Upset Deschutes County citizens voice concerns over state wildfire hazard map as commissioners discuss impacts

(Update: Adding video, additional comments from hearing members)

BEND, Ore. (KTVZ) – A full house of worried Deschutes County residents showed up Wednesday as county commissioners discussed the state’s recently revised wildfire hazard map, as many residents shared their objections and concerns about the wide-ranging impacts. But in the end, commissioners could not reach an agreement on a joint message to the governor and lawmakers.

The agenda item was included to discuss the issues, with a focus on legislation under consideration in Salem. It was not scheduled as a public hearing, with a public notice, but word on social media and elsewhere led to dozens of residents being on hand.

Commission Chair Tony DeBone said he welcomed the "community conversation," not just about the map but about legislation in Salem that could lead to major changes.

"There are several Senate bills that are working through our Legislature right now that would further restrict what a private property owner can do on their property," said Sisters resident Jim Lanzarotta, one of several residents who spoke at Wednesday's meeting.

La Pine resident Rich Harp, one of over a dozen who addressed the board, said many residents in the wake of recent wildfires, including the Darlene 3 that threatened homes in La Pine, would like a "half-mile clear-cut" around the city. He noted that La Pine is the only city in the region that is all labeled as "high risk" on the new maps.

"Every model has flaws - this one definitely does," he said.

"Insurance companies and reinsurance companies use their own processes to determine rates. However, this high rating sends a clear message: If you're considering moving to La Pine, or starting a business in La Pine, you're not coming -- it's just too risky," Sharp said.

"We can lower our risk rating, with your help," he added, urging commissioners to work with state and federal agencies to reduce the risks posed by homeless camps in the forests.

"We will do our part," Sharp said. "We will harden our homes. We will be with you every step of the way. Please, I beg of you, please help our city."

Commissioner Phil Chang, with a quarter-century of forest management experience (and who has been a firefighter), pointed to the numerous projects and programs aimed at reducing wildfire risk on public lands.

Commissioners were debating whether and how to voice support of legislation from Senator Jim Golden, D-Ashland, to move back from property-level designations to broader areas.

Lanzarotta noted that and other legislation and said, "I just want to let you know that there are tremendous consequences of these designations of a flawed map, and no one's adequately addressing that."

Commissioner Patti Adair spoke of one woman's home she drives by every day that is an example of flaws in the map of "high-risk" areas: "It's definitely not high-risk. There's nothing out there."

Chang said requiring defensible space is a positive thing, but he pointed out, "Our own county maps show far more areas as high-hazard than the state maps. I don't think the appropriate solution is to make less areas high-hazard. The other way may be more appropriate."

"Maybe the map's not perfect," he said, but "this policy helps prevent people's homes from burning to the ground in Deschutes County." He said things to work on include "adequate state wildfire funding, so at the end of the next (legislative) session, we don't have to spend $218 million to pay for the last wildfire season."

He agreed that the state should look at boundary issues and concerns over the cost of appealing property designations. "But if the request is to have the county fight against this component of (Senate Bill) 762 (which created the maps), I won't be supporting that."

But he added: "I'm just one vote."

DeBone said of Golden's bill that if the move is to have more broad areas, rather than assign risk at the level of individual properties, "I'm absolutely there."

"There is some common ground here - and then it gets political," he said.

But when DeBone asked Chang about the move to make the designations more broad, Chang replied: "It's not going to make a difference."

But as the debate continued (until a lunch recess, then after), Adair said it's a pocketbook issue, to her.

"We cannot afford to live here. I want this map to go away," she said. "I know insurance companies have their own, fabulous maps, but the stat doesn't need to do its own map, too."

Chang defended the revised state map, flaws and all: "There's a lot of misinformation, and people overestimating the impact."

DeBone said the discussion would continue after lunch: "It's time for the senator and governor to hear from us."

Post-lunch debate doesn't reach consensus

Later, when it came time for commissioners to discuss their own recommendations to Gov. Tina Kotek and state lawmakers, the three board members each shared their own views, then splintered in somewhat predictable fashion and decided in the end to each act on their own.

Adair, who drafted a possible joint letter to state officials, added a word, saying she wanted to propose the state “permanently delay implementation of the map.”

“That map is a mess,” she said.

“I would go a different way,” DeBone said, backing Golden's legislation designating broader risk-level areas, not at the individual property level.

“It just hurts people’s heads,”  he said, noting the various factors at play, from the wildland-urban interface to fuel loads. He also supported extending the appeal period for residents.

Commissioner Phil Chang said he “might be able to support” such specifics, butadded, “We need incentives, and we need requirements to ensure defensible space.”

Adair said sharp rises in insurance rates are enough incentive.

“That’s your opinion,” Chang said.

“It sure is,” Adair replied.

Chang said, "Doing area designations instead of speckling (at the individual property level) might be a real improvement.”

Adair said she already exted the governor last week saying “we need to get rid of the state fire map. That’s what my letter will say. People have to be able to get insurance. They have to be able to sell their properties. It is the major asset they worked their whole lives on. It’s overwhelming.”

But DeBone said,  “I always cringe” at setting up yet another process to distribute state money, adding, “There’s not enough money in the world to fix all that. We need to switch gears on that.” He later said he didn’t even know how many hundreds of millions of dollars it would take to achieve the statewide goals.

More testy moments and interruptions ensued.

“We’re going the right way in a lot of things,” Adair said. “The map is clearly not helping the people who live here and pay property taxes.”

So it became clear that consensus was going to be hard to achieve.

Chang said, “We’ve decided what we’re going to do about this – everybody’s going to do their own thing.”

DeBone agreed: “We probably don’t have enough common ground to have a specific letter from the Board of County Commissioners,” though he also spoke positively of “lots of passion and discussion.”