This is rather lengthy so bear with me.
STATEMENTS COVERED
· Executive session notice
· Request for Information
· Executive Session meeting No Funding Fiasco
· Questions about financing a paving project
· Letter to John Laherty Deschutes Co.
· Misstatement on County issuing Legal Opionion
STATEMENT # 1
Executive session notice Oct 04, 2021 Glenn Brown in General Discussions
“The Deschutes County Clerk's office informed me today that a county government meeting notice published in the Nugget is not valid for Deschutes County government meetings because it is not a paper with county-wide distribution. Official county government notices must be published in The Bulletin, the only newspaper with Deschutes County-wide distribution.”
Responses on Forum
Jim Becker As a follow up to your post I called the Deschutes County Clerk's office and this morning they informed me that while your statement is correct. The Nugget is not valid for Deschutes County government meetings because it is not a paper with county-wide distribution for county notices the Bend Bulletin is the require news media
However, they concluded that there must have been a misunderstanding in the interpretation of their response or the question asked. Once again they reiterated that the county does not offer legal advise.
They referred me to ORS 192.640.for explanation of the requirements.
Whitney Lowe We contacted Deschutes County about your concerns and they said they do not give legal advice about this question. We have contacted the Special Districts Association of Oregon (SDAO) and they stated that the notification to the Nugget Newspaper was appropriate for our organization.
STATEMENT # 2
Request for Information June 23, 2021
GB Response to County Correspondence Glenn <glennbrown27@protonmail.com>
To: Panoramic Road District Garry Miller (Treasurer),
Patti Adair Wed, Jun 23 at 9:13 AM Good morning, Are the minutes for the June 1 and June 8 available please?
“I see notes for June 1, if that's it that's fine, but nothing for June 8, 2021. I'd also like to know whether any Board member or the District received any written communications in May 2021 or June 2021 from any County official regarding paving or financing. If so would you please post them on the District website for all to read. Glenn Brown “
Response
Gary Miller resigned as treasurer in July 2018
Glenn I have not received a response to my question as to what specifically you wanted. I have not received your answer. So let’s try this. The board has corresponded with the county in reference to your complaints. That letter is posted on the web. The board has corresponded with the county in reference to annexation and easement questions. You haveknowledge of that contact. Thank You Jim
STATEMENT # 3
Executive Session meeting on litigation in General Discussions
“In light of the Board's earlier assessment fiasco and to hopefully prevent another, I've notified and asked the County Counsel, County Commissioners, and representatives of the local newspapers to attend this Executive Session to be sure our Board stays between the lines this time.”
Response by Nyle
Nyle HEAD <craftsman_homes@msn.com> To:Jim,Panoramic Road District,Glenn
Mon, Jul 5 at 8:04 AM
Glenn, The project is/was financed through Kitsap bank. It did NOT take 2 years to find financing. It has been discussed for 2 years but never attempted. Once the decision was made to move forward with the project,(after a vote among the Owners of their property) SDAO received approval from Kitsap Bank to fund this project, with amazing interest rates! It took approximately 1-2 months for approval. The reason this project is not happening right now is because of YOUR threatened law suit. We as a board were advised, because of your threat, to get this project validated so the project could proceed smoothly. Nyle Head
Response by Jim
Presented in Board Meeting Kitsap Bank Project Financing Information
The district has received a letter of commitment of up to $ 850,000 through SDAO from Washington based Kitsap Bank. According to SDAO the district has received excellent terms and conditions from the bank for a small special road district.
The district will receive both interim financing and permeant financing from Kitsap Bank
Interim financing
Estimated construction costs, estimated interest, fees and other charges
Up to 9 months at an interest rate of 3.5 % interest
$ 750 fee will be charged by the bank.
Permanent financing
Actual cost of construction, interim loan interest, legal and other chargers calculated
Actual assessment calculated and prepayment option offered to landowners
Balance of loan, plus interest charges, guaranty fund (equal to 1 years of debt service)
Term of 10 years
With semi-annual interest and payments
Starting no later than 6 months after the last draw
Prepayments may be made.
Actual amortization tables will be established when loan request finalized. Glenn please attend the board meetings, so when statements are made you at least have a basis.
STATEMENT # 4
Letter to John Laherty Deschutes Co “From: Glenn <glennbrown27@protonmail.com> Sent: Thursday, June 3, 2021 2:14 PM To: Panoramic Road District Garry Miller (Treasurer) <panoramicroads@gmail.com>; John Laherty <John.Laherty@deschutes.org> Cc: Board <board@deschutes.org> Subject: Questions about financing a paving project During the meeting a Board member said it would "foreclose" on some (but not all) non-payers. Foreclose means that the Board has a legal right to lien and take our properties for non-payment. Yet the Board has so far been unable to get a loan or bonding for the project, and has declined to answer questions about it. So here are my two questions: If the Board has authority to lien and take our properties without a levy vote or LID, why can't this project be financed after two years of trying? Has the Board tried to finance this project and been declined; if so, why was it declined?”
1. Misstatement to County
“Yet the Board has so far been unable to get a loan or bonding for the project, and has declined to answer questions about it” Response The funding was in place yet this statement was sent to the county.
2. Response from John Laherty <john.laherty@deschutes.org> To:'Glenn',Panoramic Road District Garry Miller (Treasurer) Cc:Board Thu, Jun 3, 2021 at 2:20 PM Mr. Brown: As I’ve previously informed you, I do not represent you and cannot provide you with legal advice. Likewise, I do not represent the Panoramic Access Special Road District or its Board. I strongly suggest that you consider retaining an attorney of your choosing to assist you in this matter. Thanks, John John E. Laherty Deschutes County Senior Assistant Legal Counsel
STATEMENT # 5
Misstatement on County issuing Legal Opionion
“The question is why the Board did not do get this opinion a year or more ago. Oh yeah, the County already told the Board their plan would not be approved by the County. They told Lee and another at the outset that the District could do a bond measure initiative, form an LID, or pass the hat. What you are trying to do now is simply passing the hat, no binding effect on anyone.”
Response
1. Please provide the source of the statement and actual statement you base the statement on.
2. LID Statement, you should have been at the board meetings when the LID process was discussed and you could have understood the LID issue.
I was on the road committee at this time and spoke Chris at the county. He told us that no District had ever successfully created a LID. FYI a LID turns the process over to the county relating to road specs, prevailing wages etc. Also, we were told that an rough estimated for asphalt paving would be approx. $ 4,000,000 by turning it into a LID because of county specs, prevailing wages, and their overhead.
I was not on the board then so I would not make a statement on why they did not