The Okanogan County Board of Commissioners met in regular session on October 2, 2006, with Chairman Don Hover, Commissioner Andrew Lampe, Commissioner Mary Lou Peterson and Brenda Crowell, Clerk of the Board present.

Executive Session – Personnel
Commissioner Peterson moved to go into executive session for 20 minutes for personnel at 9:15 AM. Motion was seconded and carried.

Open Session Resumed at 9:35 AM.

Executive Session - Personnel
Commissioner Lampe moved to go into executive session for 10 minutes at 10:10 AM to discuss personnel. Motion was seconded and carried.

Open Session resumed at 10:20 AM

Update – Planning
Greg Wilder discussed the difficulties with the City of Oroville 3-party agreement. The Commissioners stated that if the City does not approve the agreement by the next council meeting that the county will not provide the loan to them for the sewer extension.

Nick reported that the Kinross groundbreaking ceremonies that he attended went well. The Shoreline Master Program is moving along. The lead entity has submitted all the applications. On the SRF Board the county looks good for receiving funding.

Public Hearing – Conservation District Assessment
Albert Roberts, Chairman for the Conservation District reported that the conservation district held meetings throughout the county. Most people who attended supported their effort to assess properties to help fund the district. The District asks that the Commissioners approve the assessment, as it will help maintain the agriculture based economy.

? stated that the district brings revenue into the county and by investing in the Conservation District, the Board would be investing in the county’s economy.

Craig Nelson explained that the number of requests determines the amount of assistance provided. In the last few years, the district has brought close to a million dollars in grant funds into the county that has been used for salaries, and support for farmers. The district also works with landowners on water quality issues who are concerned that their rights could be impacted in the future by statues and rule making authorities. When the Conservation District gets referrals from regulatory agencies, of violations they work with the landowner to help them minimize penalties and meet the requirement. Many times it is related to cows and water. In this light, the assessment could help with emergencies. Several letters of support have been provided to the Commissioners with one in exception.

Norm said that although the district has never needed an assessment before is that the district used to be able to call on the NRCS for assistance. Now, the person who used to lend assistance from NRCS has been put behind a desk to administer contracts and the district has to have staff available to do the job. He noted that Conservation Districts are formed as any other district.

Commissioner Hover opened the hearing to public comment.

Randy Kelley, District Conservationist, for NCRS, provided a letter in support of the Conservation District’s request for an assessment. He stated that Okanogan County Conservation District staff is overloaded with projects. They have managed to bring funding into the county for financial assistance to agricultural producers. Without the conservation district this county would be hurting. This district’s staff is the best in the Northwest.

Vic Stokes, President of Okanogan County Cattlemen’s association stated that last year when the district came and spoke regarding this issue the overall group was supportive with only one or two who didn’t feel it was appropriate. Vic has been helped by the district programs, and is aware of how much this program helps ranchers. Other ranchers on coordinated resource management (CRMs) feel the same way.

John Larson, Executive Director of Conservation Districts in Washington explained that the majority of Washington Districts on the eastside of the Cascade Range have assessments. The challenge is that grant funds are soft money. There is nothing more frustrating to getting things accomplished with grant funds. Districts that have an assessment have a good return on their money. Non-grant funds will cover local priorities whereas grant funds are restricted.

Fred C? President of Washington Association of Conservation Districts explained that he became involved with the districts because years ago he saw the possibility of regulatory requirements. Fred stated that the association supports the concept of local assessments. Commissioner Peterson asked if other counties charge an overall assessment or if it is divided by land use. Each district has a different way of imposing the assessments.

Ralph Longnecker, Orchardist has participated in the county’s watershed study. He stated that 50 years ago the Conservation District urged him to plant fescue in his orchard and is currently the standard practice.

Butch Ogden, Regional Manager for Central Washington. Commissioner Peterson asked what the state commissions’ budget is. Butch remarked that he has not looked at the budget for a while but would send the information to her later. The total is 46 million dollars for the biennium. Each district gets an implementation grant each year of $34,700 for 47 districts. Each district gets around $10,400 in regular funding. This year the legislation provided $100,000 for to be used for the neediest to work toward an assessment. All the grant funds that Okanogan County applied for were obtained.

Commissioner Peterson said that at the Fish & Wildlife Commission meeting she heard that they want to partner with the Conservation District Commission to fund projects for F&W and not fund local conservation districts. This seems out of balance. She said she would look into it and agreed that there are ways to help districts to get more funding from the commission if they have a need. It was noted that many of these funds are subject to legislation.

John Culp, City of Okanogan Council member stated that the city of Okanogan supports the assessment. They have assisted the city with water conservation measures. Over the last four years, the district has been awarded over $75,000 to implement the program locally for technical assistance. Also, there is $60,000 for the Methow that is being matched. This brings money into the county. This is a good thing to allow the district to use a small thing and capitalizing on it.

Commissioner Hover closed the public comment. Commissioner Peterson asked Craig Nelson how he would address landowners who do not receive any services. Craig replied that we all benefit from clean water and it helps producers create a viable economy. Producers would move out of the community if they do not receive the help they need. By helping landowners such as fruit producers, these funds are turned around into the local economy. Commissioner Peterson asked if the Conservation District has thought about putting a limit on the number of projects that can be done. It was explained that the Board sets the number of projects and staffing. Projects have been turned away. They are not looking to increase staff with these dollars. The funds would be to do those projects not funded by grants. There is a cost share is to implement a conservation practice and is paid for or contributed by the person receiving the help. Commissioner Peterson feels it is unfair that the people have to be taxed to pay for a state regulation.

Commissioner Hover asked why the Farm Bureau does not support the assessment. Craig said that it is his impression is that they just do not want more taxes. Commissioner Peterson would like to see how other districts do their assessments.

Commissioner Lampe moved to continue the hearing to October 10^th at 10:00 AM. Motion was seconded and carried.

Big River Subdivision Long Plat- Planning
Ben Rough presented the staff report regarding Big River Long Plat Subdivision. Included in the report were Noxious Weed plan, Protective Covenant, Public Health report and Right to Farm both have been filed.

Commissioner Lampe Moved to approve the Final Approval for the Subdivision Long Plat 2006-1, subject to the attached Staff report including Findings of Fact, Conclusions and Conditions of Approval. Motion was seconded. Motion carried.

Update – County Medical Experience – Benefax
Ward Sandberg and Monica Kersey

Ward updated the Commissioners on the county current medical experience. Ward explained other options for the county’s medical plans.