[0:20] Oops.

[0:48] You know who Michael is

[0:54] introducing.

[1:18] What's that?

[1:21] Natural resources land policy committee they go out the roles as far as how they

[1:28] go work on stuff we know yet.

[1:33] » I don't know. Um, seems like that public lands meeting

[1:40] probably quarter of the year that we meet. Oh, that's western interstate

[1:45] stuff though. They meet in person four times a year.

[1:53] Hi, family. Hey, morning.

[2:01] » Before we get going, I'll ask you to remove your hat, please.

[2:20] That's ridiculous.

[2:25] » Yeah. So that that one in >> right I just meant work from scratch. Is

[2:31] that a committee where it's done or just also committee

[2:36] because last year that a great resolution

[2:42] » guess I'm over by a couple

[2:47] distracted for a minute there. Good morning everybody. It is 9:32 a.m.

[2:50] September 2nd, 2026. Uh county court is in session for regular session. Please

[2:55] stand and join me for the pledge.

[3:00] I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the

[3:05] republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and

[3:10] justice for all. Thank you.

[3:24] » County Court. Uh, for the record in attendance, myself, Judge Hart,

[3:28] Commissioner Frank, and Commissioner Doro, public attendees,

[3:32] um, we have, uh,

[3:38] Rick, [laughter]

[3:41] » Paul, Paul. There we go. Sheesh. And, uh, Connor gets from the

[3:47] fairgrounds as the fair manager. um online um Michael Miller, Brent

[3:53] Thompson, Hannah Strain,

[4:00] um Bryce, let's say that's Bryce Mertz, Diana Antwell, and Rick Stafer

[4:08] at the current time. Uh late items, any late items for the agenda?

[4:15] » No. Any amendments or changes relate items to the agenda?

[4:20] » No. >> Agenda approval.

[4:22] » Move to approve the agenda as presented. >> I second.

[4:26] » Motion's been made and second to approve the agenda for county court regular

[4:29] session September 2nd, 2026. Been made and seconded. Any further

[4:34] conversation, discussion? All in favor signify by saying I.

[4:39] » I. >> I. And

[4:40] » opposed. Hearing none. Motion carries. minutes

[4:43] approval for August 19th regular session minutes.

[4:48] » Has everyone read it? >> Yeah. And there was only one thing and I

[4:51] couldn't email Danny quick enough, but there was a there was a typo. Chris Pat

[4:56] node. It's just missing a de. But if you're listening to the minutes and you

[5:00] don't know her, you wouldn't know it wasn't Chris Pat. No. So, sorry I didn't

[5:03] get that to you sooner. Other than that, >> I changed that for

[5:07] » Well, they can approve it with that. >> Yep. With that change,

[5:11] » I move to approve the August 19th Har County Court meeting minutes as

[5:15] discussed. >> Second.

[5:17] » Motion has been made and seconded to approve the Harney County Court regular

[5:20] session minutes from August 19th as discussed with the change as discussed.

[5:25] Any further discussion? Huh? >> All in favor signify by saying I. I

[5:30] » opposed. Hearing none, motion carries. Opportunity for public comment. Anybody

[5:35] in the room? Rick. >> Rick Paul Burns. Just a reminder that

[5:39] SEAK meets later this month. So any transportation issues you've got, please

[5:43] get them to us so that we can respond to them.

[5:45] » Yes. >> Where it's about the 24th I think is the

[5:48] meeting >> somewhere around there. And I forgot to

[5:50] look. Where are we at next time? John Day.

[5:52] » John Day. >> Yeah. Um I was going to

[5:56] ask or inquire at the meeting um about I think this topic's been discussed before

[6:02] but not stop light walk cross crosswalks you know not installing uh stop light

[6:08] ones but just the you know like the flashing caution type of crosswalks.

[6:14] Um, here in town it's I mean traffic is getting crazy and I don't know what all

[6:18] the parameters are for crosswalks and everything but I was going to ask that

[6:23] question. >> I think it's a good question. Every

[6:26] intersection because they crosswalk if it's marked or unmarked sugar they'll

[6:30] say so that any place that there was a in this case or cut uh for the handicap

[6:38] is is a legitimate cross without a lighter.

[6:43] I was going to inquire about something along the lines as what they have out at

[6:46] Hines where it's the flashing yellow light when they push the button and it

[6:50] just gets the flashing caution lights. It gets people's attention, you know,

[6:54] something maybe along those lines in a couple different spots through town.

[6:57] » Yeah, I people don't realize where people are supposed to stop for

[7:02] crosswalks. >> Yeah, I've seen so many close calls for

[7:04] one car stops and the other car especially in the fourlane zone.

[7:08] » Right. Right. pressure. >> I was just curious as to a couple of the

[7:12] the main areas that that you've noticed or catch your attention.

[7:16] » Um probably somewhere around um Reeds Lewab.

[7:21] Uh maybe somewhere around Dairy Queen. >> Yes.

[7:24] » Okay. >> We watch that a lot and people coming

[7:27] over from the motel to days in is DMO almost um daily through there. We watch

[7:36] that all the time. I don't want to have I don't want to have one at every

[7:40] intersection along the way, but I think, you know, strategically placed two or

[7:43] three of them here or there would be of benefit. Thank you.

[7:46] » I wonder [clears throat] like the slowdown for the burn school that is

[7:52] time activated and comes on at a certain time. I wonder if they could do that if

[7:56] the if the traffic flows over a certain amount, have those come on because when

[8:00] stuff is slow, it's not as much of an issue, but like you said, this summer

[8:03] there's been so much traffic that it is an issue. Yeah. What interrupt?

[8:09] » Yeah. School school zone kicks on. The flashing lights in the school zones kick

[8:13] on at I don't know 6:45ish or so. 6:50ish,

[8:19] something like that. And they're on until about 7:50

[8:23] cuz I come through at usually about a quarter till they're still flesh. I

[8:26] think they go off about 7:50. So they're on for 45 minutes to an hour at morning,

[8:32] lunch, and afternoon. >> Sure. seems like they'd maybe be pro

[8:36] programmable. You know, the technology is not new

[8:41] technology. >> Certainly something we can bring up and

[8:44] have a discussion, but >> yeah. And and I have a question just in

[8:46] general. So, um how many seats on the sea act does Harney County have

[8:52] including the cities or any other? >> Five, six,

[8:56] » one, two, three. >> You got one for each city, for the

[8:58] county, for the tribe and and then at large, which I am six. Yep.

[9:04] Is are there any barriers to helping have more participation or are you

[9:08] satisfied with the level of participation from our county on

[9:13] » I think the representation that we have is fine. Um I think bylaws probably

[9:19] specify which we can always discuss and change but

[9:22] » but ours have pretty good people attending or zooming in regularly.

[9:29] » I mean >> competing schedules. I I give a report

[9:34] written report generally to each of the cities

[9:37] uh because Brenda and Roxan usually don't attend it. Roxanne has covered the

[9:43] best about zooming in and the tribe I have bitched about constantly. Suzanne

[9:49] does not attend and she does not come in. Well, I I just

[9:55] » if uh if it was the scheduling of it or if it's just something maybe to be

[9:59] revisited to help. It's good to get their input and have them participate.

[10:03] » I've asked the um I know two members of the council of it tribe with the tribe

[10:09] and they have no idea. They don't know really why Susan is appointed because

[10:14] they have a transportation committee and she's not on it. Um, so I suggested

[10:20] they'll try to appoint somebody else who can have more interest, but we're going

[10:26] to have the issue with them. Um, it's ongoing and really the SEAK doesn't add

[10:32] to it with the boat overpass for the animals out about well post 200 in that

[10:41] area. they're trying to do. And right now the ODOT has an agreement with the

[10:46] trucking industry that they'll have no o overpasses on Highway 20 between Bend

[10:51] and Ontario um so that they can have their oversized

[10:56] loads go through here. So it may have to be an underpass for

[11:01] the animals to be able to pass through. They are actively working to have an

[11:07] animal overpass. I'm using that word because I don't know

[11:11] what else to use from one a safe pass from one side of the road to the other.

[11:17] » I have my own personal doubts on those on the effectiveness of

[11:22] those uh installations. You know how

[11:27] » it is an ongoing conversation with the northern pyudes and

[11:33] » their planned wildlife project on that highway is an overpass.

[11:38] I I'm using the word overpass because I don't know what else to use. It's either

[11:42] going to be over or under the road. >> Generally a tunnel.

[11:46] » Well, I think the verbage I think the verbiage has been an overpass.

[11:51] » I don't Yeah, I agree. I don't think that's going to be effective at all.

[11:54] That's ridiculous.

[11:59] » Cak has not been involved in that discussion except where I bring it up. I

[12:04] mean, it's a less than 30 second discussion.

[12:09] Thank you. >> So, anything else?

[12:12] » You got another month. I have one more meeting.

[12:18] » Um, any

[12:22] any comments from anybody online?

[12:32] I don't hear anything. We'll move on. Um, we don't have any Well, we have the

[12:36] fair board here. Is there anything you want to brief on the upcoming fair?

[12:41] » It's happening whether I'm or not. >> It does do that.

[12:46] » Uh, I mean, we're looking good for everything so far. So, it's just a

[12:51] matter of all those fun last minute little, oh crap, get it done things. So,

[12:57] » I would agree. I would check my email in two days, but [clears throat] the last

[13:01] that I talked to the building official, he said he didn't work really closely

[13:04] with you and the extension agent. Have you guys planned a walk through yet?

[13:08] » We just got that done yesterday. Oh, >> and uh Rick said he'd be signing the

[13:13] TCO, I believe, Thursday. Um so, we'll be all good to go there.

[13:19] » Awesome. >> I think there's um electrical

[13:22] inspections that need to be done today. I believe they're planning on that today

[13:28] » and then TCO on Thursday.

[13:34] » Um, for the just for the record, so to speak, I I'm pretty sure we had talked

[13:39] about it, but I had a member of the public ask me the other day about some

[13:41] of the recent uh department head type positions that we filled. And so for

[13:46] those people who missed it, whatever. Congratulations. Connor Githens is our

[13:49] fair manager. Um, we also, um, hired a new juvenile director, Jeremy Thomas,

[13:56] and, um, emergency manager in the throws of the fires, Carrie Conway. So, those

[14:01] three positions, just for the record, somebody said they hadn't heard, so I'm

[14:05] restating them. I think we have stated those before, but just in case.

[14:11] Um, old business, fair wash rack. Um, I wanted to add

[14:16] this. Um, and the the building official the building official is online, uh,

[14:21] Rick Stoffer. But, um, I need to clarify in in our discussion on July 15th, it

[14:27] was discussed about the construction of the wash rack and whether or not it was

[14:31] being connected to a potable water source or a a wellwater source. Um, and

[14:37] it was said that it was being connected to a wellwater source, but there's been

[14:41] some concern that it was actually connected to a potable water source. And

[14:46] then therefore the permitting and licensed plumber requirements and the um

[14:53] the mode of connection the type of connection all comes into play. So um I

[14:59] want to verify one way or the other whether this was if if somebody can

[15:02] honor um somebody commissioner Frank as the leison on the fair board if somebody

[15:08] can verify whether or not that was a potable water source or a well wellwater

[15:12] source. >> I'll tell you what I know. Um firstly

[15:16] the fair board asked that we table this and not have discussion or take action

[15:21] until they can be present because none of them could be present today. But I

[15:24] said we're going to have discussion about it anyway. So I'll share what I

[15:28] know. One of the fair board members who is the liazison to the livestock

[15:31] committee and is involved in a lot of volunteer work down there told me the

[15:36] following. They had to dig up a line because it was broken because when it

[15:40] was installed they back filled with pit run and as it settled the line broke

[15:45] » a line that was >> a previous line just a previous water

[15:49] » connected to potable or or irrigation well

[15:53] » I don't know they had a broken line so they had a hole there exposed they had

[15:57] reached out in July to all the available local plumbers to hook this project up

[16:02] and still had heard nothing back and there was two weeks to there. And so

[16:08] there was a 4-in white PVC line, which is usually

[16:13] consistent with what would come from an irrigation well. And so

[16:18] they use their expertise to tie into that water line. They absolutely did not

[16:22] tie into a C900 line, which is a city water line. And that's as much as I know

[16:29] about that. And there was also some question and concern about the hangman

[16:34] being off of metered water. And I I'm not sure where the water comes from for

[16:40] that hangman. But one of the discussions that we had had when John Lar Garza came

[16:44] to town was if we could get some technical assistance or some master

[16:49] planning to identify where all the electrical infrastructure is, where all

[16:53] the water infrastructure is because right now no one's sure which lines are

[16:57] coming from where is my understanding. But that's what happened with hooking up

[17:01] the wash. No one. >> I don't think so.

[17:06] That for for example, one of the things that we talked about that fairboard

[17:09] meeting the other night is there are some weird there's some sprinkler stubs

[17:13] out in the parking area that aren't being used anymore. And it was suggested

[17:20] we should just tear those lines out so that it would be easier to maintain that

[17:23] area. But >> when when the underground infrastructure

[17:28] stuff was was being done a few years ago as part of all this capital improvement

[17:33] that had to be done first, isn't it all lined out? What professional or city or

[17:38] county entity has that information on >> any new stuff that went in should

[17:42] absolutely be mapped out and there should be a record of that? But all the

[17:45] old stuff I I don't know if there is a

[17:49] comprehensive layout of what what old stuff is where. And so I know the

[17:54] concern with whether or not it's portable water or the irrigation water

[17:58] has to do with backflow devices. >> So So when at the last a few a few

[18:03] county court meetings ago when there was a discussion and it sounded like uh fair

[18:09] board chair and former fair manager said we have eight eight you know acres of of

[18:15] irrigation water rights. And it, you know, I've got the impression they knew

[18:20] where it is, was knew what they were talking about on that. Or are you saying

[18:24] there's not clarity on that now? >> Oh, no. They have a well that has an

[18:28] irrigation water, right? They just don't know where all the infrastructure that's

[18:32] been put in in the last 40 or 50 years is going to that. And that hangman, for

[18:36] example, according to their recollection, has been installed for at

[18:40] least 22 years. And so it would take some testing shutting off the metered

[18:47] water to see if you still have water there. And they try not to use it anyway

[18:51] because according to one of the fair board members that works on that stuff

[18:55] and has expertise in the area, it hammer slams when you turn it off. If people

[19:01] fill up out of it and they don't turn the valves off the right way, it slams

[19:05] and it causes a problem. And so they said if there is an issue with the way

[19:09] they installed that water rack, it was two weeks till fair and they need

[19:14] to water that water act. So they hooked into a line that was available. If we

[19:18] need to re-evaluate that would be a good time to maybe re-evaluate some of these

[19:23] other water sources as well because I also don't know what serves the water

[19:27] that goes back behind the arena. I don't know if that's the irrigation well or

[19:31] city water. So um

[19:35] » so those pass were there 50 years. >> Um

[19:42] anyway so so that those yes those were my concerns as well on the on the

[19:46] metered water if if we tied into a metered water supply which in the

[19:51] meeting of July 15th the the fair president and the former fair manager

[19:56] both indicated that that line they were tying into was the well line. Not I mean

[20:00] they indicated during that meeting they were confident that it was the well

[20:03] line. So that's what that's what I went on that's what we went on at that time I

[20:08] believe. Um I don't know and I can't I don't know as we can say I guess I guess

[20:14] the test I would propose is um make sure there's no other metered water running.

[20:19] Go out there and turn on that wash rack and turn on that hangman and see if the

[20:23] meter runs when you turn it on. If it is then that's metered water. And I have I

[20:27] have I have concerns then and I realize that the the the jumble of lines and not

[20:33] knowing what's what or whatever. But I have a real concern then about using

[20:37] pouring dollars on the ground because that hangman is going to be used for

[20:40] watering the arena, watering the track, watering other other areas for dust

[20:45] abatement and um and then the wash rack for washing animals down that could be

[20:51] used out of an agricultural source. Again, I don't I think the ter

[20:55] determination is is to find out and and a good mapping of resources out there or

[21:01] utilities and infrastructure would be a good would be a good step forward. But

[21:05] for the time being, I think a simple test of turning on the water and see if

[21:09] the meter's running or not would be a good good layman's test.

[21:14] » Add my little bit. So, talking with Lindsay,

[21:19] um the all of the hydrants along the arena on inside the track, that is all

[21:26] off of CityWA. Um and when Rick came to me about all of

[21:32] this, I double checked with Lindsay and shot her a text on August 27th and asked

[21:39] her if that line that feeds the hangman behind the arena is potable water. and

[21:45] she did confirm that it is. Um, which is the line that is that now has the wash

[21:52] rack hooked into it. Um, and that leak in the line is to the line that feeds

[21:58] the hangman. And so that's where they tied in the wash rack. And I have I have

[22:04] the text from her that says um I asked her if it's potable water and she

[22:09] replied with yes. Um, so that's that's what I know on that. So,

[22:15] » did she know she did she discover that later on? Because I can replay it. The

[22:20] July 15th meeting, they both said it was the wellwater.

[22:23] » Yeah, >> I it was my understanding and it was

[22:26] clear in that meeting that if we hooked into the wellwater, we didn't need the

[22:30] certified plumber and the permit. What I'm guessing is that a volunteer

[22:37] that was helping recognize we can't get a plumber out

[22:41] here and there's a water line right there and we need water. So, we're going

[22:44] to hook into it. He suggested that if there is a problem with that after fair

[22:48] is over, it's nothing to dig it down, cab that off, and do whatever they need

[22:52] because it sounds like potentially if that's not the well line, they're going

[22:57] to have to run quite a ways line to get to the well line. I guess that that's my

[23:02] understanding as well. Um, and whereas I'm all for making sure we're good for

[23:09] fair, I would also like to make sure things are just getting done correctly

[23:13] the first time so we don't run into stuff like this. I believe it's my

[23:18] understanding again, and this might be wrong, but I believe when some of the

[23:22] infrastructure work was done out there at the fairgrounds, I think in the early

[23:25] stages of the of the project, that the well line coming from the well to the

[23:30] hangman, because there's two hangmans out there. There's one at the east end

[23:33] of the of the fairgrounds and one at the west end of the fairgrounds that they

[23:37] put in new line from the well location which is right in front of the the newly

[23:42] constructed event center. It was right in front of the 4 building in in past

[23:48] layout. Um but they put in new line from there running east and connected it to

[23:55] the hangman. So that so that portion of it was connected to the hangman. And

[23:59] then also I believe as a part of that they put in new

[24:03] new access points or whatever for sprinklers along that road along the the

[24:08] main road that comes in there some somewhere along there. They put that

[24:10] line in so that they could then water and irrigate the the grass there.

[24:14] » Yes. >> So that part of it I believe we can

[24:16] confirm as new. Whether or not that line or any line went westward from the well

[24:23] was would be the question. and and existing line. If there's existing line

[24:27] that goes westward from the well, >> well, at least it's not

[24:34] super far away from what it's going to have to be corrected.

[24:40] » I agree with what the fair manager said about we need to make sure we do things

[24:45] right the first time, and I appreciate that. I don't know, and I'd be curious

[24:50] to hear the building officials take on this. If that is installed incorrectly,

[24:56] as it sounds like it may be, I don't know if there is time since fair starts

[25:00] in less than a week to rectify that, but I think we probably need to do it

[25:04] immediately following and maybe can make some of those other changes as well.

[25:08] Does that sound like what you're thinking?

[25:11] » Yeah. >> So, it can be changed. It can be changed

[25:13] afterwards. Um, but you know, I don't know if you guys all looked at my email

[25:19] from uh last Tuesday. Um, but you know, we had a very clear

[25:26] conversation in court on July 15th about unlicensed people doing work on potable

[25:34] water systems. It was very clear, very clear. And so I bent and said, "Okay, if

[25:39] you're going to hook into the well line, then that's fine." Um the the well is

[25:45] hundreds of feet from where this wash rack is. Um so I happened to just stop

[25:52] by uh last week and found this open hole

[25:57] and saw the work and it was saddled into a C900 pipe. Somebody somebody cut into

[26:02] the pipe, installed a saddle and installed uh an incorrect valve. Um, and

[26:08] [clears throat] so I told Connor at that time I wanted them to stop the work.

[26:14] And he he I believe he made a phone call and had a conversation with or I left a

[26:19] message for somebody and then somebody decided to go in and just finish the

[26:23] work regardless. So the the work that is done in there is

[26:28] not correct. It was not done by a licensed plumber. It is on a potable

[26:31] water line and you know after fair it's going to have to be dealt with. But, um,

[26:37] this is probably going to be sent to the building codes division for them to to

[26:40] deal with. >> Rick, uh, do you have knowledge or

[26:48] official records that maybe some of the rest of the players don't seem to have

[26:52] on where the potable water lines are?

[26:59] Well, I did the inspections on those water lines and so I know what was put

[27:04] in by the uh by FiveStar last year. Um, plus there are some plans that show

[27:11] things and show some existing lines. Uh, the part that I do agree on is there's a

[27:16] lot of lines out there that have been, you know, who knows what's been done

[27:20] with them over the years. But you know what this comes back to is is this is

[27:25] another line that's not done correctly on a on a big investment that was just

[27:29] done. So, you know, why why would we want to do it

[27:33] wrong? Um, you know, the way it was installed, it was installed with a valve

[27:37] on a 45 that you could never shut the water off to because it's about 5t down

[27:42] in the ground. um and it's an incorrect valve for that

[27:47] type of installation and there's no backflow uh feeding the uh yard hydrant

[27:52] they put in. So there's a multitude of of issues here.

[27:59] Num number one being the fact that we were very clear about this and then it

[28:03] was just an attitude of we're just going to do what we want. So you know that's

[28:07] that's we're just going to let the ships fall where they may.

[28:12] That's uh that's frustrating to say the least that the information you're giving

[28:17] us that it was hooked into a C900 is at odds with the information that I was

[28:22] given. I'm optimistic that moving forward the

[28:27] fair manager seems to be on the same page that we can have this stuff done

[28:32] correctly. >> I completely agree with that statement.

[28:40] we'll make it a high priority and try to figure out how to pay for it

[28:45] right after fair. >> Um,

[28:50] thank you for the discussion. It's just that I I felt it was um

[28:55] definitely an issue that needed to be discussed and we need to get to the

[28:59] bottom of it and ensure that things are done appropriately and correctly in the

[29:03] future. People don't know for a fact firstand knowledge fact when we ask them

[29:10] questions technical questions they should say they're not sure. Okay

[29:15] everybody thank you.

[29:20] Um any other any other points on um on that

[29:25] topic?

[29:28] » It's all up and running and ready to go for fair

[29:32] » as far as I know. is glad. All right, we'll continue to investigate

[29:38] and pursue that and make it right if we need to.

[29:43] Um, new business proposed recision of the 2001 roadless area conservation

[29:51] rule, RIIN, um, and associated docket numbers at the

[29:57] federal level. Um

[30:01] » is this uh this is not exclusive to the blues plan.

[30:08] This is in general across all forest lands.

[30:12] » Yeah. For about the last year and a half or two years there was talk of resending

[30:17] the roadless rule and it's finally coming to fruition and is open to

[30:22] comment and the comment period ends pretty quickly. I want to say

[30:28] it's before our next meeting and so this this draft of comments was made based on

[30:35] all the conversations that the ENRAC and the BIC has had regarding the roadless

[30:40] rule and it's something that our community has been pretty vocal about

[30:43] for the last 10 years if not more. And so I think this draft of comments is

[30:51] consistent with the community wants the NRA's recommendation.

[31:04] » So um this was was this reviewed discussed by the ENRACH? This was not

[31:09] reviewed by the ENRACH because of the time sensitivity and we weren't going to

[31:13] have another ENRAC meeting by the time this has to be submitted. But it all of

[31:18] the previous discussions the ENRAC has had about the Robus rule which was

[31:21] mostly in the context of Blue Mountain forest plan are reflected in this

[31:27] » and those representatives on the REN rack on the ENRACK from our local

[31:32] federal agencies. How did they I mean were they were they in favor of this?

[31:38] Are these comments in line with their concerns or

[31:41] » Yes. And a lot of this road roadless rule

[31:46] really seems like it pertains more to the Forest Service than the BLM. And the

[31:53] roadless rule would still allow local discretion if a road needs to be closed

[31:59] down for ecological purposes or whatever, but it would also allow us to

[32:03] build roads if we needed the infrastructure for maintaining the

[32:08] forest or for fire suppression. And I think that falls right in line with our

[32:12] our local district and our lo what's the think about this I

[32:19] think of Josh Giles in terms of immigrant creek ranger district and then

[32:22] Ann for the the mountier forest. So I think it's consistent with

[32:28] our local and our forest prerogatives. I think it's

[32:35] growing up here and remembering the the timber years and the timber sails along

[32:40] with timber sails. Um roads were constructed, logging, you

[32:45] know, skitter trails or whatever they called them were constructed for getting

[32:50] the timber out of the cut location and out to a deck location, etc. Um, I would

[32:56] presume that this roadless rule pre prevented within logging sales of being

[33:01] able to do that kind of work and and make it economical to get the timber out

[33:05] of the out of the forest. So, this would open up for timber sales. Again, you're

[33:10] not going to put a a road down a down a geographical uh terrain that's, you

[33:16] know, got a 45 degree angle or something, whatever, but but it still

[33:19] opens up to be able to put in those kind of accesses for commercial uses. Is that

[33:25] I mean, would that return that ability? Is that what this is? Okay.

[33:28] » And I read it very carefully. I think it's a

[33:32] good letter. I support it. And you know, basically it's saying that we support

[33:38] receiving it. as it should be. That's one of those one-sizefits-all

[33:43] rules that does not uh enable local good decision- making by the professionals

[33:48] and the community as well to decide if and where you know where

[33:53] those areas might need to be. So, I totally support it. Not just my own

[33:58] opinion. I'm glad ENRA didn't have a problem with it, but also on behalf of

[34:02] plenty of the people that reach out to me and tell me that that's they want it

[34:06] rescended. So, I'm in support of it. >> I think and I I'm trying to remember the

[34:12] last the last uh forest plan meeting that we went to, this topic was

[34:18] discussed and I remember talking to Ann and and

[34:23] one of the other um managers. It's important that just because this is

[34:29] rescended doesn't mean that roads are going to pop up or stay open all over

[34:32] the place. This is it's it's management discretion is really what it gives

[34:37] gives. >> So

[34:40] » that's a a big improvement. >> Yeah.

[34:42] » To go in that direction. So um I would uh go ahead and move that to approve the

[34:50] proposed the county court's comments on the proposed recision of the 2001

[34:55] roadless area conservation rule as presented.

[35:01] » Second. Motion's been made and seconded to approve the proposed or the comments

[35:06] to the proposed recision of the 2001 roadless area conservation rule RI0596-

[35:14] A66 docket FS-2025-00001

[35:21] as discussed any further discussion >> I think Danny put this on our letter

[35:26] ahead or was this form >> I did not do that on this form but I can

[35:33] would you mind submitting it? And I don't I can make sure that you have the

[35:36] information. It's either an email address or it might be one of those

[35:39] links that you have to go online. >> Absolutely.

[35:42] » And and Danny, since we are starting to do um some of these in this fashion and

[35:46] again, I'm sure you'll take out the draft.

[35:48] » Yes. >> But always please make sure there's a

[35:50] space between the title and their body. Thank you very much.

[35:56] » Any further discussion? All in favor signify by saying I I

[36:02] » opposed. Hearing none. Motion carries.

[36:06] Um and then I guess kind of leading right into next topic is u blue mountain

[36:11] forest plan revision decision of environmental impact study

[36:18] action or action pack. We've been beating this one up for half a year at

[36:23] least and and this set of comments it's drafted maybe in June was circulated to

[36:29] the ENRACK. It was based on the extensive comments they have already

[36:33] helped draft >> and it's very similar to the last set of

[36:37] comments that we submitted prior to the the determination of environmental

[36:42] impact study. The Forest Service has been very

[36:48] very receptive, yeah, to the comments the Haring County has made and it's

[36:52] reflected especially in alternative 2 that they've incorporated that into the

[36:56] plan. And so this this is a pretty old document that's just been waiting to go

[37:02] in. But I think the deadline is towards the end of September.

[37:06] This is the condensed version. The extended version is 13 pages. and I

[37:10] don't know that it really drives the point home any more than this shorter

[37:14] version. >> I think this is a good document and a

[37:17] good way to um go ahead and comment and I like the fact that there's an

[37:21] attachment with some of the specific requested changes in the the verbiage

[37:27] which would support the narrative that we were providing. So, uh question uh do

[37:33] you know if um of uh some of the other local

[37:38] governments that are within the mountain forest land region are also the

[37:43] important alternative to >> I think most all of them are and what I

[37:49] would suggest is if we choose to take action on this and and submit it damy's

[37:53] willing to put it on some letter head and send

[37:56] » Oh yeah, that was the one said you already did.

[37:57] » She did both. >> She actually did both.

[37:59] » Yeah. past me took care of that already. >> But if she would officially submit this

[38:05] one, I would also forward it to all the BIC members. That's something that we

[38:09] have kind of asked you if you are willing to share your comments so that

[38:13] it can kind of give other people ideas and I want to say Mororrow County maybe

[38:18] has already sent their copy around to the the group and in our copy as a draft

[38:25] has already been sent to the big and EOCA because EOCA will probably submit

[38:30] their own comments. So, everyone's pretty well in line.

[38:47] Yeah, I think

[38:54] a lot of people would like to see things go back to

[38:58] maybe pre974ish whatever in forest management, but in

[39:06] all practicality it's not going to happen. Um, so I think a lot of the

[39:10] strides made in in this plan and in this negotiations and comments and feedback

[39:16] from counties and public um goes a long ways.

[39:29] So um the previous roadless is ready to go. It's on letterhead and ready to go.

[39:36] We have which that one we didn't have signatures on though. Did the court want

[39:40] to have signatures on it or just submit it upload it as is?

[39:43] » As is fine. >> Okay. And then the the uh

[39:50] uh Harney County comments on the Blue Mountain Forest Land Management Plan

[39:55] draft environmental impacts. It does have signatures on it.

[40:00] » I move to approve. >> Second. A motion has been made and

[40:05] seconded to approve the Hornney County comments on the Blue Mountain Forest

[40:09] Plan Management Plan draft environmental impact statement support for alternative

[40:14] two as discussed and presented. Any further

[40:18] discussion? >> Good job.

[40:20] » All in favor signify by saying I. I opposed

[40:25] hearing none. Motion carries.

[40:54] And

[41:02] next topic, and I thought we discussed this a little bit last time. I hope it

[41:07] got carried over accidentally, but we can cover it real quick. Like AOC annual

[41:11] conference in November. Um, I talked with Commissioner Elect Omen. You are

[41:15] planning on attending. if you would coordinate with Danny on if she hasn't

[41:20] already um on paying the the uh fee, the attendance fee and for lodging. Um after

[41:30] after you take office, we'll have a credit card purchase card for you and we

[41:33] could take care of those items yourself. But in the meantime, Danny has a card

[41:38] and she'll be able to help you with that if she hasn't already.

[41:41] » I think she already has. >> Yeah, we're after. But I do have some

[41:46] bills for you. Perfect. >> Um,

[41:51] uh, Commissioner Doro, are you planning on attending?

[41:52] » I am not. I'm not. Save the county money.

[41:55] » Okay. Um, Commissioner Frank, >> I am. Let's send the Kenny's phone.

[42:00] » Um, I'm planning on going. Um, I'm going to go Tuesday through Friday. Well, I'll

[42:06] leave Friday morning because the we are planning on doing the county booth at

[42:10] the U Travel Oregon or whatever it's called these days. Um, so I want to be

[42:16] there for that, but I'll leave first thing Friday morning. And then they have

[42:19] some administrator sessions that really take up most of my time while I'm there.

[42:25] A lot of those topics and whatnot, I try to hit the other stuff that's important,

[42:28] but I hit those primarily. So, I will be leaving Tuesday afternoon on the

[42:36] 18th 17th 17th and then coming back Friday morning.

[42:43] Um is there anything else I wanted to hit

[42:46] on for that? Um

[42:50] » that would be talking about moving the region.

[42:55] » Oh yes. >> So

[42:57] » so that week the 18th I think it is is a county court session.

[43:01] » Yes. Um, so I would propose that we move that

[43:06] county court session to the 16th on Monday.

[43:09] » Fine to read. >> You want a motion?

[43:14] » I don't think so. Just administrative in nature. We'll just make sure it gets

[43:17] changed on the calendar and everything so that the public knows. And then there

[43:21] was another another conflict coming up with county court. Uh, was it in

[43:26] October? >> Yes. December.

[43:28] » Yes. I I have something I'd like to attend that's on a county court date and

[43:32] that would be October 7th. Um it's it's a first expo with a lot of information

[43:39] and I never really got any of that information before. So um if we can

[43:44] shift that a day or two, I'd appreciate that.

[43:49] It's one time deal. >> I'll honestly probably be unavailable

[43:53] that whole week anyway. So you guys still have a corn, but just throwing

[43:57] that out there. >> Okay. Um J. Um

[44:10] I think the sixth would probably work better for me. I can do it. Okay. I have

[44:15] these under scheduling, but since we kind of broached on it up here um under

[44:20] this other topic, we just cover them. But um

[44:24] anyway, so then um we'll change county court session from October 7th to

[44:29] October 6th. Same time, same times for both or same normal times, different

[44:34] dates. >> Right. Um next up then is order

[44:41] rescending legalization order recision of document number 2007

[44:48] 2052. Action for action. Um,

[44:54] so have a res or an order prepared.

[44:59] County council has reviewed it. Uh, order rescending legalization order.

[45:05] Recision of document number 200072052 in the matter of recision of the

[45:10] legalization order for East Steam Road, Harney County Road number 20,

[45:16] East Stein Roads, East Steam Road, Andrews diversion. Whereas on September

[45:22] 5th, 2007, Harney County Court entered a legalization order pursuant to OS

[45:28] 362.201 to 362.221 221

[45:32] uh recorded September 12th, 2007 in the county clerk's records of Harney County,

[45:39] Oregon as document number 2072052, which legalized a newly surveyed

[45:46] alignment of the East Steam Road, Harney County Road number 201 between section

[45:53] one and a quarter corner of section 34 and the northwest corner of

[46:00] of section 26, Township 35 South Range 33 East. The Andrews diversion declared

[46:06] that alignment to be a county road and withdrew the prior alignment of East

[46:10] Road from the county road system to become a local access road under OS

[46:15] 368.001.

[46:18] Um I wanted to get that first portion in there. Um, unless the court Oh, yeah.

[46:24] Fire alarm testing was on my notes to let everybody know they're certifying

[46:29] the elevator and um it's just a test.

[46:36] Uh I had that in my notes because say right up front at the beginning and

[46:39] skipped it. So anyway, I wanted to get that first paragraph in there. Um unless

[46:44] the court thinks it's important to read the entire thing. I do want to note that

[46:47] um that uh the county did hold a public hearing in fields

[46:54] um closer to those residents properties and and

[47:00] uh constituents in that area. a few members attended or a few residents

[47:06] attended and we discussed the pros and cons um of of realigning it or or

[47:14] keeping it as it is. Um it was discussed that um the county does have a grant a

[47:21] public lands access grant for paving uh up to Frog Springs from where the

[47:26] current pavement ends up to frog about Frog Springs that's supposed to take

[47:30] place in 2028. the estimated cost of of

[47:36] realigning diverting the road was estimated at approximately a million

[47:39] dollars or more. So these are all factors that we took into consideration

[47:44] um before coming to the to the um decision to resend that order.

[47:52] » Uh judge I don't think we need to read the whole

[47:56] thing. However, and I wouldn't mind doing it if you don't want to do it. I

[48:00] think maybe reading the now therefore it is hereby ordered section. Okay.

[48:05] » At the end and also I have a question on the fourth item on that last paragraph.

[48:11] It says this order shall take effect immediately upon its entry by the Hardy

[48:15] County Board. Do you mean approval or adoption or I didn't know what entry

[48:22] just seemed a little bit >> um

[48:27] I don't know. Well, I'm going to say the uh entry being as soon as it's recorded

[48:32] by the clerk because there is a a recording section by the clerk. So, upon

[48:36] its entry into the records. >> Okay.

[48:40] » I thought this resolution was really well done. It's really thorough. It

[48:44] captures everything that we talked about.

[48:47] I I move to approve. >> Let me finish. Let me let me read the

[48:51] now therefors. Um, now therefore, it is hereby ordered

[48:55] that the legalization order entered by the Harney County Court on September

[48:59] 5th, 2007 and recorded September 12th, 2007 in the county clerk's records of

[49:05] Harney County, Oregon as document number 2072052

[49:10] is hereby rescended and vacated in its entirety. The Harney County Road

[49:14] Department and County Surveyor are directed to update the county road

[49:18] inventory and records for East Road, Harney County Road number 201,

[49:24] including to wit that the portion of East Road designated as a local access

[49:30] road in the legis in the legalization order is now to be added back to the

[49:34] county road system. Nothing in this order con uh con constitutes

[49:40] a final determination of the ownership status or disposition of the surveyed

[49:45] right of way described in the 2007 legalization order. The Harney County

[49:50] Court reserves the right to take such further and additional action upon

[49:53] consultation with legal counsel as may be necessary or appropriate to fully

[49:58] resolve any remaining questions regarding that right of way.

[50:04] Uh, this order shall take effect immediately upon its entry by the Harney

[50:08] County Court dated this 2nd day of September 2026.

[50:13] Um, yeah. So, I guess the one of the major

[50:17] points there is that the rightway stays in effect. There is no obligation by the

[50:21] by the county to maintain or construct a road just based on the fact that there's

[50:27] a rightaway there. We have rightaways all over the county. Um, many of them

[50:31] are not maintained and they're just on paper and at the later time the

[50:34] landowner wishes to request that right away be vacu uh vacated, we could do

[50:39] that at a later time. Elevator fire elevator fire alarm

[50:46] testing. Um, so with that said, any other

[50:51] discussion or a motion? I move to approve

[50:57] the Harney County court order in the matter of the recision of the

[51:00] legalization order for East Steam Road, Harney County Road number 20, East

[51:05] Steams Road/Andrews Diversion. Um order rescending legalization order the

[51:10] recision of the document number 200072052.

[51:16] » Second. A motion has been made and seconded to approve order rescending

[51:21] legalization order recession of document number 2072052

[51:26] in the matter of the recision of the legalization order for East Stein Road

[51:31] Harne County Road number 201 East Road/Andrews

[51:35] diversion. Any further discussion as as presented and discussed? Any further

[51:40] discussion?

[51:46] All in favor signify by saying I. I. >> And opposed.

[51:50] Hearing none. Motion carries.

[51:58] Can I bring up a quick go back real quick? The building official still on

[52:02] the line. I think he probably is.

[52:07] Um,

[52:11] » is he not going to be able to attend virtually either this morning?

[52:15] » He was on early. >> You want me to reach out to him?

[52:17] » He's not on here now. It doesn't look like

[52:20] » I can reach out to him. I I was just going to ask if he has any documentation

[52:24] of the incorrectly installed valve and plumbing. If he could share that with

[52:29] » such as photos and Yes, he does. He can >> he does have

[52:33] » he does have all that. We can send it out to you.

[52:37] » Thanks.

[52:41] » Um okay, ne next topic is um on I guess

[52:47] retention would be the the classification of our building official.

[52:52] Our building official um has done a lot of great work in the last two plus

[52:58] years, two and a half years, whatever it's been um with

[53:03] re envisioning the building department um

[53:08] to the point of expanding and providing service to neighboring county, Brandt

[53:13] County, and serving as the building official. And our entire two programs

[53:17] are still mingled. Um, at this point we

[53:23] and I don't recall exactly I want to say we we did a 8020 split on fees. Do you

[53:30] know Jesse what our building permit split was that was?

[53:32] » So before before we were able to have the building official position it was

[53:37] 90. I wanted to get to that >> the uh with Grant County right now I

[53:42] believe it is they get 15% we get >> 85 8550 so we get 85% of every dollar in

[53:53] permit fees with Grant County and then all of our permit fees here in Carne

[53:57] County with the exception of the fees that we have to pay to the state just

[54:01] that are statutory. Prior to that, uh, a big portion of our

[54:06] inspections were conducted by the state and they kept 90% of every dollar and

[54:13] they didn't even come out on site. We still had staff that would go out to a

[54:17] to a to a site, whether it was electrical panel or or plumbing or

[54:22] whatever, and turn on FaceTime on their phone and show the inspector that's

[54:26] sitting in Bend or Portland or wherever, this this is what it is. So, so they got

[54:33] 90% of the fees for doing that. Um,

[54:39] we now have a building department that doesn't rely on any

[54:43] general fund subsidization. Um, because of that, because of doing it

[54:49] all in house. Um, there I could look back at the budgets in the past. I

[54:53] didn't in preparation for this, but uh there was a easy

[54:59] $30 to $50,000 that this that the general fund was subsidizing the general

[55:03] or the uh building department for in the past.

[55:07] Um so I think I guess my point being is the building official

[55:13] has been offered a position in another jurisdiction. I don't know where um at

[55:20] this time. I don't I don't know where, but he's asking for um a $10,000

[55:26] increase in his salary, which he justifies off of the entry level of

[55:32] building official and other local. Granted, the cost of living in Harney

[55:37] County is not what it is in other higher paying localities, but um I can't in

[55:43] order to do that, I'm going to have to make some movement in in budgeted funds

[55:48] and it'll have to come before the court anyway. So, I we just as well discuss it

[55:53] and decide whether or not we want to retain um and then make those moves in

[55:58] budgeted funds or or or stay with what we have. Um he's also asked for um a uh

[56:08] solidified telework agreement um

[56:14] which I think it works right now. Um but we never did a formalized agreement for

[56:20] his telework. Um and he's asked to acrew vacation time

[56:28] one category higher than where he's at right now. Right now the the beginning

[56:32] entry entry level um um vacation acral is one to five years at 6.66 hours or

[56:43] something like that and it comes out to be two weeks and the next level up is is

[56:48] 3 weeks is what it the hourly rate includes to. So that's where I'm at with

[56:54] it. Um

[56:58] the court has not given me as the administrator the authority to move on

[57:03] these kind of things independently. So and and we have to do a budget move

[57:07] forward anyway. So I'm asking the court I I would like to retain him. I guess my

[57:10] recommendation is I would like to retain the building official. Um what he's done

[57:14] for our department, what he's done for Harney or for Harney and Grant County,

[57:19] we're a model. There are jurisdictions all over this state that are probably

[57:24] going to continue to try and recruit him. Um I would probably propose if we

[57:28] decide to do this if we can work with legal counsel to have some kind of a

[57:34] commitment letter. Um I don't know how that how applicable, how enforceable

[57:38] those are or whatever, but um it would probably be an ask that I would consult

[57:43] with council on to do that.

[57:46] » Does he live in Harney County? >> He does not live in Harney County. He

[57:49] lives in Clamoth County. >> Did the court give him money to move to

[57:56] Harney County, but part of it? >> No.

[58:00] » But gave him a a a sign on bonus. I believe it was an initial bonus, but it

[58:06] wasn't an actual moving allowance that I recall. Not that it not that it it makes

[58:11] any difference because I'm I don't have a vote at this time, but uh I would

[58:20] I would my vote and my position would be absolutely not. I couldn't support that

[58:28] with where the people that voted for me that elected me

[58:34] um and the sentiment that has come from

[58:39] right? The appearance of what the building department has

[58:46] driving brand new rigs. Um, now I'm not saying either way. I'm just saying from

[58:53] the constituents that that I know I would have to

[58:57] » be on the contrary of raising changing a budget for that position.

[59:04] » All right. I will comment on the vehicles. I mean, all of our departments

[59:10] need vehicles and have to travel and get out and do the job. The assessor's

[59:14] office has to assess properties to gather those taxes. Building department

[59:18] has to approve those those building permits, applications. Um, and that's

[59:25] goes into our tax base and everything too. So, the ability that they had to

[59:29] buy those vehicles within their department and not from general fund,

[59:34] which is previously in uh the vehicles that were all down there previous to

[59:38] those two or three new vehicles were all purchased by general fund dollars and in

[59:42] this case they weren't. Our general fund is extremely strapped and they have

[59:47] found ways to limit the burden, if you would, on the general fund and allow us

[59:53] to be able to do more with other departments that are dependent on the

[59:56] general fund. So in that respect, I would I would rebut by saying that

[1:00:01] » I I would I so I I don't know that this I would um I would like to have some

[1:00:09] personal conversation with the judge outside of this particular setting um to

[1:00:16] discuss some of those issues. So I'm just stating where I would sit if I had

[1:00:21] a if I had if I was there, I would just just so that the court knew that. No, I

[1:00:27] respect that. And in four more months or so, you'll be off to court.

[1:00:32] » I did. But yes, >> and and I and it's I did before I took

[1:00:36] office. I came in and was privy and part of these discussions because there was

[1:00:40] things that would carry forward into my term. So I I appreciate that you're here

[1:00:45] and you contribute to the conversation. >> Thank you.

[1:00:49] Um, I will also wanted to add to the fact that um, I have been contacted by

[1:00:54] contractors in the local area and they find the service that's that's provided

[1:00:59] by our building department as on the spot, very timely and uh, very

[1:01:05] accessible. Um, I think a lot of that or all of that can be contributed to the

[1:01:10] building official. Don't get me wrong. Um, nobody is

[1:01:16] irreplaceable. Myself included. Anybody is is

[1:01:19] irreplaceable, but it's the time in between if we don't retain two as to how

[1:01:26] are we going to navigate that in our building department for not only us, but

[1:01:30] in some respects Grant County that we have a contract with to to perform those

[1:01:35] services for. Um

[1:01:40] I I think it's important to be able to

[1:01:44] retain for succession even to continue the what we're the track that we're on

[1:01:49] and developing other individuals that might someday then be able to

[1:01:54] succeed our building official. You never know how that's going to pan out. It's

[1:01:59] just but you got to try to plan for it. So So those are my points I guess for

[1:02:04] retaining

[1:02:11] I feel like the building officials performance to my knowledge

[1:02:18] has been exceptional. I will say that I do view

[1:02:22] it in kind of two different buckets and you spoke to the fact that you've had

[1:02:26] contractors reach out to you as have I. I think when it comes to development in

[1:02:31] the community and we have new development and new construction going

[1:02:35] on with contracting crews that are that are accustomed to all the

[1:02:40] permitting and everything that needs to take place to do it by the book. They

[1:02:46] love the responsiveness of our building official and our building department.

[1:02:49] When they need inspections, they have them done. However, there is the other

[1:02:54] bucket of people which are people who just want to do something simple at

[1:02:57] their house like extend a water line or do a simple add-on. And I think there's

[1:03:02] a lot of frustration there because we do everything by the book. And I'm not

[1:03:07] insinuating that we shouldn't do things by the book, but sometimes that is a bit

[1:03:12] of a barrier and an obstacle. I think the majority of the people in the county

[1:03:17] fall into that second bucket. the majority of square footage and dollars

[1:03:20] in construction falls into that group that appreciates the responsiveness.

[1:03:25] I think by all accounts the building officials performance has been really

[1:03:29] good. I am very in favor of offering flexibility in the job because I I tend

[1:03:36] to prefer outcomes rather than just how many hours they're in the county. And if

[1:03:40] we have expectations for them and they are meeting those or exceeding those,

[1:03:44] that's all I care about, not how many hours they're in the office. I think as

[1:03:48] we finish up this class and comp study, flexibility might be only one of the

[1:03:54] only ways that we can help with retention and recruitment and make some

[1:04:00] of those positions that maybe are under paid more desirable. That being said, I

[1:04:06] am not in favor of a pay increase, especially as we're finishing up this

[1:04:11] class and comp study. And we are going to have some positions that need to be

[1:04:16] paid a lot more than they are currently paid. And if I remember correctly from

[1:04:21] that initial report that that particular position was a grade 12 and was proposed

[1:04:26] to be a grade 11, I just think it is not very defensible for us to do a $10,000

[1:04:32] increase or a department head. We know we're going to have other department

[1:04:36] heads and positions that are going to require increases and we probably do not

[1:04:41] have the financial resources to give all those increases across the board.

[1:04:47] Those are my thoughts.

[1:04:51] Well, here's some of the things why I am

[1:04:55] generally in support of this. um is that um our building official

[1:05:02] has taken our building services by an order of magnitude to a place of

[1:05:09] excellence, place of service, place of consistency

[1:05:13] and legally supportable and sustainable things. It has been a culture shift for

[1:05:18] our county for people that just like to, you know, do their own work at stuff.

[1:05:23] There's still things that that need to be done and

[1:05:27] and consistently and and fairly. And our our con local contractors years ago

[1:05:32] working with them, they were very asking us to do what we can to make sure

[1:05:37] that um licensed work is done by licensed professionals. There's a reason

[1:05:42] for it. It's really about consumer safety and other matters, but it's wrong

[1:05:47] not to. And I remember when this building official came and he did a

[1:05:51] courtesy stop by to the commissioners at the time after he was well on the way to

[1:05:56] being hired. I said, "How do you you know what do you think about enforcing

[1:06:01] things, not enforcing things was the grayer and we had a good conversation

[1:06:05] and he has he has been consistent and fair in things. He has tried to work

[1:06:09] with things when there's difficult, but there are some things that have to hold.

[1:06:12] And I I support that and I appreciate how hard it is to make that paradigm

[1:06:17] shift. But he he he has a lot of certification and has continued to get

[1:06:21] more certifications during his time here. He's very highly skilled. I get

[1:06:26] great uh responses from contractors and other people how how responsive he and

[1:06:31] his department are. um

[1:06:35] he's creating sustainability for whenever he isn't here anymore. He, you

[1:06:39] know, with his people, his people are uh pursuing additional

[1:06:44] um education, training, and and skill sets, which I I appreciate. Um

[1:06:52] a pay increase when it's not, you know, right at the time of budgeting, you

[1:06:58] know, it's like, well, that's that's unusual.

[1:07:02] uh he's asking $10,000 now. When he was hired, he was the Grant County program

[1:07:06] wasn't there. And to my knowledge, he didn't get he may have gotten some some

[1:07:11] minor increases, but he didn't get like the fact that his program is a twocount

[1:07:16] program, not a onecounty program. Really didn't get any significant increase to

[1:07:21] to account for that. A telework agreement formalized. That's probably a

[1:07:25] good idea. I don't know anything about about that. It just sounds like

[1:07:29] generally a good idea. So expectations are are clear. Um uh with technology a

[1:07:34] lot can be done and with just good time management, you know, seems like that

[1:07:39] could work. Um increase vacation time from two weeks to three at his level.

[1:07:43] Yeah, I would be fine with that. Um but again, we don't want to do personnel

[1:07:48] matters all the time just as a matter of a county court agenda item. But in this

[1:07:52] case, um he's got an opportunity and he came and had a conversation with you. um

[1:08:00] when in shifting the culture to which some some people maybe weren't pleased

[1:08:04] about certain calls he made or or whatever. Um I would just say that I the

[1:08:10] fact that he's doing it right. He's not being a jerk. he's doing it right, but

[1:08:14] he's he's being professional and and you know has facts on his side when when he

[1:08:20] has something that is um being challenged and that

[1:08:27] the responsiveness and and and positive uh work that is being done that far

[1:08:34] outweighs any of the grumblings that some people might have about the book.

[1:08:38] So, I I have always gotten a lot of feedback around this department and this

[1:08:43] individual um why I don't know, but people call me

[1:08:48] and um I think he's doing an outstanding job. He's he has two counties and never

[1:08:54] got really recognized for that since he'd been hired two and a half years ago

[1:08:58] and I'd hate to lose him now. So I I I mean to me the building part is

[1:09:04] one of our success stories under a hard time of um county services and um

[1:09:11] revenues and you know with creative thinking and good hard work uh and a lot

[1:09:17] of a lot of over I'm sure unp you know a lot of working late and creating all the

[1:09:23] the agreements and things. He's always come and basically given us complete

[1:09:27] staff work on some of these major major things.

[1:09:31] does a great job and we support >> I don't disagree with anything you

[1:09:35] commissioner Doro said or or Judge Hart but when when we hired the building

[1:09:42] official initially we extended above and and gave more money to get someone

[1:09:49] who was highly qualified and we have seen the fruits of that and it paid off.

[1:09:54] I have no doubt that he is worth more money than we're paying him and and the

[1:10:00] problem of if we lose him, what do we do? That's a very valid concern,

[1:10:03] especially as we have some development starting to take place. However,

[1:10:09] especially in the shadow of that pending class and comp study, I would be very

[1:10:14] open to any other flexibility we could show or things like the extended

[1:10:19] vacation time. I don't think I would be supportive of of more dollars because

[1:10:25] there's nothing. We have lots of other department heads that are probably not

[1:10:28] compensated at fair market value and I boy I just don't I don't know that I'd

[1:10:35] support that. I I do have intended to discuss with um

[1:10:41] the consultant contractor for our class and comp that in addition to our base

[1:10:47] salary schedules and and classification schedules that we look at um the

[1:10:54] creation of some senior tier positions that would encompass, you know, maybe

[1:10:59] three or four positions throughout the county to include uh a county

[1:11:03] administrator, um the building official,

[1:11:06] And um I still lobby for and I would like to have the discussion because we

[1:11:12] need to make a decision on a piece of property. Um I still lobby for the

[1:11:16] creation of a uh county health services administrator. I still lobby for that.

[1:11:23] Um I don't know, you know, people have asked, we haven't been able to fill it

[1:11:27] with a fill the public health director position. Would we be able to fill a a

[1:11:32] health administrator position? But all those positions are going to be higher

[1:11:36] level pay than what our even top 14 grade and steps are. So um I think it I

[1:11:43] think it might be warranted to look at some kind of a senior management level

[1:11:49] position grade uh creation which that would then fill in or fit into that. Um,

[1:11:55] and I think again as we as we've kind of gone over the class and comp study, uh,

[1:12:00] where we're at with it, um, there are some positions that need

[1:12:05] further review and and making sure that the preliminary or draft classifications

[1:12:12] are where they should be. And I'm not sure if the

[1:12:16] as you've mentioned it and I've talked about it, I don't think his job

[1:12:19] description mentions Grant County in it at all, which brings a lot more

[1:12:24] complexity to it. Would definitely bring it up in in classification.

[1:12:28] Um, so we need to look at that aspect of it. Um

[1:12:38] I have I on the on the financial side of it

[1:12:43] that money is able to be paid through the budget from the building department.

[1:12:48] It's not going to affect general fund again. So it's I mean if it were

[1:12:55] the struggles we've had over the last three years and the last four budgets

[1:12:58] that I've had to prepare revolve around the general fund and relieving the

[1:13:03] pressure on the general fund. I'm I'm extremely concerned that if we allow our

[1:13:09] building department to

[1:13:14] retreat back to where it used to be that then we're going to have that burden

[1:13:18] back on the general fund again. Um,

[1:13:23] I agree with everything Commissioner Doro said. I'm not 100% opposed to what

[1:13:28] you've said, Commissioner Frank. I I understand and I had those I had those

[1:13:31] exact same thoughts and feelings in trying trying to decide my position on

[1:13:36] this. But when it comes right down to it, I think my position is is that I

[1:13:40] support it because of the alternative or the potential alternatives of what

[1:13:46] the building department could recess to. >> And I I would acknowledge for the

[1:13:54] record, I I do acknowledge that if we if we lose Rick, we will lose money and we

[1:14:00] will lose progress. I I just am not sure if that supersedes the defensibility of

[1:14:08] the $10,000 raise, especially with the lar department. And it does make it more

[1:14:14] complex because that is a self-sufficient

[1:14:17] department. Um that's tough.

[1:14:22] If >> if we would take action on that, I would

[1:14:24] ask that we break it into can we break it into the flexibility and break it

[1:14:29] into the pay increase. into separate elements and vote on

[1:14:34] separate elements. >> Um

[1:14:39] » and and is this a model of how um we as a county court will always need to talk

[1:14:46] about things of this nature? agenda.

[1:14:51] » Well, and I think that needs to be ironed out too, maybe in a separate

[1:14:53] discussion or whatever, as to what leeway and what what u authority

[1:14:59] » um I as the administrator or whoever is the administrator is going to have.

[1:15:05] » Um >> okay, I just I'd rather take care of it

[1:15:08] » at a lower level, >> but knowing that the court trusts the

[1:15:12] decision that's made by myself or whoever. Um but again, this

[1:15:18] um will require a resolution to move some funds from one portion of of their

[1:15:25] budget to another portion. Um it's funds that we don't believe are going to be

[1:15:29] needed. Actually, we budgeted $40,000 in capital outlay for for transportation, a

[1:15:34] vehicle. And I I asked I asked Rick, I asked the building official if he

[1:15:40] planned on using that, and he doesn't have any plans on buying a vehicle. So,

[1:15:44] we both don't know how that got put in there other than maybe just a

[1:15:47] placeholder for some funds. I don't know. But anyway, that's where the funds

[1:15:50] would be transferred from is from capital outlay to personal services.

[1:15:57] And since that would definitely require a vote and a move by

[1:16:03] the county court, take care of the discussion now all at

[1:16:07] once. But this is somewhat timely as well because I I need to be able to give

[1:16:11] an answer to the building official.

[1:16:16] Are you setting a precedence um without the study being done?

[1:16:24] » Um and those and those items being finished for

[1:16:31] your other department heads.

[1:16:38] » I thought it >> Are you open the door? Are you opening

[1:16:42] the door for some negotiation? Maybe some

[1:16:49] just [clears throat] a just a thought. That's just a thought.

[1:16:52] » Yeah. Um, when we first retained the building

[1:16:56] official and we and we set the compensation at a

[1:17:01] rate higher than what the what the current grade scale even indicates, I

[1:17:06] would suppose at that time we probably should have done a a an employment

[1:17:10] contract to go along with that, not just a normal hiring. Um, which would have

[1:17:17] addressed that issue right there. Um,

[1:17:29] I don't I don't I don't think so. I don't I don't think we would be setting

[1:17:33] a precedent. It's still we still have a pay scale, pay grade

[1:17:37] scale, um, at the time for the needs and what we determined we needed and and

[1:17:43] we're okay with that that level of compensation.

[1:17:47] Um, I think we're okay as far as not setting

[1:17:52] a precedent.

[1:17:58] » Um, I I don't care how we vote on it. I, you know, whether you all just say that

[1:18:03] you give me the authority to negotiate or we address each item individually. I

[1:18:09] move to approve the building official's request for

[1:18:14] teleawwork and vacation time. Does that address those components of the eclipse?

[1:18:23] » You want to make that you just made a motion for just those two items so far.

[1:18:27] Um I second. A motion has been made and seconded to approve uh the request for

[1:18:33] telework agreement and um vacation approval

[1:18:40] um increase for the building official. Any other discussion? Well, let me let

[1:18:46] me add some discussion there. Is there any parameters or any limitations to the

[1:18:51] telework that the court would be concerned with

[1:18:54] or you going to let me negotiate that? As long as he meets,

[1:19:00] » he accomplishes the mission. >> Okay.

[1:19:02] » With excellence. >> All in favor signify by saying I

[1:19:06] » I >> and opposed.

[1:19:08] » Hearing none. Motion carries. So then the next topic is compensation.

[1:19:13] » How how they voted on one then I guess we'll vote on the other.

[1:19:16] » Yeah. If you'll make the motion, I'd appreciate it just because I might get

[1:19:20] the wording. So, um um I'll make a motion to approve a

[1:19:28] $10,000 increase um for retention of the building official salary. $10,000

[1:19:35] increase in salary for retention of the building official.

[1:19:38] » I second. >> A motion's been made and seconded

[1:19:42] to increase in compensation by $10,000 for the building official

[1:19:48] for retention. Any further discussion? All in favor signify by saying I. I

[1:19:55] » I opposed. N

[1:20:00] » and um the eyes have it. Majority motion

[1:20:06] passes.

[1:20:10] » Thank you for the discussion and the consideration.

[1:20:14] » When do we need to do the resolution? How timesensitive is that

[1:20:18] » resolution >> to funds?

[1:20:21] » Um, we can do it next court. Um, I mean, as it is right now, we're just into the

[1:20:26] year, so it's not going to be I mean, there's funds there that are budgeted up

[1:20:30] to this point. I mean, technically, we wouldn't have to do it until we got down

[1:20:33] to the last couple of months, but we'll have it done in the next county court

[1:20:36] session because there, yeah, there's funds

[1:20:40] available to to cover it at this time. Um,

[1:20:50] correspondence

[1:20:54] have a letter from the Department of the Interior

[1:21:01] Bureau of Land Management. I'm pleased to announce the completion of the Lewis

[1:21:08] Lois Lewis Canyon Geographic Management Area final environmental impact

[1:21:13] statement. The final LG >> huh

[1:21:19] » L US E >> I don't know that's how it says

[1:21:23] » um the finalized LCGMA

[1:21:28] FBI is available at link is there in the documents for

[1:21:33] public or anybody who wants to look at it. Um I have a notice of public hearing

[1:21:39] from the city of Hines.

[1:21:42] And the notice is hereby given that the Hines Planning Commission will meet in

[1:21:46] council chambers at Hines City Hall located 101 East Barnes Avenue, Hines,

[1:21:51] Oregon, and remotely via Zoom on Wednesday, September 9th, 2026,

[1:21:55] beginning at 5:30 p.m. for a public hearing to consider the following

[1:21:59] requests. Application 2025-.07.008

[1:22:05] Telos Development. So this is in regards to the application. The um Telles

[1:22:11] development company has submitted an application to create a subdivision on

[1:22:16] three parcels in the city of Hines. So public hearing public

[1:22:22] hearing city fines.

[1:22:26] All I had for correspondence. Any other correspondence?

[1:22:29] » If we could go back to the Laos Canyon Febis.

[1:22:33] I reached out to that contact and I hadn't checked my email in two days, but

[1:22:39] they did respond back and they said that the decision does not affect Harney

[1:22:43] County land, permittes, infrastructure, any other county interest. There was

[1:22:46] just a courtesy and so if you guys want or it probably makes sense I can forward

[1:22:52] this to Danny and it can be as correspondence to go with that.

[1:22:59] I just wanted to share that. >> I do have another piece of

[1:23:01] correspondence. I didn't I wasn't familiar with it. I

[1:23:04] didn't even know didn't know where it was at.

[1:23:08] » I figured it was out of Horn County because I hadn't heard Well, there's a

[1:23:11] lot of places I've heard of, but sure didn't ring a bell.

[1:23:16] » Just did they say where it was at? >> It's in the Vale district.

[1:23:19] » Bale district. >> That's all they said about it.

[1:23:22] » So, there was another piece of correspondence. I don't know if you both

[1:23:25] got your certified copy in your box. I know I've got one and it's from maybe

[1:23:30] it's because I made a comment quite a while ago. This is from the Department

[1:23:34] of the Air Force. It's a memorandum for federal, state, and local public public

[1:23:38] agencies, interested parties, and members of the public from a Colonel Ray

[1:23:44] Gunter, commander of 366 Fighter Wing and Mountain Home, Idaho Air Force Base.

[1:23:51] The subject is notice of availability of the draft environmental impact statement

[1:23:55] for the proposed homeland defense over the horizon radar northwest region. And

[1:24:00] basically it says that um there will be a 15-day public

[1:24:08] comment period beginning this Thursday, September 4th to September 19th for the

[1:24:13] purpose of soliciting input regarding the analysis presented in the draft EIS.

[1:24:19] It gives the um the website where people can go to view that

[1:24:25] and provide input and it also gives information on to where inquiries

[1:24:30] regarding this could be directed to the Mountain Home Air Force Base public

[1:24:34] affairs office. So I would like to Am I the only one who received this?

[1:24:38] » I didn't get one. >> Okay. I don't know how long ago, but I

[1:24:42] think you were both there when when they had their not well publicized um

[1:24:49] showing of some of their early stuff. And I remember at the time I did do some

[1:24:54] thinking about it, researching it and and provided some input that I submitted

[1:24:58] at the time just as myself. Um so I would like this to be um go ahead and

[1:25:05] scan into our record so people can access that. And that's all I had on

[1:25:10] correspondence. >> Not to put more on your plate, but

[1:25:12] because you have done some research, would you be willing to draft a set of

[1:25:16] comments in response to that for the court?

[1:25:18] » Sure. Did you submit some back at the day too? And if so, let me see those as

[1:25:23] well. I don't remember if you did did or not. I don't remember what month or year

[1:25:27] it was, >> but if I did, I think it was last 2025

[1:25:31] sometime. I'll have to live. But yeah, I'd be happy to do that. And since

[1:25:37] it will be

[1:25:40] before our next county court meeting, the deadline, uh, if you're I can just

[1:25:46] send you all an email with my draft and if you say put my name on it or don't

[1:25:51] put my name on it, I'll at least submit something for myself. It's not all of us

[1:25:56] or two of us. Okay, >> that's good.

[1:25:58] » All right.

[1:26:02] Um, scheduling. So, I already took care of kind of earlier took care of the two

[1:26:06] rescheduling dates topics that I had on here. Other than that, it's normal first

[1:26:11] and third. I need a calendar here. I think I've said that before.

[1:26:16] » I can do that. >> I'll give one up out of my mind. It's

[1:26:18] all marked up in my office and we're almost at the end of the year. We'll get

[1:26:22] one for next year. Um, other than those changes

[1:26:29] to the uh 16th and 6th

[1:26:36] » or the uh was it >> that would be November 18th move to

[1:26:42] Monday the 16th

[1:26:47] » and October 7th moving to October 6th. Yeah.

[1:26:52] » And then next county work date is September 16th.

[1:26:57] » Okay. >> Um any other meeting schedules of

[1:27:03] interest?

[1:27:09] » We have the u September 10th um session or continued session from Wealth Works

[1:27:17] uh with Harney High Partnership etc. that um is something we've been going

[1:27:22] to. That's the next one is >> which one? What day was it?

[1:27:25] » September 10th at 8:30. You can either go to the high desert partnership

[1:27:30] and join the folks who will be there or you can zoom in. I'll probably zoom in.

[1:27:36] Could can I ask about that because I was thinking about it and

[1:27:42] since we are starting to deliberate things that we are going to take action

[1:27:45] on in that do we need to publicly notice that meeting

[1:27:51] » because I think there's a lot of value in us all attending but I feel like

[1:27:55] we're getting to the point where our options are either to delegate

[1:27:59] » one person to go or to publicly >> what's an example of an action you think

[1:28:04] » like the riff

[1:28:06] stuff and we kind of deliberate how we're going to put in for that. Or maybe

[1:28:11] I'm wrong. I was >> I think we cover it and we discuss it at

[1:28:16] county court meetings, but that's just my thought. I mean, that's it's almost

[1:28:20] like a work session, those things, even though it's it's kind of high level. And

[1:28:25] then if we say we think the county can help in this way, then that would be

[1:28:29] something we discuss throughout. You can you can check with high desert

[1:28:34] partners what their intent is, but I don't think

[1:28:38] I think it's more of a a work session for kind of a a little group of specific

[1:28:43] partners or like the governmental entities. I agree

[1:28:49] that any any formal decisions definitely have to be brought back to this to this

[1:28:54] body. Um and I think in our last in our last

[1:29:02] session it it was comments from each of us

[1:29:06] towards the group not deliberation between ourselves.

[1:29:10] » Right? >> So as long as we're careful on that part

[1:29:12] of it and not deliberating between ourselves on some kind of an agreeance

[1:29:16] or plan for the county then we're not deliberating and it doesn't create that

[1:29:21] quorum issue. >> No, I think you guys are right. I just

[1:29:24] want to talk about I think I think you know when I'm sitting there and I'm

[1:29:27] thinking of my comments are to the group as a whole

[1:29:32] um >> it's brainstorming. We're doing a lot of

[1:29:34] brainstorming is what it is. So >> when it comes down to that so we'll be

[1:29:39] careful to make sure that we bring stuff from that back

[1:29:45] along the way as appropriate. Um, there's a maybe I've got it wrong,

[1:29:52] but if anyone's interested, I hadn't penciled in that Pacific Core OTC

[1:29:57] transmission topic, transmission line topic that there's a virtual

[1:30:03] session on September 9th from 6:00 to 7:00 p.m. I'm going to zoom in if I if

[1:30:10] I'm available just to hear. I'm not working that issue per se, just general

[1:30:14] awareness. Uh,

[1:30:22] I'm going to participate on the 15th in the 211 roundt.

[1:30:29] Um, that I'm I forget who's hosting it, but

[1:30:33] I I thought for emergency management and time such as that, I I had the time. So,

[1:30:39] I'm going to go. It's a three-hour meeting. Not sure.

[1:30:43] » September 15th. The >> 15th. Yeah.

[1:30:46] and it's it's at 11 and it's you have to sign up ahead of time and it's got a

[1:30:50] lunch in it and it's going to be out of the tribe. So, I'll represent or listen

[1:30:55] in for Harney County and bring anything back to you all. If you have any thing

[1:30:59] you want to talk to me about before that, please do. That's all I had.

[1:31:06] » Oh, the mission for >> Oh, yeah. The old Bernie County Fair

[1:31:10] from the 8th to the 13th. It's coming up.

[1:31:15] There's a fivemile dam meeting on the 14th, which I haven't attended any of

[1:31:19] those, but I probably will because if we can get them hooked up with the Klein

[1:31:25] Schmidt consultants, I think there'd be a lot of knowledge in that group.

[1:31:29] Where's the Oregon Infrastructure Summit that conflicts with our next

[1:31:34] county court meeting? I was trying to pull up that email to see what that was

[1:31:39] about. >> What day was that meeting?

[1:31:42] » On the six. Wait, what day was the five mile band meeting is on Monday?

[1:31:48] I think it's at it's in the afternoon. Hold on. I'll tell you exactly.

[1:31:54] » 1 to 2 at the community center, I believe, is where that

[1:31:59] » Monday the 14th. >> Thank you.

[1:32:04] » Oregon Infrastructure

[1:32:14] Is this the one that's in >> I think you need to go to a few more

[1:32:18] conferences. >> Yeah. Yeah.

[1:32:23] » Statewide forum focused on infrastructure investments, policies and

[1:32:26] partnerships needed to support Oregon's communities and economies.

[1:32:33] business leaders and infrastructure professionals for a day of high level

[1:32:36] discussion.

[1:32:39] » Even get a railroad do it. >> Yeah. I mean, it sounds pretty

[1:32:44] important, but also don't know. Was that on anyone else's radars?

[1:32:51] » What day is it? >> It's on the 16th.

[1:32:56] » County court date. >> County court date. No.

[1:33:01] I don't recall seeing it. Oregon Infrastructure Summit.

[1:33:06] Who is it? Is it by Business Oregon? >> Business Oregon and Northwest

[1:33:11] Environmental Business Council. Looks like it's in Salem.

[1:33:24] Yeah, I might if you haven't seen it, I might forward it to you guys, but I

[1:33:29] don't know. I think I probably saw that and looked

[1:33:35] on calendar and thought about it and didn't

[1:33:39] situation didn't sound out. Honestly, part of me kind of feels like we need to

[1:33:45] get our own house in order first. And we've been working pretty hard at lining

[1:33:48] out our infrastructure. And so >> that's that's how I feel, but also um

[1:33:55] you know, the legislature is always a big piece of of things that we always

[1:33:59] need addressed. So, you know, I don't know if there's going to be an

[1:34:03] opportunity for to get some uh after conference summary of some highlights,

[1:34:10] you know, that they might put out is to >> rebuilding our transportation vision.

[1:34:17] Hopefully, a good one. >> Yeah. Whose vision has

[1:34:22] » Well, it won't be ours if we're not in the room.

[1:34:25] I I have I have to say that there's one coming up in December that I've gone to

[1:34:30] which is the the governor's uh >> business

[1:34:36] » business leadership summit something like that. I'm not going to it this

[1:34:40] year. I've gone the last two three years and it and I get absolutely nothing out

[1:34:44] of it. >> Portland centric.

[1:34:46] » Yeah. Last year was it?

[1:34:49] » Yeah. >> Countyentric.

[1:34:52] » Yeah. But it doesn't include if it was the governor's plan for the entire

[1:34:57] economics of the state and covered all four corners of it. That would be

[1:35:02] different and that would be something that we'd want to be in tune with to

[1:35:05] make sure we're working with and not against. But it doesn't do that. It the

[1:35:11] first year was entirely about Portland. >> The governor came out and scolded

[1:35:15] everybody and said stop digging on Portland,

[1:35:20] you know. And then the next year it was all Eugene centric and all of their big

[1:35:25] plans and everything. But that doesn't well in the first year too I I took

[1:35:30] exception with that that they made the statement that the entire economy of the

[1:35:35] state of Oregon is uh revolves around Portland. And I'm like I don't know of

[1:35:40] any any time in my lifetime that a dime earned in Portland benefited Tarnney

[1:35:46] County. Well,

[1:35:49] remember when uh Tim, you know, was appointed to to lead some

[1:35:56] type of economic um thing 16 members. Nobody from the

[1:36:02] east side. I mean it was agriculture is not even a

[1:36:07] thing that they >> so while I

[1:36:10] » they define business a certain way that excludes us and they and that sounds

[1:36:14] like that forum you've tried you've gone two or three times right and uh tried to

[1:36:20] speak up and do stuff and it's just it's not a good use of

[1:36:23] » I usually sit with AOC members

[1:36:27] » they have an AOC couple of AOC tables and I'm not the only one um AOC staff

[1:36:33] themselves have not been have not been uh real impressed with it

[1:36:39] in past years as well. >> I remembered you saying that and that's

[1:36:44] what I kind of wondered about this one. I'll reach out to

[1:36:47] » So I guess my point being is regards to this one is that I'm a little it doesn't

[1:36:53] do good to bury your head in the sand and ignore all of these opportunities

[1:36:56] and we're not representing ourselves and we don't have any representation or or

[1:37:00] leadership from county to them. But I'm just a little tainted on these meetings

[1:37:06] that are organized and coordinated and and centric to the west side of the

[1:37:11] city. >> I'm going to put that as a very brief

[1:37:14] hot topic at our AOC district 2 hot topic and just say there's this thing

[1:37:19] who's been going. What's your impression? Here's county's impression.

[1:37:23] AOC, you're here. you know, and just get some more. Um,

[1:37:28] » actually, I think the int the attendance overall in the last three years of that

[1:37:32] business leadership summit has dropped from my times I've been too. So, I don't

[1:37:37] think all, you know, all the way around. I think people are stopped going to that

[1:37:40] one. And that one could be just in and of itself. And the other ones have

[1:37:43] value. I'm I don't without going, we don't know.

[1:37:47] » You definitely need to put on schedule. Do you have any dates?

[1:37:50] I don't >> other than I mean it's on my calendar

[1:37:54] but just for meetings and scheduling whatever I'll be out Thursday and Friday

[1:37:59] this week. Monday's a holiday and the following

[1:38:04] week I'm out Thursday, Friday the 17th and 18th I think it is.

[1:38:16] » Okay. >> I need more vacation time too. I want to

[1:38:19] lobby for more vacation time. I think I've only with these days

[1:38:24] » these days off I've only taken about eight days this year

[1:38:27] » so far.

[1:38:34] » Were you gonna did you already? >> Yeah, that's it. That's all I had.

[1:38:40] » Um for scheduling then uh regular court dates general

[1:38:45] deliberation. I don't really have anything. I think

[1:38:48] most of what we've covered just normal business continuing jail

[1:38:54] project. You can see it's moving along. Still dealing with O uh OJ on um

[1:39:01] uh funding our monthly invoices with them

[1:39:06] and putting a package together that they like to see and we'll approve. They're

[1:39:11] being they tell us one thing and then don't deliver on their end. So get a

[1:39:15] little frustrated. Um, as you can see, we have some

[1:39:20] screening equipment out in the foyer. Now, that is uh was all purchased with

[1:39:25] state funds, circuit court funds, OJD funds for court security.

[1:39:30] They have a training session on October 8th, I think, for anybody who will be

[1:39:36] operating this the scanner and whatnot, sheriff's office staff. And u then we're

[1:39:41] looking at going live with it around the middle of October. Is that where they're

[1:39:46] going to have that stuff or they just set it down?

[1:39:48] » That's where it's going to be until we have have the ability to reconstruct.

[1:39:52] Yeah, just >> um I did as you may recall through the

[1:39:58] AOC OJ courthouse task force last well earlier this year I guess it

[1:40:04] was J January February time frame I submitted a request for

[1:40:10] » 1.5 1.7 million I have to pull it up and refresh but somewhere around there for

[1:40:17] capital improvement funds to build a an addition to the front of the courthouse

[1:40:21] for a security screening checkpoint that all this would then move into. Um all

[1:40:28] the ADA access and everything would then come through the front of the

[1:40:31] courthouse. >> I remember.

[1:40:34] » So it's there until we but but it's good to have it there now. you know, in a lot

[1:40:40] of instances, it's probably going to be pocket knives and whatnot that people

[1:40:43] forget to take out of their pockets or whatever, but um all of that goes

[1:40:47] towards statistics and proving that, you know, and to be quite honest, at

[1:40:52] this point right now, we don't know who walks into circuit court or the

[1:40:55] courthouse with a concealed weapon on. So, um, in my past life in law

[1:41:02] enforcement and being an active shooter instructor,

[1:41:05] uh, it's not a matter of if Harney County has ever hit with an active

[1:41:09] shooter situation. It's a matter of when. And I think our

[1:41:15] distant past or recent past, whatever you want to call it, um, ex exhibits the

[1:41:20] fact that, uh, things can happen. So, I I I welcome it. I'm glad we have

[1:41:27] it. It's going to be a cultural adjustment for people, but um I think

[1:41:32] it's in this day and age, it's a it's a necessary

[1:41:36] function. That's all I really have.

[1:41:40] » I got several quick uh Okay. So for association foreign counties district 2

[1:41:48] I'm reaching out to our the commissioners and judge the one judge to

[1:41:53] tell them which you've got an email from me but um which of the offices of that

[1:42:00] organization are up for election etc. And I'm encouraging and people are very

[1:42:04] busy and I know Commissioner Frank you are very busy

[1:42:08] but I would like to put a bug in your or be nominated for the least hard thing to

[1:42:14] do which just being an alternate so you might not have to do anything. It's just

[1:42:17] a one year. So Hardy County at least have somebody doing something and that

[1:42:21] would be the AOC district 2 representative to the AOC membership

[1:42:26] committee alternate. We'll have some would you consider that and if not we

[1:42:30] can talk later. I hate having to twist people's arms, but it's everybody's so

[1:42:35] busy. Um, I'm getting, you know, I'm having those conversations. You can

[1:42:39] think about it. >> Yeah, we can talk about that. I agree.

[1:42:42] » I'm trying to give you the one that's least likely to have any time that you

[1:42:47] would have put it. Um, let me know. Um, okay.

[1:42:53] uh just to check in on any of the um delinquent taxes that are

[1:43:02] situation of any large amounts and where >> there's no no change that I'm aware of.

[1:43:08] » How many years into it are we >> the one big account the biggest account

[1:43:13] that's delinquent? I think we're starting the fourth year.

[1:43:19] And without getting too much into it, was a recent award of a lot of federal

[1:43:24] grant was that aimed at that same

[1:43:28] » so that >> so um the one account that is delinquent

[1:43:35] the most that that is back delinquent in taxes the most is is that facility out

[1:43:40] there. um they were awarded a 2 million even I

[1:43:45] think it was 2 million even uh grant from USDA for forest products

[1:43:51] and what they're what they're doing is they're expanding currently right now

[1:43:54] they they make alpha alpha pellets they're going to expand into fuel

[1:43:59] pellets for pellet stoves same same size of pellet uh and make and make fire heat

[1:44:08] fuel pellets they can switch in the summertime and

[1:44:12] make same system, same production line. They can make alphalfpha pellets in the

[1:44:17] summertime, spring, spring through summer, whatever that looks like, and

[1:44:20] then switch production to fuel pellets in the in the fall, winter time. I would

[1:44:27] they can't use those funds to pay their back taxes, I guess, is the short short

[1:44:31] part of that. It's all about uh equipment purchase and whatnot. I will

[1:44:35] say I'm encouraged by it because it it increases production and possibility of

[1:44:41] jobs and everything else that go along with it and allows them or hopefully

[1:44:45] gets them to a track where they're back on track with their prop property taxes.

[1:44:50] » I just I get people who ask me. >> Yeah, I've seen I've seen some of the

[1:44:54] social media comments on on it recently about

[1:44:59] about that topic. Um Yeah. I will say too though that

[1:45:05] the dynamics of back taxes and going into foreclosure, it runs almost a six

[1:45:11] to sevenyear cycle before a property is ever even um deeded to the county,

[1:45:17] before it's a done deal and that and and that a motion or action from circuit

[1:45:23] court deeds it to the county. year one, two, and three, an individual,

[1:45:28] any individual, whether it's a homeowner or whatever, can pay their back taxes

[1:45:35] the most delinquent year. And there are some properties in Harney County that do

[1:45:39] that. They're three years in the rears and they pay the last most most

[1:45:43] delinquent year and keeps them afloat another year. There are some properties

[1:45:48] that kind of have that track record. Um

[1:45:52] once you get past that third year, you can't and get into the fourth year, you

[1:45:56] can't just go back and pay the most delinquent year. You then have to pay

[1:46:00] all three delinquent years. So in this case, I believe that's where they're at

[1:46:04] at this point where in order for them to stay

[1:46:07] operational, they would have to go back and pay all three delinquent years, I

[1:46:12] believe. I would have to clarify that with the assessor, but I believe that's

[1:46:15] my understanding. Um, looks like there's somebody from the

[1:46:19] assessor's office on. Is that correct?

[1:46:24] If you can answer that. I think it's Jennifer. Is it Jennifer?

[1:46:31] » It's not muted. >> So, anyway, that that's my

[1:46:36] understanding. Um, so you know, again, if they're planning

[1:46:42] on continuing production, which they got a grant to do, that would mean at some

[1:46:46] point they're going to have to come in and pay the taxes in order to stay

[1:46:49] operational. So, I see it as a good thing, but

[1:46:56] when when it finally happens, I have no idea.

[1:46:58] » Okay. um regarding

[1:47:02] the flood mitigation work with our

[1:47:07] contractor group and things moving on it. I just

[1:47:11] want to let you know that um two of the individuals who have spoken to me who

[1:47:18] have been at county court over you know last year or so uh occasionally on uh

[1:47:24] and that would be Louis and Melody Mold. Um, I did send them each a a fairly long

[1:47:30] text saying, "Here's a situation. You need to contact Brandon McMullen and

[1:47:34] please let your neighbors or county court. Let them know that they need to

[1:47:40] contact Brandon McMullen. He's the lead on this

[1:47:44] to see if you can have an opportunity or still have an opportunity. Provide that

[1:47:49] information, data, or anything else you have that you want to be considered into

[1:47:53] this." So, I put in their court. I talked to Brandon first to make sure

[1:47:58] that's that's how it works. So, I hope that that word gets out to all the

[1:48:02] interested parties and if they do or they don't. Um, let's see. uh

[1:48:12] the contracting policy that's in the works

[1:48:17] uh you know and what levels you know >> procurement

[1:48:20] » procurement and does that also include procurement of services

[1:48:24] » yes services goods >> does it have a pretty good piece in it

[1:48:30] about conflict of interest or perceived

[1:48:33] conflict of interest or not and I just throw that

[1:48:37] Not because I'm trying to point fingers or say anything was or wasn't, but

[1:48:41] incidents in the recent work at the fair grounds, you know, one of the

[1:48:46] individuals on fair board who happened to have that expertise was, you know,

[1:48:50] called on to do stuff, etc. And I'm sure did receive some pay or will. So, I

[1:48:54] mean, just not getting nit. I haven't looked at the

[1:48:58] latest rendition, but you know, just the more we can just line things out easily

[1:49:05] and whether it's needs to be stringent or not so stringent, but proper.

[1:49:09] » I I first off, I thank Commissioner Frank for taking that on and

[1:49:13] spearheading that because I've been trying to work with county council for

[1:49:16] over two years and getting that policy updated, especially because it has new

[1:49:21] limits on it for spending limits, increased limits.

[1:49:25] um >> you know as to whether any other

[1:49:28] announcement of even if it's a short fuse or not you know if it's an

[1:49:32] emergency situation uh >> and I haven't had a chance to to review

[1:49:36] the entire and I saw your reply as far as um whether that's like a a forward-

[1:49:42] facing county policy type of a document whereas the the actual

[1:49:49] governing document would be a would be something else like the the uh resol

[1:49:54] resolution would be something else. I I like that. I think that sounds good.

[1:49:58] That would be like that would serve as like an attachment to the resolution.

[1:50:02] Um, but I also, like I said, I haven't reviewed the whole thing yet, but I

[1:50:06] think we need to consider, too. And if there's some not some language in there,

[1:50:09] there needs to be some language in there about when we're doing business with

[1:50:14] federal dollars and the requirements of of u title 2 CFR, Code of Federal

[1:50:22] Regulations, as to um federal guidelines on reporting and and uses and

[1:50:30] everything. Um, oh, some of that's coming into play right now with these OJ

[1:50:34] dollars for the for the uh jail project because those are actually ARPA funds.

[1:50:39] So, they're federal dollars and we have to comply with not only the state's

[1:50:44] requirements but the federal government's requirements on those

[1:50:46] dollars. So, I think um when when and if a department or anybody's looking at

[1:50:52] applying for federal dollars that we should probably have language that

[1:50:57] addresses concerns of 2CFR. I think it's 2 CFR 200.

[1:51:03] » Awesome. Anyway, that was just I just wanted to pass that thought, not trying

[1:51:08] to request anything specific. And then in the discussion earlier on the agenda

[1:51:14] item of the building official and the compensation stuff. So

[1:51:19] do we do sometimes if someone is an employee and

[1:51:25] is it something to think about or not not a good idea or you already do it

[1:51:29] anyway on sometimes there is a a contract for an extra duty or a contract

[1:51:36] for an extra role or you know i.e. I was just thinking on, you know, Grant and

[1:51:40] Harney County, you know, we don't have a lot of these that have, you know,

[1:51:46] two roles beyond our borders or anything else. is is that and maybe

[1:51:52] again I just jot it down during today's conversation is you had said something

[1:51:57] should maybe should have been a contract and that was something else but

[1:52:00] » well because we filled it outside of the of what the grade scale oh said but we

[1:52:06] filled it outside of that because of the expertise we were looking for but that

[1:52:10] possibly should have been the only other contract that we have deals with another

[1:52:15] specialized technical position and that's our nurse practitioner

[1:52:19] or she nurse practitioner or is she a a physician assistant? I always get the

[1:52:23] two of them confused. Over at the over at the RHC at the health clinic, that

[1:52:27] individual is on a contract based on and again um

[1:52:32] the only time you can contract out for uh labor personnel services is for

[1:52:40] specialty type positions. you know, attorneys, um, engineers, surveyors,

[1:52:46] um, medical professionals, those kind of things. Your normal positions, you can't

[1:52:50] do that with this position with the building official. Um, you potentially

[1:52:57] could have been >> a physician's assistant.

[1:53:00] » Physicians assistant. Thank you. I always get to do

[1:53:04] » somebody who's listening. Um, so,

[1:53:10] so it's something we probably should have explored and I didn't think about

[1:53:13] it at the time. >> That's fine. I just had a question since

[1:53:15] I don't know what that stuff about. That's all I had.

[1:53:17] » And I'm actually I think I think I'm going to in light of this and this

[1:53:21] discussion, I'm going to confer with CIS who does our, you know, covers this for

[1:53:26] labor issues. I'm going to confer with them and county council and determine

[1:53:30] whether we need to have that kind of a of a contract moving forward.

[1:53:37] Thanks. I'm done. >> That procurement manual doesn't have a

[1:53:41] conflict of interest section, but it does

[1:53:44] have criteria in RFP process that doesn't

[1:53:50] that tries to uh discourage favoritism. But I think that's a valid question to

[1:53:56] ask Audrey. And since we want to ask her about the federal

[1:53:59] funds as well, and for it to be a manual, I mean, it's 50 pages. It's a

[1:54:03] beast. But I think as a department head, it would be really handy to have that

[1:54:06] document if you had questions. And the way she put it, it lines it out. It's

[1:54:11] kind of a if this, then do this. >> And I think I was

[1:54:15] today's thought was more am I thinking of when do you have to RFP?

[1:54:20] Because if you don't, it might look like a complicated. It

[1:54:24] might be that's the only person, you know, who's got the

[1:54:30] locally that has the skills or availability to do it, you know, and

[1:54:34] it's a short-term thing and, you know, just

[1:54:36] » there there's all kinds of provisions for within the procurement process.

[1:54:40] Number one, the dollar amount and how much solicitation you have to do,

[1:54:44] whether it's something small that you can go direct to anybody and just

[1:54:48] contract it. whether it's intermediate and you have to do some informal

[1:54:52] searches or it gets higher to a larger one and you have to do a formalized RFP.

[1:54:57] Um there are also provisions for soul sourcing wherein you're talking about a

[1:55:02] service or a good that only one individual or organization or entity

[1:55:07] company is the only one that provides that that that service or good that

[1:55:12] you're looking for. Um it gets complex the the the uh procurement

[1:55:19] Right. Uh uh OS is four chapters. That's 179

[1:55:26] I want to say or something like OS 179 seems I don't know how but anyway but

[1:55:31] it's it's it's chapter A, B, C and D. There are four very big chapters dealing

[1:55:37] with procurement on on that. So it's very it's very complex.

[1:55:42] » Thanks. General deliberation. First off, capital

[1:55:47] improvements update on the fairgrounds. There will be lights in the event center

[1:55:52] fair and the doors be up, which is exciting. And the carnival's coming

[1:55:57] back, which took a lot of work from the fair board and fair manager because

[1:56:03] there was there was a period there where we weren't sure if we're going to be

[1:56:06] able to get that back. So, >> is it the same carnival as last year or

[1:56:08] different ones? Same. >> So, that's exciting.

[1:56:13] real quickly. Uh, last Sunday, not last Sunday, Sunday the 23rd, whenever that

[1:56:18] was, BOSCA had their meeting and talked about legislative priorities. But some

[1:56:24] of the big priorities they'll have is a legislative concept which would

[1:56:29] make the state coordinate with local governments if they are giving any grant

[1:56:34] funds or appropriations to any local groups like nonprofits or NOS's or

[1:56:39] anything like that. Yeah. to make sure that it aligns with what the counties

[1:56:44] » and hopefully that will also fit broad, >> right? And then there's also it was

[1:56:50] brought up after the fact. Should we lump unfunded mandates into that and so

[1:56:55] we're working on a potential other legislative concept that will address

[1:56:59] unfunded mandates because ironically there are statutes which prohibit

[1:57:03] unfunded mandates but it doesn't seem to be very effective because we have a lot

[1:57:07] of them. I'm glad glad that's will get worked on particularly on if the the

[1:57:12] counties can at least eyeball oh yeah those are legitimate you know they all

[1:57:16] do some of that work that's fine we don't have to spend a lot of time on it

[1:57:20] but when that when that fictitious fraud website that said it was covering Harney

[1:57:27] Grant and few other counties got actually got funded by OA

[1:57:32] three years ago for something that was supposed to be CBOS's and our public

[1:57:36] health They they discovered this had happened

[1:57:40] because they said we aren't a CBO but we are the only entity that you know can

[1:57:44] provide these services in Harney County and we would like to maybe get a waiver

[1:57:47] and they no you're already funded your countyy's already funded. So that would

[1:57:51] touch on that some of that work. Yes. >> Thank you.

[1:57:55] » Uh DA funding and more specifically deputy DA funding from the state is

[1:58:01] another legislative concept they're working on. Right now, the state funds

[1:58:05] DAS, but it does it at a much lesser amount than it does

[1:58:10] public defenders and in a in a way smaller ratio, which affects our public

[1:58:15] justice program, >> but also they don't fund deputy DAs at

[1:58:20] all. So, in a lot of these counties, counties who have more discretionary

[1:58:24] money can supplement that DA funding to recruit DAS and they can also pay

[1:58:31] several deputy DAs. We've had a deputy DA position that's been unfilled for

[1:58:35] years because we can't offer it out of pay that incentivizes anyone to come

[1:58:40] here and so >> yeah we're working on a concept with

[1:58:44] that of course need to reach out to the DA's group to see what they're thinking

[1:58:48] on that but that is another priority and then EMS

[1:58:53] that kind of came out of the the listening session we did in

[1:58:59] there are all these barriers and now we don't have EMS and EMTs in rural areas

[1:59:06] and Jefferson County has an EMT and a commissioner who are have done a lot of

[1:59:14] research on that and so they might take the lead on that but I I'll also share

[1:59:18] with the group our new EMS supervisor director Jim is planning

[1:59:26] some trainings for EMR which isn't EMS certification but it's emergency respon

[1:59:31] response and he's going to be targeting >> first responders,

[1:59:35] » I think. So, yeah, he's going to be targeting RFPA because they're already

[1:59:39] out in the county. They already have some structure and organization and just

[1:59:43] having a network of people that could respond with a little bit of training to

[1:59:46] keep one of the big things is if somebody passes out before an ambulance

[1:59:50] gets to them in the fields and can't tell them their name or any of their

[1:59:54] medical issues or where they're from, someone first on the scene can get that

[1:59:58] information and have it. Anyway, that was another good thing being worked on.

[2:00:03] And then I think Umatella County will take the lead on pursuing nuclear

[2:00:08] studies and the color of water which has to do with point of diversion, but it it

[2:00:14] affects all of Oregon, but it county tried running that last year. It has to

[2:00:19] do with basically if you have one point of diversion from a river, you could

[2:00:22] change your point of diversion. It doesn't change your water right or

[2:00:24] anything else like that. You're just changing where you're taking the water

[2:00:27] from. And so those were some of their priorities they went over. I reached out

[2:00:33] to the RFPs late after our last conversation about whether or not we

[2:00:38] should pursue becoming RFPA members. And as of Monday, I'd heard back from at

[2:00:43] least four of the seven RFPAs. When I have more information about if we can,

[2:00:49] what their bylaws are, what potential costs would be, I'll bring that back.

[2:00:52] And my one last thing, we've already talked about it a bit, but judge, I was

[2:00:57] just wondering, something came out in the paper and I

[2:01:00] haven't read the paper yet about foreclosures, and I was wondering if you

[2:01:03] could just, you've already told us quite a bit about what that foreclosure

[2:01:06] process looks like, but where does it go from here? Apparently, it was noticed in

[2:01:10] the paper, and so now what happens? So, I haven't seen that story or article in

[2:01:16] the newspaper, but it So, we have tax foreclosures, but

[2:01:22] you also have bank private foreclosures, and the sheriff does does sales sheriff

[2:01:27] sales for private foreclosures as well. Um, so I don't I don't know what the

[2:01:35] article is. Um, the tax foreclosures are just that, just like we just kind of

[2:01:39] briefly discussed already that somebody's three years delinquent. Then

[2:01:44] it goes in a I can't remember each phase of it, but

[2:01:47] there's three more years of phases of notifications and trying to get the

[2:01:52] people to pay and giving them not, you know, sending notices. And then in the

[2:01:57] in the seventh year basically is when it gets for practical purposes when it gets

[2:02:02] uh deed to the county for back taxes. We haven't put out notice of ours. So, I'm

[2:02:08] I'm guessing this person misunderstood it. It was those private foreclosures

[2:02:11] that's always in the paper. That sounds like that's okay. That's what happened.

[2:02:15] » Just a comment on the DA funding, etc. um what I would like to advocate for and

[2:02:20] we'll mention it that is going to be one of the hot topics AOC district 2 and and

[2:02:24] I'm sure AOC stuff but I believe every all 36 counties should be fully funded

[2:02:30] by state dollars to have a DA and a deputy DA and whatever little bit of you

[2:02:36] know office all of them at at a good competitive

[2:02:41] salary in a county like Multma I remember one of their commissioners

[2:02:45] telling me well we have 17 deputy DAs because we you know we have a lot of

[2:02:49] people we have a lot of court cases and stuff and of course they have a lot more

[2:02:54] tax revenue because they have a lot of people etc. And they said we don't

[2:02:59] really have a problem paying you know and I said I know that but I said you

[2:03:02] know we can never retain we often cannot retain you know good quality person who

[2:03:09] otherwise would do a great job here and maybe like to live here because of the

[2:03:13] discrepancy. So again, I believe the state should, if they really want our

[2:03:18] our court systems to to stay timely and getting stuff done and doing a great job

[2:03:23] and equity across wherever you live in order, maybe have a decent district

[2:03:27] attorney office with a primary and a and a deputy that might not be looking for

[2:03:34] the next race elsewhere all the time. >> Some

[2:03:38] of the big that should be basic level capacity for the whole state. One of the

[2:03:42] big hurdles on on retent or recruitment is I know that that our DA has gone

[2:03:48] straight to law schools trying to recruit recent graduates. Well, those

[2:03:52] recent graduates are coming out of law school with big heavy uh student debt

[2:03:59] and and our pay is not going to is not going to allow them to pay that debt and

[2:04:04] you know live or you know pay their bills. So, I don't know, maybe in

[2:04:08] compensation somewhere there's some kind of uh and I don't know if I don't know

[2:04:15] how you would do this on a national level, but at a state level if there was

[2:04:18] some kind of student loan forgiveness for a certain amount of time of working

[2:04:23] in rural areas or something, they do it they do it with uh medical

[2:04:28] » staff and teachers where they work, you know, if you work in a rural area for a

[2:04:33] certain number of years and a portion >> I don't know how all that would work

[2:04:36] out, but maybe as an idea or a portion of or an idea for recruitment with

[2:04:40] something like that comes from the state. It goes a little bit further even

[2:04:45] as far as funding goes. It goes a little bit further than just DA's. The DA's

[2:04:50] office is a state office, but the whole grand bargain and the circuit

[2:04:56] court system. Half of our courthouse almost is is taken up by circuit court

[2:05:01] and we get no revenue whatsoever. We have to fund the maintenance and the

[2:05:05] infrastructure and everything for that service.

[2:05:09] » Think about that blindfolded lady holding the scales. It just doesn't make

[2:05:13] any sense to me the like orders of magnitude more public defenders that are

[2:05:19] funded by the state than there are prosecutors. And so it's a very uneven

[2:05:23] balance of prosecution to defense. And it it affects the crimes that we are

[2:05:28] able to prosecute at a local level. having

[2:05:34] been a juror in Arlington, Virginia, San Diego, California, and even Hung County

[2:05:39] over my years. Um, not picking on any of them, but the public defenders

[2:05:45] were really bad. They were I mean I just thought that poor defendant they at

[2:05:52] least should have competent you know and I I just remember thinking we can't

[2:05:56] factor that in but um you need to have good ones but did they did they over in

[2:06:02] Oregon did they just put more money into that side or

[2:06:06] » well and you know what I could be off on that

[2:06:08] » other places they were like well they the prosecutors were better but other

[2:06:13] places >> and I may have misstated that but the

[2:06:16] fact of the matter is there more money in the private sector as a defense

[2:06:20] lawyer. That's more accurate. There's more money in the

[2:06:23] » private sector. >> So why would you be

[2:06:27] » a DA or a deputy DA if you can go in the private sector every twice as much

[2:06:34] » which is which is if you're talking private sector is comprised of both

[2:06:37] public dollars for for appointed public defenders and private dollars from those

[2:06:43] individuals who can pay for their own defense.

[2:06:46] Well, good. It's been something that AOC in various capacities have been trying

[2:06:51] to advocate for for a long time and we just keep working on it.

[2:06:57] Was there anything else from the EOCA portion of that you wanted to I mean I'm

[2:07:02] not looking to make this an EOC a debrief. I just

[2:07:07] » Well, we just found out that the Sheets County will not be a member this year

[2:07:11] and it's their new commission going forward if they want to be a member.

[2:07:16] And I was thinking about like a AOC district

[2:07:22] 2 because I've been thinking about that stuff lately is when the shoots county

[2:07:26] next year has five commissioners and

[2:07:31] is beginning politically to become uh a little bit more on the loose side of

[2:07:36] things. AOC District 2, see we're kind of like

[2:07:40] tacked in there. You know, there's Clamoth Lake and us and then there's

[2:07:44] Crook Jefferson shoots, whatever. But that that may change the flavor of that

[2:07:49] district. We'll just see. Right now, we have a lot of commonality.

[2:07:55] And this is the only time Har County is kind of grouped more of a central Oregon

[2:07:59] with Eastern, which is good. It's good to sometimes be grouped at least one in

[2:08:03] a couple forums aside from the our guys that were always grouped with. So

[2:08:11] about any other discussion

[2:08:18] get out of here before lunch today. If there be no further business

[2:08:24] court shall adjourn.

County Court Regular Session 09/02/26

Transcript