Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Urban Growth Boundary And Permitting topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Residents press council on urban growth boundary, biomass plant and permitting enforcement
Summary
Multiple residents used the visitors' appearances section to urge caution on an upcoming urban growth boundary public hearing and to ask how petitions, odors, and conditional-use permit enforcement will be handled.
Residents at the Prineville City Council meeting raised environmental and permitting concerns ahead of a scheduled public hearing on an urban growth boundary (UGB) expansion and a proposed biomass facility.
At the start of the visitors' appearances segment the council reminded the public that the formal public hearing on the UGB expansion was moved to May 13 and will be held at Barnes Butte Elementary School; remarks at this meeting would not be part of the hearing record. Several speakers nonetheless urged the council to note concerns in advance of the May 13 hearing.
Adam Mikulski of 3992 NW Hantzig said he worried the economic-development organization EDCO was effectively lobbying to retain staff using taxpayer funds and urged caution about spending public money on private nonprofits. Mikulski also tied his remarks to Earth Day, saying, “with all this other stuff, all the stuff that we're trying to bring in here, polluting the air, water, whatever, there's all every action, there's a reaction, and we really gotta be careful on what we need to do for our future generations here.”
Ken Smith of 1076 NW Peppermint Drive pressed the council on how many resident signatures would be needed for the council to drop the biomass proposal, asking repeatedly whether a petition or vote threshold exists. Council members responded that there is no statutory “bright line” number for a petition to force that outcome, that two ordinances (first and second readings) would be required for certain code changes, and that the council would decide by majority vote at the public hearing. Smith also asked about possible conflicts of interest from contractors; a council member replied that elected members should disclose conflicts per applicable rules.
Hank Simmons of NW Garden Lane asked council to consider the effect of buffers around industrial facilities and urged the council to be careful about how buffers could change allowable uses on nearby land and potentially limit future residential or subdivision development.
Other residents asked about odor from railroad carloads of asphalt and about enforcement teeth in conditional‑use permits (CUPs). Council staff said the railroad operator uses chemical mitigation measures to reduce odor and that CUP enforcement mechanisms depend on the permit and jurisdiction; residents said they wanted clearer enforcement tools. One resident said odor from a cannabis facility at the old mill site had decreased after the city notified the operator.
The council repeated that the formal UGB public hearing is scheduled for May 13; staff directed residents to submit written testimony to the city recorder (cityrecorder@cityofprineville.com) for inclusion in hearing records.
