8 — THE BAKER COUNTY PRESS
FRIDAY, APRIL 14, 2017
Local
Planning Commissions finally
approve mining zone change
BY TODD ARRIOLA
Todd@TheBakerCountyPress.com
Bringing a contentious
application process to its
near conclusion, on Friday,
March 31, 2017, the Baker
County Planning Com-
mission voted to approve
PA-16-002, a request from
Helge Brothers, LLC, for
a zone change from Rural
Residential (RR-5) to Min-
eral Extraction (ME), for
a roughly nine-acre parcel
located in the Cracker
Creek Road area north of
Sumpter.
Present from the Com-
mission for the three-and-
a-half hour continuance of
the public hearing for the
Remand of the request, on
Friday were Chair Alice
Trindle, Vice Chair Jim
Grove, and Commission-
ers Suzan Ellis Jones, Tom
Van Diepen, Kasey Wright,
Tim Kerns, and Rob Craw-
ford. County Planning
Department staff presence
included Director Holly
Kerns, Senior Planner Eve
Henes, Planners Kara Har-
ris and Carson Quam, and
Planning Assistant Kevin
Berryman.
Presence also included
Eastern Oregon Mining
Association (EOMA)
President Ken Alexander,
EOMA Mineral Policy
Director Jan Alexander,
and Keith Jones.
During the Commission’s
five-hour public hearing,
on Thursday, January 26,
2017, the Commission vot-
ed, four-to-two, to deny the
request, based on lack of
significance (whether the
property is a significant re-
source), as required by the
Baker County Comprehen-
sive Land Use Plan. Grove
made the motion to deny,
Crawford seconded, and
the motion carried, with
Trindle, Grove, Kerns, and
Crawford in favor, and
Wright and Van Diepen
opposed (Jones was absent,
due to surgery).
Two public hearings
were held before the Baker
County Board of Commis-
sioners in the matter, one
on Wednesday, February
1, 2017, and the second on
Wednesday, February 15,
2017 (detailed in the Fri-
day, February 3, 2017, and
Friday, February 17, 2017
issues of The Baker County
Press), with extensive
testimony provided up to
that point, for and against
approval of the application.
Noting an existing conflict
between the Comprehen-
sive Plan, and the zoning
in the Zoning Map, which
needed to be addressed, but
stating that the application
could be reviewed using
the established process,
County legal counsel Drew
Martin recommended
remanding the request to
the Planning Commission,
which the County Board of
Commissioners then did,
during the second hearing.
The Remand hearing
was held on Thursday,
March 23, 2017 (detailed
in the Friday, March 31,
2017 issues of The Baker
County Press), and, after
further testimony was
provided, during delibera-
tions, it was decided that
a decision could not be
reached yet, and the matter
was continued to Friday,
March 31, 2017, with a
motion from Crawford,
and a second from Wright.
Trindle opened the
Friday, March 31, con-
tinuance of the Remand by
Todd Arriola / The Baker County Press
Planning Department staff and Planning Commissioners discuss the Sumpter
mining claim issue yet again.
reminding attendees that
the record was closed to
testimony (the Commis-
sion was now in delibera-
tions). She asked whether
there was a challenge to
the jurisdiction of the
Commission to hear the
matter (none was de-
clared), whether there was
any conflict to be declared
by a Commission member
(none was declared), and
whether there had been
any ex-parte contacts by
a Commission member
(none were declared).
Trindle spoke about the
focus at the conclusion of
the previous meeting, dur-
ing which the Commission
had decided that the crite-
ria had been met to deem
the property a “significant
site,” after which Trindle
began a discussion about
Goal V criteria, an analysis
based on economic, social,
environmental, and energy
conflicts, were a zoning
change approved, from
RR-5, to ME.
Continuing with that
same theme, Holly pro-
vided a checklist to the
Commission (she noted it
was just a guide), in order
to help streamline the
process regarding incom-
ing conflicting uses with
mining, to which she said,
“The only components that
I was able to identify in
testimony was a residential
use impact, about how
residents feel, or how resi-
dents... react to mining...”
She noted outgoing con-
flicts also, and explained
how she compiled the
information, along with ap-
plicable exhibits, as well as
other details, and she said
this would be a starting
point, and the Commission
would be free to use it, or
use another method to help
analyze details.
Discussing the subject
of the size of the potential
impact area relative to the
property, and conflicting
uses, Trindle asked wheth-
er 1,500 feet (the default
recommended range, Holly
said) would be the con-
sensus, and Grove found it
acceptable, and Crawford
suggested that it could be
extended farther, depend-
ing on noise. Trindle said
the applicant provided
information in the Op-
erating and Reclamation
Plan, suggesting that the
minimum property setback
could be 25 feet adjacent
from Federal lands, 30 feet
from Spaulding Gulch, and
50 feet from the Tax Lot
1400 boundary line.
Van Diepen suggested
the area could be reduced
to 1,000 feet, and after
further discussion and
debate, Grove said he was
reluctant to reduce the area
farther, and that in discuss-
ing conflicting uses and
economic impacts, in his
experience, the value of
property next to ME would
decrease, and there would
be complaints against the
ME.
Van Diepen said, “No,
I think that’s conjecture.
I’m glad you’re walking on
water, and know that.”
Grove said, “Well, I’ve
got a few years of (real
estate experience).”
After further discus-
sion, and frustration about
the slow rate of progress,
voiced by Van Diepen,
Jones said, “The other
thing that bothers me is,
we’re going through this,
and we need specific mo-
tions that are voted on and
passed; otherwise, this is
going to be a balled up
mess... This is completely
in violation of Roberts
Rules (of Order), which
our Bylaws state that we
follow.”
Crawford moved that
there is no economic
impact established on the
incoming conflict, Wright
seconded, and the motion
carried. Wright moved that
there is no social impact
on the incoming conflict,
Crawford seconded, and
the motion carried.
After further discus-
sion, Grove moved that
ME would not be affected
through any environmental
impact with RR-5, Timber
Grazing (TG), and the
Sumpter City limits, Van
Diepen seconded, and the
motion carried. A similar
motion carried, regarding
energy impacts.
After the first of two
short breaks, in discuss-
ing how ME affects
the surrounding areas,
Trindle suggested there
are conflicting uses, Grove
made that motion, Kerns
seconded, and the motion
carried. Further explana-
tion provided by Holly
resulted in Trindle asking
for a motion that there are
conflicting uses, and that
they should be allowed,
but in a limited way.
Grove made that motion,
Crawford seconded it, and
the motion carried.
Subsequent motions
included Crawford’s,
who moved that Planning
Department staff draft
language requiring an ac-
knowledgment of possible
conflicts, for future devel-
opment, building permits,
etc., Jones seconded, and
the motion carried. After
further discussion, Trindle
suggested that there are
established conflicts within
the impact area, with
dwellings and RR-5 zones,
such as property values,
noise, dust and air qual-
ity, fire abatement, weeds,
reclamation, and clarity
on permits. Crawford so
moved, Grove seconded,
and the motion carried.
Before the second short
break, Trindle, Grove, and
Crawford discussed the po-
tential effects to property
values, and Van Diepen
stated that the Sutherlands,
testifying in opposition,
said they didn’t ask any
realtor about the effects to
their property value, next
to ME, and that would be
speculation.
Deliberations continued
for about an hour after
another short break, dur-
ing which the analysis of
economic, social, environ-
mental, and energy (ESEE)
consequences, based on the
decision to allow, limit, or
prohibit a conflicting use,
was discussed.
The various consequenc-
es were deemed to be low,
with several motions made
regarding the subject.
Following this, the Com-
mission discussed buffer
zones, Grove suggested
200 feet, then 100 feet, and
after some calculations, ul-
timately, Kerns moved for
a buffer of 50 feet on Tax
Lot 1400, and the buffers
as suggested in the Operat-
ing and Reclamation Plan,
Van Diepen seconded, and
the motion carried.
Ultimately finding that
the criteria had been met
for approval of the applica-
tion, Crawford made the
motion to approve, Wright
seconded the motion, and
it carried. The application
goes before the County
Board of Commissioners
for final approval.
Trindle said, “I’d like
to take this opportunity to
express my appreciation
to all of you that partici-
pated in this process...It’s a
volunteer position...I’d like
to give a special call out to
Eva, and to Holly, for the
time that you have spent
on this...This was one
of the more challenging
situations, certainly, in the
seven years that I’ve been
on the Commission...”
Jones, providing com-
ment later on the whole
process, said, “If the four
planning commissioners
who voted to deny the ap-
plication in January would
have put their personal bias
aside, and looked at the
legal facts instead of just
looking for reasons to deny
it, this application would
have been approved then—
in January.
“Instead, they cost
hundreds of hours more
in staff time and supplies,
cost the County Commis-
sioners time, and certainly
cost the rest of the volun-
teer Planning Commission-
ers more hours in home-
work, and meeting time
and travel, not to mention
the stress, time, and money
of the applicant.”
Sumpter
CONTINUED FROM PAGE 1
Sumpter Valley Community Volunteers (SVCV) will
be helping with a breakfast-type meal after the runners
finish. There will be multiple aid stations along the route,
with the Locked and Loaded off-road group volunteering
at the station on Marble Pass and one on the Crest. The
Baker City High School cross country/track team will be
the beneficiary of the event.
Hostetler said the marathon runners will finish in three
to four hours with the top runners on the 50-mile course
finishing in about seven hours. He offered to bring sig-
nage about runners being on the road. After discussion
on how busy the roads and trails can be, especially on
weekends, Council agreed signage would be a good idea.
Hostetler stated they are expecting only about 75 run-
ners the first year, but are hoping to see the event to grow
to several hundred within a few years. More information
on the race can be found at elkhorncrest.com. The group
has rented the Grounds Friday to Sunday and will be out
by noon on the final day, when Music in the Meadow
begins.
Fire Department Report
Jim Sheller reported two medical call outs during the
last month. The Department is getting ready for spring
to get the gear out and start training again on fire. They
have been doing medical training.
Planning Report
Leanne Woolf reported that at the Commission’s 3/20
meeting, moved from Thursday to Monday due to flood-
ing, Sheriff Ash came out and talked about law enforce-
ment’s part in an evacuation. He stressed that there is no
way to plan for every eventuality and said the key is to
communicate, communicate, communicate.
On April 6, the Commission reviewed a couple of new
applications and answered questions from someone who
may be interested in joining the Commission.
Woolf has stepped down from the Planning Com-
mission but has volunteered to continue helping with
the Comp Plan. John Young, Leland Myers, and Dave
Stellman are on the Commission, with Stellman currently
on leave of absence. A couple of people have expressed
potential interest in joining. Clarke stated if anybody in
the audience wanted to step up, there are openings. A full
Commission would have five members.
Ordinance NO 2017-3: City Permits for Marijuana
Retailers and Dispensaries
Council voted unanimously to read the ordinance by
title only as it has been announced and posted for some
time. City Recorder Julie McKinney read the ordinance
twice and council voted unanimously to pass it.
Superintendent’s House
Dennis Bradley of Oregon Parks and Recreation De-
partment (OPRD) addressed Council regarding offered
possession of the building known as the Superintendent’s
House. OPRD is proposing a no-cost transfer to the City,
other than the cost for the City recording the deed. Cer-
tain stipulations are required, including that the property
must be used for public purposes or benefit.
Bradley stated that approval would go through a seven-
person Commission. The process usually takes two meet-
ings, an informational meeting, and a second at which the
Commission could take action.
Kammie Bunes of OPRD explained the idea of trans-
fer was presented to the Commission in June 2016. She
told them at that time that the focus of OPRD in Sumpter
is at the Dredge itself and they do not have the time
and money to put into the Superintendent’s House. The
Commission would be interested in hearing what the City
would propose as far as use of the property and agree-
ments with volunteer groups.
Christy Sweet, also with OPRD, explained the build-
ing is listed on the National Register and there would
be grants potentially available to the City for building
preservation. Some of the grants are 100% and others a
50% match, with the matching funds allowed to include
in-kind services. She said OPRD has a preservation plan
if the City would like a copy and mentioned that there
are some Oregon Revised Statutes under which the City
would fall if planning to make big changes to the prop-
erty.
Bunes explained some strings that would be attached to
the transfer are that OPRD cannot do a no-cost transfer to
a non-profit organization. A reversionary clause would be
included in the agreement stating that if the City doesn’t
follow the associated rules for historic properties, the
building would go back to OPRD.
Bradley stated the Commission is going to want to
make sure the City is willing to take the property on and
understands the responsibility.
Clarke motioned that Council accept the offer to give
them the Superintendent’s House and write a formal let-
ter. Motion passed unanimously.
Bunes explained the next meeting with the Commis-
sion is in June in the Salem area. Things would need
to be mutually understood by about a month before. If
more time is needed to get an outline of the plan to share
with the Commission, there will be another meeting in
September.
Budget Committee
Council voted unanimously to appoint Lila Young,
Anna Stafford, Nancy Myers, and Gail Moore to the
budget committee.
Resolution 305-A
Council voted unanimously to approve amendment list-
ing sewer reserve under line item for debt-reduction.
Resolution 333-A
Council voted unanimously to approve amendment for
movement of budget capacity within water, street, and
sewer funds to cover unexpected expenses. Listed funds
will neither increase nor decrease.
SEE SUMPTER PAGE 9