BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS'

WORK SESSION

April 3, 2007

9:00 a.m.

Harris Hall Main Floor

APPROVED 4/9/2008

 

County Commissioner Faye Stewart presided with Commissioners Bill Dwyer, Bill Fleenor and Peter Sorenson present.  Bobby Green, Sr., was excused.  County Administrator Bill Van Vactor, Assistant County Counsel Stephen Vorhes and Recording Secretary Melissa Zimmer were also present.

 

A. ADJUSTMENTS TO THE AGENDA

 

None.

 

B. PUBLIC HEARINGS/MEASURE 37 CLAIMS

 

1. PUBLIC HEARING/In the Matter of Considering a Ballot Measure 37 Claim and Deciding Whether to Modify, Remove or Not Apply Restrictive Land Use Regulations in Lieu of Providing Just Compensation (PA05-6425, Bixler).

 

2. PUBLIC HEARING AND ORDER 07-4-3-1/In the Matter of Considering a Ballot Measure 37 Claim and Deciding Whether to Modify, Remove or Not Apply Restrictive Land Use Regulations in Lieu of Providing Just Compensation (PA06-7095, Burch).

 

3. PUBLIC HEARING AND ORDER 07-4-3-2/In the Matter of Considering a Ballot Measure 37 Claim and Deciding Whether to Modify, Remove or Not Apply Restrictive Land Use Regulations in Lieu of Providing Just Compensation (PA06-7100, Campbell).

 

4. PUBLIC HEARING/In the Matter of Considering a Ballot Measure 37 Claim and Deciding Whether to Modify, Remove or Not Apply Restrictive Land Use Regulations in Lieu of Providing Just Compensation (PA06-7102, Carpenter).

 

5. PUBLIC HEARING/In the Matter of Considering a Ballot Measure 37 Claim and Deciding Whether to Modify, Remove or Not Apply Restrictive Land Use Regulations in Lieu of Providing Just Compensation (PA 06-7117, Defoe1).

 

6. PUBLIC HEARING/In the Matter of Considering a Ballot Measure 37 Claim and Deciding Whether to Modify, Remove or Not Apply Restrictive Land Use Regulations in Lieu of Providing Just Compensation (PA06-7126, Defoe2)

 

7. PUBLIC HEARING/In the Matter of Considering a Ballot Measure 37 Claim and Deciding Whether to Modify, Remove or Not Apply Restrictive Land Use Regulations in Lieu of Providing Just Compensation (PA06-7125, Edgemon).

 

8. PUBLIC HEARING AND ORDER 07-4-3-3/In the Matter of Considering a Ballot Measure 37 Claim and Deciding Whether to Modify, Remove or Not Apply Restrictive Land Use Regulations in Lieu of Providing Just Compensation (PA06-7107, Gifford).

 

9. PUBLIC HEARING/In the Matter of Considering a Ballot Measure 37 Claim and Deciding Whether to Modify, Remove or Not Apply Restrictive Land Use Regulations in Lieu of Providing Just Compensation (PA06-7327, Glover).

 

10. PUBLIC HEARING/In the Matter of Considering a Ballot Measure 37 Claim and Deciding Whether to Modify, Remove or Not Apply Restrictive Land Use Regulations in Lieu of Providing Just Compensation (PA 06-7119, Grant).

 

11. PUBLIC HEARING AND ORDER 07-4-3-4/In the Matter of Considering a Ballot Measure 37 Claim and Deciding Whether to Modify, Remove or Not Apply Restrictive Land Use Regulations in Lieu of Providing Just Compensation (PA06-7108, Keepers1).

 

12. PUBLIC HEARING AND ORDER 07-4-3-5/In the Matter of Considering a Ballot Measure 37 Claim and Deciding Whether to Modify, Remove or Not Apply Restrictive Land Use Regulations in Lieu of Providing Just Compensation (PA06-7085, Kirkpatrick2).

 

13. PUBLIC HEARING/In the Matter of Considering a Ballot Measure 37 Claim and Deciding Whether to Modify, Remove or Not Apply Restrictive Land Use Regulations in Lieu of Providing Just Compensation (PA06-7106, Lamb1).

 

14. PUBLIC HEARING/In the Matter of Considering a Ballot Measure 37 Claim and Deciding Whether to Modify, Remove or Not Apply Restrictive Land Use Regulations in Lieu of Providing Just Compensation (PA06-7328, Lassiter).

 

15. PUBLIC HEARING/In the Matter of Considering a Ballot Measure 37 Claim and Deciding Whether to Modify, Remove or Not Apply Restrictive Land Use Regulations in Lieu of Providing Just Compensation (PA06-7115, Lone Rock2).

 

16. PUBLIC HEARING/In the Matter of Considering a Ballot Measure 37 Claim and Deciding Whether to Modify, Remove or Not Apply Restrictive Land Use Regulations in Lieu of Providing Just Compensation (PA06-7116, Lone Rock3).

 

17. PUBLIC HEARING AND ORDER 07-4-3-6/In the Matter of Considering a Ballot Measure 37 Claim and Deciding Whether to Modify, Remove or Not Apply Restrictive Land Use Regulations in Lieu of Providing Just Compensation (PA06-7094, Neumann).

 

18. PUBLIC HEARING/In the Matter of Considering a Ballot Measure 37 Claim and Deciding Whether to Modify, Remove or Not Apply Restrictive Land Use Regulations in Lieu of Providing Just Compensation (PA 06-7121, Rankin).

 

19. PUBLIC HEARING/In the Matter of Considering a Ballot Measure 37 Claim and Deciding Whether to Modify, Remove or Not Apply Restrictive Land Use Regulations in Lieu of Providing Just Compensation (PA06-7124, Ridgley).

 

20. PUBLIC HEARING AND ORDER 07-4-3-7/In the Matter of Considering a Ballot Measure 37 Claim and Deciding Whether to Modify, Remove or Not Apply Restrictive Land Use Regulations in Lieu of Providing Just Compensation (PA06-7122, Sletager).

 

21. PUBLIC HEARING AND ORDER 07-4-3-8/In the Matter of Considering a Ballot Measure 37 Claim and Deciding Whether to Modify, Remove or Not Apply Restrictive Land Use Regulations in Lieu of Providing Just Compensation (PA06-7109, Svingen).

 

22. PUBLIC HEARING AND ORDER 07-4-3-9/In the Matter of Considering a Ballot Measure 37 Claim and Deciding Whether to Modify, Remove or Not Apply Restrictive Land Use Regulations in Lieu of Providing Just Compensation (PA06-7118, Swearengin).

 

23. PUBLIC HEARING AND ORDER 07-4-3-10/In the Matter of Considering a Ballot Measure 37 Claim and Deciding Whether to Modify, Remove or Not Apply Restrictive Land Use Regulations in Lieu of Providing Just Compensation (PA 06-7120, Watson).

 

24. PUBLIC HEARING AND ORDER 07-4-3-11/In the Matter of Considering a Ballot Measure 37 Claim and Deciding Whether to Modify, Remove or Not Apply Restrictive Land Use Regulations in Lieu of Providing Just Compensation (PA06-7101, Willie).

 

25. PUBLIC HEARING AND ORDER 07-4-3-12/In the Matter of Considering a Ballot Measure 37 Claim and Deciding Whether to Modify, Remove or Not Apply Restrictive Land Use Regulations in Lieu of Providing Just Compensation (PA06-7111, Woodard1).

 

26. PUBLIC HEARING AND ORDER 07-4-3-13/In the Matter of Considering a Ballot Measure 37 Claim and Deciding Whether to Modify, Remove or Not Apply Restrictive Land Use Regulations in Lieu of Providing Just Compensation (PA06-7112, Woodard2)

 

Stewart asked if there were any ex parte contacts.

 

Sorenson said someone called him about a hearing from the Cottage Grove area.  He thought it was on Woodard.  He asked Woodard to call Stewart.

 

There were no other ex parte contacts.

 

Kent Howe, Land Management, reported there are 26 claims today and staff had mailed notice to the property owners within 1500 feet of the subject properties in mid-March. He stated that staff conducted the analysis of the pertinent Measure 37 requirements on these claims and summarized the information in the staff reports.  He said the analysis addresses the requirements of ownership, date of acquisition, the current zoning, the zoning regulations at the time of acquisition and some form of competent analysis of fair market value reduction resulting from the land use regulations that have been applied to the property since the current ownerís acquisition.  He noted for those claims that did not provide an appraisal, the county administrator has waived an appraisal requirement because they have provided a competent analysis of value reduction.  He said they received a letter regarding the Grant application.  He said they requested suspending the process for their claim indefinitely. He noted of the remaining 25 claims, 15 have been recommended for denial.  He added of those, seven do not appear to be valid because there is not any reduction in the fair market value from the enforcement of restricted land use regulations.  He indicated those are Defoe1 and Defoe2, Lamb1, Lassiter, Lone Rock2 and Lone Rock3.  He said the other claims recommended for denial have not submitted adequate evidence regarding the alleged reduction of value despite requests for that information.  He noted without additional information, the county administrator would be compelled to recommend denial of those claims. 

 

Howe indicated the Bixler claim was submitted in September 2005 and the application was not complete at that time. He said the applicant was notified by written correspondence and no further information has been received. 

 

Bixler

 

Lucette Wood, said she was speaking on behalf of her parents who own the land.  She said they donít have representation.  She had documents to submit.  She stated it was her grandparentsí land and they bought it intending to have plots for their grandchildren.  She said her mother was going to have the land transferred and they did do it in 1982, but thereafter the new zoning restrictions were applied and they were not able to get family plots. She requested three family plots of five acres and to leave the rest undeveloped.

 

MOTION: to keep the record open to April 24 and another hearing on May 8.

 

Dwyer MOVED, Sorenson SECONDED.

 

Van Vactor indicated they were also lacking valuation information.

 

VOTE: 4-0.

 

Birch

 

There was no one signed up to speak.

 

Campbell

 

There was no one signed up to speak.

 

Carpenter

 

Gary Carpenter, Eugene, said his parents bought the property in 1975.  He said his wishes were to sell a portion of the land to pay for it.  He said the zoning changed after he bought it to five acre plots.  He said his dad hesitated selling five acres, then decided he would and the County said no. He said his fatherís wish before he died  was that the property would be divided among his kids and grandkids.  He said they are petitioning for the five acre plots.

 

MOTION: to leave the record open to April 24  and to work with Land Management  to get the correct information and the hearing on May 8.

 

Dwyer MOVED, Sorenson SECONDED.

 

VOTE: 4-0.

 

Defoe1

 

Norm Waterbury, Eugene, represented the Defoes.  He just received the staff report.  He said there was an issue of title.  He said the applicant hadnít identified the original family and whether the current owners are family members as defined by Measure 37.  He said they are the original owners but it would take time to address the issue.  He asked for a continuance.

 

MOTION: to leave the record open to April 14 with a hearing on May 8 for Defoe1 and Defoe2.

 

Dwyer MOVED, Fleenor SECONDED.

 

VOTE: 4-0.

 

Defoe2

 

Ronald Major Defoe,  Junction City, stated he hadnít seen the staff report.  He wanted to continue this.

 

Edgemon

 

Sheryl Balthrop, Eugene,  said the only issue is whether they had submitted a complete claim regarding valuation.  She said they had submitted a comparative market analysis and they have a realtor present to qualify.  She noted that the claimant has owned the property since 1967 and wants to place one residence on tax lot 1000.  She believed they submitted sufficient evidence regarding the reduction in fair market value caused by EFU 40 in 1976.  She asked that the waiver be granted.

 

Robert Edgemon, said he bought the property in 1967.  He said he owns additional property.  He noted after he bought it, everything was changed on the zoning.  He said he raises cattle and hay and he wanted to put one dwelling on the bottom of the property.

 

Dale Veenendaal, Springfield, said he did a market analysis and it showed flatland property, through Marcola was between $8,000 to $10,000 per acre for land.  He said it is not developable land. He said with their property he came out between $25,000 to $40,000 per acre with a house on it.  He went by the comparables.

 

Van Vactor said they still need a linkage.  He asked if the regulation as to whether or not it is buildable affects the value of the property.  He asked if there was a difference between buildable and non-buildable land at $10,000 per acre.

 

Veenendaal said the properties that do have houses on them brings the value up

 

Van Vactor indicated there are parcels zoned rural residential that would not be impacted by the resolution and it could be a comparable.

 

MOTION: to keep the record open to April 24 and a hearing on May 8.

 

Dwyer MOVED, Fleenor SECONDED.

 

VOTE: 4-0.

 

Gifford

 

No one signed up to speak.

 

Glover

 

Ron Funke, stated he represented the Glovers. He was surprised to see it was recommended for denial.  He indicated that all evidence had been submitted.  He said there was a note back from the planning department that the appraisal was not submitted when the application was initially submitted. He noted the appraisal has been submitted.  He said it has been submitted as supplemental information.  He added the appraisal has been done by a state certified real estate appraiser and he shows a current value of $640,000 and an after value of $910,000 for a net difference of $570,000.  He said the Glovers bought the property in 1968 and they want to create two or three additional parcels.  He said they want to have their children build on one parcel with two other parcels to be sold for other development.

 

Van Vactor said in reviewing the file it looked like an appraisal had been submitted.  He said the waiver has been granted to the claim.

 

Adele Glover, Junction City, said they bought their property in 1968 with the idea that after they build a house for themselves, they would establish a rental or supplemental income.  She said with Measure 37, they saw it as an opportunity to develop their land.

 

Jeff Greenwald, Junction City, stated he was a neighbor.  He wasnít opposed to the Measure 37 claim but he wondered what it would do for his land.

 

Grant

 

MOTION: to keep the record open to April 24 with a hearing on May 8.

 

Dwyer MOVED Fleenor SECONDED.

 

Howe indicated the Grants requested an indefinite extension.  They donít want to proceed at this time.

 

Dwyer withdrew his motion, Fleenor withdrew his second.

 

Keepers1

 

Nadine Keepers, Eugene, said her grandmother bought the property in 1941.  She indicated it was turned over to her parents in 1953 and she bought 10 acres in 1969 with the idea she would build one house on it.  She didnít get to and it was rezoned to Exclusive Farm Use.  She wanted to build one house on it.

 

Kirkpatrick2

 

Terry Casey, said he owns the meadow that is adjacent to the property they want to build on.  He said they already have a trailer on their property and they want to put two more trailers on their property.  He was opposed to the claim.

 

Daren Kirkpatrick, Marcola, said he never met Casey and it is not in a timber area, he lives next to fields.  He added he is not going to put trailers in, he will put homes in.  He said he bought the property in 1986 and it was zoned RR1.  He said in 2000, the state administrative rule changes changed his property to RR2.  He didnít think it was fair.

 

Lamb

 

Doris Lamb, said she bought the property in 1958 to have it become a Century Farm.  She said she still owns part of the land her father started in 1912.  She said the valuation is what the County disagrees on.  She said her timber is valuable.  She wants to continue the land in timber and wants to set up a trust where her children could build on the land if they want.  She said she is on a hardship case and has moved a manufactured home on her property.  She wanted a waiver. She wanted to use the proceeds from timber management.  She asked for a waiver on the hardship and a waiver to set up a trust for her heirs to have rights to the property for development.

 

Stewart said there wasnít an appraisal.

 

Lamb said the valuation doesnít show what she wants to do with the land.  She wanted more time to do research.

 

MOTION: to leave the record open to April 24 and a hearing on may 8.

 

Dwyer MOVED, Fleenor SECOND.

 

VOTE: 4-0.

 

Lassiter

 

Bernard Woodard, Cottage Grove, said he is the agent for the Lassiters.  He just received the report on Friday.  He thought the ownership was good but the problem was with the competent form of value reduction analysis.  He asked for an extension.

 

MOTION: to leave the record open to April 24, and a hearing on May 8.

 

Dwyer MOVED, Fleenor SECONDED.

 

VOTE: 4-0.

 

Lone Rock2

 

Samuel Garst, Elmira, stated he had no comment.

 

Sally Cowan, Veneta, found out about the notice.  She wanted to be put on record.  She wasnít familiar with the valuation and how it could have been higher with farm and forest land.  She noted all surrounding timber is concerned about a domino effect.

 

Linda Davies, Veneta, said she only knew about this as it was put in her mailbox.  She had questions about water and will comment on it later.  She was opposed to this and she has lived in the area for ten years and it is in the floodplain area.

 

Kate Cole, Veneta, was concerned about watershed.

 

Greg Corbin, said he represented the Lone Rock timber claim for both claims.  He wanted an extension of time to respond to the staff report.  He was unable from the staff report to identify the analysis that was used to come to a conclusion.  He indicated there are two claimants:  Lone Rock Timber Company and one for the timber holder.  He said the analysis was different.  He wanted to be able to provide that for the record.  With regard to the development, a development proposal in a claim is used to give a target for purposes of compensation and understanding what the diminution in value is.  He said it doesnít represent an actual proposal for development .

 

MOTION: to keep the record open to April 24 with a hearing on May 8 for Lone Rock2 and Lone Rock3.

 

Dwyer MOVED, Fleenor SECONDED.

 

VOTE: 4-0.

 

Ida Templeton, was against this.  She said she has lived on Knight Road since 1960.  She wants to give her property to her children.  She never received any information and wants to get put on a list.

 

Lone Rock3

 

Daniel Stander, Eugene, said he was speaking on behalf of 32 neighbors.  He said his testimony addresses continuous ownership and alleged reduction in fair market value.  He noted the property was sold in 2004 for $99,000 and it was recorded in July 2004.  He said the bargain and sale deed was in the packet.  He said because Richard Sohn owned stock in both Umpqua and Lone Rock that there had been continuous ownership.  He noted under Measure 37, legal entities cannot have family members.  He said one entity selling to another entity breaks the chain of ownership.  He noted both entities are currently active and are separate and distinct legal entities.   He noted that eight Lone Rock claims have been filed with the state and have been denied, because the state concluded that Richard Sohn does not own the properties and the current ownership began when the property was conveyed to the current owner.  He said they concluded there has been no reduction in fair market value because no regulations have been put in place after Lone Rock gained ownership.  He said Mr. Sohn is not an owner of the property as defined by ORS 197.353 11 (c).  He said Lone Rock purchased the property in June 2004.  He said it was zoned F1 at that time and is zoned F1 today.  He said there have been no changes to what land uses are allowed since the time of purchase.  He indicated that there has been no reduction in fair market value.  He urged the Board to deny the claim as there has been no restrictive regulations enacted since Lone Rock Timber Company acquired the property.

 

Greg Corbin, Portland, wanted to continue the matter. 

 

Neumann

 

No one signed up to speak.

 

Rankin

 

Eileen Rankin, wanted an extension of time  as she just received the staff report.   She was missing the valuation and she will have it.

 

MOTION: to leave the record open to April 24 with the hearing on May 8.

 

Dwyer MOVED, Sorenson SECONDED.

 

VOTE: 4-0.

 

Ridgley

 

Wes Ridgley, said he didnít have the property values.  He used the Countyís real property values..

 

MOTION: to leave the record open to April 24 with the hearing on May 8.

 

Fleenor MOVED, Dwyer SECONDED.

 

VOTE: 4-0.

 

Sletager

 

Trudi Sletager, appreciated the recommendation.

 

Svingen

 

Karen Lawrence,  stated that this was the second Measure 37 claim in her neighborhood in Santa Clara. She indicated the proposed development would place 12 acres of urban density in actively farmed land.  She said there was a lack of clarity in the zoning provisions that would have pertained to this property in 1964.  She said the tax lot is stamped as being in a Lane County special permit area.  She asked to see the accompanying code provisions to verify what it means, because it is in the area of a floodplain.  She indicated that staff had not provided to date the designation and the development restrictions.  She noted the area was unzoned in 1964.  She found Lane County 9.700 to 9.995 for an unzoned development permit that restricts development in unzoned areas based on compatibility with surrounding properties, nuisance potential, adverse effects on the livability of surrounding properties and noise levels.  She said there is incompatibility in the center of productive farmland.  She said there is no indication that a development of this kind would have been allowed at the time of purchase.  She asked the Board to deny the claim.

 

Kathy Lesiak, Eugene asked the waiver be denied for the claim.  She noted in 1998 the property was transferred into a living trust that said the transfer deed did not allow use of the property in violation of land use laws and regulations.  She said in 1998 the Svingens accepted the EFU zone and conveyed it into a trust and the EFU 30 zoning. She thought it could be contested at the state level.  She said the claim of loss of fair market value is not properly substantiated. She said the property is downstream from the confluence of the McKenzie and Willamette Rivers.  She commented that in 1964 it wouldnít have been suitable for subdividing into one acre parcels.  She said the comps didnít take into consideration the siting of the subject property in relationship to the waterways.

 

Joshua Clark, said he represent the Svingens.  He said they are not asking for approval of any specific development plan.  He said the one used in the application was used for getting a valuation assessment.  He said they are asking for a waiver of the regulations to allow uses that would have been allowed at the time the applicants acquired the property.  He recommended approving the claim.

 

Swearingen

 

Steven Cordel, Cottage Grove, said he and his wife oppose the proposal about dividing the property at Saginaw.  He said it would have a negative impact to his property.

 

Watson1

 

Roger Emmert, Sweet Home, said he hadnít obtained a copy of the staff report..  He agreed with staffís recommendation.

 

Willie

 

Robert Crider, Creswell, said he lives adjacent to the Willie property.  He said his family has owned the property since 1967 when they bought it from Willie.  He said the property was productive farmland.  He said the land has been overgrown with brush.  He didnít see how Measure 37 could reduce the property anymore than it already is.  He was concerned about a millrace that runs through his property onto Willieís property.  He opposed development of the property.

 

Fleenor indicated the findings show a lack of demonstration of ownership.

 

Norm Waterbury, stated he represented Berta Willie.  He said the staff report he received said something about a revocable trust.  He said he received a note about the trust and they presented the current trust as it currently exists.  He said there was another trust that was vacated ten years ago dated 1995.  He said staff asked if the first trust was a revocable trust.  He said it was because she couldnítí create a revocable trust from an irrevocable trust.  He indicated that his client is 90 years old and she had a hard time coming up with paperwork.  He said Willie called her last night and found the original revocable trust from 1995.  He asked for an extension.

 

MOTION: to keep the record open until April 24 and the hearing on May 8.

 

Fleenor MOVED, Dwyer SECONDED.

 

VOTE: 4-0.

 

Woodard1

 

Jerry Plat, Elmira, he said they want to build 12 single family dwellings on two acre parcels within the 115 acre parcel and access to the land is off of Suttle Road.  He said the water table is low in the area.

 

Woodard2

 

Mike Reeder, Eugene, represented Steve Woodard.  He said he sent an e-mail to Vorhes responding to the staff report that discussed the issue of when the claimant acquired an interest in the property for purposes of Measure 37.  He said they have a warranty deed from 1948 where Woodard has an ownership interest in the property.  He added that his father had a life estate in 1948 with the executory interest being reserved for the four siblings.  He said the staff report discussed the issue about having an ownership interest in the property at that time.  He said Measure 37 speaks to having any interest in the property.  He said there were no land use regulations on the property in either 1969 or 1948.  He wanted it waived to 1948 because it was clear.  He said it is a valid claim and he recommended approval.

 

Vorhes said in the past they have had a life estate holder and the remainder claim and the orders have issued waivers to the life estate holder but not to the remainder holders.  He indicated that the deed in this case is specific.  He said it raised the question of when  the operation of the deed actually conveyed.  He thought that took place at the time of Oscar Woodard.

 

Dwyer asked if the claim was complete and where they go back to.

 

Vorhes said the representation of 1969 is when the father died and that was the position they took in the staff report and full ownership of the property vested in the four children.

 

Reeder said they didnít have a problem with the County using the 1969 date for purposes of the waiver.   He said it was from County Circuit Court showing when he died.  Reederís concern was about how the state handles their Measure 37 claims because they donít get a chance to explain issues like this.  He wanted the County to let the state know this is a valid claim.

 

Vorhes said if it Board wants to take action today, they might take tentative action and direct staff to draft an order.  He said based on the evidence, they do have a date of waiver they could put into the Board order of the 1969 date.  He added that they could check with the state to see where the state is with this claim before they take final action.

 

Steve Woodard, Cottage Grove, said he is the claimant.  He said they want to complete the claim but there is no rush.  He said they want to lock in whatever opportunities they could get from Measure 37 to provide for their children and grandchildren in the future. He hoped the Board would approve the claim.

 

There being no one else signed up to speak, Commissioner Stewart closed the Public Hearing.

 

MOTION: to approve Campbell, Keepers, Kirkpatrick2, Newman, Sletager, Swearingen, Watson1, and Woodard1.

 

Dwyer MOVED, Fleenor SECONDED.

 

VOTE: 4-0.

 

Burch and Gifford claim.

 

Sorenson said they had a hearing and no one spoke and then they received a letter.  He indicated the letter in the Gifford case asked if they could have the hearing rolled to May 8 to have staff look at the legal issues.

 

MOTION: to keep the record open to May 24  and a hearing on May 8.

 

Dwyer MOVED, Fleenor SECONDED

 

Vorhes said this raised issues more to the state law about transferability.  He said in addressing waivers, they look at minimum lot size of the applicable zone and waive that provision in the appropriate case, but donít waive the land use regulations.  He added that they apply those in conjunction with the applicable regulations that remain in place under the waiver.  He said the argument under state law affects the ability to divide agricultural lands and it might come into play in the future if someone raises it as an issue.  He indicated the Board only has the authority to address and waive the land use regulations if enacted.

 

 

VOTE: 1-3 (Fleenor, Stewart, Sorenson dissenting).  MOTION FAILED.

 

Burch

 

MOTION:  to approve the Burch waiver.

 

Dwyer MOVED, Fleenor SECONDED.

 

VOTE: 3-1 (Sorenson dissenting).

 

Gifford

 

MOTION: to approve the Gifford waiver.

 

Dwyer MOVED, Fleenor SECONDED.

 

VOTE: 3-1 (Sorenson dissenting).

 

Glover

 

Stewart said they brought in an appraisal and it met their needs and it is recommended for approval.

 

MOTION: to tentatively approve the waiver.

 

Dwyer MOVED, Fleenor SECONDED.

 

Vorhes said they did not have an order.

 

VOTE: 4-0.

 

Svingen

 

Fleenor said he had reservations about this claim.

 

Vorhes explained the issue in a conveyance to a trust is whether it is revocable and who the trustees are.  He said in the case where the grantor to the trust is designated as a trustee (and there is a revocable authority within the trust) they viewed that the trust is a new owner but the trustee, the grantor, who continues to hold power over the property as trustee and has the ability to revoke the trust, continues to hold an interest in the property that has not changed as a result of the conveyance into the trust.  He said to the individuals for the grantor trustee, they waive to the individual, not to the trust and waive to the date the individual first acquired an interest in the property and that is the proposed order for Svingen.  He said they do not waive to the trust because it is a new date of acquisition and it is uncertain under the trust that the trust wonít continue, it would go on to someone else. He added there is a transferability issue. He recommended only waiving to the trustee who was the original grantor and retains the interest in the property.

 

MOTION: to approve the waiver.

 

Dwyer MOVED, Stewart SECONDED.

 

Stewart thought it met the criteria for date of acquisition and revocable trusts.

 

Fleenor said he would vote a reluctant yes.

 

VOTE: 4-0.

 

Wood2

 

MOTION: to tentatively approve to March 9, 1969 pursuant and having the order placed on the Consent Calendar.

 

Dwyer MOVED, Fleenor SECONDED.

 

VOTE: 4-0.

 

There being no further business, Commissioner Stewart adjourned the meeting at 11:15 a.m.

 

 

Melissa Zimmer

Recording Secretary