City Council Packet - 01/30/1978 r, . --
t
TIGARD "l-IT`K COUNC,1 L,
STUD't' SESSION
JANUAR' P.M..,
CHARLES -F. T1 KD, ADM
A_^-ENDA
y. CA'i l TO ORDER
ROLL CALL
w
v
CD
J R FPCRt' f
J
k,.S^10 N. _. .. .
_ _ .. „ s
D.
_
4. SET DA'k F - _. : Ar: _-. . !'.. P'
t�. DISC,F' 1O, . ed
S W U
1•' SFRI.k TRFET RE�i RFA ,?r; — 0 a`, P: .
(: ) R;aqu=. ,:.ed ^J C, 7 CI'::1..
�3. PROPOSAL ^ S.. Mary°; W:: I= lz_ .._.`e F:?.k.
14. ANNEXATION REPORT
i5'. AUDIT FEES __ � :z:. .�I '� �r :_�.d :: ,h!>.� 30,.
YE-. OTHER
17. :,72,30"R?'ti^F
TIGARD CITY COUNCIL
STUDY SESSION MINUTES
JANUARY 30, 1978, 7:30 P.M.
CHARLES F. TIGARD SCHOOL
ADMINISTRATION BOARD ROOM
1. ROLL CALL: Present: Mayor Wilbur A. Bishop; Councilmen John E. Cook,
Alan W. Mickelson, Kenneth W. Scheckla (arriving at 7:45 pm),
Lynn R. Wakem; Ben Altman, Planning Department; Joe B. Bailey,
Legal Counsel; Raeldon R. Barker, City Administrator; Doris
Hartig, City Recorder; Aldace Howard, Administrative Aide.
2. DISCUSSION - Submission of new City Tax Base at May Primary Election.
(a) General discussion outlining steps necessary if tax base increase
will be submitted to the voters on the May, 1978 primary ballot.
(b) Council discussed the preparation for and organization of this
tax base measure:. Mayor Bishop outlined his proposal noting that the
City should consider approximately $1.50 per thousand dollars of
assessed valuation. It was suggested that Council confer with the
Budget Committee prior to adopting a tax base proposal.
(c) Motion by Councilman Cook, seconded by Councilman Wakem to authorize
staff to prepare the necessary documentation for inclusion on the
May primary ballot asking the voters for an increase in the tax base.
Motion approved by a 3 to 2 vote. Councilman Mickelson and Councilman
Scheckla voting Nay.
Amount of tax base was not stated at this time.
3. DISCUSSION - Establishment of 1978-79 timetable for Budget adoption.
(a) City Administrator outlined the proposed timetable concerning
preparation of the budget for fiscal 1978-79. Staff encouraged
to have budget prebared prior to March 21, 1978.
(b) Motion by Councilman Wakem, seconded by Councilman Cook to approve the
budget timetable as outlined.
Approved by unanimous vote of Council.
4. CITY EMPLOYEE LABOR NEGOTIATIONS.
(a) City Administrator requested an executive session to
discuss this matter.
(b) Council agreed.
5. PARK BOARD RECOMMENDATIONS
(a) Ben Altman, Assistant Planner, synopsized a report noting that the
Park Board recommends sectional development of greenways and associated
park facilities. The number one priority for park land acquisition
is an area between Hall Blvd. and Main Street along Fanno Creek. This is
suitable for the development of a civic center complex.
(b) Council discussed the proposal and agreed that a facilities study,
now underway by the Planning Department, would address the civic center
issue and associated land developments.
(c) City Administrator outlined his previous experience relative to civic
center construction.
Council and staff discussed the following recommendations:
Survey the needs
Check funding availability:-
No special committee assignments at this time
Wait for public facilities plan
Prepare a realistic program including needs for entire
community benefit
Work through a Tigard Citizen's Forum to sell the project.
(d) Mrs. Mary Payne, representing a newly formed group the "Friends of the
Museum" presented a letter stressing the need for consideration of
a museum to be constructed as part of the civic center plan. Letter
alsd mentioned annexation of the Durham School to the City and
the possibility of obtaining two historic homes in the Tigard area.
Administrative Aide agreed to act as laison between the City and this
group. Council concurred. Council stressed that this project and the
civic center project not be given top priority until more pressing issues
have been resolved.
6. DOWNTOWN URBAN RENEWAL PROPOSAL
(a) This issue will be addressed following the submission of the public
facilities and transportation study now being prepared by the
Planning Department.
7. ANNUAL PICNIC FOR CITY EMPLOYEES
(a) Council discussion on this issue centered around need and desire on the
part of the employees for a picnic.
(b) Motion by Mayor Bishop, seconded by Councilman Wakem to poll the
employees to ascertain interest in a picnic and report back to Council
with the results.
Approved by unanimous vote of Council.
8. DISCUSSION OF LIBRARY REQUEST FOR RESOLUTION SUPPORTING THE LIBRARY LEVY
(a) Brief report from Librarian asking for supporti.of the resolution.
(b) Motion by Councilman Wakem, seconded by Councilman Cook directing staff
to prepare appropriate resolution endorsing the Library Levy.
Approved by unanimous vote of Council.
PAGE 2 - COUNCIL MINUTES - JANUARY 30, 1978
F
9. DISCUSSION OF STREET LIGHTING
(a) Brief presentation by City Administrator in response to Councilman
Cook's inquiry about residential streetlighting requirements and the
area at 69th Avenue. Mr. Waye Lee has had difficulty obtaining necessary
parts and fixtures for his development on 69th Avenue.
A'further report on residential lighting will be forthcoming.
10. STREET OVERLAY PROGRAM
(a) City Administrator briefed Council on the overlay program for Spring,
1978 for L.I.D. on the Burham Street Project. Burnham Street is
scheduled to receive major attention with drainage, bikepath and
resurfacing.
(b) Council concurred with the suggestion of the City Recorder that a
contact, pu,,lic relations person be considered for the initial
citizen approach.
11. ST. MARY'S WOODS STATE PARK PROPOSAL
(a) 450 acre potential park site under consideration in the county adjacent
to Beaverton for a state park.
(b) Council supported this proposal and directed staff to prepare necessary
letter of endorsement.
12. ANNEXATION REPORT PRESENTATION
(a) Staff gave general Feport on status of annexations.
(b) Council directed that further committee study be made and a policy
statement be drafted for Council review.
(c) Motion by Mayor Bishop, seconded by Councilman Mickelson to appoint
Councilman Wakem, Councilman Cook, and Aldace Howard and one member of
the Planning Department to an Annexation Policy Study Committee.
Approved by unanimous vote of Council.
13. AUDIT FEE DISCUSSION
(a) City Administrator presented a letter from the firm of Coopers and Lybrand
requesting that consideration be given to an increase in the audit fees
for fiscal year 1978-79.
(b) Council discussion on past performance, fee schedules and services
received.
(c) Motion by Councilman Mickelson, seconded by Councilman Cook, to
approve contract addendum with fee to not exceed $6,800.00 for
fiscal year 1978-79. City Administrator to negotiate for a two
year contract at this amount.
Approved by unanimous vote of Council.
PAGE 3 - COUNCIL MINUTES - JANUARY 30, 1978
14. ANNEXATIONS TO THE TIGARD WATER DISTRICT
(a) City Administrator discussed two petitions for annexation to the
Tigard Water District. Boundary Commission proposal number 1182 ,for
the Krueger Annexation property already within the dity limits and
proposal number 1181 for an area outside the immediate sphere of
Tigard influence. City Administrator recommended approval of both
proposals.
(b) Motion by Councilman Cook, seconded by Councilman Mickelson to approve
the annexation of B.R.C. proposals 1181 and 1182 to the Tigard Water
District.
Approved by unanimous vote of Council.
15. STUDY SESSION RECESSED AT 10:35 P.M.
16. EXECUTIVE SESSION
Council went into executive session at 10:45 P.M. under the provisions of
ORS 192.660 (2) (a) for the purpose of discussing labor negotiations.
City Administrator reported on Thursday, January 26, 1978, meeting with
Tigard Pmlice Officers Association. Ground rules were established for
negotiations under the provisions of ORS 192.660, subsection 4. City
Administrator cited general areas to be discussed under negotiations.
TPOA will present specific language proposals at next meeting, scheduled
for February 7, 1978 at 10:00 A.M. City Administrator to make progress
report at next Council meeting.
17. MEETING ADJOURNED 11:00 P.M.
City Recorder CT
ATTEST:
Mayor
PAGE 4 - COUNCIL MINUTES —JANUARY 30, 1978
t
- Jar 30, 1978
TO THE EDITOR:
It seems a shame that honest and conscientious electcdofficials
cannot pursue their legitimate interests and business without harass-
ment, innuendo and untruthful rumors. Because of this fact of life
I have chosen to make this public statement:
Effective February 1 , 1978 I am terminating my association with
the Tigard office of Bucher Realty. I will continue with Bucher
Realty in their Beaverton office.
As a matter of policy. so that there can be no further mis-
understanding from those who giie stion my r.ir;hto and pirrsci i.t; oC a
livelihood as a real estate sales associate, I will concerltruLe my
activity in areas outside the City of Tigard and its contiguoum
areas.
And as a matter of public record I hereby state that in the
less than two years I have held a real estate liconse that I have
listed and gold only two homes, each on a single t.-IX lot, within
the city limits of Tii;ard. All. other sRl.es and property _listinj_cs
have been in Tualatin, Beaverton, Multnomah or in Washington County
territory.
At no time in my real estate work have I ever represented a
property owner witli more than 2'1 acres of land . 1 have never
represented, do riot represent, nor do not intend to vepres�!rnt any
Large land owner or duu v' ;loper within tho Tigard urban rrrowtti bound-
aries as a real. estate afent or in any capacity for which I would
receive compensation. The only property I will handle in Tigard
will be a singly: family horse.
Also for the record , the only property interests my wife, Martha,
and I have in the City of Tigard are our home at 10590 S.W. Cook Lane
(free and cloar) and ri small business build i'W, at 12200 ` .W. I•lain
3trcet (not free: and clear) . 1--JY '.;i:'c rttici .l hive abSoWtoly no other
financial interests, conimittments or arrangements with any other
member of our family or relatives in any past;, pending; or future
propert- plans in the City of Tigard.
11 copy of this letter will be attached to my filing of the State's
Verified Statement of 1�conomic: Inter.cst as required by the Oregon
(lovernment l-,thics Commission on April 15, 1978, it will be a
certified filing.; under oath.
During the nett few month, I as Mayor and some of our Councilmen
and the City Administrator will. be conferint; with property owners who
may own property in areas of the City designated as poos_i.ble park and
civic center sites. I and these ot;ner s will be doln,�- this as repre
s,?ntnti.ve.:; c,f t}ro c74+*! and will receive n;)„olutely ro compensation in
the form of commissions o. fees of any kind.
It is unfortun.xte that public officials who are willing to devote
hours of their personal time for the betterment oi' the community and
without salary must endure this kind of personal reproach, IIowever,
I can assure the people of Tigard that; this harjiusrrrcut will not lessen
my enthusiasm and continued devotion to carry out my duties au Mayor.
Wilbur A. Bishop
Mayor of Tigard
MEMORANDUM
TO: City Council
FROM: Ben Altman, Assistant Planner
SUBJECT: Park Board recommendations for priority park site acquisition.
DATE: January 25, 1978
In November, the Council requested that the Park Board place a high
priority on selecting park sties for immediate acquisition.
Since November, the Board has worked diligently, evaluating potential
park sites. Although they have not completed the process, substantial progress
has been made. The Board recommends to the Council the following as their
first priority selection. The Board also recommends immediate action be taken
to include this proposal in the upcoming Budget Committee work for FY 1978-79.
In considering priorities for acquisition of park land, the Board
originally began evaluating individual sites. However, it became apparent
that a more systematic approach was necessary to integrate development with the
greenway.
Therefor_, the Board recommends that the Greenway and associated park
facilities be developed in sections (see attached map). That a complete
concept plan (including all potential improvements) be developed for each section,
and that each section be developed in approprate phases based on available
funding. In addition, the Board recommends that a number one priority be
approved for. Section (8), on the attached map, from Main Street to Hall Blvd.,
along Fanno Creek. Subsequent priorities will be recommended for the other
sections, following further study.
The Board has selected Section (8) as first priority because of its
central location to the entire plan area, and because of the potential to
coordinate park development with Planning for a Civic Center Complex. The
Board further recommends that staff be directed to develop a complete concept
plan (including a Civic Center) for this area as soon as possible, and that
immediate action be taken to negotiate purchase of needed properties and easements.
The area offers an excellent opportunity to develop community identity for the
core area of the City.
+Ya
�t
yi
f.-e,l-`_ • a;2 Ram:
t :
_.+ 11 IL
� > 4
�1 ..WAW
IF
ME
i
I 1 � ��• '/ids.
h
Nam MOVE
. .. _
. ,.
to ti.
:.'.!. ._._.., ._ .. mac•. _� _ .._...
30
f.n,
..,,..., _n 4.0 vic;:.itY.
y ..
L'�� "rt ski R�1 r J��a�, ir"�^�+..�U[-�-rT+ > '-,(r. '. �*M•.. _ c/
<. � tiro s 1 i `h i.:.c � r'a.h y+ y.' r l 4 '.•. r,�.�
0.7
• .,y ��.+����t-kl4 :.^ '� -5-e.-'ice ar _ "6✓
ns Rd 3 _,
e
ft An MR
ffik
Ry
STATE PARK PRPSAL
-
'" (K-Mart) _
Tualatin Valleys HWy..
Located in the heart PARCEL OF UNDEVELOPED LAND: 450 ACRES
of unrbanized Washington
County ,!,;.OUR-LAST CHANCE FOR A
STATE PARK FOR OU4 COMMUNITY"
ENDORSED BY
WASHINGTON COUNTY BOARD OF C"ISSIONERS
WASHINGTON COUNTY PARK AND RECREATION ADVISORY BOARD
BEAVERTON CITY COUNCIL
ALOHA-COOPER MOUNTAIN C"UNITY'PLANNING ORGANIZATION
RALEIGH-HILLS-GARDEN HOME COMMUNITY PLANNING ORGANIZATION
AAUW - BEAVERTON BRANCH
EAST WASHINGTON COUNTY LEAGUE OF WOMEN VOTERS
TUALATIN VALLEY HERITAGE, INC.
TUALATIN HILLS PARK AND RECREATION DISTRICT
BEAVERTON SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 48
STATE SENATOR VICTOR ATIYEH
STATE SENATOR BLAINE WHIPPLE
STATE REP. TOM MARSH
STATE REP. MIKE RAGSDALE
STATE REP. MARK GARDNER
STATE REP. PAT WHITING
RON OSBORN. CHRMN., CAROLWOOD NEIGHBORHOOD
BETTY CULP, CHRMN. ROYAL WOODLANDS-PINEHURST ACTION COMMITTEE
MARY GRIFFITHS, CHRMN. HYLAND WAY NEIGHBORHOOD GROUP
TOM WALKER, CHRMN., MURRAYBROOK HOME OWNERS
PATRICIA HEWITT, CHRMN, HART RD., HEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION ,
HOLLY HARBERS- MURMURING PINES NEIGHBORHOOO
JOSEPH SMITH. HYLAND HILLS ACTION GROUP 1 �1
DAWN HOLT - 11355 S.W. Ridgetrest Dr.,
FORMER BEAVERTON MAYOR DAVID MC BRIDE
FORMER BEAVERTON MAYOR JAMES R. MOORE
FORMER BEAVERTON COUNCILPERSON SHARON RITTER
FORMER BEAVERTON COUNCILMAN RAY HACKL
HELP NEEE .IS URGENTLY DD (See over - more taforma.)
YDJR
(clip and return)--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
NAME __. ..._ .. ..._ .
_.._ _.�._.__ HONE.—•- ._ ._.
ADDRESS CITY ZIP
I. I support the proposal of acquisition of the St. Mary's Woods for a state
Park by the State of Oregon.
2. You may use my name as being a supporter of the proposed park:
X
3. 1 would be willing to help the committee in their efforts.
4. I would like more information regarding this proposal.
5. I would like to contribute funds to the committee.
(Checks payable to St. Mary's Woods State Park Committee, Inc., a non-profit
corporation registered with the State of Oregon).
MAIL THIS FORM TO:
Mike Snow, Co-Chairman, St. Mary's Woods State Park Committee, Inc.
12950 S.W. 19th Ave., Beaverton, OR 97005 646-0282
QUESTIONS? Larry Cole 644-7573 Jack Nelson 644-1398 Donna Stuhr 649-4093
,,..-
- ..f,4fi-Fi397•_._.+,+e+>:t.+•.e.�.sx:�.ti.e.:^l.. r+�....... .r4'as:.-.
Mill
ST.'.MARY'S WOODS STATE-PARK COMMITTEE., INC. is a group of 17.East Washington
County residents who have joined togather to pursue the purchase•of a 450-acre
tract of land.by the State of Oregon for state park. St. Mary's Woods is one
of the largest,tracts of undeveloped land in urban Washington County It is a
haven for wildlife and an ideal outdoor classroom for local residents to study
nature and enjoy the tranquility of a dense wilderness. The property i's located
between Tualatin Valley Highway and Jenkins Road, 170th and Murray Blvd. It is
owned by the Archdiocese of Portland, and it is truly unique in several ways.
Beaverton Creek and Cedar Mill Creek converge to form a small pond and marsh
near the center. When hiking through, one notices the vegetation can change from
wet, thick undergrowth to a sparsely covered dry forest floor in just a matter of
feet. There are also hundreds of different varieties of plants and animals inhabit-`
ing St. Mary's Woods. Included is the rare sessile trillium. Owls, rabbits, ducks, j
Cooper's hawk, green heron and great blue heron are a few of the wildlife. It is the -.
only piece of property in this area where you will find groves of ponderosa pine,
quaking aspen, red cedar, maple, Oregon white oak, fir and Western yew in close "
proximity. }-
This land fits all the site considerations for a major state park in Washing-
ton County and the need for one is great.
�r VAtttir news
Legislator says park
needs 10(visca/ supe®
BY MARK SROK Jan.4.They are reporting to other leg- local state park.Mrs.whiting said,Is
Thras staff v+•Itw islators an community efforts to estab• that St.Mary's woods is one of six sites
intense community support will be Hsh a park at the site. located throughout the state given
necessary if St.Mary's woods is to be Doth are acting as members of a joint high priority for park development
purchsaad and developed Into a state senate and house task force created to
park,according to Rep.Pat Whiting,D The fact that the forest is considered
_ assess the fiscal responsibilities or the a wilderness area adjacent to a high-
-"TT ere s no money In the budget state
transportation department The density urban environment is an im-
now er purchase the tract);' Mrs. state parks and recreation branch falls portant consideration in its possible
Whiting said."Proceedings are just be- under the jurisdiction of thir depart- purchase for a state park,Mrs.Whiting
ginning to lay the groundwork for set- mens. said.
ting aside funds for the.park" —"'Cf�e community is going to have to The superinendent of state parks.
Mrs.Whiting,along with state Sen. get out and pu.h very hard if it wants Dave Talbot, Dec. IS recommended
Walt Brown, D-Ciacksmas County, • a Park there"she said that state funds be set aside for pur•
toured a portion of the SL Mary's tract T,'M=r Lnat favors funding of a chase of a park at SL Mary's woods.
1
. L
T
ANNEXATION REPORT
January 30, 1978
Unfortunately our history has followed us, but in the case of annexations, it
has become a yoke around our necks. At each Boundary Commission hearing we attend,
one of the opponents to a proposal will inevitably disgorge his traumatic horror
story of how previous councils have perpetrated foul deeds, reaching outside the
boundaries to clutch more land, plundered and molested innocent acreage contiguous
to the city, etc. "Forced annexations" are repeatedly discussed as though we had
absolutely no regard for the voting rights of citizens, had removed all due processes
of law and had generally acted without regard for individual rights. In short,
gentlemen, Tigard has a serious problem. However, this issue, if addressed in
perspective, can be solved and can work to provide benefits for Tigard.
At the last Boundary Commission hearing concerning the Crawford Annexation, it
was quite clear that the "Islanders" objected. In the remarks made by Dr. Cease,
there was a slim ray of light. He concluded his remarks with, "it is only a matter
of time before you will, in fact, be included in the Tigard boundaries." If you
will allow me a moment of philosophical thought, I would like to suggest a
possible approach.
As long as Tigard is fragmented, there is little hope for a truly progressive
movement to take place. When neighbor fights neighbor, there are no winners. You
have all outlined important goals and priorities for this community, but, as we
face the future, there are a few barriers in the way of accomplishment of these
"ideals".
In the final analysis, the major objection to annexation is the objection to the
"level" of government which would serve those in the annexed property. This is very
evident in the Crawford case. Mayor Bishop has tried harder than anyone else in this
community to further the annexation cause, and he deserves a great deal of credit for
his efforts. Unfortunately, he represents development interests and for this reason,
his efforts are considered a conflict of interest and are not accepted in their true
light of community strengthening. I share his philosophy that a united Tigard is a
valuable force. I believe in his efforts, and support the annexation cause.
We will not be able to shed the cloak of "forced annexations" as long as we
use the majority method. We "triple them in", as the saying goes, and those who
object and are annexed regardless, never forget the obvious "force" - the City of
Tigard. Whether or not we can truthfully state that "majority rules" is a real
question. Obviously we have made some enemies. With this background in mind, we
have several options. The first is to keep hacking our way through the property
lines as they present themselves. No an easy avenue, but over the next ten years
we might bury two or three of the opposition and gain 200 acres. The second method
might be to wave the flag and sell a realistic program and try to attract favorable
response. The third approach is my favorite 'open government learning and progress
attack.
An example of what I am referring to might help. We have been accused of
"forced annexation" for two reasons: One is fact. We do force peoply simply
because of the majority method we employ at the present time. Second, we have not
it
ANNEXATION REPORT
January 30, 1978
Page 2
taken the time, nor made the effort to teach the rules of the game. The proponents
of the annexation are depending upon us to carry their ball and the opponents are
hoping we drop it. We have never collected both teams for a locker room "chalk
talk." In the case of the Crawford annexation, "islanders", they are leery of the
City. This, again, is the historic yoke we carry. If I could suggest an approach?
If we could establish a firm, equitable policy with specific goals and objectives
in mind. Assemble our staff and map a five year program for street improvement,
sidewalk construction, sanatary, sewer and storm drainage installations, public
facilities installation, etc. Then invite all interested parties to an open-forum
meeting to outline our program. We should involve all factions from the county,
city, staff, proponents, opponents, Boundary Commission. Really invite participa-
tion! The League of Oregon Cities has established a task force specifically to
resolve annexation issues. They will obviously have an interest in this approach.
Assemble the multitudes and iron out the problems and programs.
I do think that the City must take the first step. If we are yelled at and
kicked . . . so what? With a realistic program geared towards accomplishing
specific goals for the betterment of the community, the yelling will mellow and the
kicking will stop. The small vocal group will be suppressed by those people who
realize we are trying.
The Planning Department has allocated a large segment of time to devote to
these specific problems and should be consulted. We are working on public
facilities programs, public improvement programs and financing alternatives. Now
seems the appropriate hour to establish a meaningful program. Council has outlined
its goals, priorities and objectives. We are at the threshold of decision.
Am I asking for too much? You are the only ones capable of answering that
question. We at the staff level and strengthen the procedural matters. I have
asked the Boundary Commission staff to review and comment on petition forms, an
annexation contract, and the submission of maps, etc. We can streamline the
process. We might be able to structure the local approach by not considering any
annexations except those which "square-off" our boundaries. Dick Bolen suggests
that we should specify a program for a specific area and then concentrate on that
area with a full effort approach from the staff and Council level.
This effort should stress the street overlay program, police protection, the
library, and maintenance of sewer lines, the planning effort, the building
inspection inferences and the vitality of Tigard.
One of the things that I am subjected to in relation to annexation is the
hesitancy of commitment. In reviewing the "policy" statement concerning
annexation, I. find that is was not formally adopted by Council, I should say
unanimously supported by Council. It does not appear in resolution form which
casts a certain negative light upon the issue at the onset. I am not suggesting
that you be unanimous in support of annexation, but I am suggesting that some of
our problems can be traced directly to what has happened in the past and that we
are presently involved in something that demands a united approach. This is
rather difficult to articulate because I obviously do not know all of the history
involved. It would appear that the make-up of the present Council is a direct
,1
F
ANNEXATION REPORT
January 30, 1978
Page 3
result of an annexation battle which took place prior to the last election. One of
the difficulties again is that now as Councilmen you are thrown into a different,
arena and the game has changed. This is true in the case of the Mayor and
Councilman Scheckla, particularly. Gentlemen, I fully realize the difficulties of
public office, but I would suggest that we are subject to forces greater than this
issue. I agree with Councilman Mickelson, when he states that he is embarrassed
every time lie reads media accounts of our annexation difficulties. Perhaps I see
a confused stance as a negative stance. I have seen communities work together to
accomplish goals. A split community is destructive. Tigard has all the potential
to become a leading community. Out of the ashes of division a new commu pity
should rise.
This report has been prepared using many reports I have prepared over the
past two months. I keep coming back to the "open government learning and progress
attack". There just doesn't seem to be a better way. You are the primary actors
in this. Hopefully, a study session will answer your questions and set the stage
for future resolves.
Aldace Howard, Administrative Aide
:;p
't
1
TO: MAYOR BISHOP AP;D THE TIGARD CITY COUNCIL
FROM: ALDIE HOWARD
3 SUBJ. : ANNE'.XATION REPORT DATED JANUARY 30, 1978. SPECIFICALLY
PARAGRAPH FOUR RELATING TO CONFLICT OF INTEREST.
MAYOR BISHOP HAS TAKEN THIS PARTICULAR PARAGRAPH PERSONALLY AND I .
FEEL A CERTAIN AMOUNT OF RESPONSIBILTY, AS THE AUTHOR, TO CLARIFY
MY MEANING.
"UNFORTUNATELY TO SOME PEOPLE, HE REPRESENTS DEVELOPMENT INTERESTS
AND FOR THIS REASON HIS EFFORTS ARE CONSIDERED A CONFLICT OF INTEREST
i
AND ARE NOT ACCEPTED IN THEIR TRUE LIGHT OF COMMUNITY STRENGTHENING."
a
NOTICE THE ADDITION OF THREE WORDS, "TO SOME PEOPLE". IN EVERY
COMMUNITY THERE ARE THOSE WHO SEEK TO DISCREDIT PUBLIC OFFICIALS.
TIGARD IS NO DIFFERENT. I TRIED TO MAKE THIS CLEAR IN MY REPORT.
I DID NOT SINGLE THE MAYOR OUT. I DID NOT CRITICISE HIM FOR HIS
COMMUNITY ACTIVITY RELATIVE TO ANNEXATIONS. BY THE OMISSION OF
THREE WORDS, IT MAY BE INFERRED THAT I ADDED GASOLINE TO AN EXISTING
FIRE. NOT THE CASE. MAYOR BISHOP CANNOT REALISTICALLY REMOVE
HIMSELF FROM PUBLIC SERVICE WHILE SERVING IN THIS CAPACITY.
CLARIFICATION OF HIS "STANCE" IS A STRENGTH. I HAVE NOT TAKEN
ANYTHING AWAY FROM HIM FOR HIS EFFORTS. ACTUALLY, NOW THAT THIS
ISSUE HAS BEEN ADDRESSED, I AM IN A STRONGER POSITION TO SUPPORT
HIM.
P
ALDIE HOWARD
t
r
f
�f
rjt
3
`1 .. ��G-�J __�•�i�~ 1..91 '�.7."t.f-,,N �'` y;.��
r'
}
CENTER FOR POPULATION RESEARCH AND CENSUS RECF�
Portland State University JA'i 2V
P. O. Box 751 ?19
Portland, Oregon 97207 �jTY OF T�GgR
REVISIONS, CORRECTIONS, & ADJUSTMENTS
Supplement No. 1 -- December 31, 1977
SUPPLEMENT TO CERTIFICATE OF POPULATION ENUMERATIONS AND ESTIMATES '
OF COUNTIES AND INCORPORATED CITIES OF OREGON, JULY 1, 1977
County Previously Certified
and Certified Population
City Population December 31, 1977
BAKER
Baker 9,575 9,655
k
CLACKAMAS
Lake Oswego 21,100 21,101
COLUMBIA
St. Helens 7,500 7,608
Scappoose 3,060 3,150
COOS
Bandon 2,225 2,228
k
JACKSON
Ashland 14,885 15,123
Central Point 5,930 5,935
LANE
Springfield 37,500 37,509
LINCOLN
Toledo 3,270 3,278
LINN
Brownsville 1,230 1,255
MARION
Salem 83,170 83,186
Silverton 5,260 5,381
MULTNOMAH
Fairview 1,720 1,724
Portland 384,500 384,569
Troutdale 2,990 2,991
•
M
d
Revisions, Corrections, & Adjustments (cont.)
Supplement No. 1 -- December 31, 1977
s
County Previously
and Certified
Certified Population
Population December 31, 1977
POLIO
Dallas
Inde 8,100 8,112
Independence 4,000
4,025
UMATILLA
Hermiston 7,575
7,582
WALLOWA
Enterprise
1,900 1,906
WASHINGTON
Cornelius 3,060
Forest Grove 10,800 3,063
Hillsboro 22 000 10,807
ar 22,D14
Tualatin 11,850 11,874
4,725 4,738
FOR THE STATE BOARD OF HIGHER EDUCATION
a
dames E. Weiss
Director
Center for Population Research & Census
Portland State University
z
Oil DOE:,
I oo ,n
'-1 •..1 N
r
.-r
I
ca
` P4
I! r) a
N ,D
I
►may O
z
U
N
•n
V)
N O� ch 4)
w It '
r�7 4.)
co
`J 04 04 LJ
V `~ z
L. a Q)) H
Q o -4 1
z _
^ W
00 � N a
G)
1 1- 1n %D N L.0 10 y
.tea 4 V .'L. L14 C
Q
4444
(L) 0 aG 4-A4-40O
w a
�! U cccc w z co 04 ro In z
V� � aaa � � � .D 0)) P4 ac) .,4
13.4
El � O •-+ cu
W 0 ;4MW o (D11' GC1 ^ [s°. ani
1� H
1
b GL b OZ N i~ N C+ to 'O 60 -.0
fn G co coCO co
w 1 a z a a, w w a oo n
d `w v a w w
aav z w0aQ' ,,
� aW A p a O
� Cn Cn
W r,4 rz U
4-)
N N 1
0 El
a
U ya V O >4 C°7
PA �4 0 E-4
zciA a v ami
H W 1 Q7
Z EE- rO1 1 p G 3 4
aV Iz 3 � U ,� �' C04
.d
u, C-4 0% to7
N a)
v
7 1
} f
9 . d %