Loading...
11/18/2020 - Minutes v City of Tigard Committee for Community Engagement Minutes MEETING DATE/TIME: November 18, 2020, 7 — 8:30 p.m. Meeting Location: Meeting held virtually through MS Teams Attending: Bhushan Gupta Present Lauren Rowles Present Christine Rehse Present Liz Aberg Present Christopher Basil Present Marissa Rainey Absent Connie Ramaekers Present Norma Trujillo Absent Dacia Grayber Present Shom Pilip-Florea Absent Dave Hanna, Chair Present Taylor Sarman Absent Dolly Specht,Vice-Chair Present Also Attending: Guests: Kenny Asher, City of Tigard Community Development Director Kirsten Hauge, Kearns &West Chris West, Pac/West Communications Liz Newton, Council Liaison Staff: Kent Wyatt, Communications Manager and Nadine Robinson, Staff Liaison Meeting start: 7:00 pm • Welcome and introductions • City Facilities Consolidation project feasibility—Kirsten Hauge, Kearns & West Kirsten and Nadine presented on the proposed city facilities consolidation project. Presentation basics included: The community is growing and to meet the resulting needs, the city is considering consolidating most of its public services in a new building. The proposed site of the facility would be at the corner of Hall Blvd and Burnham St. The site is adjacent to retail, apartments, parks, public parking, employment and trails and transit connections. The city believes the project can be funded without raising property taxes. Voters would be asked to approve an extension of the current property tax rate in a future election. Additional financing would be provided through a combination of fees, revenue funds, photo enforcement revenues, tax increment financing and land sale proceeds. In February 2020, Council first heard about the feasibility of consolidating city services in a new facility. After learning about the potential benefits, Council gave staff direction to continue exploring the feasibility of moving the project forward. Why is the project necessary? • Current buildings are overcrowded. For example, the police department was built when the department had a total of 31 staff. Now they have 136 authorized positions. • Extensive, expensive repairs and system replacements are needed— such as HVAC systems, city hall and police department roofs and sewer line replacements. • More importantly the facilities do not meet current seismic standards. In a seismic event the buildings may be in a condition that would not allow the city to maintain operations and respond to community needs. • Looking long-term, it is less expensive to build a new facility than maintain the old buildings and continue to lease space. • The city is the biggest landowner in the downtown and is not using the land to its full potential. The land could be repurposed to support downtown living, shopping and dining. Potential Opportunities • The project creates an opportunity to add affordable housing and build a more livable,walkable downtown. • Long-term the project is likely to: o Result in the lowest net overall cost of space. o Provide a better urban design solution in downtown Tigard. o Allow more intensive utilization of urban land. o Generate new tax revenues. Next steps: • January 19, 2021 the city Redevelopment Team will provide City Council with an update on the feasibility of the project and confirm their continued support. If Council gives the direction to move forward with the project, community outreach will begin. • Spring 2021, staff will identify the public works operations site and building design options. • June, the Redevelopment Team will provide City Council with another update and ask if they support moving forward with a general obligation bond in November. If the bond goes to voters in November and passes, the plan is to begin construction of a new public services facility in 2023. Project community engagement efforts to-date: • Interviews were held with city staff and community stakeholders to determine their awareness and support of the project. • A focus group meeting was held with downtown Tigard business leaders. • Key findings report was provided to the city. • A communications and engagement plan has been developed. Guiding project principles based on input: • Focus on the project need and keep it practical. • Appeal to community interests and needs. • Connect the project to the city's overall vision and align it with the city's goal for racial equity. • Build community excitement and ownership. Respect the balance between generations and looking to the future. Going forward: • Inform community leaders and stakeholders on the need for the project. Meet with boards and committees to educate and get feedback. • Starting in mid January, launch a broad education campaign about the need for the project. Engage the public in the visioning design process. Incorporate feedback into the planning. CCE Questions and Feedback The committee was asked to provide feedback on the presentation and the planned approach going forward. They were also asked to identify the opportunities, challenges and concerns related to the project. Basil asked how racial equity is going to be incorporated by the city. Kent replied it is a change of mindset. Every project the city starts will be looked at differently. We are moving to be a city for all and have all voices heard. The city will be using a racial equity lens. We will be asking questions like; Is the project fair to all the neighborhoods? Fair to all the different groups? Basil commented that ODOT has a social equity program which seems to have a lot of the same intent. Their projects affect communities, neighborhoods and users. ODOT is now asking who is impacted, how are they impacted and what is being done to mitigate those impacts. He thinks our equity program is similar and would like to learn more about what the city is doing. He expressed concern for the whole gamut of residents - low to high income. Who is able to pay? How will the city evaluate it and determine a strategy to pay based on ability to pay? Basil is suggesting the city be ready to respond to these types of questions when addressing other groups. Dave asked if the city has uniform project support (as indicated in the slides.) He also asked why someone wouldn't want the city to do the project. Kirsten indicated the city does not have stated support as we have talked with so few stakeholders. She said that after meeting with stakeholders there was general head nods that the project made sense. Stakeholders did express concern about the cost and timing. That is why the presentation addressed the "Why Now" question. Dave said that unless the city has stated support the slide should be updated so it doesn't sound like there is support. The city should identify consequences and concerns and have a narrative that is presented before the questions are asked. What reasons would stakeholders have to say no to the project? Do those reasons hold water? Dave recommends being prepared to address those concerns. Bhushan said the project numbers make sense. He asked how much the project will cost. Kenny responded that currently the project is estimated to be in the $135M-$140M range. He said the statement in the presentation is accurate. The city believes, with voter approval, we can fund the project with the current tax rate and the other sources identified in the presentation. Bhushan asked if there is data showing what kind of return on investment the project will generate. Kenny said one known return would be tax revenue from repurposing the land. However, the city hasn't identified the catalytic affect. He indicated it is hard to quantify the affect it will have. It was clarified that the public works project, to move out of the downtown, needs to take place first so the public services building project can move forward on that site. Kenny added that having a maintenance yard in a place you want to do your most intense development is a maladaptive use. He added that the funding for the public works land purchase and facility build will primarily be through utility rates. Liz A. noted COVID has been transformational with more people working from home. She asked if that is going to make a difference in the planning for building. Kenny said yes, it will have an impact and we are factoring it into the programming. It will be a smaller building than we would have envisioned prior to COVID. Not so much because of COVID but because we have learned how effective working from home can be. However, surveys are showing most people want to be back in the office at least part time and that they are not comfortable with sharing space. As a result, the square footage reduction might not be as significant as some people would anticipate. • Update on the Public Safety Advisory Board (formerly Public Safety Transformation Commission) — Kent Wyatt Kent thanked the committee for spreading the word about the Public Safety Advisory Board and for providing feedback on who they wanted to serve on the board. The city was concerned about how well the process would work. We were very happy with the results. At the November 10th Council meeting, Council approved 7 members and 2 alternates to the board. Kent said there is tremendous diversity in members. The board's first meeting will be in December. Councilor Newton will be serving on the board. She indicated any training that is offered to the committee will also be offered to the public (and committee.) • Dolly asked to provide an update on two items. • Washington Square Regional Center Development The Sears development is on the back burner because the company that owns the mall is regrouping. The taskforce is interviewing community members on how they would like to see the area grow. Hwy 217 is going to be expanded which will necessitate closing Hall Blvd,which are ODOT projects. • Dolly facilitated a DEI day for Tigard Leadership program. Part of what came out in the Teams Chat is from that day. Dolly indicated a good way to reach other demographics is through the churches. • Review and approval of September 2020 meeting minutes Bhushan moved to adopt the September 2020 meeting minutes and Dolly seconded the motion. No one opposed the motion, and no one abstained. The minute were approved. • Elect 2021 CCE Chairperson and Vice-Chairperson Nadine explained that with missing meetings due to COVID, the 2020 chair positions were filled late. With this election of the 2021 chairperson and vice-chairperson positions the committee will be back on schedule. After discussion, Dacia moved to have Dave Hanna serve as chairperson. Connie seconded the motion. Dave called for discussion and there was none. All were in favor and the motion carried. Dacia moved to have Dolly Specht serve as vice-chairperson. Connie seconded the motion. Dave called for discussion and there was none. All were in favor and the motion carried. • Other • Bhushan asked if Tigard had experienced anything like the Tootie Smith story out of Clackamas County. The team said no. However, Dacia commented that TVF&R has seen an expediential increase in COVID cases. She said, "It is real!" Dolly is encouraging the CCE members to be leaders and set the example by encouraging mask wearing in the community. • Basil would like to have an update on the Washington Square Regional Center Plan. Dolly told him information is available if he googles the topic. She said the committee is gathering information right now. The task force is doing one-on-one interviews with community members. She indicated the bulk of the plan area is the WA Square Mall. The plan encompasses property in Washington County, Beaverton and Tigard. Basil is asking for a 10-minute update at the January meeting. • Dolly congratulated Dacia on winning her seat. Dacia indicated her intention is to stay on the committee. She finds the information she learns through the committee helpful. • Liz N. will provide regular updates on the Public Safety Advisory Board. • Bhushan asked when his term on the committee expires. Nadine will check. • Dolly suggested that at the next meeting time be allowed to meet the new members. She indicated at one time the committee had a role in choosing new members. Dave clarified the committee used to review the applications and make recommendations. However,when the by-laws were re-written the committee fell in line with rest of the city committee's and the decision making was given to the City Council. • Adjournment 8:30 pm