nrr"/' lutrrrl-*^",(ra',nrl 6nEa4 Ellhr- tl{orkDr, A.o4g> cLictrosrn ) ( ( llAn {bnr,-o rcF,,aTUt,*ffi 'nd,mututrt^ /4*tu'F '?/RA sut Dt>.L!,*^'a tE ffi-t/ #,n*t, {hu*.J, ,rJ t /a?*ul )d (nAp ( (j;;,%-{.e,J"I'LI* lA3' ta$nnn ,* 01, 3// $ PETITION TO THE DESCHUTES COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMTSSTONERS {BOCC} PAGE _ OF _ PAGES Petition agalnst marljuana production facillty at 59188 Goodrlch Road, Sisters, OR 97759 Name Signature Street Address Phone ilrfilt /rylft fi*e-q/r" szpl&c/aptu jy/-hrpffi ..^' ft+{ 11r*t'*r,wJ -b R$u"V ?nnt1 bru/ lrKtr 5,lt 1q-11{'l /..-..\ J*trya S:ravr&4r6 €*nL,1fnnonu 54t './ag -s$3 be . Be,,tn7* l/p"/-il/"- /? 4 "*zr& r {as4669zrt' /t bst,t *c ?'d (T Yto I vsu,-t AP fh. t\.o L l(, ,i,.l .] .,h RLI } \.r+ flz S \,1 I -?l?-tr$ I 81 6o CnHF, watu/*' 4.o 'T) f.k'"rr{*-*-a/; 5+r-s13-7d6o o ln D c- ll \r.rmn'rr"/ A7?7ZQ r(r) l['16 6 Cst'riv"-r,-q'# K{ +J B'{- tJslvl s.fr-f?3-1btro Nur* hao,r lLb*,'." il,r* W"^; n ^Or"^'a Jr t( s ( As dl{rnn \tt!t-,13/r-n ' " 5ql-3zo-bas -'i,, n e*pLH",*l !l(^' ^ 8",*K) {'t'i} l nr-;': ?/dfap-f,it.t",t.?') n{"1 - ----l'l ,V/ rtr'z"ffs1 J mp,lrc r(t/,nr^- ;h; g..JA, f'y'tat ala t7o (. ,[d,#fl.^ &cp o .} €lt 3fo G6 pt ct€ s j6 u s,3.sJ'l-trr r' t TL d# fiil-Vtr-t7s(, B,s-., t al+rn-e a LIf-777- 6 / E fu*# l /7rr1'a2trP ( I b{qzr 5f/- 3r?.- lfrc Ttf+*t A 6tcye149^t?.- t PETTTION TO THE DESCHUTES COUNW BOARD OF COUNTY COMMTSSTONERS (BOCC) PAGE _ OF _ PAGES PETITION TO THE DESCHUTES COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMTSSTONERS (BOCCI PAGE _ OF _ pAcES Petltion against marljuana production facility at 69189 Goodrich Road, Slsters, OR 97259 Name Signature Street Address Phone t ,'9*^ B7*Sqn IsJ4 fzl r -7 89'' ^tne'p", ( ND ( ( Qod-rm"n& I 7 7'/ Fs*{4.- J u ,Y7/ /*d 60aath f? {* ft 7277 I Gesl'rru,kD< fuwOD^n{\l Eb W"{1,oA a**A rl,o 4t't4 3qq3p ila4 F-eo ,| rAuvD )rrr,, il,.*-"t IILLrsl+*k . *s -7 30 "/L Ly Co\tl,,-woop IttL" ,a trtrp.te /LLro* lru gnelh f'/l -rrl -rud{ buu, Wq 5 161, ,o,'s48qt he 6id*7 tr EB,*l {*,ka^,/-*D ,Ot Q z 7a z l(-;taw 3 3/o &/o P+a ewkt 6?t-Jsa-glCI? Ot 6en/"Orz &,- d [, filarrti (&*tr&"# n 7.2loE zoszi 9*Jlra I?"1 fc\-l/o-6U1 qffiil*t 7?r*l Flz lizoy V Pa,,,i a{^ l?eff flgafu 4 / {f/f/o t7&t ,a'ml{ ,11*,rl ,?il 7 )/c !' l21b 3r) 4*ff-**,* -H (6 54-tqo-fr4 ,&^" t l,atQ\ &J* ttry{tio#41i il4J"t^l T(4-?q1-3/h /Z,tlLrt"-, hr^-l .ly977az /, lJ& C r7 d,6F< + &/'eK s"-/;ef/ ,/4 t r), :/ot / zarlF/nzfkht K z7A ?tD rf rz,'r / d+no 'ltu PETITION TO THE DESCHUTES COUNTY BOARD OF COUNW COMMTSSTONERS (BOCC) PAGE _ OF _ PAGES pETtTloN TO THE DESCHUTES COUNW BOARD OF COUNTY COMMTSSTONERS (BOCCI pAGE _ OF _ PAGES Petitlon agalnst marliuana productlon faclllty at 59188 Goodrlch Road, Sisters, OR 97759 Name Signature Street Address Phone \.\ N,,:.... *N.\\lsnn N',.,.* N\\*,,.' F(\n^ \onaS *n .kr.\k^ \r{ \ -sqq-: b=^l 7b7 I fr,,,rrn D lrtn* #r**,^,fl,, E#r/ 5il-stlf-rlgq Yl#.ul{lrt,riu4rts r} i. i\\ti,rur. i&{{{t'J'il At Aa 5lu il,r,, lnn ,f$ ilf,rtlr* illch#, t7 ,1 /;:ro tutso nsmie pn I ysa-,{ffiy, Bnffirafl' L. 7 PETITION TO THE DESCHUTES COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMTSSIONERS (BOCC) PAGE _ OF _ PAGES Petitlon against marijuana productlon faclllty at 69188 Goodrich Road, Slsters, OR 97759 Name Signature Street Address Phone *^ soLt ^Wt/ 5,((4 37f-tzsl' VL$Nt \,\Mh'ru- t/Jru1 kqoryrl \cea eend q.l)Dl EIIJ {dx:o8R' 4-6O OCL asz @+D 3 51*5 ran htL 'frro I \ ETITTON TO THE DESCHUTES COUNTY BOARD OF COUNW COMMISSTONERS (BOCC) PAGE _ OF _ PAGES PETTI|ON TO THE DESCHUTES COUNTY BOARD OF COUNW COMMTSSTONERS (BOCC) PAGE I OF 9rouo Petitlon agalnst marljuana ptoduclion facillty at 69188 Goodrlch Road, Sisterc, OR 97759 ,ltner: Norma and Richard Tewalt F il e # : 247 -L7 -OO02L6-LR I 247 -I7 -OOA217-AD Applicant / Agenu Norma and Richard Tewalt From: The Below Signed Appellants as Neighbors to the Subject Propefi Date: August 25,20L7 WHEREAS, you are our elected representatives; and WHEREAS, it is universally accepted the first duty and responsibility of elected representatives is to provide for the safety and security of their constituency; and WHEREAS, the BOCC has been granted legal authori$ by the State Leglslature to place reasonable regulations on the time, place, and manner of production of marijuana in Deschutes County, pursuant to ORS 4758.340, and these must be conslstent with the County Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Ordinances and applicable provisions of public health and safety laws; and WHEREAS, in the "Findings and Decision," it is stated, 'The Deschutes County Code does not allow the Planning Division to approve or deny this application based on. . .Previous code violations on the property, lmpact of mariJuana on neighboring pets and livestock, lncreased crime and threat to safety of neighbors, or Potential rgatirre effects on chlldren in the area."; and */HEREAS, the Oregon legislature recognized and, by excluding marijuana production from protectlon of DCC 9.12 and ORS 30.3905, Rlght to Farm, publicly acknowledged that marijuana production is not equivalent to normalfarming operatlons and requires special consideration and greater over-sight; and WHEREAS, based on results to date, it is now recognized and acknowledged by law enforcement agencies throughout the State that marijuana production has a history of frequently bringing increased crime and public safety issues, including threats of bodily harm, to a here-before safe nelghborhood; and WHEREAS, the Applicants' initial application included "Phase l" which they withdrew once they were put on notice that a see-through, dilapidated, piecemealed structure only 30 feet from the neighbo/s properry and wlthln a llne-of-slght to the neighbo/s residence was not going to be approved by the County, the Applicant withdrew "Phase 1," but indicated their preference for substandard quality of construction and an absence of concern for public heahh and safety; and WHEREAT the Applicant's above described behavior indicate the Applicant has a lack of respect and consideration for the neighbors and nelghborhood and the established codes; THEREFORE, for the reasons stated above and in our appeal, we the undersigned do respectfully request the BOCC to consider this appeal ln the scope of their highest duties and responsibilitles and give full consideration to 'previous code vlolatlons on the property, lmpact of marijuana on neighboring pets and llvestock, tncreased 'me and threat to safety of neighbors, and potentlal negative effects on children in the area" and deny Norma *rd Richard Tewalt's Application for a marijuana production facility to be aonstructed at 69188 Goodrich Road, ,ters, OR 97759. A marijuana production facility does not belong ln the Goodrich neighborhood, a well established family, normal-farming neighborhood. We plead with the BOCC to deny this application. rttN\ pEnTplt To fiE DESCHUTE OOUiTW IOARD OF CqJilW CoitMrsspilEm IBOACI PAAta OF- PACES prtlson qjnrt mrrlprnr productlon frclllty rt 60f88 Goodrlch Ror4 Slttrl, OR 9:1739 orrner: llormr rnd Rlchrrd Tcwrlt ADDEHDUM I I t0 t6 t7 Appllcrnt / {cnb Normr rnd Rhhrrd Tcwrlt tlltilz247.l7{00216-lR/a47.f7ffi21t.AD From: Thc Eclow Sfincd Appcflrnts es Ncfhbors to the subl.ct Ploplrty tlate: August25,2Ol7 WHERIAS, you trt our elected rtpre$nt.tlvcs; rnd WHEREAS, h ls unhcnrry acccfied the ll7lt duty rnd r:cponglullty of chctrd rap?.f.nutlvrl lr to provlds fur thc srfr'ty rnd trcurlty of th.lr conrtltrrncv; rnd WHERGAS, thr IOCG hrt bcrn jrntcd hfrl ruthorlty by th. Strt Lqkhturr to drc. rrronrtilr rqubtlonr on tfu tlmc, p[cc, rnd msnnrr of productlon of mrrtuana ln Dccrhgtor County, puftu.nt to ORS {751.:}10, lnd thcrc mwt be coffibtcnt wlth thr Gounry Comprrhcnrlvr Phn rnd Zonlng Ordlnrnco rrrd rppllcrbh prwlrlonr of pub$c holth rnd srfcty lrws; end WHEREAS, ln thc 'Findinjr rnd Dcci:ion,' lt b strtcd,'Tln Dcrdrutee Gounty Codr dorc not lsow th Phrnl.l8 DMrbn to .Fprov. or drny thir rppllcrtlon brrcd on, , ,Prwlosr codr vlolrtlonr on thr PrgF.rtY, lmprct of mlrlfurnr on ncldrborlnl prtr rnd llvartocl, lncrcarod crlmr rnd thrcrt to srfcty of ncl;hborr, or Potrntlrl n.Srtlw .fftctl on chlldrcn ln thc rrce."i rnd WHEREA5, thr Oru3on l4lrlrtun rcco;nlrcd rn4 by rxcludlnt morflurnr prcductlon from protecdon of DCC 9.12 rnd ORS 30,3905, tl3ht to Frrm, publlcly rcknoudedgcd thrt mrrl|rnne productlon lr not rqutwhnt to nonnrl frnnlU optntlons rnd rcqulrcr spcclrl consHrntlon rnd Srcrtcr ovrr+l5h$ rnd WHEREAS, brscd on rerulE to drte, lt ls now rccognlrcd ud mtnolhdted by law rnforemcnt qenchr throughout thr St t $16 m1[u.m produalon hr r hlstory of fteqwndy brlnghl lncruescd crlmo rnd publlc srhty lsurs, lndudlng tlrcru of bodlly hrrm, to I hrrtbrfon rrft nrl3hborhood; rnd nPh$. WHEREAIS, thc AppllcrntJ lnitld rppllcrtlon Indudd l' whlch th.y wlthdrcw oncr thry mr. put on notlc. thil I sec-tfircujh, dlbpldrtrd, phcrmrrled rtructuru only 30 fcct from thc ndlhbo/r propsrty end wlthln I llnr.of*lfltt to the nefhbor,r nrddcacr wls not goiil to br rpprovcd by t[c County, thc Appllcrnt wlthdrrs 'Plr6. l,' but lndlotad thak pnfcr.nca br subctrndrrd qurllty of conrtrustlon rnd rn rbecncc of concern for Fubllc holth rnd sfrty; rnd WHEREAIS, Sn Apflkrnfr rborn dercrlbcd brhevlor lndlcrtc the Apgllcant hrs r bck of ruprct md onsHcntlon for tho nrfihbon snd ncltttofiood end $a cstrbllrhad codcr; TI{EREFORE for thr lcasom strtcd ebour end ln our appeal, wr thc mdcrs[ncd do rerpectfully rcq/ert thc BOCC to {prwlouc conrldrr thls rppol ln thc rcopr of tftclr hlghcst duthl rnd rrrponslbllltlc rrd 3lvr fnil conrldcntlon to codc vlolrtlonr on drr pflrpclty, lmprc of mrr0utnr on neilhborlry prtr rnd llvrrtock, lncnrrd crlmr rnd tlr.rt ur relety of nrl3hbon, rnd pohntlrl n.jltlv. Gff.cta on chlldrcn ln thr rru' end drny llonnr rnd Rlchrrd Trwdfr App$crtlon ior r mrfluanr productlon hclllty to be corutructed rt 69188 Goodrlch Rord, Shtarr, OR 9?739. A meriluene productbn frcllltV docs not bclon3ln thc Gmdrldr ncl$borhood, r w:ll crtrbllrhcd ftmlU, normrl-frmlnr nrLhborhood. ft dmd wlth thgocc thlr :-aQ w.1+ lkkq .4t4 )c ,jt 1l\1e.e 1 aR, q7? 6 7 Sltnrlrnr sddnts Pt*ttnmu lftnil b.clto of - tOot qnrtlonr crll t{l{2t{eel PETlrloN TO THE DESCHUTES CouNrY BOARD OF COUNTYcoMMrssroNERS .3_orLpAGES (BOCC) PAGE Petltlon against marliuana production facility at o91gg Goodrich Road, slsters, oR 97259 Name Signature Sffeet Address Phone fc-rl (f e, €(r{ tfl /fi/r bYL{ {-runn n S f" (latLtrlt l7f/ |yt- Y{u- r }- rl PETlrloN TO THE DESCHUTES COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMtSstoNERS pAcE (BOCC) _ oF _ PAGES t q (BOCCI w PAGES -ETtT|Oil TO THE DESCHUTES COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS PAGE -fu-AF Slgndture Address Print name l>LtP rLt-.#V v6(e DetlE wt a &(e Nicole Mardell From: Miller, Dusty < [email protected] > Sent: Sunday, September 17,2017 LL:06 PM To: Nicole Mardell Subject: Public meeting regarding Tewalt application scheduled for 10 am Sept. 1.8 Attachments: Miller and Beer letter to BOCC 170917.pdf Dear Nicole Mardell, Please provide copies of the aftached letter to the Commissioners on the Deschutes County Board of Commissioners prior to the Public Meeting regarding the Tewalt application, which is scheduled for 10 am September 18,2017 . Sorry for the late filing of this letter, but my wife and I were out of town and were not aware of the continuance application by Robert King's legal team until late on Friday evening of last week. You may publish this letter on the Dial website if appropriate. My wife and I will be attending the meeting tomorrow and will also bring copies of of letter. Thank you for your consideration, A. Dusty Miller, PhD Rosalie A. Beer 1 From: A. Dusty Miller and Rosalie A. Beer, 17915 Edmundson Rd, Sisters, OR 97759-9768 Date: 9/L7/20L7 To: The Deschutes County Board of Commissloners Nicole Mardel, Assistant Planner Subject: Request to Deny Appellant Request for Continuance of Public Hearing regarding Tewalt Marijuana Production Application Deschutes County Board of Commissioners: We respectfully request that you vote to deny the appeal by Robert King's legal teaml to continue the Public Meetingt to discuss the King Appea13 of the Tewalt Marijuana Production Application from the scheduled date of September 18,20L7 to October 76,2At7. My wife Rose and I are permanent residents of the neighborhood affected by the Tewalt Marijuana Production proposal. We have met with Norma and Rick Tewalt and are impressed by the extensive planning they have done to minimize any possible impact of their project on the local community. Furthermore, we are inspired by their intent to provide a medically useful mar'rjuana product, cannabidiol (CBD), which has proven benefits in the treatment of several chronic diseases. Norma and Rick are long-term residents of the neighborhood, and are kind and friendly neighbors who appear only to have the best intentions. lf successful, this project could contribute to the economic vitality and tax revenues ofSisters, Deschutes County, and the State of Oregon. The appellants claim that Robeft King will not be able to participate in the Public Meeting on September 18, and imply that the earliest date he can participate is on October 15, and then only by telephonel. This is clearly a delaying tactic because there is no believable rationale for his not being able to participate by telephone on the currently scheduled date. His legal team states that his disabled wife "requires previously scheduled care the week of September 18 which will make him unavailable to participate in the hearing of his appealon the planned date". lt is impossible to believe that he would not be able to participate by phone on September 18, let alone not be able to participate by phone until October 15. The Tewalts' land use application for marijuana production has already been provisionally approved by the Deschutes County Planning Divisiona. While an appeal has been filed by Robert King, a non-resident living in San Juan Capistrano, California, this appeal has been soundly rebutted bythe Deschutes County Community Development Departments. Their conclusion is that "Staff finds no credible transportation l Appellant Request for Continuance - https://weblink.deschutes.org/cdd/DocView.aspx?id=583804&cr=1 t Notice of Public Hearing - https://weblink.deschutes.orglcdd/DocView.aspx?id=683053&cr=1 3 Application Materials - https://weblin k,deschutes.orglcdd/DocView.aspx?id=681526 4 F&D decisions - https://weblink.deschutes.org/cdd/DocView.aspx?id=680709 t Response to Appeal Materials - Ltr. from P. Russell - htt psr//webl i n k.desch utes.orglcdd/DocVi ew,a spx?id =6827 1.2&cr=L arguments ln the appellant's submitted nor is there any factual evldence demonstrating this application would adversely affect Goodrich Road." ln concluslon, appellants have not provided any reasonable argument suggesting that approval ofthe Tewah Mar'tjuana Productlon Appllcation should not be granted, or.that publlc hearlng(s)on this application should be continued. My wife and I hope that the Board of Commissioners wiltvote against the current appeal for continuation, and for approval ofthis excitlng and beneficial proJect. Sincerely, tffi'* # **4 '4r,r.{r1*. A. Dusty Mlller, PhD &r**, Rosalie A. Beer ID )q1- \tr' o)otooD- ko . Jacob Ripper From: Doug Hermanson <[email protected]> Sent: Monday, March L3,2077 5:09 PM to: Jacob Ripper Subject: letter Attachments: Pot Grow letter to county 3132017.pages; ATT0000l.htm Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Completed Jacob, I just checked and I sent you a letter that was a previous draft, Can you replace it with this one? There is one paragraph added toward the end. Thank you, Doug Hermanson . Tol Jacob Ripper, Deschutes County, AssociatoPlanner RE: File #247-16-000600-AD I am writing to discus the above Application for a recreational Pot Grow opcration for the the Rubio koperty, My wife and I own the property that bordersthe Rubio Property on the Westom side, We are cunently building a hcne on our property for our fimily to livc in. When we learned the Rubios inten&d to have a large pot grow opention on their troperty we were distressed. However, we realized itwas legal and figureditwastheirright, WebelievedtheCountywouldprotectourinterestswithyourgchildrenlivirgonourpropertybymakingsuretheRubiosfollowed the laws and codes, After spending much time and energy looking into this, we have leamd from others with pot grows near their homes that the ounty has had a long history of doing very little in the way of enforcing the codes and regulations on rndical pot growers. We have seeo grow operations that are not only ursightly, they appear to be in violation ofcounty codes and stde regulations. I have heard stories of excessive light pollution dl through the night. I have heard of excessi',e odors mainly dring hawest time when growers open doors to allow air through which defeats the purpose ofair scrubbers. I have heard of run off water coming onto neighbors properties fom thoso grows that they have no idea what is in this water. The neighbors to these grows shard with us that they have been fighting for years to get the county to clean up thb farm and make them play by the rules. They shared thatthey have receired almost no help from the couo! or the state. I have no way of knowirg if Mr, Rubio will be a grower that is a good neighbor or a bd one. I would like to go on tecord opposhg this application until the county canprovide assurarrces that ifMr, Rubio violates the codes and regulations thathe county will do sometring to eirforce their codes We plan on raising our young girls on this property and want to make $re it is safe and enjoyable. You should be especially cognizantof&e neighborhods surroundiqg these applications. There are 27 orooertiq wlthin a lhousand feet ofthls orooosed ggryperation That does not soutd like EFU land! Normally, you might expect 6 neighbors wlhin one thousand feet. I urge the commissioners to consider all of the evi&nce before ruling on this Please add this letter to the file, opposing this ryplication Respecttully, Doug Hcrmanson and Erin Walling 2304s Alfalfa Mkt Rd Bend, OR 97701 I . Jacob Ripper From: Ed Kruskamp Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Completed Dear County Comm issioners, We are writing to urge Deschutes County to reject the recreational marijuana production permit submitted by Rubio Real Estate Investments for tax lot #1713334000201 address 23105 Alfalfa Market Rd in Bend. After seeing the recent media stories about the appeal underway regarding the Alfalfa Market Rd property we felt compelled to reach out to the people in that Alfalfa neighborhood. We began meeting with Lance and Monlka Piatt as well as their other neighbors in recent days provlding them with real world examples of how poorly designed and non compliant marijuana production operations can negatively affect rural livability. It is our understanding that the Piatt's and their neighbors have just recently held a hearing with the county commissioners regarding the proposed recreational mariJuana permit mentioned above. We live in rural Deschutes county, specifically Tumalo, and currently have a neighbor's medical marijuana production operation covering multiple tax lots on Couch Market road, These four tax lots abut with five other neighbor's lots on Couch Market and Tweed Road. This current production, although medical only at this time, has created direct negative impacts upon livability of this entire rural Tumalo neighborhood. Our Tumalo neighborhood has submitted a number of formal complaints to the county regarding concerns ranging from light pollution, threats, noise pollution, ground water use and contamination as well as a litany of building code violations. We have even had members of the planning commission as well as county code enforcement out at our property a number of times over the last two years to see first hand how our neighbor's operatlon impacts the rural landscape and livability. I should add that we recently met with Nick Lelack and his managers to discuss issues associated with code compliance and enforcement, During those two recent meetings we expressed frustration that while code and regulations are in place they are not always enforced. As we have seen, the codes, although intended to ensure a safe and livable place for all are too vague, create loopholes for producers (i.e, ocean shipping container abuse) with little regard for impact to livability. This needs to change if this county is going to remain a livable place for all. We know that while there are penalties for non-compliance too often they are not executed and the result is a warning rather than a fine. The problems associated with poor roll out ahd enforcement of county regulations (opt- - in and opt-out) for rnariJuana production has become nightmare for many rural property owners in Deschutes county like ourselves. We are hoping that sharing our experience with Lance, Monika and her neighbors will spotlight the lmportance of effectlve oversight and leadership from the county commissioners as well as enforcement agencies. Please understand we are not against legalization, In fact, we voted for legalization thinking state and local governments would put in place complete and enforceable regulations that protect all citizens and the quality of life in Oregon. In my opinion Deschutes County needs to get out in front of this lssue and should be very careful to ensure that the majority of property owners are not paying a price for the minority of the property owners, Additional tax revenue associated with marijuana is not a valid reason to destroy the livability of this county. After all, most rural residents live rural because they value the beauty, safety, solitude, quite and generally hlgh livability of their property. We plead with the commissloners to reject the permit for this operation and future requests for recreational production until more due diligence can be conducted regarding the planning and enforcement of this industry in Deschutes county. Regards, - Ed Kruskamp s4l 2 Jacob Ripper From: Dan C Hello Jacob and thank you for your time, I am writing in support of the proposed cannabis facility located at 23105 ALFALFA MARKET RD. The guidelines for thls OLCC application process/licensure have been worked out over a very long period of time with input from numerous stake holders including the public. There was no shortage of concern or guldance that went lnto every aspect of the licensure development process, and this is evident to anyone that attended the OLCC meetings, listened to the OLCC staff during their listening tours, or the on line audio of these meetings. I've reviewed many of the public records/statements noted in the subject flle and found them to be lrrelevant to the county or state application approval process. Rather, most of them are personal concerns based in unfounded fears, lack of understanding of how the process works, and the idea of a federally illegal substance that has a massive stigma attached to it being legal. The documents provided to you by opponents are nothing more than propaganda and irrelevant. ln a quick search, lfound: "Focus on the Family, a conservative Christian group, has created a gulde on "The Allure of Legalffi'that its supporters - and marijuana opponents - can use to advocate against passage of the initiatives.' This "piece" is nothing other than age old rhetoric with absolutely no credible claims or citations. Recent empirical evidence has shown Just the opposite to all of these claims including decreases in DUll rates ( http://www.thecannabist.co12016112l20lm ariiua na-drivine-stats-traffic-fa-talities-med_ic.al-r.nariiuana- lqwsl6977Ol), opiod deaths (down 25%in legalstates htto://drusabuse.com/leealizine-mariiuana-decreases- fatal-opiate-overdoses/ ), crime rates (http://dailvcaller.com/2016/02/27ldcs-leealized-weed-is-one-vear-old- and-crime-has-cratered/ ) , and cartel involvement (https://www.washinetonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2015/03/03/leeal-mariiuana-is-finallv-doine-what-the- drug-war-couldnt/?utm term=,5c7edebb9d77 ). ln fact, the new cartel issue is that they are operating in legal states to transportto non legalstates, so it is easily argued that the illegality of these prohibitionist states are continuing to create a market for them to prosper (which is and has been a cornerstone to ending cannabis prohibition). Lastly, home owners are concerned about property values. lt is no coincidence that the current states with legal recreational access to cannabis including Oregon (#1), Washington, and Colorado are in the top 5 fastest appreciating states ( https://www.fhfa.eovlAboutUs/Reports/Paees/US-House-Price-lndex-Reoort-4Q- 20t6,asox ) with regards to home values. They are not seelng decreases ln value, as expressed by some of the community commenters. Research again has shown that lega! operations have created gentrification in areas that were previously less than desirable in Colorado and California in particular, and is likely due to legal access and the significant security measures taken by the property owners, and required by the state. A fairly recent article has in fact shown that dispensaries (which this of course is not, but has very similar lf not more strlngent security measures) "are as safe as banks." http:#www.thelinemedia.com/features/leeal mariiuana jFPaq! 0218l.5.aspx While I appreciate the county's effort to make sure the citizens are heard, this property meets the zoning 1 criteria as proposed, and should be allowed per state and county law. Sincerely, Dan Cochtane 2 Schwabe WILLIAM$ON & WYATTo March 8,2017 THoMAS M. TRIPLETT Admitted in Oregon T:503-796-2901 Vr,q. n-rvrA,rl ([email protected]) ttriplett@sch wa be.com VLq. Frnsr Cla,ss Matl Deschutes County Commissioners c/o Jacob Ripper, Associate Planrner Deschutes County P. O. Box 6005 Bend, Oregon 977 08-6005 RE Appeal of Deschutes County Administrative Determination Approving Recreational Marijuana Production Facility 247-16-000600-AD Rubio Real Estate Investments, LLC, Owner By Douglas R. White, Oregon Planning Solutions, Applicant/Agent 23105 Alfalfa Market Road, Deschutes County Appellants - Lance and Monika Piatt Dear County Commissioners : I write in support of the Piatt appeal. Certainly the normal issues of noise, smell, appropriateness to the arca, and safety are key and common issues with which you deal frequently. This appeal brings another, important issue to the fore. I arh sure each of you is aware that growth, manufacture and distribution of marijuana violates federal law. It is also certain that federal law trumps state law on this subject. The Oregon Supreme Court in Scevers v. Emerald Steel Fab,348 OR. 159 (1940) was faced with the question of whether a disabled user of medical marijuana could be disciplined by his employer for usage of the prescribed dosage. The employer had a no drug policy applicable to its employees. The Oregon Supreme Court adopted the defendant's argument as follows: . Marijuana, including medical marijuana, is a proscribed substance under the Federal Controlled Substances Act. a Use, sale, or distribution of marijuana violates federal law. a Under the supremacy clause to the United States Constitution, the Oregon medical marijuana statute was unconstitutional. o In consequence, the employee had no justiciable rights under the ADA' This decision is not an outlier. Rather it is the unanimous opinion of courts which have dealt with the subject. See Coats v, Dish NeWork from the Colorado Supreme Court; and James v' 1 1 t PD>(\o88044\033786\TMTV0233 84. Deschutes County Commissioners March 8,20L7 Page2 City of California, among others. You should also recognize that the federal government recently refused to delist marijuana from the Controlled Substance list because of its grave and continuing health concerns" Bottom line is that the land use applicant asks the County Commissioners to bless an activity which is unconstitutional and, which under federal law, is a crime. Nor may the Commissioners take solace under the Cole memoranda for two reasons. First, it is highly probably that Attorney General Sessions will withdraw the memoranda. But even more significant is the fact that civil liability can exist for the applicant, and potentially the Commissioners under the Federal RICO statute. Further, the County may be exposed under Section 1983 of the 1867 Civil Rights Act for damages sustained by the neighbors. I strongly recommend that the County deny the land use applicant. At minimum, it should defer action pending clarification by the Attorney General. Very truly yours, /znu**rZ Thomas M. Triplett TMT:bak cc: DavidDoyle, Esq. (david.doyle@deschutes'org) schwabe.com PDX\088044\033786\TMTU0233 I 84. I Jacob r rltll Concerned Oregon Citizen < concernedoregoncitizen@ pfotonmail.com > Sent: Wednesday, March Ot,20t7 7:43 PM To: Jacob Ripper Subject: Public Hearing - Iile #247-t6-000600-AD Dear Mr. Ripper: It has come to my attention that there is going to be a public hearing on Monday, March 6 at 10 am. As I work, I am unable to attend the meeting in person but I did want to send along my concerns about the proposed marijuana production facility at23l05 Alfalfa Market Road in Bend. I have several concerns regarding the use of this property as a marijuana production facility. I do not feel that EFU property should be used for marijuana production for many reasons. Since marijuana is a crop that can be grown indoors (and is required to be grown indoors per 18.116.330), production and cultivation belongs in an industrial district. EFU farming should be for crops or livestock that can be farmed outside. Even though surrounding properties vary from EFU to MUA-10, residents of the area are still part of a neighborhood where families with children and grandchildren live. Some of these families came to the area because they wished to get away from the vibe of being in town and wished to raise their families in a more wholesome environment where they were not subject to vacation rentals, parties, noise, smell from neighbors smoking marijuana outside, and other in-town issues. Marijuana production facilities do not belong in neighborhoods, even rural righborhoods. to marijuana production ^ rrov€ experienced first-hand being next a facility, which is why I am taking this opportunity to speak out against this proposal" Despite air-filtration systems, the smell of marijuana is still evident in the air around a production facility. It is very disconcerting to feel safe in your country environment where you know your neighbors and then have strangers (production employees) basically in your back yard. Which brings me to my next issue. Who is going to be the operator of this facility? Who will be licensed via the OLCC? What sort of background check is done on the ownerloperator of the property? In all sincerity, how do we know that this is not a "legal" cartel operation that filters money through various third parties in order to cover their tracks? (The concem over which is what leads me to submit my concerns anonymously.) If we can't t'follow the money" because it is a cash operation, how do we know how the deal is financed and how do we know where the money goes? Are background checks required of all employees? How do we know they have not been involved in the illegal drug trade? How do we know the product (or a portion thereof) is not intended for illegal trade? Was this property so appealing to the owner because of its location to highways 20, 97, andthe airport? What do we know about the people involved? I am not opposed to legalized marijuana or its personal use. What I am strictly opposed to is growing and production in neighborhoods, Just because this property is out of city bounds does not mean it doesn't have an environmental impact on the good citizens of this county. It is my understanding that per 18.116,330.8-20 that in the EFU zone, a new dwelling used in codunction with rnarijuana crop is prohibited. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I understand that to mean that there will be no .use on the property, just a "warehouse" or three buildings dedicated to growing marijuana - is that correct? So we now will have a schedule 1 federally illegal drug being grown in the neighborhood with no one living on- site as a caretaker or guardian of the property? I understand that lights and video surveillance are allowed, but I those are not appropriate deterrents to match the level of the growing facility. The proposed marijuana farm represents an "attractive nuisance" in the community and knowing that it is not protected (let's face it, cameras tCHf help the authorities catch a criminal after the fact but do nothing to protect the neighbors) all but invites rninals to the area. I believe that this is the first time an appeal has been submitted for a growing operation. I might suggest that no one has spoken up before not beoause they are ambivalent about the proposal but because they fear any potential retribution from an applicant or property owner. Please put yourself in our shoes. Were a marijuana production facility to be proposed next to your home, would you be happy about it? Would you welcome itt Would the comings and goings of strangers and seasonal workers be of concern to you? Perhaps you may be okay with it, but I venture to guess that most people wouldn't. Yes, this is also a NIMBY issue, which is why marijuana production belongs in industrial areas. In researching EFU issues, I referred to this page: http://www.landuseoregon.com/references- resources/exclusive-farm-use/ A couple of excerpts stood out to me: ,,preservation of i maximum amount of agricultural land, in large blocks, is necessary to maintain the agricultural economy of the state and for the assurance of adequate, healthful and nutritious food" / ioutd imagine this to be the initial purpose behind EFU. "No state agency, city, county, or political subdivision may enact local laws or ordinances, restrictions or regulations-tnat wouti restrici or regulate farm structures or accepted farming practices because of noise, duit, odor, or other materials carried in the air, arising from farm operations in farm use zones, that do not extend into an adopted urban growth boundary, unless the practice affects the health, safety and .relfare of the citizens of the state. (ORS 215.253)' I strongly argue that allowing a mariiuana -cduction facitity in a neighborhood affects the safety and welfare of the restdenfs thereof' Other concerns about the proposed use of this property are related to waste. It is stated that marijuana waste shall be stored in a secured waste receptacle in the possession and under control of the OLCC licensee or OHA person Responsible for the Grow Site. More information is needed on this. What is the receptacle? What is done with the waste long-term? Certainly the PRMG doesn't just collect waste containers and store them long- term on the property. What kind of container is it? If the property is not inhabited by the licensee or PRMG, then the *urt. is not in their possession nor is it under their control. What about grey water waste? Where will that go? Will there be a septic system? What is the environmental impact of marijuana waste water on a leach freld-and surrounding enviionment? Will there be indoor plumbing to include toilets on-site, or will there be porta-potties? Another concern is the section about fire protection for cannabinoid extracts. Processing of cannabinoid extracts shall only be permitted on properties located within the boundaries of or under contract with a fire protection districi. Does this property fit into that category? What kinds of protections will be in place for the prevention of fire? There have been multiple news stories about people processing CBD oil and causing an ixplosion in their facility. That potential scenario puts not just that property in danger, but the thousands of u.r., ,,.rrrounding it. Juniper trees abound in the neighborhood and the chances of a fire spreading quickly and causing great devastation are high. Does the property owner carry enough insurance to absorb the threat of a lawsuit in case of such an instance? 'm sure I will have many further questions and I'm sorry I will miss the meeting. Within the neighborhood *rrere have been many diicussions about this issue and many of us share the same concerrls and vehemently I believe there is going to be a petition against this that will .,poso this proposed marijuana production facility. be presented at the meeting. 2 I appreciate your consideration in reading my concerns. I am not alone. "Not in my back yard" is a valid concern and just as deserving of attention and consideration as the other concerns I addressed. I believe that 'qis being a new issue for the state of Oregon there are growing pains. Having an appeal brings to light the ncerns of citizens of the rural areas of the county. It is my recommendation and request that the county planning commission take a hard look at the issue of having marijuana growing facilities in rural neighborhoods; just because there are fewer people there does not mean that we should have to be subjected to having these facilities in our back yard. I urge you to deny the owner's request for a marijuana production facility (in fact, I beg you); and fuChermore, I urge the county planning commission to put a hold on further applications for such use. Marijuana production facilities do not belong in EFU zones. As marijuana can be grown indoors (and is mandated by 18.116.330), it belongs in industrial zoning warehouses. Thank you for your time and consideration. Sincerely, Concerned Oregon Citizen Sent with hqlonlvlAil Secure Email, 3 RECEI BY: rEts 2? \afl DELIVERED BYs February 23,2017 Jacob Ripper Associate Planner Community D evelopment Department Deschutes County Planning Division 117 NW Lafayette Avenue Bend, Oregon 97708-6005 RE: File No, 247-16-000600-AD Dear Jacob, The attached PULSE magazine was published and distributed by the Bend Bulletin in November of 2016. There is an article in this magaeine titled "Unintended Consequences", pages 4 through 9 and 34 through 39, that reports the facts about the legalization of Marijuana. Please review this article and add it to the appeal file no. 247-t7-000036-4'. Thank you, L Enclosure: PULSE Magazine CC: Lance and Monika Piatt, Deschutes County Commissioners, Tammy Baney, Tony DeBone, Phil Hendetson America's great social experiment' of legalize led to rising pot-related emergency room visi BYMARKIANHAWRYLUK "l chose drugs over my kic She started smol :i na was legal. Pot browniet caramel corn li and li more Colorado officials were surprised by the interest in edibles, which they thought would be a small segment of the market GREG'CROSS but accounted for 45 percent of sales in the first year after legalization. Edibles pose a unique challenge because no other drug is leave it alone, the boy ate the entire thing. although it is unclear how much marijuana infused into palatable and appetizing form The cool years p ri or to I egal izati on in 2012, mar'1j uana Wang and his colleagues also looked at sales of marijuana that looks like common ingestion accounted for 4.3 out every 1,000 calls to the poison control center in Colo- candies. Marijuana gummies must now, be ED visits at the children's hospital. ln the two rado, where the annual number of calls for sold in cubes or other generic forms, rather years after legalization, the rate increased to l SUSMITTED PHOTO ntestoabaut 1 Sally Schindel, of Prescoft, Arizona, is pictured with her son, Andy Zorn, every 20 people i: who took his own life, saying marijuana had ruined his brain. i: are moderately i least five different mental hospitals, and two court-ordered I in at mental health treatments. ^/users,andthe was for alleged marijuana use and entered a tginstoincrease ' ln 2013, he arrested {: diversion program that included regular drug testing. ln that brief i f window of sobriety, he told his mother quitting marijuana was much amaticallywith ! 1 harder than he ever thought possible. She would later read in his I weeklyuse." I medical records that he had been diag- r1 nosed with severe cannabis use disor- Dr. Christine Miller, 1 - SUEMITTED PHOTO I pharmacologist t der, a psychiatric term for those addict- , nore ;. specializing Lori Robinson attended her son Shane Robinson's wedding in 2009, two ed to marijuana and unable to stop. $ in neuroscience months before he had his first psychotic break after smoking mgrtjuana. The following year, his father found ,' ' BABY MAY HARi/IYOUR his body in the midst of a heavy, pour- ff ir you use*,,,,*ll^''Jl;,ffi ffiJ.::.iiij* J.S. because of federal emergency room at 5t, Charles Bend, said a significant number of ing Arizona rain. patients presenting problems "My soul is already dead," Zorn wrote. search has been done with mental health also use marijuana, rirr' ! r'tr"'. I I !, r*r' lu note. "Marijuana killed my ,: :;; of marijuana. and that makes it difficult to determine whether their psychosis is in his final . pr;i:iilrr Ocnter'lt0tlirr:'ils:(: , "';l;rl;i,*]'ij ,,,, rs. r:j,: 'i' risk for schizophrenia being caused by marijuana or some underlying mental illness. soul + ruined my brain." "'_1i:i:''il}_' {a r" "r ""it"'r Ith, we're up to about "lt feels lil 1 The CDC's Youth Risk Behavior Surveil- first, Oregon fourth, Washington fifth. marijuana-prevention campaign targetir lance System study released in June as well "Colorado, people have labeled as a social teens in the Portland metro area and Jos as a recent study from the Substance Abuse experiment, they're basically the petri dish phine and Jackson counties in Southel Latallna lsland. He had stayed up late, load- the source countnr for heroi n. ed the best photos from their day onto his Facebook page so his wife could see them Veneatela ond t u, t Dld are in the morning. She logged on at 3 a.m. just source co u ntries fo r cocai n e, as he was finishing and they had a brief chat before she left. Mexico isthe source countryfa After learning of the accident, Barry logged onto to his Facebook account to see metha m pheta m i n es. You a re what his last words to his wife had been. the source statefor moriiuana; Have a good trip. Drive safe. The loss of his wife hit even harder when DEA agent Tim Scot .l0, this year, Sean, was diagnosed with - cancer and underwent chemotherapy treat- ments without her at his bedside. Reducing crime "He would be much better off with his mother there," Barry said. Pro-marijuana advocates have argue The now single father said he never had a that legalization would help to reduce th strong opinion about marijuana legalization, crime and violence associated with illegt and the accident hasn't changed his stance. drugs. That hasn't been the case in Colt For him it's more an issue of people using it rado, where legal pot sales have provide PHOTO- responsibly and understanding the risks. additional cover for a thriving undergroun averton,was killed July 4,2015, by a driver underthe influence of mariiuana. "Marijuana makes you mellow, and that's marijuana trade. ln April, DEA agents tol great as far as someone's attitude goes," the Colorado Springs City Council of mor Barry said. "Marijuana impairs your ability than 186 large-scale cannabis growing ope said Dr. Yolanda Evans, assistant professor of the commercialization of medical marijua- to drive in a similar way as alcohol. lf people ations in the city, mostly destined for out-o adolescent medicine at Seattle Children's Hos- na in 2009, from 4.5 percent in the first six dont understand that, that's the problem," state sales. ,,1 pital.'They'll say, 'marijuana is natural, it's an months of I 994, to l0 percent in the last six States have grappled with how to deal "You have to understand what Colorad herb."lt's not going to do anything to me."ltt months of 201.l. with marijuana-impaired drivers, including is," DEA agent Tim Scott told the City Cour legal, so that means it must be OK."' Researchers from the National Highway creating legal limits that specify the amount cil, according to the Colorado Springs C: Surveys'show many teens consider mar- Transportation Safety Administration took of THC drivers can have in their system zette. 'Afghanistan is the source country fc heroin. Venezuela and Colombia are sourc Uuana to be less harmful than alcohol and voluntary but anonymous oral ariiJ blood based on a blood test, much like the blood al- less addicting than nicotine or other drugs. drugs tests of drivers in Washington state cohol count used for drunk drivers. But there countries for cocaine. Mexico is the sourc "The general mindset of society is that and found the THC-positive rate had in- is no science showing that specific levels of country for methamphetamines. You are th it's not addicting," lnaba said. "Even when creased from 7.8 percent before legalization marijuana are a reliable indicator of impair' source state for marijuana we get people coming in for marijuana ad' to 1 8.9 percent one year after. The rate of fa- ment. Some drivers do just fine with a large Marijuana arrests in Colorado droppe diction in a residential program, they're still tal crashes with marUuana-impaired drivers amount of THC in their system, while others by 46 percent from 2012 1o2014, althoug snickered and laughed at. People say, "'Why in Washington doubled after the state legal' become intoxicated even at low levels. most of the decrease was in anests for por don't you go out and get a real addiction, ized recreational use, from B percent in 2013 "There is understandably a strong desire session, Marijuana sales arrests declined 2 like heroin?"' to 17 percent in2A]d.. by both lawmakers and the public to cre- percent, while arrests for marijuana produr As the perception of risk goes down, so One of those crashes killed Jennifer Barry, ate legal limits for marijuana impairment in tion did not change appreciably, accordin do people's risk-mitigation strategies. A re- An avid photographer, the 43-year-old Bea- the same manner as we do with alcohol," to the Colorado Department of Safety. cent survey of college students at two major verton woman left her home at 4 a.rn. on Marshall Doney, president and CEO of AAA, ln Oregon, marijuana production has not universities in Washington state and Wiscon- July 4, 2015 to photograph horses at Emer- recently said. "ln the case of marijuana, this moved into residential areas, with hash o sin found that ofthe 20 percent of students ald Downs in Auburn, Washington. She nev- approach is flawed and not supported by extraction operations becoming the net who admitted to using marijuana, 44 per- er made it. scientific research. ltb simply not possible meth labs. ln the past year, explosions c cent of males and 9 percent of females said At 5:39 a,m., near milepost 100 on north' today to determine whether a driver is im- butane used to extract hash oil have rocke, they drove after using. bound lnterstate 5, a white Chrysler 500 paired based solely on the amount of drug houses in Medford and Springfield, and stat hit Barry's Volksv,ragen Jetta from behind at in their body." police shut down an extraction operation i Driving high more than 120 miles per hour. The driver, Doney said states should use a positive Bend in April. ln Washington state, 17 TH{ a4 L*9 |-t'trw Ln- \'1 -oDo l45-AD -to {a,ca A {4. o A,t 2{77{ t7 a k /?o ^L/,A { Deschutes County CDD A/-A f P*fuf # {26 €{ Ca*& /)n^ /d'TA s-4*n"€lvd\ \ a T fr--r,ft/"* n C ail re.rN V / /-L* *4*** I ny kcX. /-*r(Kd \ vA 4,J-^- + f &f 4ilL /Y\ 2 fr,frr-z uqfu'* c.'fuL'k fur { &td ab- t ,,J FJ*"r ) /^* /? / ffip;irnyn, .Fc.f,qTI_*.I.JSf tSttg;41 trt'f c-"a*= -{ V.coAtrffi* r':L C P!- Faot, g o at t r ? ltJ (tu dL"fuMa< F* "! G^ ? TZoD-(ooi- lf li,tlhif il'l'ili liJ,,,irf =?T*E-Gf,r.].Ei!= ipptt,ilfi,r,,l,,}Jt,irif r qi}tif , vt'Wvoat'8\'LhZ av,4lTrQ@'-Bl-LhL Jo9\^\N ri' _ - .:.,,: "' r , ,.i,.i.f. "! rl ,l: FF\ N .\ EEI 4 tt ..1:: Nal a LNT t(A '/\E OF E.{€ H lf:i*'#' ES i '< /:r 5 .l Matt Martin From: Brooke Colburn < [email protected] Sent: > Tuesday, February 2Z, lo: ZO1g9:21 AM- Nicole Mardell Subject: Marijuana production facirities in rurar east Bend and Arfarfa Good morning Ms. Mardell, I am writing to express my concern over_existinq *q proposed marijuana production facilities in rural east Itrifr1tfi:f,,frT:,%T:ffi'*j;T,iil",l?::T3ififiT*if,l':;l*5i,",i1,,"", i; d;;;;ini,vr,.,", The growers that are already here have caused awful greenhouses air quarity conditions. The is disgusting' and for the stench coming from the neichbo; ;;;;ili;r" or downwino oiir,.r" operations, rhis probrem is that;;;,";;" l]il-,ffijfil,flgrHTdfli;rl3T*{g'J#,T,tiT:fing supposed to have odor Another major concem is the amount of watgr these growers are usftrg. I am concemed that the tremendous io"ine to ;ffin:,T.:'1LT:::J?ff;iiltr#:::1i1""il"T:1, ue[r"t.ii.liuir.., thar rhe ,..,ioiu, In addition to air quality and groundwater-depletion, these grow sites are arso neighboring property vatues.lhat should having catastrophic impacts t;* ilt#,j. to anyone ,onriJ.ring on ?{; a'owing mo* bf th"r" on"iu"i.;;;. nexf to *rem, because fff"1lffiIi!f;:?:ff;#;:tfr::"t'rvo rhey creare so many I am concerned when I hear about new mar[iuana production for 24350 facilities being considered, Dodds Road' because trre existinc grow sites such as the proposal quality' are J.eady.;"il;"#;y use exorbitant quantities of warer fr;; ;q;-if";# probrems. They ruin the air Families the ar fu,"i", u""a;;#r" like mine ohoose to tive in the country ur""or" w"rt"y our properry varues. G;"il;#sphe.f and being outdoors, tr" *i'r *mmunitv. pi"u," o'o no, L:11ffff,f,8:,:ii:S:Hl#: arrow ;i;;;; marijuana production Sincerely, Brooke Colburn 25221 Deer Lane Bend, OregongTT0l I PETITION FROM THE COUGAR TRAIL NEIGITBORHOOD We are opposed to the proposed land use action, File Number,247-18-000128-AD, by Waveseer of Oregon, LLC, a corporation based in Chicago, on the old Robinson Ranch now owned by Peter Winsor for a Marijuana Production Facility. ,r,First, there is no benefit locally from having such a facility near our properties. o Second, Winsor leased this property to others in 2017, creatinga nuisance for the Cougar Trail Neighborhood with loose cattle causing damage to our properties and time spent herding them elsewhere. o Third, we have no interest in having any actual or potential criminal activity near Cougar Trail. Marijuana cultivation is illegal under federal law. Deschutes County does not have the mpnpower to ensure the Oregon regulations are being followed even though marijuana is legal here. Our neighbors on Dodds Road and in Alfalfa do not approve such a facility near them. 2, L6,tg J, li* fo lltnsb '- /RanaiJ A ' \tnoJz b lsto Qongar'fra*{' -2?-/ g d''' 5c-* 6s'/ae,r'lYt a2d*Luufu * /;e i, L. /"'-o t lqo+o SkYr"r+$p^- N*u* il*'Pn t-- f,^rJb"L z/l-L lu /JqDA fil' [uM.&8, q3 L -sffi a:F,L ' llo' 6 r+7t c4 u/,4-F - b|a''gl( 2',f o> r >z i4\ ll/,t)<- atl fu'+ fu{{-o:&5 A t 9. DaDD t t?o. N\,,,O:lVcoil 9n70l L' E_/-./ ..J PETITION FROM THE COUGAR TRAIL NEIGHBORHOOD We are opposed to the proposed land use action, File Nurnber,247'18-000128-AD' by Waveseer of Oregon, LLC, a corporation based in Chicago, on the ol'd Robinson Ranch now o$med by Peter Winsor for a Marijuana Production Facility- r First, there is no benefit locally from having such a facility near our properties. ,f, Second, Winsor leased this property to others in 2017, creating a nuisance for the Cougar Trail Neighborhood with loose cattle causing darnage to our properties ancl tirne spent herding them elsewh'ere' t Third, we have no interest in having any 4stu.t or potential criminal actirrid near Cougar Trail. Marijuana cultivation is illegal under federal law. Deschutes County does not have the manpower to ensure the Oregon rcgulations are being followed even though marijuana is legal here. Oui neighbors on Dodds Road and in Alfalfa do not appfove such a.facility near them. fud'ffv'Yg,{, ,*f,h$*t$'4ff 7 zffitu.*w Rd,, 4ffi s'#F's.s - fo 5 5 }.ft10,'*16, b 4l' 3'.e 23%,bD,- ,M,.@ 1*J*'tttl& M.u ffiq:"#drf hftt1, fuldD{b'r$inq Nicole Mardell -om: Linda Wallace < [email protected] Sent: Monday, February 26,2018 8:32 PM to: Nicole Mardell Subject: Public Comment - Notice of Application 247-L8-000128-AD February 26,2018 Deschutes County Community Development PO Box 6005 Bend, OR 97708-6005 Attn: Nicole Mardell Re: Notice of Applica tion 247 -18-000128-AD To Whom It May Concern: I am opposed to the Waveseer of Oregon, LLG's application for "approval of an administrative determination to establish a Marijuana Production Facility with up to 10,000 square feet of total mature canopy area." Waveseer LLC is actually an out-of-state business whose address is 1248 West Altgeld St, Chicago,Illinois, 6A61,4. The property at24350 Dodds Roadn Bend OR 9770f is owned by Peter lAripssl', and the land itself is heavily encumbered by a Trust Deed in the Deschutes County Official ,cords, No. 2016-047602.I live nearby at61735 Cougar Trail, Bend 97701. Last summer Peter Winsor leased his land to atenant and what followed what a succession of problems related to the mishandling of cattle. Neighbors on Cougar Trail had siguificant damage to livestock and property due to the tenant's negligence. At the time Mr. Winsor supported neighborhood efforts to get a related COID lease terminated so the tenant would before forced out of the neighborhood. We are disappointed Mr. Winsor is now seeking to lease his property for marijuana production when he has already shown questionable judgment when selecting tenants. t Furthermore the State of Oregon and Deschutes County do not have adequate law enforcement of marijuana, and there needs to be a moratorium on new applications until the problem is addressed. According to a recent article in The Bend Bulletin on2l20/2018, "Deschutes County's sheriffand district attorney blasted efforts to regulate legalized marijuana, saying Tuesday the state is allowing black market operations to proliferate." We don't want criminal activity in our neighborhood and lower property values that are the result of placing these grows in what has been traditional exclusive farm use. It was mistake for Deschutes County to mandate indoor grows in exclusive farm use zones - it concentrates the smell and creates a host of other problems. A better solution is to create an industrial grow zone where marijuana can be grown indoors inside of industrial buildings where no one will care about the smell or questionable visitors, Forcing these grows on residential communities who don't want it is completely destructive to our neighborhoods and way of life. --d finally, until federal law changes marijuana production is illegal. It could be said these are growing pains to .ecriminalizationbut we are a long way from marijuana being viewed as a crop like hops or grapes. Until federal law changes and all states can have their own rnarijuana production, we don't want this in our neighborhood and possibly supporting criminal enterprises by out of state interlopers. I Nicole Mardell I *rln: Ken Sandine Yes, Nicole. Good catch. I had to go back and look at what I typed' Thanks, Ken From: Nicole Mardell Subject: R E : Pro posed La nd Use Ap p I ica tion #247 -t8-0001 25-AD Good afternoon Ken, To ensure I am adding your comments to, the correct record, are you referring to file 247-I8-OOO128-AD? Mar'tjuana production proposed at 24360 Dodds Road? Best, Nicole Nicole Mardell, Associate Planner Community Development Department PO Box 6005 | 117 NW Lafayette Avenue Bend, Oregon 97708-5005 Tef: (541) 377-37s7 www.deschutes.org/cd Discldimer: Please note that the informotion in this emoil is an informal stotement made in occordance with DCC 22,20.005 and shall not be deemed to constitute final County oction effecting a change in the stotus of a person's property or conferring any rights, including any reliance rights, on any person. From: Ken Sandine [mailto:[email protected] Sent: Thursday, February 22,2Ot8 3:00 PM To: Nicole Mardell From: Kenton Sandine 23860 Dodds Rd. Bend, OR 97701 February 2018 xE: Proposed Land Use Application f247-18-000125-AD I Nicole Mardell Deschutes County Planning Dear Nicole: Thank you for taking the time to inform me about the "Proposed Land Use Application" that affects our neighborhood. My major concern is the appearance of intent to use well water to irrigate the marijuana during the period of time when COID water is unavailable, The plans submitted in the application show no tanks, cisterns, or ponds capable of storing water in the quantity that COID supplies during its irrigation season. lf water is to be trucked to the marijuana farm for continuous production, where will it be stored? Residents along Dodds Road get their drinking water from wells. Ours is a very costly 835 feet deep I The well- drilling company had to return after the initial depth of 815 feet quit supplying water. That would suggest to me that the aquifer supply is not endless and that commercial exploitation of residential drinking water puts many homes along Dodds Road at risk. lf there is no provision for storage, what ls the water source the applicant is proposing to irrigate the crop when COID ls not providing lt? That is not stated in the application. Considering my fears, I hope you can have the applicant respond in an appropriate wayto you, and the neighbors on Dodds Road. Sincerely, (en and Marie-Louise Sandine 2 Nicole Mardell r'OlTll David Swan Hello Nicole: Per our conversation t have outlined our response to the application you provided us via mail. Since we purchased our property 6 years ago,25 acres and have built a custom home that lhave spent a fortune on. I selected this spot for our family with the intention of being surrounded by other farming operations , good neighbors and peacefulquiet enjoyment. I have some serious concerns with a commercial Marijuana growing operation located next to our 25 acres. They are as follows: 1. Plot location: The plot plan shorfus the start of the southern fence line of the project to be 700' feet from Dodds Road, but on the notes section it is stated 400' from Dodds Road. The southern fence line location of the project should be no less than 700' from Dodds Rpad (as is stated in the drawing 700 FT SET BACK). Why not place the build North of the home?. 2. Air Quality: As stated in the county requiremeqts : Must at alltimes prevent unreasonable interference of neighbors use. I understand that of meaning air quality and outdoor fresh air enjoyrnent, with no odors present. 3. Lighting : shall not be visible in the evening hours, I understand that as 5pm to 7am. As it is dark at 5pm in the Fallseason. 4. Noise : Any consistant and prolonged noise from the use of fans, heating ,cooling ,purification systems, or other devices shall not interfere with the quiet enjoyment of properties surrounding the grow operation. As stated in the code, less than 30db's . 5. Safety : For the safety of the children on the surrounding farms and ranches: Who hires and vets the workers ? 5. Land Values : Do grow operations enhance the value of our land in a positive manner? Today we have a real estate valuation of well over 51,200,000. 7. Right to Sue: Even though I have addressed my concerns for various issues that would effect the peaceful enjoymentand safety ; ldo notgive upthe rightto sueforprotectionof allproperty rights, homevalue depreciation, nuisance or any other issue; resulting persons and property at24442 Dodds Road in the State ,Federal Court and Supreme Court level. Thank you for your attention to this matter, Regards, ' David Swan .442 Dodds Road From: ibradetich(Oaol.com To: Nicole Mardell Subject: Dodds Road Marijauna Farm Date: Monday, February 26,20L9 3:43:32 PM February 22,2018 To: Nicole Mardell Deschutes County Development Dept. REVISED From: Donald W. & JeriL. Bradetich 24425 Dodds Rd, Bend, OR Re: Land Use Application No.: 247-18-000128-AD After reviewing available information regarding the above referenced Land Use Application plus information from ranchers already affected by marijuana farms, we see the potential for serious issues to develop: 1.) Water: The site plan identifies the water source as well water even though the site purchase included 55 acres of Central Oregon lrrigation water. We were assured by your office that no wellwater was to be used on this site to irrigate marijuana. However, we have learned that seven (7) wells in the Alfalfa area have gono dry due to uslng lt fur marljuana lrrigation. We don't know if the Alfalfa area obtains their well water from the same aquifer as our end of Dodds Road or not. \Mrat we do know is we have been in a worsening drought for several years, and overuse of any water source has been known to cause extreme water shortage around the world, i.e. the Oglala flquifer in America's bread basket; and south Africa is in extreme drought due to overuse of potable water. As you may know, Central Oregon is a semi-arid climate that does not get enough precipitation to replenish deep aquifers in normal years. That's assuming you are drawing from an aquifer that can be replenished - the Oglala cannot due to being so ancient and so far underground. We may be finding out about ours in the near future if well irrigating continues. That would end untainted drinking water for all of us out here. Also in the water concerns lies contamination because of chemicals in insecticides and fertilizers. lf there are shallow wells or ditches, an abundance of those chemicals will leach into the water making it toxic for any wildlife as well as our pets who frequently drink from the irrigation ditches and any pool of water. 2.) Odor: We've done some research on this subject because we've learned from families that live in marijuana farm areas that the blooms smell so strongly like skunk that they could not have their windows open last summer. According to our research, which I'd be happy to send you a copy of, this is a very valid issue. And all that clean, fresh air that Central Oregon has always enjoyed will be as contaminated as the water. We are aware that odor cannot be used as a valid reason to deny approval of a land use permit since we are a farm area where even pig farming is allowed. However, I helped my father when he was raising an average of 300 pigs a year on this property; and I assure you that odorwasn't even in the same category as skunk. 3.) Trafiic: Dodds Road, which goes through ranch country from Hwy 20E to Alfalfa Market Road, is a rather narrow two (2) lane that would become quite dangerous for children waiting for and leaving the school bus; riding their bikes; or just walking along the roadside, That's not mentioning the risk to wildlife. There have been too many lying dead along the road already. 4.) Light: I believe there is a light pollution law in Deschutes County since we were required to get a dimmer yard light because of neighbor complaints. I understand that marijuana farms use grow lights, would that law be applied to them? 5.) Ghildren: Our next door neighbor home schools her own and other families' children and teaches a 4H horse-showing class at her home. lf I understand this correctly, it is illegalto have any kind of mariju ana transactions near child ren's g roups. We are aware, also, that the State of Oregon and the counties that approved marijuana farms make a goodly tax income from the product, but will it be worth damaging/ruining one of the cleanest environments in the country? { Nicole Mardell rl .om: [email protected] Sent Thursday, February 22,20L8 4:48 PM To: Nicole Mardell Subject Marijuana Farm Land Use Application No. 247-18-000128-AD DeschutesCountyDevelopmentDept. Marijuana Farm February 22,2018 To: Nicole Mardell Deschutes County Development Dept. From: Donald W. & Jeri L. Bradetich 24425 Dodds Rd, Bend, OR Re: Land Use Application No.: 247-18-000128-AD After reviewing available information regarding the above referenced Land Use Application plus information from ranehers'already affected by mar'rjuana farms, we see the potentialfor serious issues to develop: 1.) Water: The site plan identifies the water source as well water even though the site purchase included 55 acres of Gentral Oregon lrrigation water. We were assured by your office that no well water was to be used on this site to irrigate marijuana. However, we have learned that (7) wells in the Alfalfa area have gone dry due to using it for marijuana irrigation. -'fe seven - don't know if the Alfalfa area obtains their well water from the same aquifer as our end of -rodds Road or not. What we do know is we have been in a worsening drought for several years, and overuse of any water source has been known to cause extreme water shortage around the world, i.e. the Oglala Aquifer in America's bread basket; and south Africa is in extreme drought due to overuse of potable water. As you may know, Central Oregon is a semi- arid climate that does not get enough precipitation to replenish deep aquifers in normal years. That's assuming you are drawing from an aquifer that can be replenished - the Oglala cannot due to being so ancient and so far underground. We may be finding out about ours in the near future if well irrigating continues. That would end untainted drinking water for all of us out here. Also in the water concerns lies contamination because of chemicals in insecticides and fertilizers. lf there are shallow wells or ditches, an abundance of those chemicals will leach into the water making it toxic for any wildlife as well as our pets who frequently drink from the irrigation ditches and any pool of water. 2.) Odor: We've done some research on this subject because we've learned from families that live in marijuana farm areas that the blooms smell so strongly like skunk that they could not have their windows open last summer. According to our research, which I'd be happy to send you a copy of, this is a very valid issue. And all that clean, fresh air that Central Oregon has always enjoyed will be as contaminated as the water. We are aware that odor cannot be used as a valid reason to deny approval of a land use permit since we are a farm area where even pig farming is allowed. However, I helped my father when he was raising an average of 300 pigs a year on this property; and I assure you that odor wasn't even in the same category as runk. o.) Traffic: Dodds Road, which goes through ranch country from Hwy 20E to Alfalfa Market Road, is a rather narrow two (2) lane that would become quite dangerous (especially for wildlife) if it is subjected to the amount of traffic I understand Alfalfa Market Road (which is 1 also a rather narrow two lane) is now carrying. I really doubt it's considerate of the wildlife, either. 4') Light: I believe there is a light pollution law in Deschutes County since we were required to get a dimmer yard light because of neighbor complaints. I understind that marijuana iarms use grow lights, would that law be applied to them? 5') Children: Our next door neighbor home schools her own children and teaches a 4H group in her home. lf I understand this correctly, it is illegal to have any kind of marijuana transactions near children's groups, i.e. the 4H group. We are aware, also, that the State of Oregon and the counties that approved marijuana farms make a goodly tax income from the product, but will it be worth damiging/ruining one of the cleanest environments in the country? Respectfully, Donald and Jeri Bradetieh 2 Nicole Mardell r'Ol?li Janet Nash There is a horse facility across the street that hosts a 4-H group on a regular basis. The Oregon Youth Challenge School is also nearby. As seems to be the cunent trend, the owners are from out of state. As long time residents of Central Oregon, we truly resent these facilities being imposed upon us, we very little recourse for current residents' It is dramatically altering the landscape of.our farming community. The Oregon Attomey General has voiced his concern regarding the over production of marijuana in Deschutes County. Please deny this application *'eith and Janet Nash ,2645 Dodds Rd Bend, OR 97701 ,m Virus{ree. wwwt avq. cP-X1 1 t{HLl"ril,$trSi$3 FtB I6 2018 February 22,2018 Des*i ir ;Xdi{A,4p.lFis-liitd I Attorncy at Iaw Community Development Department P.O. Box 6005 Bend, OR 97708-6005 Re: Notice of Applicatian 247'18-000 I 28-AD Dear Sir or Madam: I am notifying you of my opposition to Waveseer of Oregon, LLC's application for "approval of an administrative determination to establish a Marduana Production Facility with up to-f0,000 square feet of total mature canopy area." The land owner is Peter Winsor. The land itself is heavily encumbered by a Trust Deed in the Deschutes County Official Records, No. 2016- A47602. And, Waveseer LLC is actually an out-of-state business whose address is 1248 West "60614, Altgeld St, Chicago, Illinois, according to its May 19, 2017 filing with the Oregon Secretary of State, Registry Number 110884996. An internet description of Waveseer, LLC is: December 2013 - Present (4 years 3 months) Las Vegas, Nevada Area Waveseer LLC, is an industry leading cannabis company with licenses in three states, Nevada, Oregon and Maryland. We operate cultivation facilities, extraction facilities and retail stores. Our retail brand is "Jenny's Dispensary, " https:1/j ennysdispensary.com It is no wonder that Oregon, and in particular, Deschutes County, is an important target for these primarily out-of-state entities. They can legally grow their crop in Oregon and sell it, although it is well docum.ented that there is far more marijuana grown in Oregon than can possibly be used here, and ihat prices are df /easr double in the eastem U.S. It is illegal uuder both state and federal law to transport a controlled substance such as marijuana - including medical marijuana -- over state lines, and once that happens, in all likelihood we have a criminal enterprise, subject to the penalties of the Racketeer Influenoed and Comrpt Organizations Act. Let me say it is not far-fetched to assume that such criminal enterprises are operating here, because Oregon marijuana is not even regulated. On Channel 21 this moming, the Deschutes County sheriff calied for no more grow opeiations, because his office does not have the manpower to physically inspect and ensure the legal operation of Deschutes County marijuana farms, :i - li : I " Federal law gqyelns. marijuana (cannabis) under the Controlled Substances Act, 21 U.S.C. $ 811, and it is in'direbtconflictwith Oregon law. Even though Waveseer, LLC has alocal ALEGAIcONSPI, € IIIRM 61510 Cougar Trail Bend, OR 97701 Phone (54f ) 318-5991 Fax (54f ) 318-598f Email: [email protected] under federal law. dispensary and proposes this new grow operation, it is still illegal to do either nttt ougtr'tttir issu" has not yet reached a federal court as far as I know, usually the federal law preempts such conflicting state law. Federally, maruuana is treated like every other controlled substance, including heroin and to cocaine. Cannabis is classified as a Schedule 1 drug, meaning it is highly addictive and subject guilty very steeP, abuse. Federal cannabis laws are very serious, and punishment for those found is including forfeiture of land and improvements used in marijuana cultivation pursuant to 2 I U.S.C. growing this illegal crop is also forfeited to the U.S. government. $ 881(a)(7). MoneY gained from Ninth Circuit and federal district court decisions are littered with cases upholding forfeiture of of Appeals both money and property involved in drug enterprises. As a law clerk in the U.S. Court fortheNinth Circuit for the Hon. Edward J. Leavy for eight years, and before that as Judge Leavy's vigorous law clerk in federal district court, I have personal knowledge of the government's D,esohrrdes CountY is prosecution of these drug-related forfeiture .c...4.$g$, rue that muddying these very dangerous waters as potential Waveseers, LlC-indeed, bY doing so, criminal activity. How can fhi.d questionable It is unlawful to knowingly open, lease, rent, maintain, or use property for the in manufacturing; storing, or clistribution of controlled substances - like the Jenny's Dispensary law Bend that Waveseer L-i.C controls as its retailbrand. 2l U.S.C. $ 856. Recent Ninth Circuit marijuana states that the government has the authority to initiate criminal proceedings against grown for cultivation, currently hampered only by lack of funding appropriations for marijuana medicinal p*por., only, and then only if the growers' conduct fully meets the requirements of prosecution state law for medicinal'marijuana. "But Congress could appropriate funds for such tomorrow.,, LLS. v. Mclniosh, 833 F.3d 1i63, t179 (9th Cfu. 2016). There are no such purposes. Congressional restriction on funding for prosecution of marijuana grown for recreational It is time to declare a moratorium on the cultivation of marijuana in Deschutes County public given these major federal law violations. I oppose this application and request that a hearing be held. Sincerely, A br- Nicole Mardell JlTl: [email protected] Sent: Friday, February 23,2018 4:28 PM To: Nicole Mardell Subject: Mar'ljuana farm use application no.247-L8-000L28-AD DCDD Mar'{uana farm February 23,2078 To: Nicole Mardell Deschutes Cou nty Development Dept. From: David and Sheri Gallucci 24375 Dodds Rd., Bend, OR RE: Land use application no. 247-18-OAO128-AD After reviewing available information regarding the above referenced Land Use Application plus information from Marijuana web sites of laws that restrict permits in Deschutes County and from ranchers already affected by marijuana farms, we see the potential for harm to our children and property to develop. 1.) Our daughter and son in law live in our residents, along with our two grandchildren, which the oldest is home schooled on the premises, through Baker Web Academy Home Schools, which is directly across the street from proposed site, less than the required 1000 ft. 2.) Our daughter runs the 4 H youth program on our property, which is a youth organization , and we have many children coming and going for programs. The name for them is the Rhinestone Riders which can be verified by office in dmond. This is also less than the required 1000 ft. from proposed site. .1 Rhinestone Riders have volunteered for the adopt a highway program where the members will be walking Dodds Rd. to remove trash and debris. Less than the 1000 ft. from the proposed site. 4.) Marijuana has a pungent skunk smell. 5.)The water use in our area has become a valued concern due to many wells in our area drying up and property owners having to drill deeper at property owners expense. 6.) Traffic is more than likely to increase, Dodds Rd. is a two lane country road that from my understanding has had two deaths due to traffic mixed with pedestrians recently. 7,)Propertyvalues are more than likelyto decrease, when and if that happens, willyou contactthe county accessors office letting them know the reason for the decreased value is because your office allowed a Marijuana Farm to go in our area? Bottom line, you will or will not issue a permit for a Marijuana Farm across the street from us. Your decision will be affecting others and not just an investor from out of state. lf you would please respond letting us know you received this email. Respectfully, David and Sheri Gallucci 24375 Dodds Rd. Bend, OR 9770I eent from my iPad 1 }Saffigih,{€,lr ';r i:tB I I Z{jt$ Community Developrnent Department Planning Division i'.ril""ti:iti;l ::r 1'.'i,.,' i; i'', Re: proposed Land UseAction File Numb er: 247-t$-ooorzg-AD In regards to the above proposed Marijuana production Facility I wourd respectfulry request denial of this facility a In light of the Associated states that the amount that can be legally mariiuana leads to we already have an overabundance of mariiuana production. It is irresponsible of the state and the county to continue to approve production fa"iliues without concern for demand. Yours, Doug and Lorraine Winger 24426 Dodds Rd Bend, OR 977or $41382-4756 [email protected] Nicole Mardell Deschutes County Planning RE: File Number 247-18-000128-AD Dear Nicole, My narne is Douglas Krutzikowsky and rny wife Kirn McCready and I own pl'operty at24356 Dodds Rd which is located directly next to proposed commercial Marijuana Production Facility. This letter is to voice opposition to this proposition. Some basic concerns are: r safety (ours) . fire risk . odor . noise o traffic r trespassing o light pollution . ecological footprint . over supply of Marijuana (black market sales) . negative affect on our property value Specifically and importantly, facility application diagram detailing proposed location of structures and setbacks is misleading. It shows seclion of our land (South of COI canal, and shaded) as being'WETLANDS'. Though this may be true by some rneasure strict definition, we use this section of our property as irrigated pasture and it includes improvements such as birthing pens for critters. Please consider our concerns and opposition to this Marijuana Production Facility in yoru land use decision. Best Regards, l)ouglas Krutzikowsky Doug [email protected] Nicole Mardell om: Bonita Williamsen Nicole: After reading the documents on the Deschutes County website for File No: 247-18-000128-AD we have a few concerns. 1.) ln their site plan they have identified their water source as well water. You stated they would not be allowed to use their well for the marijuana growing business but I didn't see it in print in this application. I read they have 55 acres of water rights but stilldidn't see the language on "no use of the well". Being a "Well" water home, we can't afford our only water source to be compromised due to contamination or over use. 2) As a property owner we are concerned about the value and devalue of our much valued and loved home with this marijuana growing business. 3.) I question the legality of this marijuana growing business after listening to our local sheriff, Shane Nelson. He publicly raised his concerns of marijuana growing businesses being allowed to grow a substance still considered illegal by the Federal Government. 5.) Traffic issues on Dodds Rd is a big concern for us who live and drive to and from work and or shopping daily, There has already been tragic accidents and deaths on this 2 lane much needed improved road that can not afford more traffic due to this marijuana growing business. My husband and myself are very concerned with the potential misuse of wellwater, potentialcrime and extra traffic on nodds Rd. We would like Deschutes County to deny this permit due to the concerns in the above email. Sincerely, Steve and Bonita Williamsen Sent from my iPhone I 0( +hofflq'B\'W1-(, swztaj ,2 e*sq From: Anthonv Raguine Tracv Griffin Subject: Pls scan to 18-047-AD & print a copy for the record. Thx. Date: Tuesday, February 6, 2018 4:28:25 PM -----Original Message----- From: BRETT HODSON lmailto:[email protected] Sent: Tuesday, February 6,2018 3:54 PM To: Anthony Raguine Hello Anthony, We are writing to express our opposition to the proposed marijuana grow operation near our properly in NW Redmond. The proposed operation is under Application File #247-18-000047-AD submitted by Isaac Babani (Cascade Estate Farms, LLC). The location of the properly is 6829 NW66th Street, Redmond, and is identified on County Assessor Tax Map 14-12-23, as Tax Lot 300. Our property is located less than l/4 mile away a17024 NW 69th Place. The basis for my opposition is: 1) Water consumption. After visiting with the Water Resources Department it is our understanding it is unlawful to use a domestic well for the purposes of growing marijuana. Thus, the applicant would have to drill an additional groundwater well to support the grow operation. New (non domestic) groundwater wells are not authorized in the Deschutes basin due to the hydrologic connection with surface water. Even ifthe applicant were successful at purchasing mitigation credits, the addition of another nearby groundwater well will harm ours and the other neighbor's water supply. We have already had to redrill our well once to go deeper and access new water. The addition of another well consuming large volumes of water year round to grow marijuana will likely exacerbate this situation. 2) Odor. Living in close proximity to an operation of this magnitude (5000 square feet) will result in noxious fumes and odors throughout the year, and parlicularly during summer and fall months. 3) Light pollution. The grow operation will require high intensity security lighting. This will result in light pollution. One of the main attractions of living rurally in this area is the dark night skies and viewing the stars. This would be harmed if this application is approved. 4) Property values. Ifthis application is approved and there is a 5000 square foot grow operation in close proximity to myself and neighbors it will harm everyone's property value (for all the above reasons). It is not equitable to harm the value of multiple residences for the financial benefit of a single individual. Taken in whole this proposed grow operation is inconsistent with the rural living that many Redmond residents in the Tetherow Crossing area enjoy. Again, it is inappropriate to harm a large group ofresidences for a single individual (who bought the property less than 6 months ago). We urge the Deschutes County Community Development Department and Planning Commission to deny this application. Respectfully submitted Brett and Michele Hodgson From: Anthonv Raouine IO: Tracv Griffin Subject: Pls scan to 18-047-AD & print a copy for the record. Thx. Dater Tuesday, February 6, 2018 11:02:48 AM -----Original Message----- From : .ludv Hansen I mailto:i [email protected] Sent: Tuesday, February 6,20189:44 AM To: Anthony Raguine Thank you for your reply. Yes, my comments are in reference to land use file 247-18-000047-AD. Please add my email to that record. I would also appreciate receiving notice ofthe decision for this project as well as any information regarding public hearings. My address is 8046 NW Grubstake Way, in Redmond. Regards, Judy > On Feb 6,2078, at 9:08 AM, Anthony Raguine > Thank you for your comments Judy. Can you confirm that your comments are in reference to land use file 247-18- 000047-AD? If yes, I will add your email to that record. Since I'm the assigned planner for this project, please direct all future comments solely to me. Thanks. > Anthony Raguine > Senior Planner > Deschutes County Community Development Department > I l7 NW Lafayette Avenue > Bend, OR 97701 > (541) 617-4739 > Please note that the information in this email is an informal statement made in accordance with DCC 22.20.005 and shall not be deemed to constitute final Counfy action effecting a change in the status ofa person's propefty or conferring any rights, including any reliance rights, on any person. > -----Original Message----- > From: Judy Hansen tmaitto juayUnanse l > Sent: Saturday, February 3,2018 l:39 PM > To: Anthony Raguine > Mr. Raguine, > I am very disturbed to leam that an application has been filed to build a marijuana facility alor{g the border to our gated neighborhood in Odin Falls Ranch. We moved here a year ago and the safety of the community was a major concem when we decided where to purchase a home. Although marijuana production has been legalized in Oregon, o'agricultureo' it needs to be kept out of residential areas. This type of is better suited to more remote, rural, areas than adjacent to residential communities. > With the introduction of marijuana farming in our community, there is certainly a risk of more crime in the area. I am aware that Oregon already has an overabundance of marijuana. Since marijuana is still illegal under federal law, this opens the gate to drug trafficking and the black market as growers try to sell their excess crops elsewhere. > I would also like to know more about what agencies in Deschutes County will be responsible for regulating this industry. Will our state and county law enforcement officers be dealing with marijuana issues at the expense of the needs of county residents? > Your attention to these concerns is appreciated. > Judy Hansen From: Anthonv Raouine To: Tracv Griffin Subjectr Pls scan to 18-047-AD & print a copy for the record. Thx. Date: Tuesday, February 6, 2018 9:24:33 AM -----Original Message----- From: Joe Farmer tmaittojoeZt:farmer l Sent: Tuesday, February 6,20189:23 AM To: Anthony Raguine Yes, we confirm that our comments are in reference to land use file 247-18-000047'AD? Thanks for your follow up! Joe & Cindi Farmer Sent from my iPhone > On Feb 6,2018, at 6:53 AM, Anthony Raguine > Hi Joe & Cindi. Can you confirm that your comments are in reference to land use file 247-18-000047-AD? > Anthony Raguine > Senior Planner > Deschutes County Community Development Depaltment > I 17 NW Lafayetle Avenue > Bendo OR 97701 > (s41) 617-4739 > Please note that the information in this email is an informal statement made in accordance with DCC 22.20.0A5 and shall not be deemed to constitute final County action effecting a change in the status ofa person's propelty or conferring any rights, including any reliance rights, on any person. > ----Original Message----- > From : Joe Farmer [mailto j oe7 I [email protected]] > Sent: Saturday, February 3, 2018 l l : 1 3 PM > To: Anthony Raguine > We live at7985 NW Grubstake Way, Redmond, OR 97756 and we are totally against the application for a marijuana growing facility near our neighborhood. The smell and the possible influx of individuals that are involved with this type of product is not something we want to have to deal with! > Joe & Cindi Farmer > Sent from my iPad From: Anthony Raouine IO: Tracv Griffin Subject: Pls scan to 18-047-AD & print a copy for the record. Thx. Date: Tuesday, February 6, 2018 9:19:24 AM From: Casey Gibbs Imailto:[email protected]] Sent: Saturday, February 3,201.81-O:17 AM To: Anthony Raguine File Number 47 -18-000047-AD Applicant: Cascade Estate Farms, LLC Mr. Raguine: I am filing my notice of OPPOSITION to this applicatlon for a marijuana production facility in our neighborhood. Below are reasons why this should not be approved. 1. INCREASED RISK OF CRIME: Several houses in our neighborhoods have already been prowled and/or burglarized. This operation will only increase the draw for persons with nefarious intent accessing our area, potentially causing increased crime problems for the entire neighborhood. 2. ODOR. Marijuana plants inherently have a distinctly unpleasant odor when growing due to the oils on the plants. This odor will permeate our neighborhoods, fouling the air and may even violate Oregon clean air standards. 3. LOSS OF TAX REVENUE: lf approved, our property values will be severely affected negatively. This neighborhood is a major source of property tax revenue to the County; I highly doubt that the paltry tax revenue the County will receive from this production facility will offset the loss of revenue from our lowered property values. 4. INCREASED TRAFFIC: The roads accessing this proposed operation are privately owned, maintained by the neighborhoods through which they pass. Approval of this application will cause increased heavy traffic over these roads with no obligation on the part of the applicant to fix any damage, nor contribute in any way to the maintenance of these roads. This will negatively impact over 600 properties financially, benefiting no one but the applicant. PLEASE DISAPPROVE TH IS APPLICATION Sincerely, Dennis C Gibbs Laurilea Gibbs 7855 NW Grubstake Way Redmond, OR 97756 From: Anthonv Raouine IO: Tracv Griffin Subject: Pls scan to 1B-047-AD & print a copy for the record. Thx. Date Tuesday, February 6, 2018 9:18:12 AM From: terry bendix Imai lto:bterry1O57 @centuryl in k. net] Sent: Saturday, February 3,2OIB 11-:29 AM To: Nick Lelack Zechariah H eck Begin forwarded message From: terrv bendix Dear Mr. Raguine, Please, NO Marijuana growing in our community!!! Please, please, please! Could this not be considered for a property somewhere OUT of a neighborhood. Meaning, anarea where no families or neighbors are within l0 miles or so. I do not feel it it safe for families within our neighborhood. My thinking is, it would bring crime to our area with people trying to steal the product and lots ofother negatives. Please say NO to this proposal for the safety of our BELOVED NEIGHBORHOOD! Sincerely, Linda Blohm Bendix 8059 NW Grubstake Way Redmond, OR 602 620 2214 From: Anthonv Raouine IO: Tracy Griffin Subject: Pls scan to 18-047-AD & print a copy for the record. Thx. Date: Tuesday, February 6, 2018 9:16:18 AM -----Original Message----- From: Roger Hansen t4ailto:rogerinred l Sent: Saturday, February 3,2018 12:45PM To: Anthony Raguine Subject: Fwd: Oregon is producing three times more marijuana than it can consume I The Independent http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/oregon-marijuana-cannabis-weed-production-overproduction- lesalise-sumlus-oroblem-lesal-black-market-a8 I 926 I I .htm I From: Anthonv Raouine IO: Tracv Griffin Subject: Pls scan to 18-047-AD & print a copy for the record. Thx. Date: Tuesday, February 6, 2018 9:13:59 AM -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] tmaitto:runlan:vrun l Sent: Saturday, February 3,2018 12:47 PM To: Nick Lelack Dear Sirs, We are filling our notice of OPPOSITION for a marijuana production facility in our neighborhood. Please DISAPPROVE this application. 47-18-000047-AD Applicant: Cascade Estate Farms, LLC. 69th Place Redmond, OP.97756 Sincerely, Lawrence W Heaston Rebecca L Heaston 8055 NW Grubstake Way Redmond, OR 97756 Sent from my iPhone From: Anthonv Raouine IO: Tracv Griffin Subject: Pls scan to 18-047-AD & print a copy for the record. Thx. Date: Tuesday, February 6, 2018 9:13:06 AM ----Original Message----- From : Roger Hansen [m ailto :[email protected]] Sent: Saturday, February 3,2018 l:13 PM To: Anthony Raguine Sir, Moments ago I sent you an e-mailed article describing the bloated crop levels of weed being 3 times more than the current consumption rate of the state of Oregon and its black market sale outside of the state. I am sending this as a follow up to my voice mail left on your machine an hour or so earlier. As I indicated in the voice mail, my family moved to Odin Falls Ranch in July of l976Io escape the crime of Northem California; much of which is driven legalized marijuana farms. The city of Shasta lake that we left, has folks being shot, stabbed, assaulted frequently due to this activity. Where it is allowed, crime follows. One of my sons is in law enforcement and has seen first hand the level of crime increase that occurs when such activity is allowed. While this activity may be state legal, it remains federally illegal and the federal govemment has recently declared its intent to prosecute jurisdictions which do not enforce federal law. This activity must not be allowed to occur in our neighborhood or any other neighborhood. Thankyou for an opportunity to voice my objection. Roger Hansen, 8046 NW Grubstake Way, Redmond,OF.97756. From: Anthonv Raouine IO: Tracv Griffin Subject: Pls scan to 18-047-AD & print a copy for the record. Thx. Date: Tuesday, February 6, 2018 9:09:15 AM -----Original Message----- From: Judy Hansen tmailtojudybhansen@ l Sent: Saturday, February 3,2018 l:39 PM To: Anthony Raguine Mr. Raguine, I am very disturbed to leam that an application has been filed to build a marijuana facility along the border to our gated neighborhood in Odin Falls Ranch. We moved here a year ago and the safety of the community was a major concern when we decided where to purchase a home. Although marijuana production has been legalized in Oregon, it needs to be kept out ofresidential areas. This type of"agriculture" is better suited to more remote, rural, areas than adjacent to residential communities. With the introduction of marijuana farming in our community, there is certainly a risk of more crime in the area. I am aware that Oregon already has an overabundance of marijuana. Since marijuana is still illegal under federal law, this opens the gate to drug trafficking and the black market as growers try to sell their excess crops elsewhere. I would also like to know more about what agencies in Deschutes County will be responsible for regulating this industry. Will our state and county law enforcement officers be dealing with marijuana issues at the expense of the needs of county residents? Your attention to these concems is appreciated. Judy Hansen Froml Anthonv Raouine To: Tracv Griffin Subject: Pls scan to 1B-047-AD & print a copy for the record. Thx. Date: Tuesday, February 6, 2018 9:04:54 AM From: marjbishop Imailto:[email protected]] Sent: Saturday, February 3, 2018 1:49 PM To: Anthony Raguine Sent from my Verizon, Samsung Galaxy smattphone Original message From : "marj.bishop " File Number: 47 -18-000047 -AD Applicant: Cascade Estates Farms, LLC To Mr. Raguine: I am writing to express my OPPOSITION to the above application for a marijuana grow facility in my neighborhood. There are numerous reasons that this should not be allowed to proceed. 1. INCREASED RISK OF CRIME: Several of our homes have already been prowled around and/or burglarized. This operation will only increase the draw for persons with criminal intent coming into our neighborhood causing problems. 2. LOSS OF TAX REVENUE: If approved, our property values will be severely reduced. This neighborhood is a major source of property tax revenue to the County. It is hard to imagine that the tax revenue received by the County for this production facility would offset the loss of revenue from our lowered property values. 3. INCREASED TRAFFIC: The roads accessing this proposed operation are privately owned and maintained by the neighborhoods through which they pass. Approval of this application will cause increased heavy traffic over these roads with no obligation on the part of the applicant to fix any damage, nor contribute in any way to the maintenance of these roads. This will negatively impact over 600 properties financially, benefitting no one but the applicant. 4. ODOR: Marijuana plants inherently have a distinctly unpleasant odor when growing due to the oils on the plants. This odor will permeate our neighborhoods, fouling the air and MAY EVEN VIOLATE OREGON CLEAN AIR STANDARDS. 5. WATER DRAIN: Marijuana production requires alarge amount of water. This would be a drain on the water supplies in rural communities such as ours. Furthermore, an article in the "Bend Bulletin" just today points out Oregon's problem with pot overproduction and how that overproduction winds up on the black market. We don't want the criminals, drug violence and money laundering associated with black market organized crime in our neighborhood. PLEASE DISAPPROVE THIS APPLICATION. WE DO NOT NEED OR WANT THIS. Sincerely, Marjorie A. Bishop 7165 NW River Springs Road Redmond, OR 97756 Sent from my Samsung Galaxy Tab@ S From: Anthony Raouine IO: Tracv Griffin Subject: Pls scan to 18-047-AD & print a copy for the record. Thx. Date: Tuesday, February 6, 2018 9:01:17 AM From: Ch risty H iguera Imai lto :cmh iguera @att. net] Sent: Saturday, February 3,2018 2:36 PM To: Anthony Raguine 5u bject: Refe rence Fi I e N u m be r : 247 -I8-OOOO47 - AD To Whom lt May Concern My name is Christy Higuera. I live at 8030 NW Grubstake Way in the Odin Falls Ranch/River Springs community. I have been notified that there is an application in process for a marijuana grow facility to be built very close to our community. I adamantly OPPOSE this application and ask that you DENY THE APPLICATION based on the following: We here in the Odin Falls Ranch/River Springs community have chosen to live in this area for the quiet, low traffic, safe environment. We have paid significant prices for our homes and property to reside here in Odin Falls Ranch because it offers these things to the residents who live here. I am a retired police officer and chose to live here because it is a very nice area that offers privacy and low crime. lf this application is approved it will definitely lead to more foot traffic and questionable individuals being attracted to the area. We have already had several burglaries in our community in the last two years and we do not need more trouble from undesirable people. Approving this application will also lead to an increase in vehicular traffic through the area which the private and privately maintained roads will not adapt to well. There is also the issue of bringing the value of our homes down if this application is approved and this facility is built so close to our homes. There are many, many other places where this facility could be built where it wouldn't be so close to other residents homes. I ask that you PLEASE DENY THIS APPLICATION and any other applications that are asking to build these types of facilities so close to other residences. lt is just not safe for the residents who live nearby Christy Higuera (541) 410-5114 From: Anthonv Raouine IO: Tracv Griffin Subjectr Pls scan to 18-047-AD & print a copy for the record. Thx. Datel Tuesday, February 6, 2018 8:59:52 AM -----Original Message----- From: Margaret Mckeown tmaitto:mcneownOl J Sent: Saturday, February 3,2078 3:16 PM To: Anthony Raguine Gentlemen, We are writing to oppose the application for a marijuana production facility at 6829 NW 66th Street, Redmond. This a residential area accessed by private roads maintained by the residents. The proposed facility would add to the traffic on these roads with no requirement that they contribute to the maintenance and upkeep of the roads. There is a school bus stop at the intersection of NW 66th Street and NW Grubstake Way and children walking to their homes could be exposed to the marijuana production and additional traffic. Our neighborhood has already experienced break ins and trespassing which will probably increase with this facility. Our property values will be negatively affected by the proximity to the facility and the odor of marijuana. We urge you to deny this application. Sincerely, Margaret and Don McKeown 8040 NW Grubstake Way Redmond Sent from my iPad From: Anthonv Raouine To: Tracv Griffin Subjectr Pls scan to 18-047-AD & prlnt a copy for the record Date: Tuesday, February 6, 2018 8:58:19 AM From: SHARON RU PERT Imai lto:sharon_ru pert@comcast. net] Sent: Saturday, February 3,2018 6:07 PM To: Anthony Raguine Mr. Raguine, Re: File # 47-18000047-AD Cascade Estate Farms, LLC I own property on Grubstake Way and plan to sell it someday to fund my retirement. Even though I have an open mind to using cannibus for medicinal purposes there many people who are against it in every way. The growing of it nearby surely will be detrimentalto allwho own or live on properties in Odin Falls. Mr. Gibbs adequately spelled out many reasons in his letter and I concur. I oppose this request and ask that you do as well lf you need to talk with me further or would like to hear my pleading for the opposition, please don't hesitate to call, write or email. Respectfully, Sharon L. Rupert 52 Northview Ct Lake Oswego, OR 97035 PH 503 201-2939 From: Anthonv Raguine To: Tracv Griffin Subject: Pls scan to 18-047-AD & print a copy for the record. Thx. Date: Tuesday, February 6, 2018 8:55:10 AM From: Karen Susac Imailto:[email protected]] Sent: Saturday, February 3, 2OI8 7 :!4 PM . To: Anthony Raguine Commu nity Development Department Deschutes County Planning Division P.O. Box 6005 Bend, Oregon 97708 Attention: Anthony Raguine - Reference file number 247-18-000047-AD I write in opposition to allowing a cannabis growing operation at6129 NW 66th street in rural Redmond,Oregon. A cannabis growing operation is fundamentally incompatible with favorable land use in the high desert environment. First, large amounts of organic compounds are left as waste from growing cannabis. There are finite methods to dispose of this waste. Burning the waste is one that could have a catastrophic impact to the area. Tax lot 300 abuts 4 residential lots in the River Spring HOA and a fire would not only level those homes but spread to homes in River Springs and Odin Falls resulting in millions of dollars of loss. Second, the source of water and the handling of waste water are problematic. There is no irrigation water access at this address nor is it likely to be available. One-eighth of an acre (50 feet by 100 feet with 50 cannabis plants) would use 24,000 gallons per season (about eight months or 240 days). This is the size of the canopy the applicant is proposing. A failure of any waste water system threatens the ground water and runoff would ultimately flow into the Deschutes River damaging a wild river and destroying an important fishery. Third, the fertilizers and pesticides used in a grow operation will be an existential threat to our native plants and animals. Additionally there will be a serious disruption to our nocturnalwildlife, especially the deer and the owls found in abundance in the area. Fourth, the added traffic on non- county maintained roads is a problem. The roads in the area are maintained by the residents. The area is an area of rural residences. The road fees assessed do not contemplate a business increasing the traffic load through employees, waste transfer and product shipment. Fifth, there are increased security concerns. Even if gated, this facility will be a very attractive target for petty and not so petty criminals. A quick look at Google Earth will show that access can be had through River Springs Estates. Those properties that abut the operation will more than likely experience increased security concerns" Sixth, the visual distraction, the odor, the noise and lighting will impinge on the solitude and the right of enjoyment that all the surrounding residents currently value. Furthermore, this operation is not bound to stay at the 5,000 square foot size; with business growth the issues outlined here will simply grow. Finally and on a more personal note, I currently hold 20 acres in The Dalles, Oregon. The property has been on the market for over 10 years. No one will consider purchasing the property because it is across the road from a marijuana grow operation. Allowing such a facility into this neighborhood in Redmond will devastate market values. The purpose of the Exclusive Farm Use is to preserve and maintain agricultural lands and to serve as a sanctuary for farm uses. Yes, under Chapter 18.16, marijuana growing is a permitted use but it is subject to many conditions and considerations. A 5000 square foot marijuana canopy is not the pastoral image of central Oregon agriculture. Our environment and an area filled with rural residences is simply not compatible with a cannabis grow operation and I urge the commission to so find. Thank you for your consideration, Karen L Susac JD From: Anthonv Raouine lo: Tracv Griffin Subject: Pls scan to 18-047-AD & print a copy for the record Date: Tuesday, February 6, 2018 B:52:39 AM From: Peggie and Joe Morley [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Sunday, February 4,2OIB 5:48 AM To: Anthony Raguine Su bject: Fwd : Ap pl ica lion 247 -I8-000047-AD M a rij u a n a G row Faci I ity Dear Sirs, my initial email was incorrect as I meant to emphasize "near" our River Springs HOA not "in" it However, I still want to emphasize the safety, security and odor concerns I mentioned initially with an operation like this being so close to a residential area" Thanks, Joe Morley h tt p : //www. c i. re d m o n d. o r. u s /res i d e n ts/m a rij u a n a-fa q -s ---Original Message----- From: Peggie and Joe Morley Dear Sirs, I have recently become aware of this application in our River Springs HOA. I need to voice my concerns regarding the implications to our safety and security having this type of grow facility in a residential area. I have only owned a home in Redmond for about a year and a half and absolutely love the town and the area I live in. Although I am aware there have been several attempted intrusions and an actual break in during the time I have lived here. I am very concerned regarding the location of a facility like this and the increased number of people who will have access to our community. While I am supportive of small business ventures per se I do not think something this belongs in a residential community. lf this business was located on 50 acres off the grid some place I do not think I would raise as strong an objection but I really think extreme considerable consideration needs to be given to locating this in a residential area. Also although not well versed in Federal and State laws I believe this is still a pure cash sales venture which heightens my security concerns even more. I have also been told the growth and harvesting process emits strong odors which I would not find appealing in our neighborhood. Thank you very much for your consideration on rejecting this application Joseph and Margaret Morley 7925 NW Grubstake Way Redmond, OR. 97756 From: Anthonv Raouine IO: Tracv Griffin Subject: Pls scan to 18-047-AD & print a copy for the record. Thx. Datei Tuesday, February 6, 2018 8:49:58 AM From: Peggie and Joe Morley [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Saturday, February 3,201"8 2:52PM To: Anthony Raguine Subject: Ap pl icatio n 247 -1.8-OOO047 - AD M a rij u a n a G row Faci I ity Dear Sirs, I have recently become aware of this application in our River Springs HOA. I need to voice my concerns regarding the implications to our safety and security having this type of grow facility in a residential area. I have only owned a home in Redmond for about a year and a half and absolutely love the town and the area I live in. Although I am aware there have been several attempted intrusions and an actual break in during the time I have lived here. I am very concerned regarding the location of a facility like this and the increased number of people who will have access to our community. While I am supportive of small business ventures per se I do not think something this belongs in a residential community. lf this business was located on 50 acres off the grid some place I do not think I would raise as strong an objection but I really think extreme considerable consideration needs to be given to locating this in a residential area. Also although not well versed in Federal and State laws I believe this is still a pure cash sales venture which heightens my security concerns even more. I have also been told the growth and harvesting process emits strong odors which I would not find appealing in our neighborhood. Thank you very much for your consideration on rejecting this application Joseph and Margaret Morley 7925 NW Grubstake Way Redmond, OR. 97756 Frcmi Anthonv Raoulne To: TEd Grimn subj*t: Pls ffin to 18-047-AD & print a copy for the Koid, Thx. Datei Tu$day, February 5, 2018 8i48:34 AIY From: Hal Campbell [mallto:[email protected]] Sent: Sunday, February 4, 2018 7:20 AM To: Anthony Raguine February 4, 2018 Commu nity Development Depa rtment Deschutes County Planning Division P.O. Box 6005 Bend, Oregon 97708 Attention: Anthony Raguine - Reference file number 247-I8-OOOO47-AD Please accept this correspondence as an addendum to my initial letter dated February 3,201,8, which was directed to you and to the Deschutes County Planning Commission, entitled, "Opposition to the Proposal for a Marijuana crow Facility at 6829 NW 66th Street, Redmond, Oregon". As the former Law Enforcement Planning Coordinator for the Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department, along with my decades of service as a law and justice professorforseveral nationalievel universities, as wellas a former member of the judiciaryforthe State of Montana, lthought it may prove helpfulto you and the Commission to provide the following list of resources in support of your deliberations regarding the land use request submitted by Cascade Estate Farm, LLC., Reference file number 24-/-L8'-OOOO47-AD. As your review of the environmental impact reports and scientific studies contained within the URL's listed below will disclose there are innumerable reasons why such requests to allow marrjuana grow operations in rural residential neighborhoods should be denied The information contained within these reports provides an articulation ofthe specific consequences pertaining to such public policy deli berations. I strongly recommend that priorto the Commission's decision regarding this specific matter; they review the included reference materials and require an "independent" environmental impact report be completed concerning the request made by Cascade Estate Farms,LLC. lndependentreview,inmyjudgment,couldbeofsignificantvaluetotheCommissionasitdeliberatesnotonlywhat course of action the Commission might deem appropriate regarding this specific request, but also in furthering their efforts to determine a countywide public policy regarding any future requests. Sincerely, Judge Hal Campbell, Ph.D. 6700 NW River Springs Road Redmond, Oregon 97756 Ha lcamobell@ live.com 541.316.161-5 Reference Listing of Environmental lmpact Reports and Scientific Studies Concerning Marijuana Grow Operations and their lmpact on Communities Marijuana's lmpact on Communities and the Environment http://www.yelm.com/images/Marijuanas-lmpact-to-Communities-and-the-Fnvironment UodatedO4-8-17-pdf Consequences and lmpacts lnclude: r Loss of neighborhood character. o Concerns about personal and family safety. o lncreased criminal activity. o Large-scale land conversion such as deforestation and earth movement. r Pest infestations. o Unpermitted construction of facilities. o lllegal marijuana production and processing. o Loss of neighboring property value. r Risks to children and pets. o Water, soil, light, nolse, and air pollution. r lntolerable skunk-like odor. r Overuse of pesticides, rodenticides, and fertilizers. r Damage to wetland areas. o Detrimental impacts to habitat, species, and ecosystems. . Overconsumption of water and depleted aquifers. . Degraded road conditions. o Excessive noise from guard dogs, industrial fans, and generators. . Storm and industrial wastewater runoff. r Increased traffic. . lnappropriate garbage and waste disposal. o Pollution from multiple generators in off-grid locations. r Misrepresentation of facts in Special Land Use Permlt & WSLCB applications. Environmental Risks and Opportunities in Cannabis Cultivation httos://lcb.wa.gov/oublications/Mariiuana/SEPA/BOTEC Whitepaper-Final.odf Washington State Marijuana lmpact Report htto://www. rias.ri.sov/docu ments/NWH IDTAMa riiua nalmoactReoortVolumel. odf HIDTA lmpact Report httos://lea rna boutsa m.o rglwo-co nte nt/u ploa ds/2016/10/CA-MJ-lM PACT-RE PO RT-FlNAL1. odf Draft Environmental lmpact Report - Kern County Cannabis Land Use https://www.kerncountv.com/planning/pdfs/eirs/CLUO/CLUO DEIR Vol2 Aooendix A.l.pdf Opposition to Marijuana Grow in Rural Residential Clackamas County htto://www.clacka mas. us/ola n n ing/docu ments/meetings/oc/201 51 02 Sexhibits. odf Environmental lmpact of Marijuana Cultivation in Nevada County htto://nccourt.net/docu ments/ejreoorts/1516-H EV-Ma riiua naCu ltivation.pdf California Department of Food and Agriculture - State of California httos://www.cdfa.ca.gov/calca n na bis/docu ments/AooendixO-CommentsT5-94.odf Hood River County Community Development - Environmental lmpact Report htto://hrccd.co.hood-river-or.us/images/uoloads/documents/Web-Page-1 Staff Reort Less-Exhibits 8.29.216-odf Land Development Code Revision - City of Phoenix Oregon htto://www.ohoenixoregon.eov/sites/default/files/fileattachments/buildine/olannine/oase/352/ldc15 O1-stffrort ph_cc 061515d.odf Staff Report for Eoard of Commissioners Public Hearing on Marijuana Operations - Polk County, Oregon htto://www.co.oolk.or.us/sites/default/files/fileattachments/olanning division/oage/3086/staff report la15-02 for boc - 1-6- 15.pdf Rand Corporation Study - The unintended consequences of drug policies: httos:/A,vww.rand.org/content/dam/rand/oubs/technical reports/2009/RAND TR706.odf Fromr Anthonv Raouine IO: Tracv Griffin Subject: Pls scan to 18-047-AD & print a copy for the record. Thx. Date: Tuesday, February 6, 2018 8:43:29 AM From: Hal Campbell [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Saturday, February 3,2018 1.2:22 PM To: Anthony Raguine February 3,201,8 Community Development Department Deschutes County Planning Division P.O. Box 6005 Bend, Oregon 97708 Attention: Anthony Raguine - Reference file number 247-IB-O0O047-AD Please accept this correspondence as evidence of my stated opposition to the proposed land use request by Cascade Estate Farms, LLC to approve a marijuana grow facility to be located at 6829 NW 66th Street, Redmond, Oregon. There are innumerable reasons why such an incongruent business operation should be denied by the planning commission which include; . Public safety concerns and the potential for increased criminal activity, . Environmental safety concerns including the potential impact such an operation might have on wildlife, ground water contamination, air quality, and soil contamination, o The potential for significant monetary damages to property owners of adjoining neighborhood parcels by values by making them less desirable, . The general incongruity and disregard that such a proposal has on other area residents in hopes of persuading planning officials to approve the location of a business enterprise within aR area historically designated as a rural residential neighborhood, o The potential civil liability and legal exposure to the County for damages incurred by individual property owners as a result of the County's actions to approve such a req uest. o Violations of federal law and statutes regarding controlled substances, I appreciate your consideration of this letter of opposition and I formally request that it be included within the file for the Commission's review. Sincerely, Judge Hal Campbell, Ph.D. 6700 NW River Springs Road Redmond, Oregon 97756 halcam pbell@ live.com 541.316.L615 From: Anthonv Raouine IO: Tracv Griffin Subject: Pls scan to 18-047-AD & print a copy for the record. Thx Date: Tuesday, February 6, 2018 8:39:29 AM From: Nick Lelack Sent: Monday, February 5, 2018 1"0:16 PM To: Anthony Raguine Nick Lelack, AICP Deschutes County Community Development Director 541-639-5sqs Sent from my iPhone Begin forwarded message: From: Alan Royse Ref: 247-18-000047-AD Sir, I live close to the proposed Cascade Estates farm marijuana grow facility and strongly oppose this proposed use. We live in a nice community, we have all worked had to make our properties a great place to live. I invite you to visit our community of Odin Falls Ranch and River Springs Estates and see for yourself. This facility will only decrease our properfy values, increase traffic and crime, and provide an unpleasant odor for all neighbors to not enjoy. The roads that this facility would use are all privately owned and maintained and I see no relief for the added traffic and road use. This type of grow facility should be more remotely located and away from established residential areas. This also negatively affects residents in two other adjoining communities. Please deny this proposal. Alan & Debbie Royse 7185 NW River Springs Rd Redmond From: Anthony Raguine To: Tracv Griffin Subject: Pls scan to 18-047-AD & print a copy for the record. Thx. Date: Tuesday, February 6, 2018 8:37:11 AM From: Spencer Krueger Imailto:[email protected]] Sent: Sunday, February 4,201,810:44 AM To: Anthony Raguine Regarding Cascade Estate Farms, LLC application for a marijuana growing facility: This is Nor an agricultural area at all but zoned such by an antiquated zoning system. Although the site might at first glance appear fairly isolated, it is in reality very close to homes in the River springs Estates and Mary K. Falls Estates subdivisions. Some of the homes are of "higher-end" and will be negatively affected tax-wise. ln addition to the well-known noxious odors produced by these facilities, there is the negative impact this one will have on the limited water table of the area, as well as the probable negative impact it will have on safety in the area, where crime has been on the increase recently. A recent Bend Bulletin article discusses the overabundance of shops and grow operations which is leading to a black, i.e. illegal, market for the drug. lnteresting, in this regard, there is an application for another grow operation at 5535 NW 62nd street in Tetherow crossing about one mile from this site. our roads are privately maintained for residential, not commercial, traffic and the applicant is under no obligation to contribute to their upkeep. Properties in River Springs, Odin Falls Ranch and Tetherow Crossing pay an annual road fee. This is a RESIDENTIAL, not an AGRICULTURAL, community. Please vote to save our neighborhood and disallow this highly negative addition to the area. Sincerely, Spencer M. Krueger & Mary Lefevre Odin Falls Ranch 7940 NW Grubstake Way Redmond, OR 97756 From: Anthonv Racuine To: Tracv Griffin Subjectr Pls scan to 18-047-AD & print a copy for the file. Thx. Datel Tuesday, February 6, 2018 8:35:56 AM From: Karen Roberts Imailto:[email protected]] Sent: Sunday, February 4,20L8 1-1:25 AM To: Nick Lelack Zecha riah H eck File Number 47 -18-000047-AD Applicant: Cascade Estate Farms, LLC Mr. Raguine: I am filing my notice of OPPOSITION to this application for a marijuana production facility in our neighborhood. Below are reasons why this should not be approved. 1. INCREASED RISK OF CRIME: Several houses in our neighborhoods have already been prowled and/or burglarized. This operation will only increase the draw for persons with nefarious intent accessing our area, potentially causing increased crime problems for the entire neighborhood. 2. ODOR: Marijuana plants inherently have a distinctly unpleasant odor when growing due to the oils on the plants. This odor will permeate our neighborhoods, fouling the air and may even violate Oregon clean air standards. 3. LOSS OF TAX REVENUE: lf approved, our property values will be severely affected negatively This neighborhood is a major source of property tax revenue to the County; I highly doubt that the paltry tax revenue the County will receive from this production facility will offset the loss of revenue from our Iowered property values. 4. INCREASED TRAFFIC: The roads accessing this proposed operation are privately owned, maintained by the neighborhoods through which they pass. Approval of this application will cause increased heavy traffic over these roads with no obligation on the part of the applicant to fix any damage, nor contribute in any way to the maintenance of these roads. This will negatively impact over 600 properties financially, benefiting no one but the applicant. PLEASE DISAPPROVE THIS APPLICATION Sincerely, Art and Karen Roberts 7560 NW Grubstake Way Redmond, Oregon From Anthonv Raouine To: Tracv Griffin Subject: Pls scan to 247-L8-000047-AD & print a copy for the file. Thx. Date! Tuesday, February 6, 2018 8:27:52 AM From: Odin Falls HOA [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Sunday, February 4,201.8 B:15 PM To: Anthony Raguine File Number: 47-1 8-000047 -AD Applicant: Cascade Estate Farms, LLC Mr. Raguine The Odin Falls Ranch Homeowner Association is filing notice of OPPOSITION to this application for a marijuana production facility in our neighborhood. There are many reasons why this application should not be approved. INCREASED RISK OF CRIME: Several houses in our neighborhoods have already been prowled and/or burglarized. This operation will only increase the draw of a criminal element accessing our area, potentially causing increased crime problems for the entire neighborhood. ODOR: Marijuana plants inherently have a distinctly unpleasant odor when growing due to the oils on the plants. This odor will permeate our neighborhoods, fouling the air and may even violate Oregon clean air standards, as well as Deschutes County regulations regarding grow operations. LOSS OF TAX REVENUE: If approved, our property values will be severely affected. This neighborhood is a major source of property tax revenue to the County; and it is unlikely the paltry tax revenue the County will receive from this production facility will offset the loss of revenue from our lowered property values. INCREASED TRAFFIC: The roads accessing this proposed operation are privately owned and maintained by the neighborhoods through which they pass. Approval of this application will cause increased traffic over these roads with no obligation on the part of the applicant to fix any damage, nor contribute in any way to the maintenance of these roads. This will negatively impact over 600 properties financially in Tetherow Crossing, Odin Falls Ranch, and River Springs Estates, pus other un-associated properties, benefiting no one but the applicant. GROLTND WATER DEPLETION: Our members are served by a community well as our only source of water. Increased agricultural irrigation requirements of this grow facility will further contribute to the depletion of the aquifer from which we draw our household water needs, to our community's detriment. OVERPRODUCTION IN OREGON: Experts in the field agree that Oregon is already producing more than five times the amount of marijuana that can be consumed by Oregonians, with Deschutes County identified as one of six counties that are major contributors. They agree that much of this overproduction is going to the black market in other stateso contributing to law enforcement problems in states where marijuana in not legal. Another grow operation will only worsen this problem. INCONGRUOUS USE: Even though the areas affected are zoned MUA-10, the primary use is 5-10 acre lots with one residence. In other words these are residential neighborhoods. A marijuana grow facility has no business in a residential neighborhood and should not be allowed. PLEASE DISAPPROVE THIS APPLICATION Odin Falls Ranch, Board of Directors Terri Timberman, President D Casey Gibbs, Secretary From: Anthony Raouine to: Tracv Griffin Subject: Pls scan to 247-L8-000047-AD & print a copy for the file. Thx. Date: Tuesday, February 6, 2018 8:25:21 AM From: Gu nther H irsch man n Imailto:ghirschman nj r@ gmail.com] Sent: Sunday, February 4,2018 9:03 PM To: Anthony Ragui ne Mr. Raguine, I am filing my notice of OPPOSITION to this application for a marijuana production facility in our neighborhood. We are concerned about the increased risk of crime in our neighborhood. Loss of property values and the increased traffic. After reading the article on Saturday February 3,2018 in the Bend Bulletin about the over production of Marijuana in this state. lt appears that this state already has three times the amount of Marijuana that it can consume. So you can understand our concern. That being said, we do not need any more of these facilities. PLEASE DISAPPROVE THIS APPLICATION. Sincerely, Gunther Hirschmann Marisol Hirshchmann 7990 NW Grubstrake Way Redmond, OP..97756 From: Anthonv Raouine To: Tracv Griffin Subject: pls scan to 247-18-000047-AD & print a copy for the file. thx Date: Tuesday, February 6, 2018 8:03:46 AM From: Brad Siemens [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Monday, February 5, 20i.8 9:29 AM To: Anthony Raguine Dear sir I live in oden falls ranch address 7965 nw grubstake way I am writing in reguards to cascade estate farms llc application for marijuana production facility please don't allow this to ruin the reason I moved here I am agaist this and will seek legal action if it is pushed forward this is not the proper place for this type of operation it will lower property values and increase traffic and crime this is a rural residencial area for families to live in peace and quiet not a place to grow drugs please useyour better judgement and rule agaistthis it's a bad idea and itwill harm more people that it would ever help thank you if you have any questions my number is 541-699-8707 brad siemens Brad Siemens I Sales Professional B&RAutoWrecking 64154 Hwy 97 Bend OR 977OI 800-320-7397 (office) | s41.-s26-11.51 (Fax) Brad.Siemens @autowrecki ng.com trtl *X CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE ** If you are not the intended recipient of this e-mail pleose reply and notify the sender immediately and delete this e-mail. This e- mail messoge ond ony ottachments is exclusively for the sole use of the intended recipient ond may contoin information that is privileged, confidentiol and/or exempt from disclosure under state or federol laws. Distribution, duplicotion or disclosing the contents of this e-moil by someone other thdn the intended recipient is strictly prohibited ond may result in legol action. From: Anthonv Raauine To: Tracv Griffin Subject: Pls scan to 18-047-AD & print a copy for the record. Thx. Date: Tuesday, February 6, 2018 8:56:30 AM Attachments: Mariiuana orow apol letter.docx From: Bill Castillo and Marj Bishop [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Saturday, February 3,201-8 5:03 PM To: Anthony Raguine Cc: nick.lelack@desh utes.org; matt.marti n @desh utes.org; Zecha riah H eck Subject: Comments on appl ication File N u m b er : 247 -I8-000047-AD Attached are our comments for the application by Cascade Estate Farms, LLC for a marijuana production facility File number : 247-IB-000047-AD Sent from Mail for Windows 10 February 3,2018 Mr. Anthony Raguine Deschutes County Planning Division RE: File Number 247-18-OOOO47-AD Application for marijuana production facility Applicant: Cascade Estate Farm, LLC We are writing in opposition to this application for a marijuana production facility immediately adjacent to our River Springs Estates neighborhood. Since voters approved the sale of recreational marijuana in 2Ot4 this new industry has grown out of control. According to a recent article in the Bend Bulletin, there are already 900 licensed recreational growers and over 1100 license applications awaiting approval in Oregon. This on top of the 25,600 growers of medical marijuana that Oregon has. According to Seth Crawford, a former OSU professor and cannabis policy and economics expert, Oregon's licensed growers already produce up to three times the marijuana demand within the state. The US Attorney for the District of Oregon, Billy J Williams, says that Oregon's growing overproduction of marijuana is attracting criminal networks, drug violence, money laundering and it is drawing down water supplies in rural communities. Approval of this application will degrade our neighborhood and contribute to the gross overproduction of marijuana that is already a significant and increasing problem in Oregon. We urge you to deny approval for this application. We believe a moratorium on approval of any new applications in Deschutes County should be adopted until better control over production can be implemented so that marijuana grown in Oregon is not being diverted to other states where it is not legal. Sincerely, William J Castillo and Marjorie Bishop 7165 NW River Springs Rd Redmond , OR97756 From: Anthonv Raouine IO: Tracv Griffin Subject: Pls scan to 247-t8-000047-AD & print a copy for the record. Thx. Date: Tuesday, February 6, 2018 8:31:46 AM Attachments: Marijuana Grow Application Letter.docx From: David Standerwick Imailto :[email protected]] Sent: Sunday, February 4,201,8 1,1,:44 AM To: Anthony Raguine Zechariah Heck Please consider the attached in objection to the above-referenced Land Use Application File Number: 47 -18-000047-AD Applicant: Cascade Estate Farms, LLC Mr. Raguine: Please consider this letter as a statement of my opposition to the above referenced Land Use Application. As the owner of Tax Lot 500 on Tax Map 14-12-23, my property is separated by only 82 feet from Tax Lot 300; the proposed site for the marijuana production facility. My concerns and objections are the same as those identified and directed to your attention by many of my neighbors in Tetherow, Odin Falls and River Springs Estates. - lncreased risk of crime Several of our neighbors have already been the victims of 'breaking and entering' type crimes. Some even more violent... Commercial activities that require by law, 24 hour security measures, will only invite further criminal activity in the neighborhood. - Odor Of course, marijuana plants have a unique, pungent odor. Quite simply, I don't want my neighborhood to smell like pot... The argument has been made that the grow is required to be indoor and therefore the odor should not be an issue. My understanding is that the building will necessarily be vented to the outside atmosphere. - lmpact on neighboring property values Property values of neighboring homeowners will be negatively impacted (likely significantly), by the establishment of the grow facility and all that comes with it. I don't feel it is fair to impact the many for the benefit of one. - lmpact on water level I understand substantial amounts of water are required for the grow. Options to meet the required water needs are to drill a deeper well; therefore impacting the level at which neighboring properties must go to meet their water needs or trucking water to the grow facility; impacting wear and tear on the privately owned and maintained road accessing the property. Again, not fair to impact the many for the benefit of one" - Overproduction of marijuana in Oregon Oregon's top federal prosecutor has stated that Oregon has a "formidable" problem with overproduction of marijuana - fueling the black market in adjacent states where marijuana production and consumption remains in compliance with federal law - illegal! Enough is enough... Production currently far exceeds demand. Let's not kid ourselves where additional, new production is going. Please reject application number 47-18-000047-AD for the above reasons. Respectfu lly su bm itted, David & Michelle Standenryick 7170 NW River Springs Road fLe; P- 2- L-tg To: Deschutes County Planning Division ,fe- From: River Springs Estates Property Owners Association, Sharon Williams- Jensen, Secretary Bob Litmer, President, RSEPOA 54L-923- 2760, Ray Jensen, Sharon Williams : 541-548-9839 Re: Notice of Application File # 247-18-OOOO47-AD Date: February 7,2018 Attn: Anthony Raguine We oppose approval of the proposed application by Cascades Estate Farms LLC to establish a marijuana production (grow) facility. We oppose this application for the following reasons: r lt will reduce the value of homes surrounding the site and specifically the gated communities of Odin Falls Ranch and River Springs Estates. r The area is not suited for this kind of commercial or agricultural use. No such use is in the surrounding area of family homes. o lt will increase the use of privately owned roads not intended for heavy trucks,( water trucks, heavy equipment, transports etc.) o The roads this enterprise will use are privately owned and the maintenance is paid for by the surrounding HOAS and communities. There is no guarantee the Cascades Estate Farm is going to pay for an appropriate fair share of the wear and tear on the roads. e There are only two means of ingress and egress for residents on 66th avenue: through Federal BLM land/ roads or the privately owned gravel road, o The BLM roads are filled with recreational hikers, off-road vehicles, target shooters, bikers and kids on bicyles. Any use of the BLM road is major conflict of use. 66th avenue turns into a BLM road. We cannot be certain the BLM roads will not be used by this commercial enterprise when there is heavy residential traffic and bad weather conditions on the roads leading to 66th st. r There is a major concern that this enterprise will increase fire hazards. r lncrease of noise, r lncrease of dust on gravel and dirt roads . Strong and repugnant odor of plants in bloom. r lncrease draw down on existing water aquifer providing water to existing communities. r Security of adjoining properties. r We are a suburban residential community with families. This is not appropriate. We did not carefully select and invest in our properties, and their locations to have a commercial enterprise forced upon us. Additional information for these bulleted concerns will be supplied as well as a petition from the Homeowner Associations. The time allotted for rebuttal and the gathering of concerns was ten days from January 26, a Friday. Our HOA President received this notice today, February 1. lf one adds in weekends and not receiving the notice until one week had already passed, we did not have the stated time allowed to gather our petition and our responses. Etr Mailing Date: ::i Friday, January 26,2A18 : Gommunity Development Department Flnnar*rg nivi$iorr Bur!:tlllc Srf€ly bi\,lsien €trsirorlrn*ntrl S{)dt Oi\'t*iolr '.* ,"r'\d 1,. P,Q, Box 60DS i 17 Nlff Lafayette lrvenue Bend, Oregon 977C8'5005 Phonei (541) 398-6575 Fax: (54'l) 385-'176'* http:1'fivrrw,cle sch ute s, org/cd NOTICE OF APPLICATION The Deschutes County Planning Division has received the proposed land use application described below: F|LE NUMBER: 247-18-0OO047-AD APPLIGANT: Cascade Estate Farms, LLC OWNER: lsaac Babanl PRQPOSAL: The applicant requests approval to establish a marijuana production (grow) facility which will consist of a 50' x 100' building and up to 5,000 square feet of mature canopy area. LOGATION: The subject property has an assigned address of 6829 NW 66th Street, Redmond, and is identified on County Assessor Tax Map 14-12-23, as Tax Lot 300. STAFF CONTAGT: Anthony Raguine, anth,Qn)[email protected]*org, (541) 617- 4739 DOGUMENTS: Can be viewed and downloaded from: www,buildingpermits,,oregon,qov and http://dial.de$chu!e.p.grg STAN qAB-pS AN D AP PL,ICABLE CRITERIA Title 18, Deschutes County Zoning Ordinance Chapter 18.16, Exclusive Farm Use Zone Chapter 1 8.1 1 6, Supplementary Provisions Title 22, Deschutes County Development Procedures Ordinance Copies of the application, all documents and evidence submitted by or on behalf of the applicant and applicable criteria are available for inspection at no cost. Gopies can be purchased for 25 cents per page. The Planning Division is located in the Community Development Department Office at 117 NW Lafayette Avenue, Bend, Oregon. Any interested person may submit written comments on the proposed land use action. Your input is important to us. ALL WRITTEN TESTIMONY MUST BE RECEIVED BY THE DESCHUTES couNTy PLANN|NG D|VTSTON NO LATER THAN TEN (10) DAYS FROM THE DATE OF MAILING. Notice of the decision will be provided by a separate mailing. For more information or to requesl copies of the findings and decision, contact the assigned planner. This Notice was mailed pursuant to Deschutes County Code Chapters 22.20 and 22.24. Ourrlitu S*rrli.:/-{ P*rtTtnnpd uith I'riie SECTI0N 23 T, 1{5. R. tzE. tf .U 4 22: OESCHUTES COUNIY & NOE} 'tii at.i t4 1l ir{ lrt i{ 1r' ".i ,.1 II $tf lrAp i t4 12 ,J& .f. 2-4 '1, . .t .,J: i ;'. : ;{ '_i :r: rt. ,1,1 i/i; r'fira, ": ,,; ,.t ..t-; ,ri ") t' r"' '11'ti : :t 1. : rtl r.tr 'll {!:i1-' UAF I \2 s[[ * t2 230 :i 9: it -j \; ,lI l"r I i*1 ii 1.1 Iti ?6 :i 14 irl 12 2: rfi ? I NDE) cd r. (t :t6 ttt is !. i? TO: Deschutes County Planning Divison : Director Nick Lelack, Zacheriah Heck, Matt Martin, Anthony Ragine Deschutes County Commissioners: Tony DeBone, Phil Henderson, Tammy Baney FROM: River Springs Estates Property Owners Association, Odin Falls Ranch HOA and residents of NW 69th and NW 55th Streets RE: Notice of Application for the establishment of a marijuana production (grow) facility. File #247-L8-000047-AD at 6829 NW 66th Street, Redmond OR,97755 The enclosed packet delineates in detail our concerns with the establishment of a marijuana grow facility in our neighborhood. Excerpts from the local papers are included as attachments. The final section is comprised of petitions. The major areas of our responses are: t. The SAFEW to residents, their families, and children with a facility that needs strict security due to it "fueling" aspects of illegal crime and violence. (see attachments) 2. The need for an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STUDY particularly evaluating the draw- down on the water aquifer already being stressed. 3. The establishment of a commercial enterprise in a residential area when historically the agriculture experienced in this Farm Use Zone was a cattle ranch. lt was sold and developed as family hobby farms. 4. A commercial enterprise brings in heaw trucks, noise, -see details- dirt and increased traffic on privately owned roads nqt intended for commercial traffic. Does the applicant show a history of contributing to the maintenance of the private roads he uses and will use for the facility? 5. We are concerned with the danger of fire. This particular kind of commercial facility uses a great deal of electrical energy to power the equipment. We recently had overloads on our current power which started fires. 6. Lastly, do we really need another grow facility? There are no strict regulations in Oregon at the present. Overproduction has led to more crime and increased growth of the black market. 7 - Most concerning who is going to inspect regulations and who is going to enforce the regulations? 8. What is our recourse if the applicant does not follow all the precautions he states he will? The following pages elucidate our concerns.