By JOE GAMM - The Daily Astorian
Friday, February 15, 2008
Clatsop County Commissioner Richard Lee has until Wednesday to either resign or defend himself in a public statement for a March 25 recall election.
The final stray signatures on the Lee recall petition were certified this morning.
Last week, supporters of the effort came in two valid signatures short of the needed 468 but, the group turned in six more signatures Monday, four of which counted, putting the total at 470.
Interim County Clerk Fred Neal said today.If Lee resigns, there will be no recall election.
Otherwise, residents of Lee's district have until March 4 to register to vote on the issue, Neal said.Although he has declined interviews with The Daily Astorian, Lee addressed the issue during a Board of Commissioners meeting Wednesday.
"I wish to publicly state that I am not guilty of the many charges," said Lee. "Thank you for your support.
"Lee is accused of using his position on the county board to favor his business interests and circumventing regulations on permits and other matters, especially in dealing with the county planning department.
During the public comment period of the meeting, Lori Durheim, of Astoria, stepped to the microphone and asked for Lee to resign.
She was followed by Jay Kiddle, also of Astoria, who also asked that Lee resign."I find it inconceivable that he can sue my interest and still represent it," he said.
Lee has had his Portland lawyer file a tort claim against the county indicating his intention to sue if certain conditions are not met.
His contention is that he has been unfairly penalized by county planners.Two other people attending the meeting, Willard and Tammy Richardson, of Astoria, told commissioners Wednesday they, like Lee, have had problems dealing with the county's planning department.
After they offered details, Clatsop County Manager Scott Derickson said he would follow up.
Meanwhile, the other four commissioners appear to be working out their differences, which culminated in name-calling and an obscene gesture at a session last month.
Commissioner Sam Patrick, who has been the lone vote in many 4-1 decisions in the past year, read a letter into the record, explaining his actions during a one-on-one meeting between Commissioner Ann Samuelson and him during a goal-setting session in January.
Samuelson said during a Jan. 23 board meeting that his references to violence "created an atmosphere of fear and intimidation.
"Patrick, a former Los Angeles County deputy sheriff, said he was simply reverting back to his training and using a metaphor about an armed person barricading himself.
"I said to you, 'In a situation like that, you do everything possible to end the situation before you drop the hammer,'" he said.
He said the two continued to discuss "expedience," and he thought they were on common ground.Patrick has said he will retire from the commission when his term ends this year.
Patricia Roberts plans to file again.
Samuelson and Jeff Hazen's positions are not on the ballot this year.
Saturday, February 16, 2008
Richard Lee Issue: County Employee Protections
1) Reporting public endangerment resulting from an action by a public employer;
2) A public employer may not prohibit, discourage, restrain, dissuade, coerce, orotherwise interfere with any employee disclosing to any person, or take or threatento take disciplinary action against an employee for disclosing any information thatthe employee reasonably believes is evidence of:
(a) A violation of any federal orMemorandum to the Clatsop County Board of CommissionersFebruary 8, 2008Page 6state law, rule or regulation by action of the state agency or political subdivision, or
b) Mismanagement, gross waste of funds, abuse of authority, or substantial andspecific danger to public health and safety resulting from action of the state,agency or political subdivision.
3) No public employer may identify the employee who discloses matters described inthis rule during any investigation of the information provided by the employeewithout the written consent of the employee. And, no supervisory or managementemployee of a public employer may reveal to an employee accused of malfeasance the identity of the employee who discloses matters described in ORS659A.203 or reports described in ORS 659A.212.4)
No public employer may take any disciplinary action against an employee foremployee activity described and protected by the law. An employer, however, is not precluded from taking disciplinary action if:
a. The information disclosed is known by the employee to be false;
b. The employee discloses the information with reckless disregard for itstruth or falsity; orc. The information disclosed relates to the employee's own violations,mismanagement, gross waste of funds, abuse of authority, orendangerment of the public health or safety.Discrimination Based on Protected Status. ORS 659A.030 relates to claims of retaliation.
To establish a prima facie case of retaliation, a complainant must prove:
(1) she engaged in protectedactivities;
(2) she suffered an adverse employment action; and
(3) there was a causal link between theprotected activities and the adverse employment action. These elements are also stated in a corollaryfederal statute related to federal employment claims, 42 USC § 2000e et seq.
The elements of the claimare the same under federal law – that is, to establish a prima facie case of retaliation, Complainant mustprove:
(1) she engaged in protected activities;
(2) she suffered an adverse employment action; and
(3)there was a causal link between the protected activities and the adverse employment action. Ray v.Henderson, 217 F.3d 1234, 1240 (9th Cir. 2000).
Tort Claim.
The tort alleged by the Lee’s attorney, interference with the business relationship,requires proof that
1) there is the existence of a business relationship
2) intentional interference with thatrelationship
3) by a third party,
4) accomplished by improper means or for an improper purpose,
5) a causal effect between the interference and the damage to the economic relationship and 6) actual damages.Services Employees Intl, v. Walter 2007 ORCA A129008-121207, citing McGanty v.Staudenraus, 321 Or. 532, 535, 901 P2d 841 (1995).
2) A public employer may not prohibit, discourage, restrain, dissuade, coerce, orotherwise interfere with any employee disclosing to any person, or take or threatento take disciplinary action against an employee for disclosing any information thatthe employee reasonably believes is evidence of:
(a) A violation of any federal orMemorandum to the Clatsop County Board of CommissionersFebruary 8, 2008Page 6state law, rule or regulation by action of the state agency or political subdivision, or
b) Mismanagement, gross waste of funds, abuse of authority, or substantial andspecific danger to public health and safety resulting from action of the state,agency or political subdivision.
3) No public employer may identify the employee who discloses matters described inthis rule during any investigation of the information provided by the employeewithout the written consent of the employee. And, no supervisory or managementemployee of a public employer may reveal to an employee accused of malfeasance the identity of the employee who discloses matters described in ORS659A.203 or reports described in ORS 659A.212.4)
No public employer may take any disciplinary action against an employee foremployee activity described and protected by the law. An employer, however, is not precluded from taking disciplinary action if:
a. The information disclosed is known by the employee to be false;
b. The employee discloses the information with reckless disregard for itstruth or falsity; orc. The information disclosed relates to the employee's own violations,mismanagement, gross waste of funds, abuse of authority, orendangerment of the public health or safety.Discrimination Based on Protected Status. ORS 659A.030 relates to claims of retaliation.
To establish a prima facie case of retaliation, a complainant must prove:
(1) she engaged in protectedactivities;
(2) she suffered an adverse employment action; and
(3) there was a causal link between theprotected activities and the adverse employment action. These elements are also stated in a corollaryfederal statute related to federal employment claims, 42 USC § 2000e et seq.
The elements of the claimare the same under federal law – that is, to establish a prima facie case of retaliation, Complainant mustprove:
(1) she engaged in protected activities;
(2) she suffered an adverse employment action; and
(3)there was a causal link between the protected activities and the adverse employment action. Ray v.Henderson, 217 F.3d 1234, 1240 (9th Cir. 2000).
Tort Claim.
The tort alleged by the Lee’s attorney, interference with the business relationship,requires proof that
1) there is the existence of a business relationship
2) intentional interference with thatrelationship
3) by a third party,
4) accomplished by improper means or for an improper purpose,
5) a causal effect between the interference and the damage to the economic relationship and 6) actual damages.Services Employees Intl, v. Walter 2007 ORCA A129008-121207, citing McGanty v.Staudenraus, 321 Or. 532, 535, 901 P2d 841 (1995).
Friday, February 15, 2008
The Richard Lee Debacle: A Few Major Questions....
How long has Lee's project....whatever it's called...been underway, 3 - 4 years now?
Zoning approvals on questionable use of property?
Conditional Use Permits?
Whatever else and the project has reached the state that it is in now?
Me? I would never get out the door with a permit or approvals on any of this stuff right from the very start, if any aspect were left unsatisfied nor, would I expect to.
Why has this all not been addressed way, way, way before now?
22 outdated and/or unsatisfied Building Permits?
Does this bleeding go all the way through to include "Inept Administration" as well as leadership?
Who, exactly is asleep at the wheel on this and why is Jennifer Bunch become the targeted "Sacrificial Goat" on this?
Zoning approvals on questionable use of property?
Conditional Use Permits?
Whatever else and the project has reached the state that it is in now?
Me? I would never get out the door with a permit or approvals on any of this stuff right from the very start, if any aspect were left unsatisfied nor, would I expect to.
Why has this all not been addressed way, way, way before now?
22 outdated and/or unsatisfied Building Permits?
Does this bleeding go all the way through to include "Inept Administration" as well as leadership?
Who, exactly is asleep at the wheel on this and why is Jennifer Bunch become the targeted "Sacrificial Goat" on this?
LNG: "The Guv" Slams F.E.R.C. Pipeline Review
Kulongoski slams feds' gas pipeline review
Governor has a 'growing concern' about regulators' handling of the controversial liquid natural gas project
BY JOHN SCHRAG
The Forest Grove News-Times, Feb 14, 2008
Gov. Ted Kulongoski told federal regulators on Wednesday to stop their review of three liquid natural gas facilities proposed in Oregon.
In a letter to Joseph Kelliher, chairman of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, the governor blasted the agency's handling of the project, and insisted that it review all alternatives to the controversial energy supply and work to restore the state's right to enforce its own environmental standards.
"I have a growing concern that the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission's approach to the licensing of plants and pipelines has created a crisis of confidence with Oregonians," the governor wrote. "It is essential that FERC conduct a process for a regional review of alternative means of meeting future demands for natural gas that is fair to the citizens of Oregon and our neighboring states."
Three companies are working with federal regulators to build liquid natural gas terminals near Astoria and Coos Bay. The proposals would send the pipelines from two of the projects through western Washington County and northern Yamhill County.
The terminals have drawn loud crowds at rallies and sparked citizen groups in Forest Grove, Yamhill, Astoria and, most recently, Salem. The groups have raised concerns about private property rights, safety and the effect on the environment.
Until Thursday, Kulongoski was viewed as a cautious supporter of the project, having said he thought that the liquid natural gas could serve as a "bridge" to renewable energy sources. His letter signaled a sharp shift.
In the letter, the governor outlined his "concerns about lack of information on the need for LNG in the Pacific Northwest, concerns about localized impact on air and water quality, and no analyzis of greenhouse gases that may be released by specific sites in Oregon."
In addition to calling on Kelliher to review alternatives to the LNG facilities, Kulongoski said he had directed Oregon's Department of Energy to conduct its own evaluation.
Further, Kulongoski said he has asked Oregon Attorney General Hardy Myers to see whether the state has the legal authority to stop progress on the federally regulated projects until FERC completes the requested review.
Finally, the governor said he was asking members of the Oregon Congressional delegation to seek a repeal of the laws that gave the FERC the authority to "preempt" Oregon's facility siting process.
Governor has a 'growing concern' about regulators' handling of the controversial liquid natural gas project
BY JOHN SCHRAG
The Forest Grove News-Times, Feb 14, 2008
Gov. Ted Kulongoski told federal regulators on Wednesday to stop their review of three liquid natural gas facilities proposed in Oregon.
In a letter to Joseph Kelliher, chairman of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, the governor blasted the agency's handling of the project, and insisted that it review all alternatives to the controversial energy supply and work to restore the state's right to enforce its own environmental standards.
"I have a growing concern that the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission's approach to the licensing of plants and pipelines has created a crisis of confidence with Oregonians," the governor wrote. "It is essential that FERC conduct a process for a regional review of alternative means of meeting future demands for natural gas that is fair to the citizens of Oregon and our neighboring states."
Three companies are working with federal regulators to build liquid natural gas terminals near Astoria and Coos Bay. The proposals would send the pipelines from two of the projects through western Washington County and northern Yamhill County.
The terminals have drawn loud crowds at rallies and sparked citizen groups in Forest Grove, Yamhill, Astoria and, most recently, Salem. The groups have raised concerns about private property rights, safety and the effect on the environment.
Until Thursday, Kulongoski was viewed as a cautious supporter of the project, having said he thought that the liquid natural gas could serve as a "bridge" to renewable energy sources. His letter signaled a sharp shift.
In the letter, the governor outlined his "concerns about lack of information on the need for LNG in the Pacific Northwest, concerns about localized impact on air and water quality, and no analyzis of greenhouse gases that may be released by specific sites in Oregon."
In addition to calling on Kelliher to review alternatives to the LNG facilities, Kulongoski said he had directed Oregon's Department of Energy to conduct its own evaluation.
Further, Kulongoski said he has asked Oregon Attorney General Hardy Myers to see whether the state has the legal authority to stop progress on the federally regulated projects until FERC completes the requested review.
Finally, the governor said he was asking members of the Oregon Congressional delegation to seek a repeal of the laws that gave the FERC the authority to "preempt" Oregon's facility siting process.
Thursday, February 14, 2008
Richard Lee: Recommendations By Counsel
From: MEMORANDUM TO CLATSOP COUNTY COMMISSION NUMBER 2
Counsel has recommended that staff action include:
1) Enforcement action be undertaken on the Planning Code violations.
2) Stop work orders be issued on the Building Code violations.
3) No further County permits be issued until compliance is achieved.
4) Issue a letter to the Lees that they will only be permitted in Community Development offices for a pre-arranged meeting with management staff, that no other staff will be permitted to speak with them on their personal issues, and that any threatening behavior may result in the issuance of a “no trespass order” as provided for by Oregon law.At this point, Counsel would recommend that the Board consider the following actions:
1) Support the County Manager and County staff in upholding the law.
2) Determine whether you will authorize the release of this Memorandum and theGoldsmith Report to the public at this time or resist disclosure.
3) Put safeguards in place in your communications with Commissioner Lee to avoid disclosure of information material to the defense of the Lewis and ClarkDevelopment, LLC Tort Claim. Commissioners will need to careful in theirconsideration of issues and handling of documents pertaining to CommissionerLee.
4) Be aware Commissioner Lee may have conflicts in the following areas:a. Any matter involving the Community Development Department includingland use appeals.Memorandum to the Clatsop County Board of CommissionersFebruary 8, 2008Page 8b.
The Community Development Department budget, and the County budget generally if funds must be budgeted for litigation.c. Enforcement actions against him and any disputes he has with the County.
Counsel and staff will need to communicate on those issueswith Commissioners at meetings from which Commissioner Lee isexcluded and maintain the confidentiality of such communications in theinterest of the County as a whole.This unique situation is caused by Richard Lee’s actions that have placed him in aposition of legal adversity with Clatsop County.
We recommend the Board of Commissioners supportCounty Staff in enforcing the law in their decision to prohibit any construction activity on the property untilthe regulatory matters are resolved and are in compliance.
If Commissioner Lee chooses not to complythen the Board of Commissioners should make clear that the Board’s expectation is simply that staff shalltreat any member of the Board of Commissioners exactly as the County would treat any other member ofthe public at large.
On employment matters, we recommend a non-interference stance in support ofCounty administration as overseen by the County Manager.
We recommend Commissioners affirm thatthe Board does not condone any Commissioner, a Commissioner’s agent, or indeed any citizen,manifesting threatening behavior toward County Staff, and thereby acknowledge the seriousness ofthese matters.
We further recommend that the Commissioners be sensitive to the need to protectconfidentiality in the preparation of any defense to any litigation brought by Commissioner Lee againstthe County.
Counsel has recommended that staff action include:
1) Enforcement action be undertaken on the Planning Code violations.
2) Stop work orders be issued on the Building Code violations.
3) No further County permits be issued until compliance is achieved.
4) Issue a letter to the Lees that they will only be permitted in Community Development offices for a pre-arranged meeting with management staff, that no other staff will be permitted to speak with them on their personal issues, and that any threatening behavior may result in the issuance of a “no trespass order” as provided for by Oregon law.At this point, Counsel would recommend that the Board consider the following actions:
1) Support the County Manager and County staff in upholding the law.
2) Determine whether you will authorize the release of this Memorandum and theGoldsmith Report to the public at this time or resist disclosure.
3) Put safeguards in place in your communications with Commissioner Lee to avoid disclosure of information material to the defense of the Lewis and ClarkDevelopment, LLC Tort Claim. Commissioners will need to careful in theirconsideration of issues and handling of documents pertaining to CommissionerLee.
4) Be aware Commissioner Lee may have conflicts in the following areas:a. Any matter involving the Community Development Department includingland use appeals.Memorandum to the Clatsop County Board of CommissionersFebruary 8, 2008Page 8b.
The Community Development Department budget, and the County budget generally if funds must be budgeted for litigation.c. Enforcement actions against him and any disputes he has with the County.
Counsel and staff will need to communicate on those issueswith Commissioners at meetings from which Commissioner Lee isexcluded and maintain the confidentiality of such communications in theinterest of the County as a whole.This unique situation is caused by Richard Lee’s actions that have placed him in aposition of legal adversity with Clatsop County.
We recommend the Board of Commissioners supportCounty Staff in enforcing the law in their decision to prohibit any construction activity on the property untilthe regulatory matters are resolved and are in compliance.
If Commissioner Lee chooses not to complythen the Board of Commissioners should make clear that the Board’s expectation is simply that staff shalltreat any member of the Board of Commissioners exactly as the County would treat any other member ofthe public at large.
On employment matters, we recommend a non-interference stance in support ofCounty administration as overseen by the County Manager.
We recommend Commissioners affirm thatthe Board does not condone any Commissioner, a Commissioner’s agent, or indeed any citizen,manifesting threatening behavior toward County Staff, and thereby acknowledge the seriousness ofthese matters.
We further recommend that the Commissioners be sensitive to the need to protectconfidentiality in the preparation of any defense to any litigation brought by Commissioner Lee againstthe County.
Richard Lee: The Core Elements Of The Issue
From: Memorandum To Clatsop County Commission Number 2
The core elements of the situation are as follows:
* Commissioner Richard Lee is a land developer who has not complied with conditional usepermits and letters from the Planning Department staff requesting compliance, and whohas issues of non-compliance with the Building Codes Department.Memorandum to the Clatsop County Board of CommissionersFebruary 8, 2008Page 2
* He is a resistant and non-compliant Planning Department customer. His wife has madedemands upon the Planning Director that Jennifer Bunch, a Planning Staff member,should be fired for her role in seeking to enforce land use requirements for the Lee’sdevelopment.
* Commissioner Lee has taken complaints about Planning and Building Codes Staff decisions concerning his development to the Assistant County Manager, and used his access as Commissioner to interrupt meetings in her office in order to do so. On other occasions, when matters have not gone as the Lee’s preferred, they have directlycontacted the County Manager. As a result, Planning Staff feels a need to deal with themon a special basis. Despite the Lee’s efforts, the County Manager’s Office has notinterfered in the planning and permitting process.
* Commissioner Lee and his wife have been confrontational in private dealings withPlanning Staff and Building Code Officials. This behavior has caused Planning Staff andBuilding Code Officials to seek assistance from the Community Development Director, theCounty Manager’s office and County Counsel in their efforts to enforce the law andexecute their duties properly.
* Jennifer Bunch has filed a written complaint concerning this behavior with the CommunityDevelopment Director and the County Manager. She reports feeling threatened and infear of losing her job.
* The Community Development Director has voiced thoughts of resigning as hispredecessors have done, rather than continue to deal with the conflict generated by theLee’s behavior.
* On January 9 and 10, 2008, Richard Lee filed a public records request seeking disclosureto him of copies of all memos, written communication, and anything that refers to him, hiswife, or properties or projects that they are involved in, between staff members andCounty officials, Commissioners, and clients.
* On January 28, 2008, the County Manager received a Tort Claims Notice from KennethDobson, an attorney representing Lewis and Clark Development, LLC, a company ownedby Lynda and Richard Lee. The Tort Claim alleges interference with the businessrelationship by County staff.
The core elements of the situation are as follows:
* Commissioner Richard Lee is a land developer who has not complied with conditional usepermits and letters from the Planning Department staff requesting compliance, and whohas issues of non-compliance with the Building Codes Department.Memorandum to the Clatsop County Board of CommissionersFebruary 8, 2008Page 2
* He is a resistant and non-compliant Planning Department customer. His wife has madedemands upon the Planning Director that Jennifer Bunch, a Planning Staff member,should be fired for her role in seeking to enforce land use requirements for the Lee’sdevelopment.
* Commissioner Lee has taken complaints about Planning and Building Codes Staff decisions concerning his development to the Assistant County Manager, and used his access as Commissioner to interrupt meetings in her office in order to do so. On other occasions, when matters have not gone as the Lee’s preferred, they have directlycontacted the County Manager. As a result, Planning Staff feels a need to deal with themon a special basis. Despite the Lee’s efforts, the County Manager’s Office has notinterfered in the planning and permitting process.
* Commissioner Lee and his wife have been confrontational in private dealings withPlanning Staff and Building Code Officials. This behavior has caused Planning Staff andBuilding Code Officials to seek assistance from the Community Development Director, theCounty Manager’s office and County Counsel in their efforts to enforce the law andexecute their duties properly.
* Jennifer Bunch has filed a written complaint concerning this behavior with the CommunityDevelopment Director and the County Manager. She reports feeling threatened and infear of losing her job.
* The Community Development Director has voiced thoughts of resigning as hispredecessors have done, rather than continue to deal with the conflict generated by theLee’s behavior.
* On January 9 and 10, 2008, Richard Lee filed a public records request seeking disclosureto him of copies of all memos, written communication, and anything that refers to him, hiswife, or properties or projects that they are involved in, between staff members andCounty officials, Commissioners, and clients.
* On January 28, 2008, the County Manager received a Tort Claims Notice from KennethDobson, an attorney representing Lewis and Clark Development, LLC, a company ownedby Lynda and Richard Lee. The Tort Claim alleges interference with the businessrelationship by County staff.
Richard Lee: Status Of Land Use File
From: MEMORANDUM TO CLATSOP COUNTY COMMISSIONERS NUMBER 2
A summary of current status of Richard Lee’s land use file is as follows:
Commissioner Lee has several outstanding sets of issues with the County Planning Department.
*The first involves compliance with conditional use permits for a golf course and an RV Park and requests of the planning staff for compliance in at least two letters.
*The second involves five property transfers from Lee to neighboring property owners.
*A final issue involves compliance with flood hazard regulations.
In March 2003 Commissioner Lee was allowed to build a 9-hole golf course on property zoned for exclusive farm use. His conditional use permit is subject to nine conditions.
The first required a final design layout showing 50-foot riparian setbacks.
The seventh required certain permits prior to construction of an outbuilding. Lee has built the course but has not complied with conditions one and seven.
In January 2005 Commissioner Lee was allowed to develop a 90-space Recreational VehiclePark on 9.5 acres zoned for Rural Community Commercial use. This approval was subject to 12 conditions. Condition three requires compliance with Oregon Administrative Rules dealing with Recreational Parks and Organizational Camps, OAR 918-650-0035 through 918-650-00801. OAR 918-650-0035 requires a set of construction plans prior to the issuance of any building permits. Although construction of the park continues, Lee has not produced construction plans that comply with OAR 918-650-0035. Also see, ORS 455.680 requiring State approval of plans before construction begins.
Between 1984 and 2001 Commissioner Lee transferred portions of his property to neighboring owners without the benefit of County approval. These transfers were made by five separate deeds. County Planning Staff believes that the County land use ordinance required each of these transfers to be approved by either a Property Line Adjustment or a Partition prior to the transfer of property. It appears that the transfers involved either vacant land or were made to cure an encroachment. Planner Jennifer Bunch discovered the problem in October 2007 after Lee submitted an application to further partition his remaining parcel of property. As there was no County approval of the transfers, Lee is prohibited from further subdividing the remaining parcel and also prohibited from obtaining permits for land use activities involving this property. This prohibition includes obtaining the permits required by condition number seven of the golf course approval. Richard Lee and Lynda Lee reacted to this situation with abusive behaviors directed at CountyPlanning Staff.To resolve these problems, permits to transfer the property, development plans for the RV Parkand golf course and permits for the outbuilding are needed. The last issue involves both the golf course and the RV Park. Both developments lie within a Flood Hazard Overlay District (FHO). These districts are designed to reduce flood damage and loss of life in areas subject to periodic flooding. §4.030(4) of the County’s Planning Code requires that fill placed below the base flood elevation in the FHO be compensated for with an equal volume of excavation frombelow the base flood elevation. Planning Staff has requested that Commissioner Lee demonstrate compliance with this code section on the plans for the RV Park and golf course. Although each development must comply with §4.030(4), it is unclear whether compliance must be demonstrated on thedevelopment plans for the RV Park and golf course.
A summary of current status of Richard Lee’s land use file is as follows:
Commissioner Lee has several outstanding sets of issues with the County Planning Department.
*The first involves compliance with conditional use permits for a golf course and an RV Park and requests of the planning staff for compliance in at least two letters.
*The second involves five property transfers from Lee to neighboring property owners.
*A final issue involves compliance with flood hazard regulations.
In March 2003 Commissioner Lee was allowed to build a 9-hole golf course on property zoned for exclusive farm use. His conditional use permit is subject to nine conditions.
The first required a final design layout showing 50-foot riparian setbacks.
The seventh required certain permits prior to construction of an outbuilding. Lee has built the course but has not complied with conditions one and seven.
In January 2005 Commissioner Lee was allowed to develop a 90-space Recreational VehiclePark on 9.5 acres zoned for Rural Community Commercial use. This approval was subject to 12 conditions. Condition three requires compliance with Oregon Administrative Rules dealing with Recreational Parks and Organizational Camps, OAR 918-650-0035 through 918-650-00801. OAR 918-650-0035 requires a set of construction plans prior to the issuance of any building permits. Although construction of the park continues, Lee has not produced construction plans that comply with OAR 918-650-0035. Also see, ORS 455.680 requiring State approval of plans before construction begins.
Between 1984 and 2001 Commissioner Lee transferred portions of his property to neighboring owners without the benefit of County approval. These transfers were made by five separate deeds. County Planning Staff believes that the County land use ordinance required each of these transfers to be approved by either a Property Line Adjustment or a Partition prior to the transfer of property. It appears that the transfers involved either vacant land or were made to cure an encroachment. Planner Jennifer Bunch discovered the problem in October 2007 after Lee submitted an application to further partition his remaining parcel of property. As there was no County approval of the transfers, Lee is prohibited from further subdividing the remaining parcel and also prohibited from obtaining permits for land use activities involving this property. This prohibition includes obtaining the permits required by condition number seven of the golf course approval. Richard Lee and Lynda Lee reacted to this situation with abusive behaviors directed at CountyPlanning Staff.To resolve these problems, permits to transfer the property, development plans for the RV Parkand golf course and permits for the outbuilding are needed. The last issue involves both the golf course and the RV Park. Both developments lie within a Flood Hazard Overlay District (FHO). These districts are designed to reduce flood damage and loss of life in areas subject to periodic flooding. §4.030(4) of the County’s Planning Code requires that fill placed below the base flood elevation in the FHO be compensated for with an equal volume of excavation frombelow the base flood elevation. Planning Staff has requested that Commissioner Lee demonstrate compliance with this code section on the plans for the RV Park and golf course. Although each development must comply with §4.030(4), it is unclear whether compliance must be demonstrated on thedevelopment plans for the RV Park and golf course.
Richard Lee: Overview Of Permit File
From: MEMORANDUM FOR THE CLATSOP COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS NUMBER 2
*Over the course of these two developments many building permits have been taken out by Lee or by contractors on behalf of Lee.
*Some of these permits have not been closed out and are now stale.
*Jim Byerly the County Building Official indicates that 22 permits are outstanding on these projects with 10 of them outdated.
*The order approving the conditional use erroneously refers to OAR ch. 618.
*Over the course of these two developments many building permits have been taken out by Lee or by contractors on behalf of Lee.
*Some of these permits have not been closed out and are now stale.
*Jim Byerly the County Building Official indicates that 22 permits are outstanding on these projects with 10 of them outdated.
*The order approving the conditional use erroneously refers to OAR ch. 618.
Wednesday, February 13, 2008
LNG: Paul Sansone On Documentation Of F.E.R.C. Process Failuires
Subject: Documentation of FERC Process Failures for CommissionerWellinghoff.
Date: Tue, Feb 12, 2008, 5:39 PM
DO YOU HAVE COMPLAINTS ABOUT THE LNG REVIEW PROCESS BEING CONDUCTED BY FERC?
Did FERC fail to notify you of the LNG terminals or pipelinesaffecting yourproperty? Were you notified by misleading notices in thenewspaper? Havethe pipeline companies threatened or intimidated you to getaccess to yourland for surveys? Did you go to a FERC hearing and was unable totell whowas with FERC and who was representing the project proponents?
Have you had trouble even finding out where the proposedpipelines will evengo?
FERC Commissioner Jon Wellinghoff has asked for documentation ofthe abusesof our democratic and private property rights.
ACTION ALERT:All citizens and groups that are affected by the proposed LNGterminals andpipelines and have documentation of problems with the FederalEnergyRegulatory Commission(FERC) LNG review process should respond immediately toFERC Commissioner Jon Wellinghoff request receive information andact toresolve the deficiencies.
Concerned citizens and affected parties should provide thisinformation toOregon's Congressional delegation to deliver to CommissionerWellinghoff ina legal manner. PLEASE RESUBMIT ANY DOCUMENTATION PROVIDEDEARLIER AGAIN toprotect against any errors or omissions that we know have already
occurred.
The information will also be collected by the ColumbiaRiverkeepers andsubmitted directly to FERC. Those affected can forwardinformation by emailto the following contact people:
Emails, reference the subject:Documentation of FERC Process Failures for CommissionerWellinghoff.
Copy the following people:David M. Berick, Senator Ron Wyden's Washington officedave_berick@WYDEN.SENATE.GovMary Gautreaux, Senator Ron Wyden's Portland officemary_gautreaux@WYDEN.SENATE.GovJason Vaillancourt, Senator Smith's officejason_vaillancourt@gsmith.senate.govAnn Richardson, Representative Wu's officeann.richardson@mail.house.govMichael Carrier, Governor Kulongoski's officemichaelcarrier@state.or.usBetsy Johnson, Senator District 16sen.betsyjohnson@state.or.usDeborah Boone, Representative District 32rep.deborahboone@state.or.usDaniel Serres, Columbia River Keepersdserres@gmail.com (who will make a FERC submittal)
(Cut and paste emails below into your email)dave_berick@WYDEN.SENATE.Gov, mary_gautreaux@WYDEN.SENATE.Gov,jason_vaillancourt@gsmith.senate.gov,ann.richardson@mail.house.gov,sen.betsyjohnson@state.or.us, rep.deborahboone@state.or.us,dserres@gmail.com.
We are requesting that FERC immediately stop all LNG related FERC
reviews inthe State and publicly investigate abuses and failures of thecurrentprocesses.
We also request that all LNG related proposals be combined into aProgrammatic Environmental Impact Statement including adefinitive energyneeds analysis.
Date: Tue, Feb 12, 2008, 5:39 PM
DO YOU HAVE COMPLAINTS ABOUT THE LNG REVIEW PROCESS BEING CONDUCTED BY FERC?
Did FERC fail to notify you of the LNG terminals or pipelinesaffecting yourproperty? Were you notified by misleading notices in thenewspaper? Havethe pipeline companies threatened or intimidated you to getaccess to yourland for surveys? Did you go to a FERC hearing and was unable totell whowas with FERC and who was representing the project proponents?
Have you had trouble even finding out where the proposedpipelines will evengo?
FERC Commissioner Jon Wellinghoff has asked for documentation ofthe abusesof our democratic and private property rights.
ACTION ALERT:All citizens and groups that are affected by the proposed LNGterminals andpipelines and have documentation of problems with the FederalEnergyRegulatory Commission(FERC) LNG review process should respond immediately toFERC Commissioner Jon Wellinghoff request receive information andact toresolve the deficiencies.
Concerned citizens and affected parties should provide thisinformation toOregon's Congressional delegation to deliver to CommissionerWellinghoff ina legal manner. PLEASE RESUBMIT ANY DOCUMENTATION PROVIDEDEARLIER AGAIN toprotect against any errors or omissions that we know have already
occurred.
The information will also be collected by the ColumbiaRiverkeepers andsubmitted directly to FERC. Those affected can forwardinformation by emailto the following contact people:
Emails, reference the subject:Documentation of FERC Process Failures for CommissionerWellinghoff.
Copy the following people:David M. Berick, Senator Ron Wyden's Washington officedave_berick@WYDEN.SENATE.GovMary Gautreaux, Senator Ron Wyden's Portland officemary_gautreaux@WYDEN.SENATE.GovJason Vaillancourt, Senator Smith's officejason_vaillancourt@gsmith.senate.govAnn Richardson, Representative Wu's officeann.richardson@mail.house.govMichael Carrier, Governor Kulongoski's officemichaelcarrier@state.or.usBetsy Johnson, Senator District 16sen.betsyjohnson@state.or.usDeborah Boone, Representative District 32rep.deborahboone@state.or.usDaniel Serres, Columbia River Keepersdserres@gmail.com (who will make a FERC submittal)
(Cut and paste emails below into your email)dave_berick@WYDEN.SENATE.Gov, mary_gautreaux@WYDEN.SENATE.Gov,jason_vaillancourt@gsmith.senate.gov,ann.richardson@mail.house.gov,sen.betsyjohnson@state.or.us, rep.deborahboone@state.or.us,dserres@gmail.com.
We are requesting that FERC immediately stop all LNG related FERC
reviews inthe State and publicly investigate abuses and failures of thecurrentprocesses.
We also request that all LNG related proposals be combined into aProgrammatic Environmental Impact Statement including adefinitive energyneeds analysis.
Tuesday, February 12, 2008
Memorandum For Clatsop County Commissioners - Two On Richard Lee - February 8, 2008
From Submitted Public Information Request
800 Exchange St, Suite 410 . Astoria, Oregon 97103 . (503) 325-8449 . FAX (503) 338-2969
CLATSOP COUNTY
COUNTY COUNSEL
MEMORANDUM FOR THE CLATSOP COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
CONFIDENTIAL COMMUNICATION/ATTORNEY CLIENT PRIVILEGED
DATE: February 8, 2008
RE: Commissioner Lee / Human Resources, Planning & Potential Litigation/
Risk Management Issues
County Manager Scott Derickson has presented an evolving situation to the County’s lawyers and requested recommendations. He perceived potential legal liabilities and political issues, coupled with employee rights, and County responsibilities. These issues are compounded by an appearance of impropriety and the risk of compounding County liability in the event incorrect choices are made.
To Read Entire Memorandum Click Here!
800 Exchange St, Suite 410 . Astoria, Oregon 97103 . (503) 325-8449 . FAX (503) 338-2969
CLATSOP COUNTY
COUNTY COUNSEL
MEMORANDUM FOR THE CLATSOP COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
CONFIDENTIAL COMMUNICATION/ATTORNEY CLIENT PRIVILEGED
DATE: February 8, 2008
RE: Commissioner Lee / Human Resources, Planning & Potential Litigation/
Risk Management Issues
County Manager Scott Derickson has presented an evolving situation to the County’s lawyers and requested recommendations. He perceived potential legal liabilities and political issues, coupled with employee rights, and County responsibilities. These issues are compounded by an appearance of impropriety and the risk of compounding County liability in the event incorrect choices are made.
To Read Entire Memorandum Click Here!
Sunday, February 10, 2008
Looking Back:Citizens For Clatsop County Charter Integrity?
Got this list from a citizen just looking back and spurred by the accusations of Conspiracy by The Daily "A", CCFOG and others against Richard Lee.
Filer/Committee
Contributor/Payee
Sub Type
Amount
137040
11/09/2007
Original
Citizens for Clatsop County Charter Integrity
Miscellaneous Cash Contributions $100 and under
Cash Contribution
$30.00
137048
11/09/2007
Original
Citizens for Clatsop County Charter Integrity
Bernard E Bjork
Cash Contribution
$101.00
137039
11/07/2007
Original
Citizens for Clatsop County Charter Integrity
Jeff S Hazen
In-Kind Contribution
$1,131.16
137038
11/06/2007
Original
Citizens for Clatsop County Charter Integrity
Hipfish Monthly
Account Payable
$160.00
137037
11/05/2007
Original
Citizens for Clatsop County Charter Integrity
New Northwest Broadcasting
Account Payable
$100.00
132930
10/28/2007
Original
Citizens for Clatsop County Charter Integrity
Miscellaneous Cash Contributions $100 and under
Cash Contribution
$200.00
132931
10/23/2007
Original
Citizens for Clatsop County Charter Integrity
Tamara Broadmore
Account Payable
$395.00
120262
10/22/2007
Original
Citizens for Clatsop County Charter Integrity
Miscellaneous Cash Contributions $100 and under
Cash Contribution
$150.00
120261
10/17/2007
Original
Citizens for Clatsop County Charter Integrity
Witham & Dickey
Account Payable
$3,581.97
132929
10/17/2007
Amended
Citizens for Clatsop County Charter Integrity
Michael Moore
Cash Contribution
$500.00
120260
10/17/2007
Original
Citizens for Clatsop County Charter Integrity
Miscellaneous Cash Contributions $100 and under
Cash Contribution
$200.00
114572
10/10/2007
Original
Citizens for Clatsop County Charter Integrity
Lynda M Lee
Cash Contribution
$150.00
114571
10/08/2007
Original
Citizens for Clatsop County Charter Integrity
Miscellaneous Cash Contributions $100 and under
Cash Contribution
$25.00
114570
10/06/2007
Original
Citizens for Clatsop County Charter Integrity
Miscellaneous Cash Contributions $100 and under
Cash Contribution
$99.00
114563
10/06/2007
Original
Citizens for Clatsop County Charter Integrity
Carrie L Bartoldus
In-Kind Contribution
$350.00
114564
10/06/2007
Original
Citizens for Clatsop County Charter Integrity
Miscellaneous Cash Contributions $100 and under
Cash Contribution
$100.00
109839
10/05/2007
Original
Citizens for Clatsop County Charter Integrity
Miscellaneous Cash Contributions $100 and under
Cash Contribution
$50.00
109836
10/05/2007
Original
Citizens for Clatsop County Charter Integrity
Miscellaneous Cash Contributions $100 and under
Cash Contribution
$25.00
109834
10/05/2007
Original
Citizens for Clatsop County Charter Integrity
Miscellaneous Cash Contributions $100 and under
Cash Contribution
$99.00
109835
10/05/2007
Original
Citizens for Clatsop County Charter Integrity
Miscellaneous Cash Contributions $100 and under
Cash Contribution
$25.00
109837
10/05/2007
Original
Citizens for Clatsop County Charter Integrity
Miscellaneous Cash Contributions $100 and under
Cash Contribution
$50.00
109838
10/05/2007
Original
Citizens for Clatsop County Charter Integrity
Miscellaneous Cash Contributions $100 and under
Cash Contribution
$70.00
115835
10/03/2007
Amended
Citizens for Clatsop County Charter Integrity
Action Sign Works
Cash Expenditure
$400.00
109831
10/03/2007
Original
Citizens for Clatsop County Charter Integrity
Miscellaneous Cash Contributions $100 and under
Cash Contribution
$100.00
109830
10/03/2007
Original
Citizens for Clatsop County Charter Integrity
Miscellaneous Cash Contributions $100 and under
Cash Contribution
$50.00
109829
10/03/2007
Original
Citizens for Clatsop County Charter Integrity
Miscellaneous Cash Contributions $100 and under
Cash Contribution
$100.00
109826
10/03/2007
Original
Citizens for Clatsop County Charter Integrity
Sign-One Signcrafters
Cash Expenditure
$835.00
109832
10/03/2007
Original
Citizens for Clatsop County Charter Integrity
Miscellaneous Cash Contributions $100 and under
Cash Contribution
$99.00
109833
10/03/2007
Original
Citizens for Clatsop County Charter Integrity
Miscellaneous Cash Contributions $100 and under
Cash Contribution
$99.00
132932
09/27/2007
Amended
Citizens for Clatsop County Charter Integrity
Sign-One Signcrafters
Account Payable
$1,685.00
109828
09/27/2007
Original
Citizens for Clatsop County Charter Integrity
Sign-One Signcrafters
Cash Expenditure
$850.00
104705
09/27/2007
Original
Citizens for Clatsop County Charter Integrity
Action Sign Works
Cash Expenditure
$400.00
104706
09/27/2007
Original
Citizens for Clatsop County Charter Integrity
Action Sign Works
Account Payable
$400.00
107051
09/24/2007
Original
Citizens for Clatsop County Charter Integrity
Miscellaneous Cash Expenditures $100 and under
Cash Expenditure
$53.20
104702
09/21/2007
Original
Citizens for Clatsop County Charter Integrity
Jeff S Hazen
Cash Contribution
$250.00
104701
09/21/2007
Original
Citizens for Clatsop County Charter Integrity
Nancy E Harbour
Cash Contribution
$4,000.00
Interesting! A Sitting County Commissioner, one that actually authored the resolution that triggered the referendum itself, contributed Approx. $1400.00? $1100.00 or so posted a day after the vote?
Filer/Committee
Contributor/Payee
Sub Type
Amount
137040
11/09/2007
Original
Citizens for Clatsop County Charter Integrity
Miscellaneous Cash Contributions $100 and under
Cash Contribution
$30.00
137048
11/09/2007
Original
Citizens for Clatsop County Charter Integrity
Bernard E Bjork
Cash Contribution
$101.00
137039
11/07/2007
Original
Citizens for Clatsop County Charter Integrity
Jeff S Hazen
In-Kind Contribution
$1,131.16
137038
11/06/2007
Original
Citizens for Clatsop County Charter Integrity
Hipfish Monthly
Account Payable
$160.00
137037
11/05/2007
Original
Citizens for Clatsop County Charter Integrity
New Northwest Broadcasting
Account Payable
$100.00
132930
10/28/2007
Original
Citizens for Clatsop County Charter Integrity
Miscellaneous Cash Contributions $100 and under
Cash Contribution
$200.00
132931
10/23/2007
Original
Citizens for Clatsop County Charter Integrity
Tamara Broadmore
Account Payable
$395.00
120262
10/22/2007
Original
Citizens for Clatsop County Charter Integrity
Miscellaneous Cash Contributions $100 and under
Cash Contribution
$150.00
120261
10/17/2007
Original
Citizens for Clatsop County Charter Integrity
Witham & Dickey
Account Payable
$3,581.97
132929
10/17/2007
Amended
Citizens for Clatsop County Charter Integrity
Michael Moore
Cash Contribution
$500.00
120260
10/17/2007
Original
Citizens for Clatsop County Charter Integrity
Miscellaneous Cash Contributions $100 and under
Cash Contribution
$200.00
114572
10/10/2007
Original
Citizens for Clatsop County Charter Integrity
Lynda M Lee
Cash Contribution
$150.00
114571
10/08/2007
Original
Citizens for Clatsop County Charter Integrity
Miscellaneous Cash Contributions $100 and under
Cash Contribution
$25.00
114570
10/06/2007
Original
Citizens for Clatsop County Charter Integrity
Miscellaneous Cash Contributions $100 and under
Cash Contribution
$99.00
114563
10/06/2007
Original
Citizens for Clatsop County Charter Integrity
Carrie L Bartoldus
In-Kind Contribution
$350.00
114564
10/06/2007
Original
Citizens for Clatsop County Charter Integrity
Miscellaneous Cash Contributions $100 and under
Cash Contribution
$100.00
109839
10/05/2007
Original
Citizens for Clatsop County Charter Integrity
Miscellaneous Cash Contributions $100 and under
Cash Contribution
$50.00
109836
10/05/2007
Original
Citizens for Clatsop County Charter Integrity
Miscellaneous Cash Contributions $100 and under
Cash Contribution
$25.00
109834
10/05/2007
Original
Citizens for Clatsop County Charter Integrity
Miscellaneous Cash Contributions $100 and under
Cash Contribution
$99.00
109835
10/05/2007
Original
Citizens for Clatsop County Charter Integrity
Miscellaneous Cash Contributions $100 and under
Cash Contribution
$25.00
109837
10/05/2007
Original
Citizens for Clatsop County Charter Integrity
Miscellaneous Cash Contributions $100 and under
Cash Contribution
$50.00
109838
10/05/2007
Original
Citizens for Clatsop County Charter Integrity
Miscellaneous Cash Contributions $100 and under
Cash Contribution
$70.00
115835
10/03/2007
Amended
Citizens for Clatsop County Charter Integrity
Action Sign Works
Cash Expenditure
$400.00
109831
10/03/2007
Original
Citizens for Clatsop County Charter Integrity
Miscellaneous Cash Contributions $100 and under
Cash Contribution
$100.00
109830
10/03/2007
Original
Citizens for Clatsop County Charter Integrity
Miscellaneous Cash Contributions $100 and under
Cash Contribution
$50.00
109829
10/03/2007
Original
Citizens for Clatsop County Charter Integrity
Miscellaneous Cash Contributions $100 and under
Cash Contribution
$100.00
109826
10/03/2007
Original
Citizens for Clatsop County Charter Integrity
Sign-One Signcrafters
Cash Expenditure
$835.00
109832
10/03/2007
Original
Citizens for Clatsop County Charter Integrity
Miscellaneous Cash Contributions $100 and under
Cash Contribution
$99.00
109833
10/03/2007
Original
Citizens for Clatsop County Charter Integrity
Miscellaneous Cash Contributions $100 and under
Cash Contribution
$99.00
132932
09/27/2007
Amended
Citizens for Clatsop County Charter Integrity
Sign-One Signcrafters
Account Payable
$1,685.00
109828
09/27/2007
Original
Citizens for Clatsop County Charter Integrity
Sign-One Signcrafters
Cash Expenditure
$850.00
104705
09/27/2007
Original
Citizens for Clatsop County Charter Integrity
Action Sign Works
Cash Expenditure
$400.00
104706
09/27/2007
Original
Citizens for Clatsop County Charter Integrity
Action Sign Works
Account Payable
$400.00
107051
09/24/2007
Original
Citizens for Clatsop County Charter Integrity
Miscellaneous Cash Expenditures $100 and under
Cash Expenditure
$53.20
104702
09/21/2007
Original
Citizens for Clatsop County Charter Integrity
Jeff S Hazen
Cash Contribution
$250.00
104701
09/21/2007
Original
Citizens for Clatsop County Charter Integrity
Nancy E Harbour
Cash Contribution
$4,000.00
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)